Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
@dholliday. People who are vaxxed have a lower risk of becoming infected. Maybe they are as infectious if they do get it. But less vaxxed people get covid than unvaxxed. So if everyone was vaxxed there would be less covid infections.

“The latest results from the UK’s national covid-19 infection survey show that having two vaccine doses remains the most effective way to ensure protection against delta. But, although people who are fully vaccinated have a lower risk of becoming infected, those infected with the delta variant can carry similar virus levels as unvaccinated people, the data show. The authors said the implications for transmission were not yet clear but suggested that the potential for fully vaccinated individuals to transmit the virus to others would make achieving herd immunity more of a challenge.”

 
Unvaxxed people who have *had* covid already.

‘Two doses of either vaccine still provided at least the same level of protection as having had COVID-19 before through natural infection; people who had been vaccinated after already being infected with COVID-19 had even more protection than vaccinated individuals who had not had COVID-19 before.’

You are deliberating misquoting something to make an incorrect point.
No, you are simply not understanding what that text is saying. It is talking about self-protection, not the protection - or risk - to others.

Show me the quote which supports roydo's view that the unvaxxed (including those who've never had it) present a higher danger to other people than the vaxxed.

This is really important stuff here, lads...please for the love of all yer gods let's focus a little.


Here are the key quotes again regarding transmission:

- our data shows the potential for vaccinated individuals to still pass COVID-19 onto others.

- Delta infections after two vaccine doses had similar peak levels of virus to those in unvaccinated people.


- we don’t yet know how much transmission can happen from people who get COVID-19 after being vaccinated – for example, they may have high levels of virus for shorter periods of time. The fact that [the vaccinated] can have high levels of virus suggests that people who aren’t yet vaccinated may not be as protected from the Delta variant as we hoped.
 
@dholliday. People who are vaxxed have a lower risk of becoming infected. Maybe they are as infectious if they do get it. But less vaxxed people get covid than unvaxxed. So if everyone was vaxxed there would be less covid infections.

“The latest results from the UK’s national covid-19 infection survey show that having two vaccine doses remains the most effective way to ensure protection against delta. But, although people who are fully vaccinated have a lower risk of becoming infected, those infected with the delta variant can carry similar virus levels as unvaccinated people, the data show. The authors said the implications for transmission were not yet clear but suggested that the potential for fully vaccinated individuals to transmit the virus to others would make achieving herd immunity more of a challenge.”


Correct. This is what dholliday is missing here. He’s comparing the relative risk of a vaccinated person with COVID, versus an unvaccinated person with COVID, and saying the viral load seems to be about the same so the risk level is the same.

This misses the point that the likelihood of someone having COVID is less for the vaccinated person, therefore an unvaccinated person poses a higher risk of passing on the virus, on the basis that they are more likely to contract COVID in the first place.
 
Correct. This is what dholliday is missing here. He’s comparing the relative risk of a vaccinated person with COVID, versus an unvaccinated person with COVID, and saying the viral load seems to be about the same so the risk level is the same.

This misses the point that the likelihood of someone having COVID is less for the vaccinated person, therefore an unvaccinated person poses a higher risk of passing on the virus, on the basis that they are more likely to contract COVID in the first place.
A related danger to society is that unvaccinated people are more likely to require hospitalization and will likely have longer hospital visits; these folks thus displace others from potentially critical hospital procedures and/or take up room for those vaccinated people with breakthrough cases.
 
Where does it show that? Not from the text you quoted, that shows the opposite (see my post above).



Sorry mate, i am not the uninformed one here.

FloweryIdolizedInvisiblerail-max-1mb.gif
 
Delta variant discovered in December 2020

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/5-things-to-know-delta-variant-covid


Quote from report I linked to

The analysis cohort included households with an index case occurring between 4 January 2021 to 28 February 2021


As February 2021 is later than December 2020 I believe your statement is incorrect
No, my statement is correct because that entire report does not mention Delta once.

Delta didn't spread in the UK until late-Spring. It now accounts for an estimated 97% of cases.



@dholliday. People who are vaxxed have a lower risk of becoming infected.
Source?

AP News don't seem to mention anything like this.


I did find this, tho':


In July 2021, around 125 breakthrough infections happened per 100,000 fully vaccinated Wisconsinites, compared with around 369 cases per 100,000 inhabitants of the state who had not been fully vaccinated.

It's not conclusive data, as we'd need to see age-breakdowns to further confirm. For example the younger unvaxxed/hesitant are more likely to socialise than the vaxxed older folk, resulting in %-higher spread.

