Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

Even if they do, their unwillingness to get vaccinated is equivalent to walking into a minefield.  Its not discrimination, its sensibility. 

We already shell out a ton of money every year for nothing, why should we add more to the pile?  If they don't want the vaccine thats fine, it's their decision.  

But why should I bare the brunt of their decisions? If I get into a car accident and its my fault, my insurance rates go up, not everyone else's.  

Practice for a real covid infection.  Your body has been prepared for it if you got the vaccine. 

There are lost of cases we treat at hospitals everyday, that no one has any problems with, that had nothing to do with sensibility ,take suicide for instance, here is a trouble person that has unsuccessfully tried to take their life, and your tax dollars used for health dare are going to get burned up treating this person, drug over doses ,injured drunk drivers, stupid accidents like jumping school buses with a moped" watch this hold my beer ...we treat all of them no questions... except covid now we stop and ask do you have your shots sorry you'll have to leave...so why just covid we could save a bundle by having all of them just pay they're own way...or refuse them care , but that is not how we set our health care up right, we treat everyone. including murders shot by police, arsonist that burned down a school, terrorist that blew up a church here in Canada everyone is treated by medical staff, unless your unvaxed...

yes as soon as anything has to do with government there is going to be huge waste of everything money, time energy, etc...and yet for decades we are fine with that... except now for some reason, why ?

What do you really bare the brunt for, do we charge people who need rescue be it in the Atlantic or mountains do we go and look for them, or do we say stupid f***er that was your choice, good luck .

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

There are lost of cases we treat at hospitals everyday, that no one has any problems with, that had nothing to do with sensibility ,take suicide for instance, here is a trouble person that has unsuccessfully tried to take their life, and your tax dollars used for health dare are going to get burned up treating this person, drug over doses ,injured drunk drivers, stupid accidents like jumping school buses with a moped" watch this hold my beer ...we treat all of them no questions... except covid now we stop and ask do you have your shots sorry you'll have to leave...so why just covid we could save a bundle by having all of them just pay they're own way...or refuse them care , but that is not how we set our health care up right, we treat everyone. including murders shot by police, arsonist that burned down a school, terrorist that blew up a church here in Canada everyone is treated by medical staff, unless your unvaxed...

yes as soon as anything has to do with government there is going to be huge waste of everything money, time energy, etc...and yet for decades we are fine with that... except now for some reason, why ?

What do you really bare the brunt for, do we charge people who need rescue be it in the Atlantic or mountains do we go and look for them, or do we say stupid f***er that was your choice, good luck .

 

Why do you keep insisting that patients should be able to tell hospitals and doctors how to do their jobs and what is safe for their patients? When did you get a medical license? ? You bitch about the cost and waste yet support everything you can that will increase it.

We do not refuse treatment on the basis of poor life decisions but patients do not get to set the conditions under which they get treatment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

"Why do the protected need to be protected from the unprotected by forcing the unprotected to use the protection that did not protect the protected in the first place? "

 

Which protection isn't protecting the people who took them?

Do we have to uninstall car seatbelts? Shall we do rid of all safety guardrails infrastructure? Do we still need waterhydrants in the streets? Why am I not allowed to handle anthrax?

 

You place yourself outside society when you actively try to undermine its future and potential. Does this mean we need to force vaccination on everyone? No. Does this mean we should enact safeguards for certain activites or professions so that they do not endanger others who may or may not be so furtunate to be able to receive the vaccine? Yes.

 

Libertarians should find themselfes an island to be alone on.

 

I just read that on another site. 

Food for thought.  

 

4 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

There are lost of cases we treat at hospitals everyday, that no one has any problems with, that had nothing to do with sensibility ,take suicide for instance, here is a trouble person that has unsuccessfully tried to take their life, and your tax dollars used for health dare are going to get burned up treating this person, drug over doses ,injured drunk drivers, stupid accidents like jumping school buses with a moped" watch this hold my beer ...we treat all of them no questions... except covid now we stop and ask do you have your shots sorry you'll have to leave...so why just covid we could save a bundle by having all of them just pay they're own way...or refuse them care , but that is not how we set our health care up right, we treat everyone. including murders shot by police, arsonist that burned down a school, terrorist that blew up a church here in Canada everyone is treated by medical staff, unless your unvaxed...

yes as soon as anything has to do with government there is going to be huge waste of everything money, time energy, etc...and yet for decades we are fine with that... except now for some reason, why ?

What do you really bare the brunt for, do we charge people who need rescue be it in the Atlantic or mountains do we go and look for them, or do we say stupid f***er that was your choice, good luck .

 

People who want to suicide fine, they need help.  But when they try it in a way that can take someone with then then that's another story.  

Should I feel sympathy for the guy that wears a suicide bomb in a public area?  

If they were up in the mountains in need of rescue that would be due to some form of accident, not negligence.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

 

You place yourself outside society when you actively try to undermine its future and potential. Does this mean we need to force vaccination on everyone? No. Does this mean we should enact safeguards for certain activites or professions so that they do not endanger others who may or may not be so furtunate to be able to receive the vaccine? Yes.

 

Libertarians should find themselfes an island to be alone on.

 

I just read that on another site. 

Food for thought.  

We have enacted safe guards that for the most part have brought us up to this point, social distancing, face masks, if you are unvaccinated limited travel, meaning no going to unnecessary places like restaurants, while vaccinated people do not have that restriction... but now we are going above and beyond sensible, taking people off organ transplant lists, firing them from jobs, and in some cases not allowing them to practice their profession in the province every again...and a lot of people are good with all of that, no arguments. What i find troubling is if they are willing to go this far, watch a person die from not receiving medical treatment or destroy that persons career because they made a personal choice... and if all of that is kosher with everyone where does it go next week, arresting them, putting them in camps...i know thats what i thought when it came down to allowing someone to die....putting someone in camps is not a big jump from allowing them to die     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Army Guy said:

We have enacted safe guards that for the most part have brought us up to this point, social distancing, face masks, if you are unvaccinated limited travel, meaning no going to unnecessary places like restaurants, while vaccinated people do not have that restriction... but now we are going above and beyond sensible, taking people off organ transplant lists, firing them from jobs, and in some cases not allowing them to practice their profession in the province every again...and a lot of people are good with all of that, no arguments. What i find troubling is if they are willing to go this far, watch a person die from not receiving medical treatment or destroy that persons career because they made a personal choice... and if all of that is kosher with everyone where does it go next week, arresting them, putting them in camps...i know thats what i thought when it came down to allowing someone to die....putting someone in camps is not a big jump from allowing them to die     

If you went walking around downtown with a rifle in your hands how many people do you think would want to approach you, stand next to you or even talk to you? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

 

People who want to suicide fine, they need help.  But when they try it in a way that can take someone with then then that's another story.  

Should I feel sympathy for the guy that wears a suicide bomb in a public area?  

If they were up in the mountains in need of rescue that would be due to some form of accident, not negligence.  

My point is this Everyone in this country is entitled to medical care regardless if they are a murder, killer, terrorist, they all get the care they need in any Canadian hospital. with one exception if you don't have your covid shots...

there are dozens of cases of people told to stay out of avalanche areas and don't, or warned not to go in certain areas, and they do...same as boating accidents going fishing in a hurricane is never advisable and yet there are some dummies that go anyway... and SAR gos and gets these people regardless, or atleast makes the attempt... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

If you went walking around downtown with a rifle in your hands how many people do you think would want to approach you, stand next to you or even talk to you? 

Trust me , i was in the same frame of mind as you where, not so long ago, i have been vaccinated, but the restrictions are getting carried away now, and it is all a ploy to drive up the number of vaccinated as close to 100 as possible ...not that long ago the magic number was 75 % then 80, god knows what it is now...the goal posts are constantly moving...

Here in Canada you'd be lucky to get 500 ft with a rifle in downtown before being arrested by some swat unit...guns scare most Canadians to death apparently...

your not saying being non vaccinated is like holding a rifle downtown.... you do know that a vaccinated person can transmit the virus as well...all the vaccine does for you is increase the odds of you surviving covid... it does not cure you, or prevent you from becoming infected, so any one can carry and spread the virus. so everyone has a rifle in downtown,   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

If you went walking around downtown with a rifle in your hands how many people do you think would want to approach you, stand next to you or even talk to you? 

This is the same group stigmatization argument used in any number of blank group persecution including genocides. The danger to the others is associated not with a label but behavior and behavior is specific to an individual. A vaccinated individual often involved in risky behaviors can be infected and transmit infection (see recent studies) as much and more than a non vaccinated one consciously and carefully avoiding the risks. Group arguments and policies go counter to democratic values, are difficult or impossible to defend and eventually undermine credibility of the policies and authority that produces them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

My point is this Everyone in this country is entitled to medical care regardless if they are a murder, killer, terrorist, they all get the care they need in any Canadian hospital. with one exception if you don't have your covid shots...

there are dozens of cases of people told to stay out of avalanche areas and don't, or warned not to go in certain areas, and they do...same as boating accidents going fishing in a hurricane is never advisable and yet there are some dummies that go anyway... and SAR gos and gets these people regardless, or atleast makes the attempt... 

Again, they are only putting themselves in danger.  Would SAR walk on really thin ice and risk their lives to save them?  These anti vaxxers really don't care if they put everyone around them at risk.  

Can people smoke in public buildings anymore?    I remember the lounge at the Skydome, you could barely see anyone inside.  Now thats gone.  Can we drink in public?  

