Jump to content

Ready for your vaccine/test passport?


Recommended Posts

I'm so ready, bring it on. Israel already doing it, Europe getting ready to require it for internal travel, New York already using an app this week to control admission to large venues and allow larger private events. Going to be a mess to begin with, and hard to standardize across the entire USA, let alone the world for foreign travel. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For sure I am ready! I would love to go to Boston to look at a new boat but cannot handle the 14 day quarantine when I get back. I am not at all certain how long it will take till they remove the quarantine here in Canada, but I can guess that you will have to have both shots plus some waiting time. At less than 60 years old I am not eligible for the first shot even if they had it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlatantEcho said:

What else can we demand documentation on to allow international travel?

Tax returns?
Political views?
 

The world is getting less free by the day here, and everyone is cheering.

 

Don't you already have to show proof of vaccinations for lots of things when travelling to lots of countries? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, danstanford said:

Don't you already have to show proof of vaccinations for lots of things when travelling to lots of countries? 

For diseases that are localised to particular countries - yes but those vaccinations are for the protection of the people travelling.  But there are many diseases that are more infectious and with higher mortality rates that don't require proof of vaccination.

IF vaccination passports for Covid-19 are required then this would be the first time that it is required for people who are not vulnerable. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

For diseases that are localised to particular countries - yes but those vaccinations are for the protection of the people travelling.  But there are many diseases that are more infectious and with higher mortality rates that don't require proof of vaccination.

IF vaccination passports for Covid-19 are required then this would be the first time that it is required for people who are not vulnerable. 

Question, answered. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/29/2021 at 3:56 PM, danstanford said:

For sure I am ready! I would love to go to Boston to look at a new boat but cannot handle the 14 day quarantine when I get back. I am not at all certain how long it will take till they remove the quarantine here in Canada, but I can guess that you will have to have both shots plus some waiting time. At less than 60 years old I am not eligible for the first shot even if they had it. 

If you were coming to look at a boat in NC, you could get the vaccine while you're down here

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

For diseases that are localised to particular countries - yes but those vaccinations are for the protection of the people travelling.  But there are many diseases that are more infectious and with higher mortality rates that don't require proof of vaccination.

IF vaccination passports for Covid-19 are required then this would be the first time that it is required for people who are not vulnerable. 

??

Who exactly is "not vulnerable"?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

If you were coming to look at a boat in NC, you could get the vaccine while you're down here

- DSK

I have certainly seen that as an option but I cannot escape the rules coming back and would be committing to 14 days quarantine on return.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Vulnerable = those who are most likely to die from covid-19 or have serious illness.

Which is less that 0.8% of the population.

Nonsense.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

??

Who exactly is "not vulnerable"?

- DSK

JFC, have you not read anything in the last year?

 

Covid is less dangerous than the flu for the majority of the population dude.
Good grief. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

With 50% of the new cases being variants over here, there is a lot more 20 to 50 years old people in ICU, and dieing from it, or having serious health consequences. Hold on to your keyboard, the ride is not over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, PeterSailor said:

With 50% of the new cases being variants over here, there is a lot more 20 to 50 years old people in ICU, and dieing from it, or having serious health consequences. Hold on to your keyboard, the ride is not over.

b-b-but the can't-do-math brigade insists that it's less dangerous than FLU!

Shirley you're not suggesting that we react in a manner that is more intelligent than medieval peasants?!?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, PeterSailor said:

With 50% of the new cases being variants over here, there is a lot more 20 to 50 years old people in ICU, and dieing from it, or having serious health consequences. Hold on to your keyboard, the ride is not over.

Media reports or facts backed by data?

While you are looking for the evidence try and explain this - the B1.1.7 variant was first discovered in Kent, UK in September 2020 I.e. 7 months ago.  If it is so much more contagious why has it taken longer to dominant than the previous supposedly more benign variants?  Those variants being the ones that have caused the majority of deaths.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

b-b-but the can't-do-math brigade insists that it's less dangerous than FLU!

Shirley you're not suggesting that we react in a manner that is more intelligent than medieval peasants?!?

- DSK

Well you would think you would wouldn't you?

After all quoting someone who is quoting factually incorrect media reports doesn't make you right does it?

Unless you keep quoting yourselves and get more people to do it then it must become true due to popular opinion.  To hell with evidence based research.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Prove otherwise.  Although how you can disprove the data will be an interesting read.