Statistically, therefore: a group of unvaxxed (possibly unmasked) hanging about together will statistically more likely contract an infection than smaller groups of vaccinated who remain cautious with masks/distancing. This is due to human behaviour, not vaccine/virus-behaviour.

To disprove this we'd need a scientific study which demonstrates a statistically higher infection rate with the unvaxxed over the vaxxed, regardless of behaviour.

Until we have this evidence: is what we know so far enough for wider society to condemn the unvaxxed and demand a limit to their freedoms?

I personally don't think so.


Maybe they are as infectious if they do get it.
That is the scientific conclusion so far, symptomatic or not.


“The latest results from the UK’s national covid-19 infection survey show that having two vaccine doses remains the most effective way to ensure protection against delta. But, although people who are fully vaccinated have a lower risk of becoming infected,
The BMJ author just added this bit in, but didn't cite how he knows this. The rest of the piece is a repeat-report on the same Oxford study i already linked (which did not have this bolded line).


those infected with the delta variant can carry similar virus levels as unvaccinated people, the data show.
Exactly.

The authors said the implications for transmission were not yet clear but suggested that the potential for fully vaccinated individuals to transmit the virus to others would make achieving herd immunity more of a challenge.”
Seems so.


You're just linking stuff here. You need to quote what is relevant.


You could do a little googling to see if what you are posting is accurate (it isn't)
What's your evidence for this? I've backed up my argument with respected scientific studies. You're just saying stuff.


or it might just be your plan to pass the time with a little forum trolling, who knows ?
Just saying random stuff...


So get a jab.
To protect myself, I make my own decision.

To protect others, I first find out if i'm a higher risk to others in the first place (i'm not).


the likelihood of someone having COVID is less for the vaccinated person, therefore an unvaccinated person poses a higher risk of passing on the virus, on the basis that they are more likely to contract COVID in the first place.
Source?

A related danger to society is that unvaccinated people are more likely to require hospitalization and will likely have longer hospital visits; these folks thus displace others from potentially critical hospital procedures and/or take up room for those vaccinated people with breakthrough cases.
Anyone can get hospitalised for all kinds of thing: speeding traffic accidents, drug overdoses, alcohol/tobacco-caused cancer, pub fights etc...it's a slippery slope to an inhumane society if we suddenly want to rank people's worthiness for treatment not on their condition, but on their life choices.


The data are still being analyzed regarding vaccine effectiveness and Delta, but this study (I've posted the summary page) just came out in New England Journal of Medicine:
Any choice quotes?

Anti Vaxxers are defo a danger to society.
Who's anti-vax in this thread?
 
No, my statement is correct because that entire report does not mention Delta once.

Delta didn't spread in the UK until late-Spring. It now accounts for an estimated 97% of cases.




Source?

AP News don't seem to mention anything like this.


I did find this, tho':


In July 2021, around 125 breakthrough infections happened per 100,000 fully vaccinated Wisconsinites, compared with around 369 cases per 100,000 inhabitants of the state who had not been fully vaccinated.

It's not conclusive data, as we'd need to see age-breakdowns to further confirm. For example the younger unvaxxed/hesitant are more likely to socialise than the vaxxed older folk, resulting in %-higher spread.

Statistically, therefore: a group of unvaxxed (possibly unmasked) hanging about together will statistically more likely contract an infection than smaller groups of vaccinated who remain cautious with masks/distancing. This is due to human behaviour, not vaccine/virus-behaviour.

To disprove this we'd need a scientific study which demonstrates a statistically higher infection rate with the unvaxxed over the vaxxed, regardless of behaviour.

Until we have this evidence: is what we know so far enough for wider society to condemn the unvaxxed and demand a limit to their freedoms?

I personally don't think so.



That is the scientific conclusion so far, symptomatic or not.



The BMJ author just added this bit in, but didn't cite how he knows this. The rest of the piece is a repeat-report on the same Oxford study i already linked (which did not have this bolded line).



Exactly.


Seems so.



You're just linking stuff here. You need to quote what is relevant.



What's your evidence for this? I've backed up my argument with respected scientific studies. You're just saying stuff.



Just saying random stuff...



To protect myself, I make my own decision.

To protect others, I first find out if i'm a higher risk to others in the first place (i'm not).



Source?


Anyone can get hospitalised for all kinds of thing: speeding traffic accidents, drug overdoses, alcohol/tobacco-caused cancer, pub fights etc...it's a slippery slope to an inhumane society if we suddenly want to rank people's worthiness for treatment not on their condition, but on their life choices.



Any choice quotes?


Who's anti-vax in this thread?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top