Does anyone know an Anti Covid vaxxer?
Discussion
Prof Prolapse said:
as I say it's spreading like wildfire amongst the unvaccinated and hospitalisations are now disproportionately high in that group. We are seeing first hand that those aged 25-44 are not as resistant as implied previously, so mild-moderate seems most fair, especially if we bring in economic factors due to time lost to work etc.
You can see it literally right now as I have pointed out, unvaccinated 25-44 year olds are now the largest group being hospitalised
Rather disingenous use of numbers there don't you think?You can see it literally right now as I have pointed out, unvaccinated 25-44 year olds are now the largest group being hospitalised
'hospitalisations are now disproportionately high in that group and 'largest group being hospitalised' simply reflects the fact that the older population that have made up over 80+% of all hospiatlisations previously have got jabbed up with consequent decrease in risk of severe illness and therefore the proportion of younger people (mostly unvaxxed) is now higher.
It does not mean that hospitalisation rate amongst the younger groups now if infected is meaningfully higher or lower than previously or that the 25-44 group are at any particularly higher risk. If you do have data showing that difference that estimated hospitalisations of 25-44 people now per 100k infected is higher though I'd be quite interested to see the source.
MYOB said:
MYOB said:
Prof Prolapse said:
Genuine question, to those who don't see the point in younger people taking the vaccine.
What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
On balance of probability, no. What's the rate of probability? What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
Nothing to respond to, it's just another vague meaningless statement isn't it?
As I’ve said before, the anti vaxxers are better off just using ‘because’ as a reason. As soon as they get into detail it’s one incorrect view after another, built up from misunderstood facts at best and pure fiction at worst.
To call it no worse than flu is daft now. It’s a March 2020 viewpoint and even then purely from the ignorant.
To claim that the vaccines don’t work flies in the face of their having resulted in a proven 75% reduction in hospitalisations.
And to completely ignore the fact that it will be the unvaccinated that will drive the next wave is wrong. It follows from this that they can have little regard for the wellbeing of others.
All in all there is no valid argument to be unvaccinated, and the round-in-circles efforts on here are grasping at straws.
To call it no worse than flu is daft now. It’s a March 2020 viewpoint and even then purely from the ignorant.
To claim that the vaccines don’t work flies in the face of their having resulted in a proven 75% reduction in hospitalisations.
And to completely ignore the fact that it will be the unvaccinated that will drive the next wave is wrong. It follows from this that they can have little regard for the wellbeing of others.
All in all there is no valid argument to be unvaccinated, and the round-in-circles efforts on here are grasping at straws.
V6 Pushfit said:
As I’ve said before, the anti vaxxers are better off just using ‘because’ as a reason. As soon as they get into detail it’s one incorrect view after another, built up from misunderstood facts at best and pure fiction at worst.
..... and the round-in-circles efforts on here are grasping at straws.
Says the person who posted this earlier......... and the round-in-circles efforts on here are grasping at straws.
V6 Pushfit said:
Having it once makes no difference to the risk or severity of catching ut again
Prof Prolapse said:
MYOB said:
MYOB said:
Prof Prolapse said:
Genuine question, to those who don't see the point in younger people taking the vaccine.
What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
On balance of probability, no. What's the rate of probability? What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
Nothing to respond to, it's just another vague meaningless statement isn't it?
isaldiri said:
Rather disingenous use of numbers there don't you think?
'hospitalisations are now disproportionately high in that group and 'largest group being hospitalised' simply reflects the fact that the older population that have made up over 80+% of all hospiatlisations previously have got jabbed up with consequent decrease in risk of severe illness and therefore the proportion of younger people (mostly unvaxxed) is now higher.
It does not mean that hospitalisation rate amongst the younger groups now if infected is meaningfully higher or lower than previously or that the 25-44 group are at any particularly higher risk. If you do have data showing that difference that estimated hospitalisations of 25-44 people now per 100k infected is higher though I'd be quite interested to see the source.
Never with intent. I think there's a real lack of understanding how little I give a s'hospitalisations are now disproportionately high in that group and 'largest group being hospitalised' simply reflects the fact that the older population that have made up over 80+% of all hospiatlisations previously have got jabbed up with consequent decrease in risk of severe illness and therefore the proportion of younger people (mostly unvaxxed) is now higher.
It does not mean that hospitalisation rate amongst the younger groups now if infected is meaningfully higher or lower than previously or that the 25-44 group are at any particularly higher risk. If you do have data showing that difference that estimated hospitalisations of 25-44 people now per 100k infected is higher though I'd be quite interested to see the source.
t about who gets the vaccine, but a spade is a spade.I don't understand who's point you're arguing. If your rationale is that the older population is no longer hospitalised after receiving the vaccine, then surely it demonstrates beyond any doubt that younger groups should be vaccinated?