Sure.

You said:

Vulnerable = those who are most likely to die from covid-19 or have serious illness.

Which is less that 0.8% of the population.

 

The vulnerable group, i.e. those who are most likely to die from covid-19 or have serious illness is certainly far bigger that (sic!) 0.8% of the population.

People older than 65 account for ca. 80% of all deaths.

17% of all US citizens are older than 65.

 

That you don't get tired of this is beyond me.

Fascinating.

Bit like an ugly car crash.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Matagi said:

Sure.

You said:

Vulnerable = those who are most likely to die from covid-19 or have serious illness.

Which is less that 0.8% of the population.

 

The vulnerable group, i.e. those who are most likely to die from covid-19 or have serious illness is certainly far bigger that (sic!) 0.8% of the population.

People older than 65 account for ca. 80% of all deaths.

17% of all US citizens are older than 65.

 

That you don't get tired of this is beyond me.

Fascinating.

Bit like an ugly car crash.

You watching car crashes doesn't surprise me as you seem to thrive on death and destruction.

I see you are also not shy of manipulating quotes and statistics to make a point.

But I guess we at least agree on one thing which is those that are vulnerable are those older than 65 with pre-existing morbidity conditions. 

BTW that 80% you refer to is 91% in Sweden - the country that didn't lockdown.

However all that aside for a disease that may end up in causing an annual increase of 10% excess deaths predominantly in those vulnerable it sure has come had a long term economic and societal cost.  Although that cost has been largely the result of Government action to a disease that seems to do what it wants regardless.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

I see you are also not shy of manipulating quotes and statistics to make a point.

I did not. Apart from making a point, that is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

You watching car crashes doesn't surprise me as you seem to thrive on death and destruction.

Says the one who has spent what, a year, as one of the rather active clowns in this circus? Come on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

You watching car crashes doesn't surprise me as you seem to thrive on death and destruction.

I see you are also not shy of manipulating quotes and statistics to make a point.

But I guess we at least agree on one thing which is those that are vulnerable are those older than 65 with pre-existing morbidity conditions. 

BTW that 80% you refer to is 91% in Sweden - the country that didn't lockdown.

However all that aside for a disease that may end up in causing an annual increase of 10% excess deaths predominantly in those vulnerable it sure has come had a long term economic and societal cost.  Although that cost has been largely the result of Government action to a disease that seems to do what it wants regardless.

I see you never get tired of getting things wrong... either thru an utter lack of ability to do even simple math, or simply telling lies like "Sweden is the country that didn't lock down."

But make sure you post a lot more angry denials, very persuasive

It's almost like you believe the virus itself pays attention to your posts

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Media reports or facts backed by data?

While you are looking for the evidence try and explain this - the B1.1.7 variant was first discovered in Kent, UK in September 2020 I.e. 7 months ago.  If it is so much more contagious why has it taken longer to dominant than the previous supposedly more benign variants?  Those variants being the ones that have caused the majority of deaths.

Data.

Maybe because we were already in travel restriction. To many peoples are still traveling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/2/2021 at 11:22 AM, Steam Flyer said:

I see you never get tired of getting things wrong... either thru an utter lack of ability to do even simple math, or simply telling lies like "Sweden is the country that didn't lock down."

But make sure you post a lot more angry denials, very persuasive

It's almost like you believe the virus itself pays attention to your posts

- DSK

Self description?  You never post any substance, evidence, facts or data.

With regard to Sweden don't confuse voluntary recommendations with draconian laws threatening prison sentences and or large financial fines enforced by state and federal police.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fundamentally a person has the right not to get vaccinated. This does not mean they have the right to travel to another country go to see a movie, or attend school. 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2021 at 5:27 PM, Kate short for Bob said:

For diseases that are localised to particular countries - yes but those vaccinations are for the protection of the people travelling.  But there are many diseases that are more infectious and with higher mortality rates that don't require proof of vaccination.

IF vaccination passports for Covid-19 are required then this would be the first time that it is required for people who are not vulnerable. 

There is a fundamental flaw in your reasoning here (and elsewhere, but I digress). If you travel from country A which still has yellow fever, to country B which has eliminated YF but still has the right climate and biotic conditions you must show proof of YF vaccination. This is not to protect the traveller, the government of county could not care less about the traveller, it is keep YF out of B. Similar restraints existed in the past for other diseases, smallpox is a good example. When the disease is defeated the restraint can be withdrawn. This will happen with COVID 19, in particular if country A, B, C etc only allow travellers in who have been vaccinated.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Self description?  You never post any substance, evidence, facts or data.

