Covid-19 News/Discussion

[AkronsWitness]

10 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

They are aware. They don't care.

Its also funny that these people who wont get the vaxx are the same ones that 1) wont wear masks to at least protect others 2) will complain about businesses shutting down because #economy 

You dont want to wear a mask? You want all business open? You want to be able to sit in a restaurant to eat? You want to go back to work? You want the cost of things to go back down?

Get..vaccinated. But they would rather throw a piss fit about getting a shot and continue with all of these shutdowns

Edited August 18, 2021 by AkronsWitness

[Mox]

4 minutes ago, AkronsWitness said:

I support this. You can do whatever you want to yourself--its your body. If you dont mind putting yourself at risk for Covid and its fallout, the fine, your choice. 

The problem I have is that those people cant seem to grasp that they are also putting others at risk who cant get the vaccine like some elderly, children, people with certain medical conditions, ect.

Its not a personal 1:1 choice, your choice directly effects so many people you come in contact with and thats what pisses me off. At bare minimum, wear a mask in public and practice social distancing--but they dont want to do that either.

From my experience (anecdotal-both in person and conversations had/read online) this isn't entirely accurate. I believe they grasp this concept. The people who tend to be open about this belief also tend to be those who strongly value individual rights/decision making. They grasp the concept and they simply don't care. The viewpoint is if you're compromised, it's your responsibility to take care of and protect yourself, not your neighbors.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

5 minutes ago, 15412 said:

Peer review became political review a very long time ago to certain degrees.

Any data to back that up, or are we just stating opinion as fact?

[AkronsWitness]

1 minute ago, Bullet Club said:

From my experience (anecdotal-both in person and conversations had/read online) this isn't entirely accurate. I believe they grasp this concept. The people who tend to be open about this belief also tend to be those who strongly value individual rights/decision making. They grasp the concept and they simply don't care. The viewpoint is if you're compromised, it's your responsibility to take care of and protect yourself, not your neighbors.

Those are the same people that will rush to the hospital and ask for medical assistance as soon as they get Covid.

[vikesfan89]

6 minutes ago, Leader said:

And why would you? If you could pick thru your personal history of vaccines you've taken (or been administered) are there any you'd choose to "untake?"

We're transforming from a society of "for the greater good" to one where if there's a variation from the norm - that variation has to take on similar weight as the norm - which is ridiculous.

If someone is against taking the vaccine for whatever reason they can't temporarily take a vaccine like someone can temporarily not smoke 

[vikesfan89]

Just now, AkronsWitness said:

Those are the same people that will rush to the hospital and ask for medical assistance as soon as they get Covid.

I doubt that.  At the very least they will wait until they are having a hard time breathing

[Xenos]

45 minutes ago, Bullet Club said:

To be fair, it's a flawed graph. I've seen it, and read the parameters. IIRC it starts in January, well before a majority of people were vaccinated, and ends in May. It's actually more of an indictment on the vaccine than not. I wouldn't give it much thought.

As to the Cleveland Clinic study, the official conclusion has been misrepresented by everyone thus far. It states: 

Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccines can be safely prioritized to those who have not been infected before.

However, the study has not been peer reviewed.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/newsroom.clevelandclinic.org/2021/06/09/cleveland-clinic-statement-on-previous-covid-19-infection-research/amp/
 

Quote

Cleveland Clinic recommends those who are eligible receive the COVID-19 vaccine.   

In June, we shared research that provided insight into how the immune system protects the body after a confirmed COVID-19 infection. The study followed Cleveland Clinic caregivers over five months as the vaccination process was beginning. The data showed that the vaccine was extremely effective in preventing COVID-19 infection. In addition, during the study, none of the employees who had confirmed positive PCR tests and remained unvaccinated were re-infected.  It’s important to note that this study was conducted in late 2020 and early 2021, before the emergence of the Delta variant.   

More research is needed. We do not know how long the immune system will protect itself against re-infection after COVID-19, as our study only looked at individuals over a five-month period, or how well-protected previously infected individuals are against variants. It is also important to keep in mind that this study was conducted in a population that was younger and healthier than the general population.  

