Poll, booster vs drug treatment

[Vaticinator]

If you can get an expert to tell me I should, I'll buy it. But I'll need that expert endorsement as I don't have a degree in water and therefore am too dumb to know if your spit water is actually good for me or not.

[altiplano]

Maybe if waving rocks and calming your chakra brings down your blood pressure and benefits your other health factors you might be on to something... but I'm not sure that part of it will work for everyone... like zinc, vitamin D, saline rinses, and a healthy body weight have been demonstrated to.

[TG]

I'd rather see multivitamin and cleanliness mandates... maybe lose 10 lbs. mandates...

We all do, but it simply doesn't work. Or maybe if you believe in it enough it will (Placebo effect)
If it was working we would have it all over the place with the usual naysayer pretending "It's not good for my body, It doesn't work!"


Wait....what did I just say!?

[altiplano]

Except it does...

It just isn't what you're being told. Safe, simple, cheap, demonstrated effective.

Lots of things are viable and yet we are being shown only one path... vaccines and lockdowns.

Two years later we have among the highest vaccinated populations in the world, we're the only county still holding out children out of school, and are shutting businesses yet again, and we still have the highest case counts our country has seen during this exercise. So are these measures working? Clearly not. It's time to fire the coach and pivot to a new direction, except some of you are so conditioned by the hysteria, the mass psychosis, that you won't accept anything else now!

[Big Pistons Forever]

Or everyone could just get a free Health Canada approved vaccine

The inconvenient fact that the anti-vexers won't address with any serious data is the fact that most people in hospital and the ICU with COVID are unvaccinated even though they comprise less than 20 % of the population. Those people are why cancer, cardiac, and other patients in need of important surgeries can't get them

The vaccines primary benefit is that if you get COVID you almost certainly won't have to go to hospital thus saving health care resources for people who need them.

Sadly there seems to be a segment of the population that refuses to accept health care facts. No amount of rational dispassionate argument seems to be able to open closed minds.

What a sad state of affairs....

[Vaticinator]

Sadly there seems to be a segment of the population that refuses to accept health care facts. No amount of rational dispassionate argument seems to be able to open closed minds.

What a sad state of affairs....

Is it possible that the coercive attempts to strong-arm people into vaccinations while simultaneously silencing any free and open discussion and debate on dissenting opinions perhaps helped to close some minds? Very early on, anyone who was hesitant or concerned about the safety of these new vaccines, was essentially branded a whack job, science-denying, fringe-occupying, conspiracy theorist who would need to be silenced and submitted. Maybe some were. Maybe some were just scared. As has been pointed out to me already, thousands of hours of captaining a flight crew does not make me an expert on leadership, but if I had to guess, I would suspect that coercion, mockery and censorship, are not very effective strategies to motivate people to pull together towards a common goal. But they are probably excellent strategies for getting people to dig their heels in and close their minds. Maybe, just maybe, all the people on social and alternative media and YouTube and the like, who get off on railing against the unvaccinated are actually contributing to the problem they're upset about. It's pretty unlikely to get a favour out of someone you've actively marginalized.

Sad state of affairs indeed.

[photofly]

Is it possible that the coercive attempts to strong-arm people into vaccinations while simultaneously silencing any free and open discussion and debate on dissenting opinions

Don't see a lot of that going on around here, do you? You've been given every opportunity to debate, and have taken advantage of most of them.

Very early on, anyone who was hesitant or concerned about the safety of these new vaccines, was essentially branded a whack job, science-denying, fringe-occupying, conspiracy theorist who would need to be silenced and submitted.

Your mischaracterization is curious. Everyone who was hesitant or concerned about the safety of these vaccines was presented with the rigorous and overwhelming evidence for their safety, and allowed to reject the vaccine, if they still felt the risk was too acute to be borne.

Once again, you do appear to live in a parallel world to most of us.

[Vaticinator]

Only you could shit on someone for desiring understanding and unity over divisiveness.

[TG]

Sadly there seems to be a segment of the population that refuses to accept health care facts. No amount of rational dispassionate argument seems to be able to open closed minds.

