Restrictions Continue for the Vaccinated

[Zeitgeist]

As evidenced by workplace protocols being implemented right now, you will still need to wear masks if you are vaccinated.  Though I’ve supported vaccination, it’s clear that restrictions aren’t ending for the vaccinated who are willing to provide evidence that they are vaccinated.  This is a serious violation of human freedom.  Sadly, I don’t think it will change no matter how much of the population gets vaccinated.  Stand up against unjust restrictions.  

Edited September 2, 2021 by Zeitgeist

[CITIZEN_2015]

Yes it is an unfortunate situation.  I am going to be frank about it. The truth is that restrictions continues because A small minority of people in Canada out of complete selfishness or misinformation refused to vaccinate themselves and help to establish herd immunity. About two-thirds of new infections and 90% of hospitalizations are among the unvaccinated people (even though their numbers is less than a third of those vaccinated), and the other third of new infections ( vaccinated people) who were infected likely got that from n unvaccinated individuals.

It is not their body their choice because their choice may cause harm and death to others in community. It is not their freedom of choice and right to choose because it infringes on the safety and lives of others in their community. Elected governments in Ontario and Quebec have introduced vaccine passports and will ban those who pose risks to the community from taking part in communal activities and make the life hopefully very hard on those people so that they are forced to make the right choice.

Yes to vaccine passports and no to lockdowns and restrictions for vaccinated people.

Edited September 3, 2021 by CITIZEN_2015

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

As evidenced by workplace protocols being implemented right now, you will still need to wear masks if you are vaccinated.  Though I’ve supported vaccination, it’s clear that restrictions aren’t ending for the vaccinated who are willing to provide evidence that they are vaccinated.  This is a serious violation of human freedom.  Sadly, I don’t think it will change no matter how much of the population gets vaccinated.  Stand up against unjust restrictions.  

You ain't seen nothin yet. Check out videos in New Zealand, Germany, cops kick the crap out of someone because they didn't want to wear their oh-so-useless mask.

And mask ain't even it. They're saying they need to scale back the amount of social contact that is taking place by about 15% in order to control the next wave. That means more social distancing measures like restrictions on numbers allowed to socialize.

[Zeitgeist]

7 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

You ain't seen nothin yet. Check out videos in New Zealand, Germany, cops kick the crap out of someone because they didn't want to wear their oh-so-useless mask.

And mask ain't even it. They're saying they need to scale back the amount of social contact that is taking place by about 15% in order to control the next wave. That means more social distancing measures like restrictions on numbers allowed to socialize.

Yup it’s all a flagrant violation of basic human rights.  I hope to God that there are mass protests that pressure governments to end all restrictions immediately.  People have been seriously weakened and conditioned to live a mindless sheepish existence segregated from one another.  They’re too weak by now, too ignorant and brainwashed to see the true level of risk.  They can no longer make a connection between the depression, powerlessness, and frustration that they feel and the restrictions that cause these feelings.  You are being mandated to carry papers to prove you’ve been vaccinated on top of having to wear masks and follow continued restrictions.  Vaccines were supposed to return us to normal life.  They have not.  End the tyranny of public health fascism or expect to spend the rest of your lives masked, segregated from others, and made to police your own movements and behaviour, as well as the movements and behaviour of others, if it kills you.   Wake up!

[Winston]

11 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Yes it is an unfortunate situation.  I am going to be frank about it. The truth is that restrictions continues because A small minority of people in Canada out of complete selfishness or misinformation refused to vaccinate themselves and help to establish herd immunity. About two-thirds of new infections and 90% of hospitalizations are among the unvaccinated people (even though their numbers is less than a third of those vaccinated), and the other third of new infections ( vaccinated people) who were infected likely got that from n unvaccinated individuals.

It is not their body their choice because their choice may cause harm and death to others in community. It is not their freedom of choice and right to choose because it infringes on the safety and lives of others in their community. Elected governments in Ontario and Quebec have introduced vaccine passports and will ban those who pose risks to the community from taking part in communal activities and make the life hopefully very hard on those people so that they are forced to make the right choice.

