How many have been vaccinated so far?
Discussion
Sway said:
Whilst the unvaxxed aren't currently dying in large numbers, that very thing creates greater opportunity for mutation that could cause them to die in larger numbers...
And no, my post doesn't imply that at all. You infer it due to the lens you're applying to everything relating to this. Just like when assumed that I hadn't been impacted personally financially...
The likelihood of it happening is irrelevant to how you'd feel in the event it happens . Is a hypothetical scenario so difficult for you to imagine? That might explain a fair amount.
Well I deal with expected probability of events and judge them as such. And I didn't assume you weren't impacted financially in the other thread, I merely stated someone who was impacted financially might not be so blase about having 5 more weeks of being screwed around by the government for no particularly good reason other than providing more political arse covering. You clearly are perfectly ok with it, many other people are not. And no, my post doesn't imply that at all. You infer it due to the lens you're applying to everything relating to this. Just like when assumed that I hadn't been impacted personally financially...
The likelihood of it happening is irrelevant to how you'd feel in the event it happens . Is a hypothetical scenario so difficult for you to imagine? That might explain a fair amount.
In your fantasy scenario, yeah fine it'll be a little grim if sars-cov2 turned into motaba due to some mutation. duh. So? If we are going to be worrying about every single potentially devastating event no matter what the probability of that actually happening is then I'm not sure how society will ever function in doing anything. What's your point then if it does?
Edited by isaldiri on Friday 16th April 20:05
isaldiri said:
Vaccines are so far all primarily focused on the spike protein. It's a little bit different from the more general infection recovery immune system response as I understand things. but anyway a little irrelevant.
Mutations are random but in say a population that is largely vaccinated, your probability of a mutation arising that is capable of resisting the vaccine is (considerably) higher because it has to be able to do so to spread than that same mutation arising out of the mutations happening in an unexposed population where there isn't the same level of resistance. Whether that probability is greater with admittedly much less infections but higher probability of doing so when it does but more infections but less probability of that mutation as it isn't required to spread isn't obvious.
And my point about you espousing zerocovid is because that is the consequence of you wanting to keep infections low/minimal forever. that is zerocovid in all but name whether you are directly stating it or not.
Where did I say “forever”? I suspect there will be a long wait for you to find that. However, that is I think irrelevant, as you are persisting with this binary view of zero Covid, once cases are low and we have a population with an enduring appropriate level of resistance it should become completely manageable, in the same way that mumps is not eradicated in the UK, but it has very low incidence mainly thanks to an ongoing vaccination programme.Mutations are random but in say a population that is largely vaccinated, your probability of a mutation arising that is capable of resisting the vaccine is (considerably) higher because it has to be able to do so to spread than that same mutation arising out of the mutations happening in an unexposed population where there isn't the same level of resistance. Whether that probability is greater with admittedly much less infections but higher probability of doing so when it does but more infections but less probability of that mutation as it isn't required to spread isn't obvious.
And my point about you espousing zerocovid is because that is the consequence of you wanting to keep infections low/minimal forever. that is zerocovid in all but name whether you are directly stating it or not.
Edited by isaldiri on Friday 16th April 19:53
Polio is not eradicated worldwide and the last case in the UK was nearly 40 years ago but we still vaccinate for it. Having known someone (now dead) who was appallingly impacted by polio I certainly wouldn’t want to see that return.
HappyMidget said:
Canada faces third wave as variants leave young people in intensive care
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/canada-f...
“Patients coming to the hospital, and certainly in the intensive care unit, now are younger. Many of them have been previously quite healthy.
“In my ICU we’ve seen some 20-year-olds and certainly 30, 40, 50-year-olds. It’s a shift in the demographic downwards towards younger patients.”
This is exactly what was said over here in the UK near Christmas, when they delved into the figures, the average age from hospital admissions went from about 70 to 68 (an example I can't remember exactly), and there was like one 20 year, one 30 year old and then a decent amount of 40s of 50s.https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/canada-f...
“Patients coming to the hospital, and certainly in the intensive care unit, now are younger. Many of them have been previously quite healthy.
“In my ICU we’ve seen some 20-year-olds and certainly 30, 40, 50-year-olds. It’s a shift in the demographic downwards towards younger patients.”
Matt.. said:
Also, have you checked the news and seen how there are variants out there causing higher risk of death and affecting younger people? Not following advice to vaccinate will increase the chance of further mutations. These mutations could reduce the risk of the virus, but they could also increase it.
Where are all these variants that are killing or affecting younger people? I'm calling nonsense on that, but happy to be corrected.Leicester Loyal said:
HappyMidget said:
Canada faces third wave as variants leave young people in intensive care
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/canada-f...
“Patients coming to the hospital, and certainly in the intensive care unit, now are younger. Many of them have been previously quite healthy.