With regard to Sweden don't confuse voluntary recommendations with draconian laws threatening prison sentences and or large financial fines enforced by state and federal police.

Let's see, who kept insisting that Sweden had everything open & free etc etc and never had any Covid-19 etc etc... when in fact Sweden did have restrictions and did have some severe outbreaks (which is why they imposed restrictions).

Who is pretending the current rise inUS  cases is not happening? Especially among young people? As well as starting out at the very beginning of this thing with zero clue what a virus actually is? I recall somebody indignantly insisting that masks would make it WORSE because virus would breed in the moisture on your mask :lol: and I also recall trying to explain why the increase in the rate of increase meant BIG TROUBLE ahead before the number of US deaths hit 20k, whereas somebody else had no clue what the math implied......

Etc etc

I post nothing but facts...

and a fair amount of well deserved mockery

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/31/2021 at 7:27 AM, Kate short for Bob said:

yes but those vaccinations are for the protection of the people travelling. 

yes and NO , stops you bringing it home .

Link to post
Share on other sites

"You can lead a covidian cult bore to culture, but you can't make him think"...

What's not to like about pay-to-play advocates for vaxx-passports?

 

Naomi Wolf fully gets it:

 

So what does social credit control look like?

Welcome to your life new normal [if you're living in a BUILD BACK BETTER controlled zone]... 

Pat yourselves on the back, you fully deserve it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Marinatrix447 said:

 

Naomi Wolf fully gets it:

 

 

Yep, a fuckin shill, both you and her.

COVID-19 pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, following the election of Joe Biden as US president, Wolf tweeted on 9 November 2020: "If I'd known Biden was open to 'lockdowns' as he now states, which is something historically unprecedented in any pandemic, and a terrifying practice, one that won’t ever end because elites love it, I would never have voted for him".[142] In February 2021, Wolf appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight on Fox News, where she said that government COVID restrictions were turning the U.S. "into a totalitarian state before everyone's eyes," and went on to say that "I really hope we wake up quickly, because history also shows that it’s a small window in which people can fight back before it is too dangerous to fight back."[143]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, definitely feel like I'm living in a totalitarian state in the USA today! NOT! Travel where I want, think and say what I want, support any political party I want, heck I can even go kitesurfing and sailing whenever I want, YIKES. Even most of the Trump insurgents who invaded the Capitol building intent on preventing a peaceful transfer of power on January 6 will get off with a rap on the knuckles. How can you even begin to postulate that this is a totalitarian country? Idiotic tin hat shit.

,

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

There is a fundamental flaw in your reasoning here (and elsewhere, but I digress). If you travel from country A which still has yellow fever, to country B which has eliminated YF but still has the right climate and biotic conditions you must show proof of YF vaccination. This is not to protect the traveller, the government of county could not care less about the traveller, it is keep YF out of B. Similar restraints existed in the past for other diseases, smallpox is a good example. When the disease is defeated the restraint can be withdrawn. This will happen with COVID 19, in particular if country A, B, C etc only allow travellers in who have been vaccinated.

But it doesn't matter unless you want to visit Country A.  If you travel to B and haven't been to A then you don't have to prove anything to B.  Having been to A AND vaccinated prior to going to A doesn't guarantee that you are not carrying YF when you go to B.  You are just least likely to be infected or be infectious with YF.

Should B then demand a PCR test to determine if YF is present because you have been to A?  Do you do this for every potentially fatal disease known to humanity?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Let's see, who kept insisting that Sweden had everything open & free etc etc and never had any Covid-19 etc etc... when in fact Sweden did have restrictions and did have some severe outbreaks (which is why they imposed restrictions).

 

Ok the old subtly change the narrative to bolster your original proposition.  Where have I said that "Sweden had everything open & free"?  However, that aside, compare the difference in restrictions between Sweden and the UK and the relative outcomes.

While you are doing that try explaining how your ilk were once lambasting Sweden for their apparently "lax pandemic management strategy" yet now once the data emerges that they have done much better than many more draconian regimes (which your ilk promoted) with less collateral damage both short long term you are saying "oh well they were just as stringent as many other countries that's why they have done better"!  FFS you can't have it both ways!