Yes to vaccine passports and no to lockdowns and restrictions for vaccinated people.

I respectfully disagree, restrictions continue because it is in the best self interest of the decision maker, not the public. 

People had and continue to make their choices. Just like a person who chooses an unhealthy life style, they make their choice, we do our best to mitigate that poor decision, but not to the total detriment to the entire society, economy, or to environment. 

People are going to die, that is life. From an ethical standpoint we have no merit, 163,898 people die every day, by our inaction we do not "care" about their deaths or their wellbeing.  

Vaccine passports do not provide enough protection for the intended goal of a safe society. Only fast testing for all individuals entering a public space would provide such a result. 

Lockdowns seem to only temporary prevent infection, I agree they are not a useful long term method. 

No restrictions for all in general lower risk public spaces. Medical faculties would required fast testing upon entering the building for all.  

Unvaccinated people pose no risk to society, vaccinated people pose no risk to society. I believe we need to begin rebuilding our worn society.  

[CITIZEN_2015]

36 minutes ago, Winston said:

 

People had and continue to make their choices. Just like a person who chooses an unhealthy life style, they make their choice, we do our best to mitigate that poor decision, but not to the total detriment to the entire society, economy, or to environment. 

 

No, when a person makes unhealthy choices in lifestyle he or she only harms himself or herself and has the right to do so whereas in vaccine refusal case he or she harms himself or herself as well as others. A very wrong analogy.  He or she has no right to do so.

[CITIZEN_2015]

39 minutes ago, Winston said:

 

Unvaccinated people pose no risk to society, vaccinated people pose no risk to society. I believe we need to begin rebuilding our worn society.  

Wrong again. They both pose a risk of transmitting the virus but unvaccinated people pose a much greater risk.

[Winston]

21 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

No, when a person makes unhealthy choices in lifestyle he or she only harms himself or herself and has the right to do so whereas in vaccine refusal case he or she harms himself or herself as well as others. A very wrong analogy.  He or she has no right to do so.

 

No this is incorrect CITIZEN_2015.

https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/obesity-and-covid-19.html

Example of unhealthy life choices by individuals causing others to be harmed, as per the CDC, "Obesity is a common, serious, and costly chronic disease. Having obesity puts people at risk for many other serious chronic diseases and increases the risk of severe illness from COVID-19." - Thus unhealthy choices in lifestyle (obesity) is actually harmful to others as they have a higher risk of severe illness and spread diseases. By this very nature and your argument, should we be banning obese people from entering public spaces. We also should be mandating that obese people should be eating less and working out more, otherwise they are spreading disease, a safety risk to the public.

I disagree with this argument, instead let people have free choice and recognize they are responsible for their choice. 

 

[Goddess]

23 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Wrong again. They both pose a risk of transmitting the virus but unvaccinated people pose a much greater risk.

No.  Vaccines drive viruses to mutate.  The Covid vaccine was never meant to block the virus completely, only lessen the symptoms.  As a result, it's the vaccinated people who are driving the mutations.  This is why we are always told to finish an antibiotic regimen - so that the virus is completely eradicated and does not have a chance to mutate. Viruses mutate to evade the vaccine and thus becomes  more difficult to treat. Vaccinated people are serving as breeding grounds for the mutations.

Whether you are going to get one of the mutations or not has little to do with the antibodies from the vaccine - it has everything to do with your T-cells.  This means booster shots are not going to help - they don't strengthen your T-cells.

Be prepared for a vaccine booster merry-go-round - great business profits for Pfizer.

By this time next year, after your 4th booster, you will be lashing out at the ones who only had 2 boosters.  2 years from now after your 10th booster, you'll be lashing out at the ones who only had 4.

Wake up.

[Winston]

33 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Wrong again. They both pose a risk of transmitting the virus but unvaccinated people pose a much greater risk.

Please read what I wrote. "Unvaccinated people pose no risk to society, vaccinated people pose no risk to society."

You just made the assumption that these people are infected, I never said they are infected. Only infected people pose a risk to society, a unvaccinated/vaccinated person poses no risk to society unless they are infected. 