People need to get used to the idea that the 80's are over. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

I love how all these so called libertarian, independent thinkers get their knickers in a knot when they have to be accountable for their own decisions. 

What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? Who's trying to avoid accountability? 

Quote

So tell me, what logic would someone who won't get vaccinated use to get a blood transfusion from someone who has? You know damn well that someone getting an organ transplant is likely to need several pints of blood during their surgery and the odds are that blood donor will be fully vaccinated. Blood donor clinics might not even take people who haven't been vaccinated.

OMG, did that actually make sense to you when you said it?

Are people with aids just never allowed to get a transfusion for the rest of their lives now, just because they can't give blood?

When people need blood, do the hospital staff look through their records to see if they've ever donated blood, and if the answer's no, they should be denied?  

Dr Love: "Wellllll, looky here. Seems like little girl Tricia here has never given blood before. Been on this planet six long years and never even thought to give up a drop of her precious blood, now she needs a transfusion. How about of you just go on home and die now, Trishy? Just die. We don't give blood to people who've never donated before!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, myata said:

This is the same group stigmatization argument used in any number of blank group persecution including genocides. The danger to the others is associated not with a label but behavior and behavior is specific to an individual. A vaccinated individual often involved in risky behaviors can be infected and transmit infection (see recent studies) as much and more than a non vaccinated one consciously and carefully avoiding the risks. Group arguments and policies go counter to democratic values, are difficult or impossible to defend and eventually undermine credibility of the policies and authority that produces them.

False.

Studies show that while both the vaccinated and unvaccinated can have similar levels of the virus in their bodies, the vaccinated are less likely to pass it on to others. Plus, ‘COVID toes’ and a pill to treat COVID at home.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? Who's trying to avoid accountability? 

OMG, did that actually make sense to you when you said it?

Are people with aids just never allowed to get a transfusion for the rest of their lives now, just because they can't give blood?

When people need blood, do the hospital staff look through their records to see if they've ever donated blood, and if the answer's no, they should be denied?  

Dr Love: "Wellllll, looky here. Seems like little girl Tricia here has never given blood before. Been on this planet six long years and never even thought to give up a drop of her precious blood, now she needs a transfusion. How about of you just go on home and die now, Trishy? Just die. We don't give blood to people who've never donated before!"

Where did I ever say people shouldn't be given blood but why would a confirmed antivaxxer want contaminated blood from a vaccinated person, considering all the nasty things they say these vaccines can do.

People with AIDS aren't donating blood. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

If you went walking around downtown with a rifle in your hands how many people do you think would want to approach you, stand next to you or even talk to you? 

Theoretically you have body armour on, and you're advocating for everyone in the country to be forced to wear body armour, but you are admitting that your body armour doesn't really work.

Some of us feel like we won't benefit from wearing body armour and we definitely feel like the fact that we're not wearing body armour won't stop your body armour from working.

And FYI, people wearing body armour still carry guns. That's the science, according to Fauci.

Your analogy is just a bit flawed, see?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

False.

Studies show that while both the vaccinated and unvaccinated can have similar levels of the virus in their bodies, the vaccinated are less likely to pass it on to others. 

That's incredibly stupid. 

You're telling me that two people can both have a billion viruses in their nose but somehow the vaccine stos them from leaving if you have covid? 

Why are the vaxxed less likely to pass it on? Because they have no friends?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

Theoretically you have body armour on, and you're advocating for everyone in the country to be forced to wear body armour, but you are admitting that your body armour doesn't really work.

Some of us feel like we won't benefit from wearing body armour and we definitely feel like the fact that we're not wearing body armour won't stop your body armour from working.

And FYI, people wearing body armour still carry guns. That's the science, according to Fauci.

Your analogy is just a bit flawed, see?

Hey thats fine, you don't want to wear the body armour then don't ask me to buy you a rifle.  

 

Use a rock. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Where did I ever say people shouldn't be given blood but why would a confirmed antivaxxer want contaminated blood from a vaccinated person, considering all the nasty things they say these vaccines can do.

People with AIDS aren't donating blood. 

FYI white blood cells are removed from donated blood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

Again, they are only putting themselves in danger.  Would SAR walk on really thin ice and risk their lives to save them?  These anti vaxxers really don't care if they put everyone around them at risk.  

Can people smoke in public buildings anymore?    I remember the lounge at the Skydome, you could barely see anyone inside.  Now thats gone.  Can we drink in public?  

People need to get used to the idea that the 80's are over. 

Yes SAR goes out on thin ice, i could send you a video if you want, in fact they have saved pets on thin ice. And of course there was a military SAR team that parachuted  onto to a floating ice burg in the Atlantic to save an Inuit boy... Again your painting everyone with the same brush, the only persons they are putting into danger is themselves, most are following the restrictions put in place, so how are they putting you in danger. like i said a million times even the vaccinated can spread the virus so everyone is a loaded gun...