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Who is pretending the current rise inUS  cases is not happening?

This "surge" in the USA?  Um  can you explain how this "surge" is statistically significant?

image2-800x448.jpg

The usual suspects are driving this "surge" - NY, NJ, Michigan.

However the drop in weekly cases since January has been 75%!

Of course lets not look at testing rate changes nor positive test rates as that might actually show good news!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

This "surge" in the USA?  Um  can you explain how this "surge" is statistically significant?

image2-800x448.jpg

The usual suspects are driving this "surge" - NY, NJ, Michigan.

However the drop in weekly cases since January has been 75%!

Of course lets not look at testing rate changes nor positive test rates as that might actually show good news!

The graph shows it better now than in January, but worse than last September/October. Doesn’t appear to be over now does it? What does your crystal ball say about the next 30 days?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Ok the old subtly change the narrative to bolster your original proposition.  Where have I said that "Sweden had everything open & free"? 

...

 

So Sweden did have lockdowns?

And their covid situation got better?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

But it doesn't matter unless you want to visit Country A.  If you travel to B and haven't been to A then you don't have to prove anything to B.  Having been to A AND vaccinated prior to going to A doesn't guarantee that you are not carrying YF when you go to B.  You are just least likely to be infected or be infectious with YF.

Should B then demand a PCR test to determine if YF is present because you have been to A?  Do you do this for every potentially fatal disease known to humanity?

Because of the effectiveness of the YF vaccination (>99%) being vaccinated is taken as protection for the country being visited, which you know of course.

Back to COVID, Brazil is having its issues right now and for the foreseeable future. Would you think that requiring a vaccination certificate/passport for visiting Brazilians would be a good idea?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Back to COVID, Brazil is having its issues right now and for the foreseeable future. Would you think that requiring a vaccination certificate/passport for visiting Brazilians would be a good idea?

I don't see it as a binary question.  Personally given my risk profile it means nothing.  

Would I go to Brazil in the middle of a pandemic?  No, not because of the risk of Covid-19, but because their society and infrastructure is under pressure and the assessed risk would outweigh any possible pleasure from the experience.

If I have already had Covid-19 (I.e. returned a positive test) will my passport say I am vaccinated?  It should shouldn't it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Gangbusters said:

The graph shows it better now than in January, but worse than last September/October. Doesn’t appear to be over now does it?

Why the focus on case numbers?  Compare the ratio of deaths and hospitalisations to the first wave between now and then or even compare between now and last September.  The ratio is substantially less.

Given the inherent false positive rate of the dominant form of testing (PCR) the case number data is becoming increasingly meaningless.

As for "it being over" unless the established decades of evidential science is wrong then it must be.  Why?  The number of people who have supposedly had Covid-19 and acquired immunity PLUS the number who have been vaccinated doesn't leave many left who don't have immunity.  Unless of course the vaccines are crap.

Best for all Americans to get on and enjoy the rest of Spring and Summer.

I do predict though that PCR testing will start to diminish very quickly and lo and behold case numbers will diminish at a similar rate.  Otherwise they won't be able to get rid of a plateau of cases based on false positives and positives returned by those who have long since recovered or been vaccinated.  We are already seeing cases of the latter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

I don't see it as a binary question.  Personally given my risk profile it means nothing.  

Would I go to Brazil in the middle of a pandemic?  No, not because of the risk of Covid-19, but because their society and infrastructure is under pressure and the assessed risk would outweigh any possible pleasure from the experience.

If I have already had Covid-19 (I.e. returned a positive test) will my passport say I am vaccinated?  It should shouldn't it.  

No it shouldn’t. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

If I have already had Covid-19 (I.e. returned a positive test) will my passport say I am vaccinated?  It should shouldn't it.  

No 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

what's painfully obvious is we have several generations who have absolutely no experience nor knowledge of infectious diseases nor the proven methods of control.

there's a reason why you don't see polo , yellow fever and the like in overwhelming numbers .

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:
22 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

So Sweden did have lockdowns?

And their covid situation got better?

 

You have avoided my question and you also haven't explained the obvious contradiction in your narrative.

:lol:

yes, one of us is certainly doing a lot of denying and tap-dancing... and isn't very good at it

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mid said:

what's painfully obvious is we have several generations who have absolutely no experience nor knowledge of infectious diseases nor the proven methods of control.

there's a reason why you don't see polo , yellow fever and the like in overwhelming numbers .