Can you prove than a person not infected poses a viral risk to society? By what measures?

[CITIZEN_2015]

10 minutes ago, Winston said:

 

No this is incorrect CITIZEN_2015.

https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/obesity-and-covid-19.html

Example of unhealthy life choices by individuals causing others to be harmed, as per the CDC, "Obesity is a common, serious, and costly chronic disease. Having obesity puts people at risk for many other serious chronic diseases and increases the risk of severe illness from COVID-19." - Thus unhealthy choices in lifestyle (obesity) is actually harmful to others as they have a higher risk of severe illness and spread diseases. By this very nature and your argument, should we be banning obese people from entering public spaces. We also should be mandating that obese people should be eating less and working out more, otherwise they are spreading disease, a safety risk to the public.

I disagree with this argument, instead let people have free choice and recognize they are responsible for their choice. 

 

Incredible!!!!. Based on your post obese people pose the same risk to other people's safety as unvaccinated people who catch the virus much more likely and spread it much more likely.

No, it is the responsibility of governments to make tough decisions for the good of citizens and vaccine passports is a step in right direction and a start. MAKE VACCINATION MANDATORY 

[CITIZEN_2015]

10 minutes ago, Winston said:

Please read what I wrote. "Unvaccinated people pose no risk to society, vaccinated people pose no risk to society."

You just made the assumption that these people are infected, I never said they are infected. Only infected people pose a risk to society, a unvaccinated/vaccinated person poses no risk to society unless they are infected. 

Can you prove than a person not infected poses a viral risk to society? By what measures?

People can read what I post too. i AM SAYING THE RISK OF BEING INFECTED IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER IN UNVACCINATED PEOPLE AND HENCE THEY CARRY A MUCH HIGHER RISK OF TRANSMISSION.

[myata]

When dealing with anyone of questionable trustworthiness there's no point in analyzing the arguments and promises for the next time - one only need to check what they did before. Let's see, in Ontario masks did not go away when cases were heading down in the spring, were not lifted in the summer when cases reached zero levels and now they are here to stay indefinitely.

In other provinces the orders may have been lifted for a short time, then quickly reinstated as usual without any explanations, proof of effectiveness and clear limits.

In my personal view, in this country with its record of Charlie Smith experts, torture mental "research" institutions, and yes, residential schools handing unaccountable bureaucrats the power to impose population-wide restrictions on citizen freedoms, under any pretext, is carelessness bordering on insanity.

OK, let's prove it again.

Edited September 3, 2021 by myata

[Winston]

5 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Incredible!!!!. Based on your post obese people pose the same risk to other people's safety as unvaccinated people who catch the virus much more likely and spread it much more likely.

No, it is the responsibility of governments to make tough decisions for the good of citizens and vaccine passports is a step in right direction and a start. MAKE VACCINATION MANDATORY 

Good to see you agree that obese people pose a risk to others purely by their health choices. Do you support a mandate on obese people to work out or a banning of them in public places unless they are not obese? If you do not how can you support a mandate on the unvaccinated? Cognitive dissonance?

I was not talking about COVID, but disease in general. We never had mandates on obese people even though their choices actually place the public at risk of further spreading of disease. By this example, we should not impose mandates on unvaccinated people, just like obese people, we respect their decisions.

" No, it is the responsibility of governments to make tough decisions for the good of citizens and vaccine passports is a step in right direction and a start." - Why do you think vaccine passports prevent total spreading? They do not, they create the illusion that everyone is safe. The only way to stop viral spreading in on the spot testing. 

 

 

[Winston]

13 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

People can read what I post too. i AM SAYING THE RISK OF BEING INFECTED IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER IN UNVACCINATED PEOPLE AND HENCE THEY CARRY A MUCH HIGHER RISK OF TRANSMISSION.

Of course people can read your post, you have the right to tell everyone on the forum what you think. 

You are right, the risk of being infected is significantly higher in unvaccinated people. But they only carry a much higher risk of transmission if and only if they are infected, otherwise they pose no risk. Please stop spreading misinformation.

[CITIZEN_2015]

1 minute ago, Winston said:

Of course people can read your post, you have the right to tell everyone on the forum what you think. 

You are right, the risk of being infected is significantly higher in unvaccinated people. But they only carry a much higher risk of transmission if and only if they are infected, otherwise they pose no risk. Please stop spreading misinformation.

I don't understand why it is so difficult for you to understand that 2 plus 2 is 4. You seem to be a highly educated mature person. If unvaccinated people carry a significantly higher risk of getting infected then they also statistically speaking have a higher risk of transmitting the virus because statistically they are more likely to carry the virus.

[myata]

2 minutes ago, Winston said:

You are right, the risk of being infected is significantly higher in unvaccinated people.

Is it actually proven by evidence, if non symptomatic infections are taken into account? Infected is not the same as confirmed cases, this much is already known.

[Winston]

1 minute ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

I don't understand why it is so difficult for you to understand that 2 plus 2 is 4. You seem to be a highly educated mature person. If unvaccinated people carry a significantly higher risk of getting infected then they also statistically speaking have a higher risk of transmitting the virus because statistically they are more likely to carry the virus.

Yes they are statistically more likely to be severely infected and thus shed more viral loads, I do not disagree.

But, saying unvaccinated people have a higher risk of transmission the virus is untrue. Infected unvaccinated people have a higher risk of transmission, is true. Yes I am arguing the semantics, but publicly it seems that unvaccinated are more dangerous, when only they are more dangerous if and only if they are infected.   

[Winston]

There are currently 3,867,902 unvaccinated individuals in Ontario(1), of that number there are 499 cases of unvaccinated individuals testing positive(2).  That is 0.01290105% of unvaccinated individuals who tested positive. 

This means if you were to meet 7751 unvaccinated individuals, only 1 would have a known positive result and may be contagious. 

7750 are untested and assumed uninfected, meaning 7750 can not transmit the virus because they do not have the virus. Thus,  it is overkill to mandate restrictions, because 1 out of 7751 people can transmit the virus, that all 7750 people must refrain from public contact even though they have no known infection. 

1 https://worldpopulationreview.com/canadian-provinces/ontario-population

2 https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

[Winston]

9 minutes ago, myata said:

Is it actually proven by evidence, if non symptomatic infections are taken into account? Infected is not the same as confirmed cases, this much is already known.

Based purely on my opinion and vaccine knowledge, I would say that vaccinations do lower viral infections. Vaccinations have a long history of success. What exact evidence are you looking for, case study, scientific paper, scientific article or vaccine manufacture study? What evidence would you consider not valid?

Infected is not the same as confirmed cases, this much is already known.-  What do you mean?

[CITIZEN_2015]

16 minutes ago, Winston said:

There are currently 3,867,902 unvaccinated individuals in Ontario(1), of that number there are 499 cases of unvaccinated individuals testing positive(2).  That is 0.01290105% of unvaccinated individuals who tested positive. 

 

Data is PER DAY per person. You need to calculate the risk for a long period of time.

And today's data shows

Ontario Health Minister Christine Elliott says 628 cases are in individuals who are not fully vaccinated or have an unknown vaccination status and 179 are in those who are fully immunized.

Since there are about 10 million fully vaccinated people on the same token the risk for vaccinated individual is 0.00179% compare to 0.012390105% which is 7.5 times higher risk. See your own calculation method PROVED my point stated earlier to which you disagreed.

[BubberMiley]

18 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

As evidenced by workplace protocols being implemented right now, you will still need to wear masks if you are vaccinated.  Though I’ve supported vaccination, it’s clear that restrictions aren’t ending for the vaccinated who are willing to provide evidence that they are vaccinated.  This is a serious violation of human freedom. 

I have long expounded on the tyranny of mandatory penis coverings like trousers and shorts. These laws have long been a symptom of authoritarian fascism, and I'm glad to see more of you on my side. Although the masks don't bother me so much because they mess up the facial recognition tech in my local mall.

[betsy]

30 minutes ago, BubberMiley said:

I have long expounded on the tyranny of mandatory penis coverings like trousers and shorts. These laws have long been a symptom of authoritarian fascism,

There you go!  

  And take note that once implemented, these tyrannical laws are hard to dismantle.   I suppose you're still wearing pants, aren't you?

[Winston]

5 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Data is PER DAY per person. You need to calculate the risk for a long period of time.

And today's data shows

Ontario Health Minister Christine Elliott says 628 cases are in individuals who are not fully vaccinated or have an unknown vaccination status and 179 are in those who are fully immunized.

Since there are about 10 million fully vaccinated people on the same token the risk for vaccinated individual is 0.00179% compare to 0.012390105% which is 7.5 times higher risk. See your own calculation method PROVED my point stated earlier to which you disagreed.

 

Great let us take say 3 weeks add up the numbers:

Starting August 13 2021, to September 3 2021. 

Unvaccinated - 8728 tested positive,

1546 ICU, 2348 hospitalized ( those removed from public contact)

 

Vaccinated - 4240 tested positive,

329 ICU, 731 hospitalized ( those removed from public contact)

 

Unvaccinated infected 4834 possibly active in the public. ( assuming they all do not self isolate)

Vaccinated infected 3180 possibly active in the public.( assuming they all do not self isolate)

 

Out of 607 unvaccinated individuals, 1 is positive and may be contagious.  0.165 % chance of contact. These numbers assume all these individuals ignore direct orders to self isolate. 

Out of 3417 vaccinated individuals, 1 is positive and my be contagious. 0.0293 % chance of contact. These numbers assume all these individuals ignore direct orders to self isolate. 

"See your own calculation method PROVED my point stated earlier to which you disagreed" - No it did not, your point was Unvaccinated people are a higher risk to the public, incorrect. Rather your point should state infected unvaccinated people are a higher risk to the public by the numbers. Stating unvaccinated healthy uninfected people are a higher risk to the public is not correct. 

 

How many people do you interact with on a daily basis? More than 600? If like most people you interact with under 100 people per day, your risk of contact is incredibly small.

Now given most of the infected individuals will self isolate once tested positive for Covid, the risk goes to near 0 for the general uninfected public. 

Thus, mandating restrictions or vaccination passports is not required. If anything is required it would be quick testing methods upon entry or daily testing. I am not in favor of either, since the risk is incredibly low for the general public we can open back up and continue life as per usual, maybe for safe caution keep the 6 ft distance. 

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

https://data.ontario.ca/en/dataset/covid-19-vaccine-data-in-ontario/resource/274b819c-5d69-4539-a4db-f2950794138c

https://data.ontario.ca/en/dataset/covid-19-vaccine-data-in-ontario/resource/eed63cf2-83dd-4598-b337-b288c0a89a16

[myata]

2 hours ago, Winston said:

Based purely on my opinion and vaccine knowledge, I would say that vaccinations do lower viral infections. Vaccinations have a long history of success. What exact evidence are you looking for, case study, scientific paper, scientific article or vaccine manufacture study? What evidence would you consider not valid?

Infected is not the same as confirmed cases, this much is already known.-  What do you mean?

I mean that there are more of those who are infected than those who had noticeable symptoms and those symptoms were identified as Covid because there are non symptomatic and low-symptomatic cases. A is vaccinated and has lighter symptoms may even not notice a few sneezes but still transmits. Making a conclusion based on experience with other illnesses may not be very reliable. Can we state for example that vaccinated against flu have lower rate of transmission? Has it ever been studied?

We're hoping that vaccines would have strong effect in a) reducing the symptoms and b) reducing the transmission but a priori there's no ground for the assumption that they are either equivalent or there's a causal relation. Actually, there are at least two distinct possibilities that would lead to different scenarios and over the coming months we should be able to see which of them will play out.

Unless we took time away from propaganda drumming and implemented a wide-scale testing program, then we would have known much better how it is transmitted. But who cared and who could spare any time away from propaganda.

Edited September 3, 2021 by myata