What a sad state of affairs....

Is it possible that the coercive attempts to strong-arm people into vaccinations while simultaneously silencing any free and open discussion and debate on dissenting opinions perhaps helped to close some minds? Very early on, anyone who was hesitant or concerned about the safety of these new vaccines, was essentially branded a whack job, science-denying, fringe-occupying, conspiracy theorist who would need to be silenced and submitted. Maybe some were. Maybe some were just scared. As has been pointed out to me already, thousands of hours of captaining a flight crew does not make me an expert on leadership, but if I had to guess, I would suspect that coercion, mockery and censorship, are not very effective strategies to motivate people to pull together towards a common goal. But they are probably excellent strategies for getting people to dig their heels in and close their minds. Maybe, just maybe, all the people on social and alternative media and YouTube and the like, who get off on railing against the unvaccinated are actually contributing to the problem they're upset about. It's pretty unlikely to get a favour out of someone you've actively marginalized.

Sad state of affairs indeed.

I don't understand this "mission" you gave yourself of giving credits to people who have zero clue of what they are talking about (The Anti-vax)
I have never had a medical specialist tell me how to a fly a plane. But yes sure, I should teach him about vaccination!


Ah! When you write loooooong texts, cut them into paragraphs. This will help pass your intended message.
That would be nice too if you don't answer my post with another question which is your trend lately. You may think you are outsmarting the other by doing so (And I'm easy to outsmart) But it just shows someone running out of arguments.

[Vaticinator]

Is it possible that the coercive attempts to strong-arm people into vaccinations while simultaneously silencing any free and open discussion and debate on dissenting opinions

Don't see a lot of that going on around here, do you?

Take you for example. You seem to take exception to any post I make that even entertains a dissenting view. You're taking exception to my non conformity of thought. You don't challenge anything with data, just attack with the goal of shutting me up. That's fine. I get it. The nail that sticks out will be hammered down. This is just a microcosm of what's happening in the world these days.

You posted an article recently about Robert Malone. Regardless of how you feel about his message, the facts are that he is not anti-vax and is in fact, vaccinated himself. He is also absolutely, unequivocally an expert on the topic of mRNA vaccines who has voiced very specific concerns about them, and as a result has been removed from more than one social media platform for "promoting vaccine hesitancy." So yes, dissenting opinions are absolutely being silenced. If a man with his level of expertise is not allowed to be a part of the greater conversation, who should be? Have you ever listened to the man speak on this topic?

[Vaticinator]

But it just shows someone running out of arguments.

My main argument has always been that people's private medical choices should stay private and shouldn't preclude them from being allowed to participate in society.

There, no questions and only a single sentence. Happy?

[photofly]

Does that belief of medical choices being “private” hold equally true for other diseases of interest to public health authorities, such as plague, syphilis or tuberculosis? Cholera? Smallpox?

You can have your opinion of course, but it’s entirely at odds with the various public health acts in different provinces. You might be shocked at the powers government have to intervene forcibly in your health decisions, little-used though those powers may be.

[Inverted2]

Does that belief of medical choices being “private” hold equally true for other diseases of interest to public health authorities, such as plague, syphilis or tuberculosis? Cholera? Smallpox?

You can have your opinion of course, but it’s entirely at odds with the various public health acts in different provinces. You might be shocked at the powers government have to intervene forcibly in your health decisions, little-used though those powers may be.

One of my buddies asked a girl checking his vax papers if she had the gardasil vaccine (for genital warts). She gave him a dirty look.

[Aviatard]

That would be nice too if you don't answer my post with another question which is your trend lately. You may think you are outsmarting the other by doing so (And I'm easy to outsmart) But it just shows someone running out of arguments.

But that’s the classic anti-vaxxer playbook. Post some easily debunked bullshit under the guise of “I’m just asking questions!”

[Vaticinator]

Does that belief of medical choices being “private” hold equally true for other diseases of interest to public health authorities, such as plague, syphilis or tuberculosis? Cholera? Smallpox?

