Covid passport

[DOMNOLAN]

I've been seeing this a lot recently. Those opposed to the vaccine, using the word prevent to make a point rather than reduce.

Why does it have to prevent the chance of catching or spreading? If it reduces the risk significantly, which to my understanding it does, why is that not seen as worthwhile? Many things reduce risk rather than fully prevent which we all go along with in day to day life.

Because this was literally the definition of a vaccine until it was changed to include these ones a year or so ago. “Makes you immune” is what the definition used to be. If you are immune you cannot spread.

It needs to prevent you catching it and spreading it so that a)the disease goes away and b) so you don’t create an evolutionary bottleneck inadvertently making the disease worse.

Leaky vaccines are dangerous which is why, for good reason, they have been banned for use in livestock for a long time.

And most importantly, if we can all admit that it doesn’t stop the spread, then there’s no reason for any of these measures, it makes it a personal choice, not one for the collective good. If you feel you want to take it, then yeah go for it, if you don’t, then don’t.

 

[4737carlin]

Disgraceful remark.

Dont care, got zero time for right wing morons

 

[davek]

No I'm not but its greatly exaggerated scaremongering. Theyre laughing at people like you dave. What variant and restrictions are next? Whilst they party the night away.

Is that what youlve been told to post on forums like this?

 

[Mosh Pit]

Dont care, got zero time for right wing morons

Keep queuing up for your booster shots and you'll not have to be around right wing morons for much longer.

 

[4737carlin]

Keep queuing up for your booster shots and you'll not have to be around right wing morons for much longer.

Well i wont since its socialists get them, you no people who actually care about others, all the right care about is themselves, this pandemic has been a nightmare for them

 

[davek]

@davek sir, you're a man who understands the dark arts of Government. Do you think it would be beyond the realms of possibility for this Government to undermine their own message on restrictions by leaking the party scandal?

Either because some in the party want rid of Johnson, or, because they're anti restrictions and want the public to resist, thus offering a scapegoat?

*dons foil hat*

That's obvioulsy what's happened. The libertarian politicians who are bought and paid for by the corporate elite wont mind sacrificing Johnson to get their way: everywhere open and devil take the hindmost in terms of health consequences.

Starmer is aiding this too. He's put winning political capital ahead of public health. He knows the attacks on the government will result in people simply saying "WTF, I'm not complying when they're not". That's because he's also part of the elite and is presently currying favour - through his patronage by the Murdoch empire - with corporate Britain, demonstrating to them that they (the parliamentary Labour Party) are again - as under Blair - a safe pair of hands to govern in their interests.

 

[davek]

Only if the vaccine prevents you from catching and spreading the disease. These ones don’t. So, it’s actually the reverse in this instance. The vaccines cause an evolutionary pressure forcing them to mutate faster and in a more specific way.

Oh, and omicron was found in vaccinated and transmitted in vaccinated.

It minimizes the possibilty for variants if everyone in the world has access to jabs. Are the vaccines 100% preventing infection? No. But to argue against them on that level would be to withdraw our support for a whole host of treatments of other illnesses and disease. Just because not all heart by-pass operations hand people a relatively normal life does that mean we stop those operations for the majority of people who benefit?

There's absolutley no way you're a scientist. Physicist or otherwise.