And there's a reason why some of those diseases are making a comeback... any bets on whether it will get worse, overall?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Why the focus on case numbers?  Compare the ratio of deaths and hospitalisations to the first wave between now and then or even compare between now and last September.  The ratio is substantially less.

Given the inherent false positive rate of the dominant form of testing (PCR) the case number data is becoming increasingly meaningless.

As for "it being over" unless the established decades of evidential science is wrong then it must be.  Why?  The number of people who have supposedly had Covid-19 and acquired immunity PLUS the number who have been vaccinated doesn't leave many left who don't have immunity.  Unless of course the vaccines are crap.

Best for all Americans to get on and enjoy the rest of Spring and Summer.

I do predict though that PCR testing will start to diminish very quickly and lo and behold case numbers will diminish at a similar rate.  Otherwise they won't be able to get rid of a plateau of cases based on false positives and positives returned by those who have long since recovered or been vaccinated.  We are already seeing cases of the latter.

Where do you come up with the idea that there are not many left that do not have immunity? My company has a head count of 45. We have had 9 confirmed Covid cases. (Tested twice a week). 2 have been fully vaccinated and maybe 5 have had one shot. That makes about 30% immunity in my sphere. Not enough for it to be over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

any bets on whether it will get worse

given the traction the current anti's are getting it's a lay down misere

Link to post
Share on other sites

mRNA/DNA gene therapies are not vaccines.

A vaccine by definition provides immunity to a disease, which is why I've had these in the past.

These novel new tools do not provide immunity to anything.

In a best-case scenario, they merely reduce the chances of getting a severe case of  SARS Cov2 if one catches it.

Though as this letter to the BMJ from a frontline NHS medical Dr. states, staff 'vaccinated' consequently still caught the SARS Cov2 virus.

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n810/rr-14

Hence, the products being touted by GAVI are medical treatments, not a vaccines.

So why should healthy people take a medical treatment for an illness they do not have if it doesn't prevent them catching a gain-of-function flu virus that they likely if under 69 years of age have a survival rate of 99.7%?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

I don't see it as a binary question.  Personally given my risk profile it means nothing.  

Would I go to Brazil in the middle of a pandemic?  No, not because of the risk of Covid-19, but because their society and infrastructure is under pressure and the assessed risk would outweigh any possible pleasure from the experience.

If I have already had Covid-19 (I.e. returned a positive test) will my passport say I am vaccinated?  It should shouldn't it.  

I didn't ask if you would go to Brazil, I asked if Brazilians should have a COVID passport to visit the US. I would have no problems with your vaccine passport saying you had COVID but that you were not vaccinated. How another country would use that data would be up to them of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Mid said:

 

If I have already had Covid-19 (I.e. returned a positive test) will my passport say I am vaccinated?  It should shouldn't it.  

No 

 

Why is that Mid? Has there been some change to the data? Is it the risk of re-infection, distrust of the original diagnosis, or something else? 

The last number I heard was as recent as a few weeks ago saying the number of people who have been re-infected with Covid, world wide, was about 50 people. 

Dan 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you've either had the injection or not , the rest is a strawman.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mid said:

you've either had the injection or not , the rest is a strawman.

What's the point of the "injection"?  To reduce infection severity (it doesn't stop infection) and attain herd immunity.  Getting the virus does the same thing for 90% of the population.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mid said:

you've either had the injection or not , the rest is a strawman.

In all sincerity, and not being in either camp, why is having Covid not enough to qualify for a passport. Would have a positive antibody test be enough in your view? 

 

Dan 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, danstanford said:

In all sincerity, and not being in either camp, why is having Covid not enough to qualify for a passport. Would have a positive antibody test be enough in your view? 

 

Dan 

In my business having Covid gots you 90 days of not having to be tested twice weekly. Being fully vaccinated gets you a free pass on testing. Both scenarios are subject to change as time passes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Marinatrix447 said:

mRNA/DNA gene therapies are not vaccines.

A vaccine by definition provides immunity to a disease, which is why I've had these in the past.

These novel new tools do not provide immunity to anything.

In a best-case scenario, they merely reduce the chances of getting a severe case of  SARS Cov2 if one catches it.