It is safe to receive the COVID-19 vaccine even if you have previously tested positive, and we recommend all those who are eligible receive it.  

 

Edited August 18, 2021 by Xenos

[Mox]

Just now, AkronsWitness said:

Those are the same people that will rush to the hospital and ask for medical assistance as soon as they get Covid.

I haven't seen evidence of that so I don't have an opinion on it either way, and that's not all that relevant to my point. I'm not choosing a side, I'm simply explaining the mindset as I have come to understand it.

[DontTazeMeBro]

1 hour ago, Xenos said:

And you people who choose to be unvaccinated are the problem and what’s holding the rest of us back. It’s why mandates and passports are becoming a thing now. 

I’m not holding anyone back because I know how to socially distance. And how ironic? Now vaccinated people get offended that I tell them not to get too close. It’s like they think because they’re vaccinated they’re entitled to spread the virus.

[Xenos]

Just now, DontTazeMeBro said:

I’m not holding anyone back because I know how to socially distance. And how ironic? Now vaccinated people get offended that I tell them not to get too close. It’s like they think because they’re vaccinated they’re entitled to spread the virus.

Just continue social distancing, wearing a mask, and if you get sick please stay home no matter how bad you may feel. I do not want the hospitals wasting precious resources on someone like you.

[Leader]

7 minutes ago, vikesfan89 said:

If someone is against taking the vaccine for whatever reason they can't temporarily take a vaccine like someone can temporarily not smoke 

The "smoking connection" to this discussion is anecdotal at best.  One (the virus) is a systemic disease. The other is a passively passed on annoyance which requires extended long term exposure to *possibly* trigger consequences. The only similarities is passing it on to others in a closed environment - where (again) one can make you seriously ill (or kill you) and run up considerable personal cost, while the other is a mild, temporary annoyance.

 

Edited August 18, 2021 by Leader

[Xenos]

25 minutes ago, 15412 said:

Here is just one link from Cleveland Clinic.        https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210608/No-point-vaccinating-those-whoe28099ve-had-COVID-19-Findings-of-Cleveland-Clinic-study.aspx

You can easily search out all such info I listed, you won't see it from the alphabet channels or WHO or the CDC though.  Science doesn't always fit their agenda.  The two most prominent doctors who fear down the road complications are from Italy and France for a hint.  Plenty from this country too though.

 

"the my body my choice reasoning is fine as long as you also support abortion. If you're against that but feel like you can use it against the vaccine, you're a hypocrite."

 

No, but nice try.  Actually it wasn't a try at all.   They use the "reasoning" to justify ending a life.  I use it as a satirical example. 

You were saying?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/newsroom.clevelandclinic.org/2021/06/09/cleveland-clinic-statement-on-previous-covid-19-infection-research/amp/

[Mox]

2 minutes ago, Xenos said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/newsroom.clevelandclinic.org/2021/06/09/cleveland-clinic-statement-on-previous-covid-19-infection-research/amp/
 

 

Well yeah, it's not peer reviewed and needs more data. I admitted the former and never argued against the latter. I simply provided information others were talking about and cleared some of it up.

[MWil23]

The last 18 months completely justify the stance that I have, which completely flies in the face of "I believe all people are good".  I believe the opposite. 

Someone better get in the powers that be's ears and explain to them that we are on the brink here and they'd better figure it out quickly, or this is going to continue to snowball.

I'm already talking to coworkers who are livid having their vaccinated freedom "taken from them" and that the only reason that they were vaccinated in the first place was to not be quarantined, not to have to wear a mask, etc.

You essentially have the following groups of people (rough estimates here):

1. ~35% are 100% on board with all Covid protocols and vaccination

2. ~35% are 100% not on board and completely anti Covid protocols and vaccination

3. ~30% took the vaccine and comply as a means to an end.

Someone needs to explain to these authorities that the silent minority (numerically speaking) is critical here to get backing on.

[AkronsWitness]

Just now, vikesfan89 said:

I doubt that.  At the very least they will wait until they are having a hard time breathing

Which goes back to my previous point of 'quit taking up our hospital space for those who actually need it'