We are not talking about not smoking in buildings or the 80's , we are talking about the restrictions getting way out of hand, like firing someone from their jobs , or taking them off life saving organ transplant lists...and they are only trending up fro here... what do you think is next to get everyone vaccinated.. 

Edited by Army Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

That's incredibly stupid. 

You're telling me that two people can both have a billion viruses in their nose but somehow the vaccine stos them from leaving if you have covid? 

Why are the vaxxed less likely to pass it on? Because they have no friends?

https://www.govexec.com/management/2021/09/no-vaccinated-people-are-not-just-likely-spread-coronavirus-unvaccinated-people/185562/

 

Despite concern about waning immunity, vaccines provide the best protection against infection. And if someone isn’t infected, they can’t spread the coronavirus. It’s truly that simple. Additionally, for those instances of a vaccinated person getting a breakthrough case, yes, they can be as infectious as an unvaccinated person. But they are likely contagious for a shorter period of time when compared with the unvaccinated, and they may harbor less infectious virus overall.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

False.

Studies show that while both the vaccinated and unvaccinated can have similar levels of the virus in their bodies, the vaccinated are less likely to pass it on to others. Plus, ‘COVID toes’ and a pill to treat COVID at home.

 

No, you just don't know how to read those studies or aren't honest about what you read. In the best case of one specific vaccine among many combinations used in this country, and only for a limited time (maximum of 3 months) vaccination offers significant, up to 60% reduction in transmission. That is approximately one third probability of a non vaccinated individual and at that level can be easily compensated by a difference in behavior. But we cannot repeat vaccinations every three months and by that time the rates of transmission even out between the groups.

People pumping simplistic and incorrect picture can actually increase the risks for the vulnerable. For example, many of care workers were vaccinated before summer and it means that by now their rate of transmission is similar to those of non vaccinated. Yet pumping vaccine uber alles propaganda can create a false sense of security where there's actually little or none. In that regard propaganda folks aren't that different with regards to intelligence and responsibility between the antivaxx or pro vac at all cost camps.

Reason lies somewhere else, in a different direction or dimension. In an intelligent approach vaccination is not a silver bullet panacea to pray on, but a tool in a toolbox with its own advantages, and limitations that can and should be used with full understanding of what it does, what it can do and cannot. An intelligent authority understands that maintaining trust and credibility with the population through open, clear and honest communication, fulfilling promises and achieving results (and admitting errors and shortcomings) is no less and probably more important than reporting some magic number. Why would we want to mention it here though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, myata said:

No, you just don't know how to read those studies or aren't honest about what you read. In the best case of one specific vaccine among many combinations used in this country, and only for a limited time (maximum of 3 months) vaccination offers significant, up to 60% reduction in transmission. That is approximately one third probability of a non vaccinated individual and at that level can be easily compensated by a difference in behavior. But we cannot repeat vaccinations every three months and by that time the rates of transmission even out between the groups.

People pumping simplistic and incorrect picture can actually increase the risks for the vulnerable. For example, many of care workers were vaccinated before summer and it means that by now their rate of transmission is similar to those of non vaccinated. Yet pumping vaccine uber alles propaganda can create a false sense of security where there's actually little or none. In that regard propaganda folks aren't that different with regards to intelligence and responsibility between the antivaxx or pro vac at all cost camps.

Reason lies somewhere else, in a different direction or dimension. In an intelligent approach vaccination is not a silver bullet panacea to pray on, but a tool in a toolbox with its own advantages, and limitations that can and should be used with full understanding of what it does, what it can do and cannot. An intelligent authority understands that maintaining trust and credibility with the population through open, clear and honest communication, fulfilling promises and achieving results (and admitting errors and shortcomings) is no less and probably more important than reporting some magic number. Why would we want to mention it here though.

What good is a tool if you just leave it in the tool box?  I can't fix my car without them( or anyone else's for that matter)

 

I get what your saying though, and yes it's true that this doesn't make one "bulletproof" or not capable of spreading the virus, but it has been proven to help fight the real infection when used properly.

 

Again, wearing a seat belt doesn't mean you won't die in a car wreck, but it can save your life in many cases.

Edited by Cannucklehead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cannucklehead said:

Think of it like boxing.  If I put you into the ring against a heavyweight contender how much of a chance would you have?

 

Now what if I put you through some training first?  

Your analogy is totally flawed.

You my friend are a member of the public outside the rink.

How much chance do you have against the heavyweight contender if the other guy gets training or not? 

Your chance is bloody the same! It is not your fight.

What kind of training the other guy wants to take is up to him, not you.

Edited by cougar
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...