Though as this letter to the BMJ from a frontline NHS medical Dr. states, staff 'vaccinated' consequently still caught the SARS Cov2 virus.

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n810/rr-14

Hence, the products being touted by GAVI are medical treatments, not a vaccines.

So why should healthy people take a medical treatment for an illness they do not have if it doesn't prevent them catching a gain-of-function flu virus that they likely if under 69 years of age have a survival rate of 99.7%?

Complete bullshit. CDC report today shows almost complete prevention of both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections, let alone severe disease, by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna/NIH vaccines. So indeed these are of course vaccines, not treatments. Furthermore, this means that they also prevent vaccinated individuals from passing on the virus, as they cannot get infected. All good.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm7013e3_w

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, TheDragon said:

Furthermore, this means that they also prevent vaccinated individuals from passing on the virus, as they cannot get infected.

That's not correct and you know that.  Being vaccinated doesn't stop you from being infected NOR does it stop you from infecting others.  For a start there isn't 100 efficacy!

Also a vaccine doesn't create an invisible force shield around the vaccinated individual what it does do is prime the body's immune system to fight an infection and hopefully not allow serious illness to develop.  If a symptomatic illness doesn't develop then you are less likely to be infectious.

When you take your kite surfing trip to South Africa you will be rolling the dice as you have no idea if the vaccine has primed your immune system.  You may be in that % where it hasn't worked!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2021 at 1:37 AM, TheDragon said:

Complete bullshit. CDC report today shows almost complete prevention of both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections, let alone severe disease, by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna/NIH vaccines. So indeed these are of course vaccines, not treatments. Furthermore, this means that they also prevent vaccinated individuals from passing on the virus, as they cannot get infected. All good.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm7013e3_w

Bullshit eh?

Marketing speak from Pfizer says COVID vaccine 95% effective...

Real life test.... not so much:

https://eu.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2021/04/05/246-vaccinated-residents-diagnosed-covid-3-dead-michigan/7100759002/

So once more, these new gene therapy tools, at best lessen your symptoms of SARS Cov 2. Nothing more, nothing less.

Though they are anything but risk free:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/972832/COVID-19_mRNA_Pfizer-_BioNTech_Vaccine_Analysis_Print.pdf

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/972833/COVID-19_AstraZeneca_Vaccine_Analysis_Print.pdf

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Marinatrix447 said:

Bullshit eh?

Marketing speak from Pfizer ....

 

so, logical conclusion... you're getting paid by the char# by a rival pharma corp that does not currently have a covid vaccine out

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Kate and BE have got a new nutcase friend in M447. The world is rapidly leaving you guys behind. As we all get vaccinated and cut our risks of infection and serious disease radically, we are moving ahead with our lives. Sorry that you are all still so negative about these amazing success stories. You insist on saying that the vaccines are not absolutely perfect, therefore we should not celebrate. They are spectacularly successful and are already turning the tide on Covid, not just for individuals like me and my family, but for the whole world. And yes, Kate, if my shoulder continues to recover I will be sailing in Panama in June and kitesurfing in Cape Town in December. I will be kitesurfing gently with my 22-year-old daughter in Cape Hatteras as she tries to improve from beginner (able to ride and not crash too often, but losing ground downwind) to intermediate (able to stay upwind and land from where you started) in just 10 days! Can't wait. Everyone in our 30+ group staying in four large houses has been vaccinated, so no masks needed anymore when we socialize. We always have a big shrimp fest at sunset on a day without much wind and that will be my biggest social event in a year.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, TheDragon said:

Everyone in our 30+ group staying in four large houses has been vaccinated, so no masks needed anymore when we socialize. We always have a big shrimp fest at sunset on a day without much wind and that will be my biggest social event in a year.

So you are not adhering to your States restrictions?  A bit reckless of you and your commune.

BTW how did your 30+ jump the vaccination queue?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing reckless about not wearing masks around other vaccinated people. We've been doing that for a month now. Latest CDC report shows negligible likelihood of getting covid in that circumstance, as the likelihood of a vaccinated person catching covid is now so low that the likelihood of transmission to another vaccinated person is negligible. We are going to have a near-normal social situation.

Nobody jumped any que. We are mostly an older gang, and the younger members include medical staff who were vaccinated early. Others like my daughter and her friend were vaccinated at the end of a vaccine session when they had extra doses and put out a call for anyone to get them.

Don't be so negative Kate, life is good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...