Fair question. And my answer is, I don't know. I think that's a question of ethics, and it's why I'm currently reading a book on the ethics of vaccine mandates, written by a professor of medical ethics. One of the tenets of medical ethics (apparently) is that generally speaking, interventions must not be coerced. So strategies like financial incentives or disincentives (ie: losing your ability to make a living or being subject to fines) are by definition coercion, and so, generally unethical. That of course is balanced against what might be in the interest of doing the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The author's opinion is that, given COVID's low mortality rate for the vast majority of the population, it does not reach the ethical threshold required for allowing coerced vaccinations. This makes perfect sense to me, but admittedly, I'm biased because that's exactly what I felt before reading the book, so feel free to disagree. Your opinion will get you roughly the same mileage that mine gets me.

You can have your opinion of course, but it’s entirely at odds with the various public health acts in different provinces. You might be shocked at the powers government have to intervene forcibly in your health decisions, little-used though those powers may be.

Right you are. And I certainly was shocked when I started looking into this topic months ago. It's actually quite disturbing when you think of what those powers could mean for us, if our government were to play their game of politics in a careless manner.

[photofly]

So your objections are based only on your assessment of how dangerous COVID is or isn’t?

I guess that’s true for everyone. Nobody would support a lockdown for the common cold, for example.

[Vaticinator]

I wouldn't say it's only based on that, although that is probably the main underlying factor. The fact that we're approaching 90% of Canadians having had at least one dose weighs into that as well as do other factors to a lesser degree. I think the overall risk to the huge majority of the population is quite low to begin with (currently 1.3% mortality although prior to vaccines was at about 2%), and that low risk is further lowered once all first dose folks get the second jab and people get boosters. It is essentially a risk assessment that is obviously coloured by my personal appetite for risk weighed against my belief that people should be allowed to have complete autonomy over their own bodies while still being able to fully participate in society.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The inconvenient fact that the anti vaxers won’t acknowledge

Only around 13 % of the population is in unvaccinated but around 60% of the people admitted to hospital are unvaccinated and around 90 % of the ICU admissions with COVID are unvaccinated.

Those people who chose not to be vaccinated are why necessary Cancer and other important surgeries are being canceled.

Why do 13 % of the population get to overwhelm the health care system when taking a free fully approved vaccine will prevent the health care system for all Canadians from collapse ?

Choices have consequences, why do the anti vacers get to ignore the consequences of their choice ?

[Aviatard]

Using this line of argument to administer policy in other societal matters would have you immediately cast out of polite society as a vicious racist.
Why should it be different in this situation?

Because these things are not equivalent, despite your attempt to suggest that they are. Are you really suggesting that minorities who are mistreated because they’re minorities and had no choice in the matter, are the same as anti-vaxxers whose behavior and choices make them outcasts? Why are you anti-vaxxers so desperate to be seen as victims? You are not Africans beIng subjected to slavery, or Jews being subjected to the Holocaust. You are elevator-farters.

[Vaticinator]

The inconvenient fact that the anti vaxers won’t acknowledge

Only around 13 % of the population is in unvaccinated but around 60% of the people admitted to hospital are unvaccinated and around 90 % of the ICU admissions with COVID are unvaccinated.

Those people who chose not to be vaccinated are why necessary Cancer and other important surgeries are being canceled.

Why do 13 % of the population get to overwhelm the health care system when taking a free fully approved vaccine will prevent the health care system for all Canadians from collapse ?

Choices have consequences, why do the anti vacers get to ignore the consequences of their choice ?

That data is about 3 weeks old. It will be interesting to see the update. I suspect it will show a significant increase in the vaccinated ending up in ICUs. (I think the vaccines are far more "leaky" than advertised, and I don't think the pharma companies and governments were fully transparent in this matter. For this reason I don't think we can say with any certainty that the vaccines would prevent the collapse of the health care system. Remember that initially we were told we would only need to reach 75% vaccination rate to achieve herd immunity. The vaccines are helping, but are not performing as advertised.) However, it is safe to say that the unvaccinated will continue to be proportionally over represented in ICUs.