“In my ICU we’ve seen some 20-year-olds and certainly 30, 40, 50-year-olds. It’s a shift in the demographic downwards towards younger patients.”
This is exactly what was said over here in the UK near Christmas, when they delved into the figures, the average age from hospital admissions went from about 70 to 68 (an example I can't remember exactly), and there was like one 20 year, one 30 year old and then a decent amount of 40s of 50s.https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/canada-f...
“Patients coming to the hospital, and certainly in the intensive care unit, now are younger. Many of them have been previously quite healthy.
“In my ICU we’ve seen some 20-year-olds and certainly 30, 40, 50-year-olds. It’s a shift in the demographic downwards towards younger patients.”
Matt.. said:
Also, have you checked the news and seen how there are variants out there causing higher risk of death and affecting younger people? Not following advice to vaccinate will increase the chance of further mutations. These mutations could reduce the risk of the virus, but they could also increase it.
Where are all these variants that are killing or affecting younger people? I'm calling nonsense on that, but happy to be corrected.Not something that the BBC said about Brazil
Leicester Loyal said:
Matt.. said:
Also, have you checked the news and seen how there are variants out there causing higher risk of death and affecting younger people? Not following advice to vaccinate will increase the chance of further mutations. These mutations could reduce the risk of the virus, but they could also increase it.
Where are all these variants that are killing or affecting younger people? I'm calling nonsense on that, but happy to be corrected.oh wait.... actually it er.. isn't...
isaldiri said:
This might help, comparison to the earlier wave with the new super scary P1 variant that's killing oh so many more young people.
oh wait.... actually it er.. isn't...
Hang on a minute - you're thinking like a normal person not a journalist.oh wait.... actually it er.. isn't...
A journalist would read those stats for 30 to 50 year olds and see "NEW COVID IS KILLING OVER 20% MORE YOUNG PEOPLE THAN LAST YEAR"
Second jabs for Mrs F and myself yesterday. No adverse reaction so far, bit tired and sleepy last night but then had been up and about since 4:30 am so not unexpected.
All PCR swab tests so far also negative for all family.12 in total for me since Jun20.
Carrying on, carrying on, keeping calm and behaving.
All PCR swab tests so far also negative for all family.12 in total for me since Jun20.
Carrying on, carrying on, keeping calm and behaving.
Biker 1 said:
purplepenguin said:
When will the booster jabs be starting?
I'm guessing they'll need to start rolling it out end of June, 6 months after the programme started - or is 12 months between boosters being suggested?!purplepenguin said:
Biker 1 said:
purplepenguin said:
When will the booster jabs be starting?
I'm guessing they'll need to start rolling it out end of June, 6 months after the programme started - or is 12 months between boosters being suggested?!sherman said:
purplepenguin said:
Biker 1 said:
purplepenguin said:
When will the booster jabs be starting?
I'm guessing they'll need to start rolling it out end of June, 6 months after the programme started - or is 12 months between boosters being suggested?!purplepenguin said:
I believe the head of Pfizer has mentioned it
There's a surprise...How long ago though?
There's always been the scientific position of not being able to rule out boosters, etc., until there's sufficient data regarding the duration of protection.
Plenty of vaccines don't require boosters or annual variant jabs.
So I'd be working on the basis of they aren't needed until they're proven that they are...
Biker 1 said:
purplepenguin said:
When will the booster jabs be starting?
I'm guessing they'll need to start rolling it out end of June, 6 months after the programme started - or is 12 months between boosters being suggested?!https://news.sky.com/story/people-will-likely-need...
The vaccination programme started Dec-20 with 2nd jab commencing late Feb-21, so the booster jab could start anytime around late Aug-21.
Sway said:
There's a surprise...
How long ago though?
There's always been the scientific position of not being able to rule out boosters, etc., until there's sufficient data regarding the duration of protection.
Plenty of vaccines don't require boosters or annual variant jabs.
So I'd be working on the basis of they aren't needed until they're proven that they are...
Yesterday: linky How long ago though?
There's always been the scientific position of not being able to rule out boosters, etc., until there's sufficient data regarding the duration of protection.
Plenty of vaccines don't require boosters or annual variant jabs.
So I'd be working on the basis of they aren't needed until they're proven that they are...
Some do... like flu.We know there are variants so it's reasonable to assume that annual jabs against the leading variants is logical?
Sway said:
purplepenguin said:
I believe the head of Pfizer has mentioned it
There's a surprise...How long ago though?
There's always been the scientific position of not being able to rule out boosters, etc., until there's sufficient data regarding the duration of protection.
Plenty of vaccines don't require boosters or annual variant jabs.
So I'd be working on the basis of they aren't needed until they're proven that they are...
I think I’ll wait and see
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff