Jump to content

Canada at the start of Delta dominated fourth Covid wave, so get vaccinated to save lives.


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Something I don't think gets enough attention are therapeutics. Evidence keeps quietly appearing that they're more effective at controlling the effects of the disease than first claimed by people like Flip Flop Fauci and his crowd.

I've been noticing there are some who like to find and holler about any little spike in infections but the "Active Cases" stat on Worldometer graphs is never that scary. 

Maybe the companies that are making therapeutics just don't have a strong enough lobbyist pre$ence. 

I bet that their popularity in Canada would soar if they hired Marge Trudeau to speak at some events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, taxme said:

The WHO(worldhealthorganization)has reported these numbers. Not me. I could be wrong though with the number. Bad info. Just saying.

Like I mentioned in an earlier post, I think that you used the world's number for the USA. It is 1.4M per year, but that's for the entire planet.

Zero of those people are wealthy or influential though, so it goes "unnoticed". 

I can guarantee you that if TB only killed 14 people per year, but they were all wealthy or they were famous actors, TB would be considered an existential threat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Majority of Canadians support mandatory Covid vaccination.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/majority-of-canadians-support-mandatory-vaccinations-nanos-survey-1.5536106

Good for Canada which is unique to have some 75% very wise people.

That's a propaganda network's way of saying "This is the will of the sheeple!"

You'll see he same kind of state propaganda if you go to NoKo. "75% of the population is against allowing a 4th style of haircut in North Korea. The 'Glorius Leader' is still the most popular cut for the twentieth year in a row."

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

That's a propaganda network's way of saying "This is the will of the sheeple!"

You'll see he same kind of state propaganda if you go to NoKo. "75% of the population is against allowing a 4th style of haircut in North Korea. The 'Glorius Leader' is still the most popular cut for the twentieth year in a row."

It is propaganda now? I thought it is government conspiracy to plant some kind of microchips or something on all of us!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the first paragraph from your link Citizen:

Quote

OTTAWA -- More than half of Canadians agree with mandatory vaccinations for people who can be vaccinated to stop the spread of COVID-19 variants, according to a new poll from Nanos Research.

And here's the problem with that:

Mandatory vaccinations won't stop the spread of Covid-19 variants.

So I'm sorry, what was your point again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Here's the first paragraph from your link Citizen:

And here's the problem with that:

Mandatory vaccinations won't stop the spread of Covid-19 variants.

So I'm sorry, what was your point again?

Two things happen when people are vaccinated:

1) The symptoms are almost all gone. Which results in not dying for pretty much anyone who gets it.

2) Due to non-existent, or very low symptoms, the ability to spread the virus is drastically reduced.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2021 at 1:47 PM, Argus said:

As long as the people dying are unvaccinated - even though they could have been vaccinated - I'm fine with that. Let them die. Their choice and no loss to society.

Unfortunately we all pay the price for their selfish choice. The vaccinated people can still get it from them and even die even though it will be very rare (thanks to vaccines) but it can happen especially those vaccinated who are immune compromised. And in addition, hospitalization will go up again and provincial governments may have to impose lockdowns again and we lose our normal lives again and will be locked in our homes again not to mention the economy will take a dive again and many of us will lose our jobs again. Not to mention a vaccine resistant mutation may arrive again as the unvaccinated people will allow the virus to thrive and mutate in their bodies. 

Public health and health of everyone supersedes selfish people who think they have a right which they do not have!. That is why we banned drunk driving and public smoking as for same reasons governments should find the balls to make vaccination mandatory or a ban on unvaccinated people to leave home and endanger others.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, myata said:

Maybe we could try next mandatory prosperity and obligatory happiness? And why not, like where are the bounds and barriers?

The bound and barriers are very clear and that is WHEN YOUR ACTION ENDANGER OTHER PEOPLE'S HEALTH AND LIVES then we need action from law makers and legislators to push or force those selfish people who may drive drunk or smoke in public to stop or refuse life saving )lives of others) vaccinations to get vaccinated.

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anti-vaxxer who encouraged others of not getting the vaccines died of Covid.

https://www.wionews.com/world/radio-host-and-anti-vaxxer-dick-farrel-dies-of-covid-urges-friends-to-get-vaccinated-before-death-404093

Although he had urged people to not get vaccinated, even in the month of June, after getting infected by the deadly coronavirus, he apparently called his close friends and requested them to get vaccinated against coronavirus as soon as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

The bound and barriers are very clear and that is WHEN YOUR ACTION ENDANGER OTHER PEOPLE'S HEALTH AND LIVES then we need action from law makers and legislators to push or force those selfish people who may drive drunk or smoke in public to stop or refuse life saving )lives of others) vaccinations to get vaccinated.

And who would decide what action endangers and what not? Does industrial and plastic pollution endanger? How about out of control logging and burning fossil fuel it doesn't endanger anything?

The Glorious and Supreme Leader aka "Public Health Authority" will decide what's good for everybody, no questions asked, no evidence and explanation needed, no controls, accountability and oversight? If so, congratulations, we already arrived. And it wasn't even close to five centuries as with some republics in history.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, myata said:

And who would decide what action endangers and what not? Does industrial and plastic pollution endanger? How about out of control logging and burning fossil fuel it doesn't endanger anything?

The Glorious and Supreme Leader aka "Public Health Authority" will decide what's good for everybody, no questions asked, no evidence and explanation needed, no controls, accountability and oversight? If so, congratulations, we already arrived. And it wasn't even close to five centuries as with some republics in history.

Yeah I don’t want to live in some totalitarian nanny state where government decides how much freedom I deserve based on “public safety”.   We’re supposed to have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms to protect our liberal democracy, including freedom of movement and the right to earn a livelihood.  There’s simply no further justification for pandemic restrictions.  Encourage people to get the jab, sure.  Take precautions to protect yourself and your loved ones and let us live life free to use our talents to achieve what we can unencumbered by government overreach.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

We’re supposed to have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms to protect our liberal democracy, including freedom of movement and the right to earn a livelihood. 

Right, it's just too bad that the courts have decided to basically look the other way till the end of the pandemics. And who will decide when it ended? Right you are. Catch-22 and conflict of interest but I mean who even bothers to notice them anymore in this country?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, myata said:

And who would decide what action endangers and what not? Does industrial and plastic pollution endanger? How about out of control logging and burning fossil fuel it doesn't endanger anything?

The Glorious and Supreme Leader aka "Public Health Authority" will decide what's good for everybody, no questions asked, no evidence and explanation needed, no controls, accountability and oversight? If so, congratulations, we already arrived. And it wasn't even close to five centuries as with some republics in history.

It has been already established that drunk driving, smoking in public and  overwhelming infections in unvaccinated and virus mutations , the rest has yet to be established. It is like you say who decides that murder and robbery is wrong!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

It has been already established that drunk driving, smoking in public and  overwhelming infections in unvaccinated and virus mutations , the rest has yet to be established. It is like you say who decides that murder and robbery is wrong!!!!

How hard is it to get that authority without accountability is equivalent to dictatorship? No matter how and with what it is justified. Every single dictator with a minimal self-respect has a solid, strong and infallible justification. If only because there's nothing or nobody that could challenge it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, myata said:

How hard is it to get that authority without accountability is equivalent to dictatorship? No matter how and with what it is justified. Every single dictator with a minimal self-respect has a solid, strong and infallible justification. If only because there's nothing or nobody that could challenge it.

Answer this, Are you saying that drunk driving should be allowed and making it illegal is dictatorship?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Answer this, Are you saying that drunk driving should be allowed and making it illegal is dictatorship?? 

But one can drive anywhere without drinking then drink on arrival.  There are and have been restrictions on our movements that we could not circumvent, no matter how much we “behave” ourselves.  I’m not even saying that there aren’t times when public safety requires people to stay home, but any such restrictions must be highly conditional and exceptional.  We simply don’t have crisis conditions that justify such restrictions anymore.  Moreover, we must be very critical of claims of crisis, as it can be used to justify many infringements on liberty.  I already think we’re being prepped for more under the auspices of “climate crisis”.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

But one can drive anywhere without drinking then drink on arrival.  

Why are you distorting facts. Of course they can drink on arrival. No one said drinking should be banned. This is not some middle eastern idiotic republic where they ban alcohol. But if they drink upon arrival then afterwards they must not drive under influence because their driving is impaired and cars become a weapon to kill so they endanger other people's lives and hence drunk driving is banned. AGAIN I AM ASKING IF YOU ARE AGAINST A BAN ON DRINKING AND DRIVING WHILE UNDER INFLUENCE???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Why are you distorting facts. Of course they can drink on arrival. No one said drinking should be banned. This is not some middle eastern idiotic republic where they ban alcohol. But if they drink upon arrival then afterwards they must not drive under influence because their driving is impaired and cars become a weapon to kill so they endanger other people's lives and hence drunk driving is banned. AGAIN I AM ASKING IF YOU ARE AGAINST A BAN ON DRINKING AND DRIVING WHILE UNDER INFLUENCE???

Of course, but that’s a false equivalence to the lockdowns.  Apples and oranges.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

It has been already established that drunk driving, smoking in public and  overwhelming infections in unvaccinated and virus mutations , the rest has yet to be established. It is like you say who decides that murder and robbery is wrong!!!!

I just read today how much drunk driving has increased in Ontario during the covid shutdown. No one is disputing the need for safety but it myst also be reasonable. There are consequences for these things and there are secondary harms.

The comparison to drunk driving does not hold up for other reasons. I am not drunk, did not drink and did not wilfully command a vehicle in circumstances that are clearly defined by law.

I am just a person who wants to go outside.

Edited by OftenWrong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

 

I am just a person who wants to go outside.

If you are not vaccinated similarly you pose a threat to others as the chances you are infected is much higher than vaccinated ones not to mention mutations.

When driving anyone poses a threat as many drivers have killed in accidents while sober however, the chances to kill in accidents increases substantially when drunk. In this case too vaccinated people can transmit the virus too but those not vaccinated have a substantial increase in risk of transmission as well as getting sick. They are very similar.

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

If you are not vaccinated similarly you pose a threat to others as the chances you are infected is much higher than vaccinated ones not to mention mutations.

I question what percentage of death is acceptable? 2% of the known infected? 0%? 

For this we must assume the individual is infected (by the original variant) and viral shedding occurs. Keep in mind if any of the below individuals is infected and the virus is replicating, variants of the virus will occurs, but with unlikely genetically favorable changes. 

If you are vaccinated, you pose a low threat due to lower viral shedding numbers. 

If you are not vaccinated, yet have natural immunity, you pose a low threat due to lower viral shredding numbers.

If you are not vaccinated nor post infect(have no natural immunity), your viral shedding is likely to be higher, thus likely to infect more people. 

In all cases, all individuals shedding the virus pose a threat to the public health and safety. If the standard is 0% infected, no individual who is infected should, by your standard, be allowed to interact with the public?

If the individuals are not infected, there is no public threat. Given the individuals are not infected, vaccinated, unvaccinated natural immunity or unvaccinated should not be prevented from interacting with the public.  Following your analogy, no one has had any alcoholic drinks, thus everyone can drive.

However keep in mind this is for the original variant, other variants may increase viral shedding of both the vaccinated and unvaccinated natural immunity. 

One could make the argument that if you test positive for the virus you should isolate for 3+ weeks ( depending on viral shedding). I think most would agree with this, especially when this naturally occurs during influenza outbreaks. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...