In light of the transmission rate of Omicron, I'm reevaluating my position on limiting access to certain things for the unvaxxed in order to preserve health care capacity. Restrictions may be wise, but I believe they must not be in perpetuity, and should only be for a limited time in order to get a handle on the situation. Which is unfortunate, because I still do not believe that any Canadian owes a debt of not getting sick, under any circumstance, to their fellow citizens. If that were the case, cigarettes and booze would be illegal, as would unhealthy food and a sedentary lifestyle. We all pay our debt to each other in the form of taxes that go to build the health care system that so many Canadians seem to have misplaced pride in. The failure is not of tax payers who become ill due to any circumstances. That would be a weird form of health communism. The failure falls, in my opinion, squarely on the governments who squander our significant tax dollars. We entrust them with huge portions of our income to build and maintain a robust system, which they have clearly failed to do.

[photofly]

Restrictions may be wise, but I believe they must not be in perpetuity, and should only be for a limited time in order to get a handle on the situation.

Welcome to the light side. You could have come to that conclusion in march 2020, but I guess better late than never.

Which is unfortunate, because I still do not believe that any Canadian owes a debt of not getting sick, under any circumstance, to their fellow citizens.

Straw man. Nobody has ever been asked to avoid getting sick "under any circumstance".

The failure falls, in my opinion, squarely on the governments who squander our significant tax dollars. We entrust them with huge portions of our income to build and maintain a robust system, which they have clearly failed to do.

Yes, it's always the government's fault. Obviously. Except I don't want the government to spaff gazillions of dollars on a healthcare system whose capacity wouldn't be needed if people would take free vaccines.

[Vaticinator]

Well, we can agree to disagree. Or not. I don't really care. Spend a gazillion on a good system or spend a gazillion on endless vaccines and boosters that don't live up to the hype. It's not as if the system wasn't broken already before covid.

[photofly]

Well, we can agree to disagree. Or not. I don't really care. Spend a gazillion on a good system or spend a gazillion on endless vaccines and boosters that don't live up to the hype.

I don't get your point about "living up to the hype". You know perfectly well that we had to wait and see how well vaccines work, and that their efficacy has varied against different variants.

I don't see endless vaccines. I see a double dose, with a booster, and talk of a second booster, because we're still in a pandemic situation.

A healthcare system is more than just hospitals, and the best healthcare system is one that prevents people from getting sick in the first place, and if they do get sick, prevents them from needing much interaction with that healthcare system. A great way to do that has been vaccines, which, I seem have to point out, actually are a product of our healthcare system, from design, and purchasing, all the way through to delivery. I'm sorry that Canada didn't have any vaccine manufacturing capacity, and that I think is a deficiency in the healthcare system that will be rectified.

[Posthumane]

That data is about 3 weeks old. It will be interesting to see the update. I suspect it will show a significant increase in the vaccinated ending up in ICUs. (I think the vaccines are far more "leaky" than advertised, and I don't think the pharma companies and governments were fully transparent in this matter. For this reason I don't think we can say with any certainty that the vaccines would prevent the collapse of the health care system. Remember that initially we were told we would only need to reach 75% vaccination rate to achieve herd immunity. The vaccines are helping, but are not performing as advertised.)

The vaccines are performing very much "as advertised" meaning they are functioning very well against the strains for which they were developed. When a new strain comes along much later against which the vaccines were never developed/tested, the fact that they are effective at all is a bonus. A vaccine against H1N1 influenza is not effective against H3N5, so if you get the H1N1 vaccine one year it's not expected to work against the H3N5 strain that comes along a year later. If you want the full effect of vaccination, you need to get another shot. That's just how the world works.

[Vaticinator]

Which Avcanada epidemiologist/vaccinologist should I believe? The one who says we will only need 4 shots, or the one who says we'll need new shots all the time? Maybe Pfizer can offer a subscription box service like Hello Fresh or Dollar Shave Club. "Take the guesswork out of vaccines! The hottest new vaccines curated for you and delivered right to your door every month! Don't let your efficacy wane!"