I've got the hospital infection rate graphs. I get them from the https://www.travellingtabby.com/ who presents the data nicely. I'm not sure if they have the trend of age groups across the pandemic. To the best of my knowledge it is publicised as it's the basis for a lot of government guidance as I understand it at least.
As I said, facts are; a virus is claimed to be more prevalent in an age group, this age group isn't vaccinated as highly, that same group experiences higher levels of hospitalisations than other vaccinated groups. Seems pretty reasonable to join the dots and say that we can reduce hospitalisations in that group by increasing vaccine uptake. Which incidentally, is exactly what the experts are advising.
Prof Prolapse said:
As I said, facts are; a virus is claimed to be more prevalent in an age group, this age group isn't vaccinated as highly, that same group experiences higher levels of hospitalisations than other vaccinated groups. Seems pretty reasonable to join the dots and say that we can reduce hospitalisations in that group by increasing vaccine uptake. Which incidentally, is exactly what the experts are advising.
You're the one who raised the "balance of probability" earlier on. But you are refusing to provide the probability rate for this age group to be hospitalised with no vaccination. Prof Prolapse said:
Never with intent.
Oh really. Prof Prolapse said:
Seems pretty reasonable to join the dots and say that we can reduce hospitalisations in that group by increasing vaccine uptake. Which incidentally, is exactly what the experts are advising.
Yes we can. So?. I refer you to my earlier post above. Sure it might be sensible and the rational thing for most (even younger groups) to take the vaccine (well as I said not AZN and perhaps given myocarditis incidence after mRNA dose 2 in the younger end of the age groups at 18-25) because balance of probabilities it's in their favour.
it doesn't change the point repeatedly being made to you that - it should be personal choice to do so and not compulsion or coercion. We are allowed to do all manner of irrational things. The fact it might be rational to take the vaccines at younger age groups is not the issue. It's a low enough risk they can choose to run either risk they want as it doesn't particularly matter across the population.
MYOB said:
No, I'm asking you a question following your comments. What's the probability rate for hospitilisation with covid?
Google is your friend;https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-da...
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsi...
isaldiri said:
it doesn't change the point repeatedly being made to you that - it should be personal choice to do so and not compulsion or coercion. We are allowed to do all manner of irrational things. The fact it might be rational to take the vaccines at younger age groups is not the issue. It's a low enough risk they can choose to run either risk they want as it doesn't particularly matter across the population.
Depending on which age group you're referring to, it's not a point I'm not sure I'm arguing.Prof Prolapse said:
MYOB said:
No, I'm asking you a question following your comments. What's the probability rate for hospitilisation with covid?
Google is your friend;https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-da...
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsi...
You asked a question based on balance of probability but yet you cannot answer a simple question based on your question/comment.
All mouth and no trousers.
MYOB said:
Prof Prolapse said:
MYOB said:
No, I'm asking you a question following your comments. What's the probability rate for hospitilisation with covid?
Google is your friend;https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-da...
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsi...
You asked a question based on balance of probability but yet you cannot answer a simple question based on your question/comment.
All mouth and no trousers.
I provided you with the probability of hospitalisation from Covid-19.
On what level of reality are you actually operating on?
I mean you are literally a moron.
I'm done, merry weekend folks!
MYOB enjoy your colouring in!
Prof Prolapse said:
MYOB said:
Prof Prolapse said:
MYOB said:
No, I'm asking you a question following your comments. What's the probability rate for hospitilisation with covid?
Google is your friend;https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-da...
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsi...
You asked a question based on balance of probability but yet you cannot answer a simple question based on your question/comment.
All mouth and no trousers.
I provided you with the probability of hospitalisation from Covid-19.
On what level of reality are you actually operating on?
I mean you are literally a moron.
I'm done, merry weekend folks!
MYOB enjoy your colouring in!
The second link sets out how cases rises with age. Again, not answering the question.
As ever there are lies, damned lies and statistics. No doubt hospitalisations of younger people are increasing, but whether it's alarming or not depends on the scale. Below is a useful graphic for the worried:
The reality is that the numbers are so low to be almost irrelevant. You also have to factor in that people in those numbers are with covid, rather than because of covid. Since many of the 'young folk" have jobs or pursuits that can cause injury, it could also be the case that hardly any of them are in hospital because of the debilitating effects of covid, but because of other reasons.
The reality is that the numbers are so low to be almost irrelevant. You also have to factor in that people in those numbers are with covid, rather than because of covid. Since many of the 'young folk" have jobs or pursuits that can cause injury, it could also be the case that hardly any of them are in hospital because of the debilitating effects of covid, but because of other reasons.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff