Enough is enough. Ban protests outside hospitals.

[Boges]

Just now, Infidel Dog said:

Vaccine passports and mandates are being allowed by the gullibles because they are being told this new wave of variants are what the corporate media and their political cohorts are calling "a pandemic of the unvaccinated." That's a lie.

When studies don't support your worldview, then it's a conspiracy. How convenient. 

 

Quote

The idea this segregation of the unvaccinated has no similarities to apartheid, Jim crow, papers please or the yellow arm band is also a lie. It may not be the equivalent of say herding the Japanese into camps during WW II yet, but it's the same principle.

I find that offensive. But continue to believe that if you wish. I certainly wouldn't voice such views amongst polite company if I were you. 

[taxme]

22 hours ago, canadian.rocky said:

Where is the real science?

It's not about science and never was about science. It has always been about politics. Why are so many politicians trying to get everyone to take their two jabs? They are not doctors, they are politicians, and they should mind their own gawd dam business and stick to politics, not that our politicians have been doing a very good job of politics at that. They screw up more than trying to make things better. Science my arse. ?

[Infidel Dog]

3 hours ago, Boges said:

It's funny that you use cases as evidence of waning immunity when it supports your opinion.

Still don't get it, eh? Is it that you don't understand or you're refusing to notice what I'm saying when it doesn't offer you what you a hope is a gotcha?

If the variant is equally transmittable in vaccinated and unvaccinated and the numbers start to show there are equal numbers of vaccinated and unvaccinated there is no "pandemic of the unvaccinated" and passports or mandates become nothing more than a scam.

Edited September 15, 2021 by Infidel Dog

[Yzermandius19]

5 minutes ago, Boges said:

As you say, if a business wants its employees and/or patrons to all be vaccinated, why can't they decide? 

they can

I might not like their decision

they may not like mine

but we should both be free to make the choice for ourselves

regardless of how much the decisions of others piss some people off

Edited September 15, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[Boges]

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

but it isn't worth it even with government backing

passports aren't going end the pandemic anymore than the vaccines themselves

the juice of lower covid deaths and cases are not worth the squeeze of taking away freedoms 

You know what? If it gives people incentives to get the completely safe vaccine, then its done its job. IMHO. 

I'm hopeful we won't see a spike because of the vaccination rate. But if it convinces people who are on the fence. . . good. 

For Anti-vaxxers? Eff em, they're a scourge. 

 

[Boges]

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

they can

I might not like their decision

they may not like mine

but we should both be free to make the choice for ourselves

without pointless government interference

Governments successfully lockdown the public world-over. So I'm not sure how this is all that different. 

[Yzermandius19]

4 minutes ago, Boges said:

For Anti-vaxxers? Eff em, they're a scourge. 

the scourge is the people using government mandated segregation to try and force others to behave the way they want

the anti-vaxxers are much less of a scourge than that by several orders of magnitude

at least they don't support the new Jim Crow laws because the pandemic has turned them into panicky zombies

Edited September 15, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[Boges]

1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said:

If the variant is equally transmittable in vaccinated and unvaccinated and the numbers start to show there are equal numbers of vaccinated and unvaccinated there is no "pandemic of the unvaccinated" and passports or mandates become nothing more than a scam.

You have "some" evidence from Israel to support that. 

But evidence from this side of the world suggest that the unvaccinated make up an overwhelming number of cases compared to their percentage of the population. 

A vaccinated-infected person may be transmissible. But evidence suggests they aren't transmissible nearly as long. 

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/verify/can-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people-spread-covid19-the-same/65-63870429-2e11-44bd-aa57-9ea8a23cb205

Quote

 

“One of the good things about being vaccinated is this duration of shedding of the virus is shorter if you're vaccinated.”

This means that people who are vaccinated spread the virus for a shorter period.

There are still months of information to be studied on the virus. However, according to our experts because of the shortness of a vaccinated person’s ability to spread the virus, vaccinated people are less contagious overall.  

 

 

[Infidel Dog]

1 hour ago, Boges said:

When studies don't support your worldview, then it's a conspiracy. How convenient. 

Except studies, the CDC, even mainstream media, and data from countries that have been dealing with the variants longer and have a high vaccination rate, often higher than Canada's do support what I'm saying.

If you'd been doing something more than plugging your fingers in your ears and chanting 'La, La, La,' so to speak, you would have noticed I've already offered the evidence for all that.

Edited September 15, 2021 by Infidel Dog

[Yzermandius19]

4 minutes ago, Boges said:

Governments successfully lockdown the public world-over. So I'm not sure how this is all that different. 

those were stupid too

they did not achieve the objective and had massive downsides not worth the minor benefits

obvious terrible tradeoff is obvious

[Boges]

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

the scourge is the people using government mandated segregation to try and force others to behave they way the want

the anti-vaxxers are much less of scourge than that by several orders of magnitude

at least they don't support the new Jim Crow laws because the pandemic has turned them into panicky zombies

They're the type of people who would compare narrowly defined public health measures to racial apartheid. 

And protest outside a Hospital to rope in the OP. 

[Infidel Dog]

1 minute ago, Boges said:

You have "some" evidence from Israel to support that. 

I've already offered it from the journal Science. Catch up.

[Michael Hardner]

38 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. do your own homework

2. you playing ostrich to ignore data that doesn't fit your narrative

3. if you are really as genuinely curious about the subject as you claim

4. then you can look it up yourself

5. if that digging leads you to a different conclusion than us, feel free to share it

1. OMG really ?  I didn't think you would pull that one ... disappointing
2. You submitted shit data, which I put good time into researching.  When I asked for the source you absconded and now you say that "it's out there"
3. Yes, I am and I'm looking into it on my own but I'm finding lots of data - some of it explaining different anomalies and some not. 
4. I'm fine to look into this on my own, and I am.
5. So far it is, actually.  But I don't have source data either - I have articles that explain various anomalies that don't match yours exactly.  If you want to debunk the debunking I will post it.  But I'm not convinced by their review either.

Like I say, no dog.  I just hate shit arguments, really hate 'em.

[Yzermandius19]

5 minutes ago, Boges said:

They're the type of people who would compare narrowly defined public health measures to racial apartheid. 

And protest outside a Hospital to rope in the OP. 

it's still apartheid

you just claim the cause is more noble this time

as if changing it from along racial lines to medical status lines, makes some huge difference in morality

especially when minorities are the groups with the lowest vaccination rates, there is disparite racial impact, just like the Jim Crow laws too

impuning the morality of those protesting against that, is asinine

Edited September 15, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[taxme]

2 minutes ago, Boges said:

When studies don't support your worldview, then it's a conspiracy. How convenient. 

 

I find that offensive. But continue to believe that if you wish. I certainly wouldn't voice such views amongst polite company if I were you. 

Of course, what you say and believe in would and could never be seen as a part of some globalist like conspiracy going on by the globalists whom apparently are trying to depopulate the world. Bill Gates to Hell is all for depopulating the world, and he is using and promoting his interests in all experimental vaccines to do the job. Wake up, stunned.

You no doubt have been fully vaccinated and you still cannot get on a plane without wearing one of those clown mask. Unh?  Canadians that are fully vaccinated still cannot drive their vehicles across at any of those land crossing borders into America from Canada. Unh? 

You need to read and get the other side of the story before you start shooting off your big leftist mouth  by trying to mock mocking and attack others for their rights and freedoms of speech to their opinions and points of view. 

I find you very offensive, comrade. Over five hundred days now to flatten the curve which was supposed to only have been 14 days to flatten the curve in the beginning. That curve will never be allowed to straighten out if your dear comrade politicians have their way. They enjoy kicking and controlling your ass every day, and apparently you appear to just love it, comrade. ? 

[taxme]

7 minutes ago, Boges said:

They're the type of people who would compare narrowly defined public health measures to racial apartheid. 

And protest outside a Hospital to rope in the OP. 

Those protest demonstrations we are seeing outside hospitals are protests by nurses and doctors who are refusing to get vaccinated. They do not want to be vaccinated because they have seen the consequences of what has happened with way too many people coming into the hospitals with serious health problems after they took their coivd vaccines jabs.

That is why they are protesting. They want to stay healthy and not get sick. That should be their right to do so and be able to choose not to be vaccinated, right comrade? You believe in freedom and rights, don't you comrade? ?

[Infidel Dog]

Here's one on a new Japanese study that might be worth knowing about:

Study claims delta 'poised to acquire complete resistance' to current vaccines

https://www.10news.com/news/in-depth/study-claims-delta-poised-to-acquire-complete-resistance-to-current-vaccines

Basically Japanese researchers engineered a virus they called Delta 4 from 4 known mutations then, "The scientists introduced this engineered virus, nicknamed Delta 4+, to immune cells extracted from vaccinated people. Antibodies produced by the existing Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine were unable to stop the man-made virus, the researchers reported.

The team concluded that delta is “poised to acquire complete resistance” to the current slate of authorized vaccines."

However, what I'll call WHO narrative "experts" caution us, "“It's an interesting study, but one has to remember it's very artificial, right? It's a virus that they made. That's not out there,”

But weren't these same types telling us the original Covid was nothing to worry about. And it turned out to be an artificial virus created in a lab. Hope these Japanese researchers keep a tighter rein on Delta 4 than the Chinese Communists did with Covid A.

And could this happen with variants mutating in the wild? Some think it could.

 

Edited September 15, 2021 by Infidel Dog

[myata]

1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

I still can't convince you that with the Delta variant the vaccinated can be as infectious as the unvaccinated, eh?

I'm looking only at published peer reviewed results and I haven't seen any (it does not mean that they couldn't exist) that reported the rate of infections to be the same in the two groups. The ones that were widely discussed recently from US studies place vaccinated group as 4.6 lower risk to infect than non vaccinated. This applies to reported cases and the risk including non symptomatic cases could be anywhere from just higher to much higher. We could have known it better if invested in voluntary testing and measurement rather than propaganda marching.

[Infidel Dog]

58 minutes ago, Boges said:

A vaccinated-infected person may be transmissible. But evidence suggests they aren't transmissible nearly as long. 

But there's many more of them...so we're told.

We're told to ignore the segregation of the vaccinated because they're just a small minority. Hmm...sounds familiar.

[Infidel Dog]

5 minutes ago, myata said:

I'm looking only at published peer reviewed results and I haven't seen any 

Oh for God's sake...

Did you try reading your own link you posted to WUSAtoday?

Quote

We obtained two studies from the CDC. Both looked at vaccinated and unvaccinated infections from COVID-19. Both studies found that the level of virus in vaccinated and unvaccinated people appears to be similar.

 

[myata]

5 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Did you try reading your own link you posted to WUSAtoday?

These are clearly different questions. The risk is measured by the number of cases by the population of the group and the report says it's higher in the non vaccinated group.

[Infidel Dog]

Not clear at all what you're complaining about. Your link says a vaccinated person has more or less the same viral load as an unvaccinated person. I posted other studies saying more or lest the same thing but you ignored them.

OK so now you want to lay the 'Ontario is the center of the universe' thing on me and hope that matters.

* sigh * Very well...let's do that...again.

From Sept. 1:

Of the 601 cases (in Ontario) today with a known vaccination status:

 

• 397, or 66 per cent, were in those unvaccinated.
• 52, or nine per cent, had a single dose.
• 152, or 25 per cent, had two doses.

So 34% of cases had at least one dose. A member of that 34% is more or less as likely to infect you as a member of the 66%.

Now you say some researchers believe the infection won't stay as long in the vaccinated as the unvaccinated. Very well let's take that as gospel for these purposes and factor that in. 

OK, now we must consider this: 85% of eligible Ontarians have at least 1 jab and are about 100% as likely to infect somebody as the 15% of eligible unvaccinated. Somebody on WUSA today says the period of infection is shorter for the unvaccinated. Can't remember if he said how much but I doubt he really knows anyway.

So based on all that information I'm going to say you're still as likely to get infected by a vaccinated Ontarian as an unvaccinated one. It all evens out. 

Other data is also telling us that with Pfizer at least and most likely the others the effectiveness of the vaccine starts to wear off after about 4 months and then there definitely will be no difference, except the 85% will still be walking around in a fog of unwarranted superior virtue calling for the segregation and punishment of the lesser thans.

[myata]

5 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

So 34% of cases had at least one dose. A member of that 34% is more or less as likely to infect you as a member of the 66%.

This is quite easy to see: you have 2/3 of the cases in a smaller (non vaccinated) population so the infection rate has to be higher in that group. That is difficult to argue with. But what is your chance of getting infected by each group is a different question. Statistically in an ideal approximation your chance to encounter a carrier in each group is proportional to its size and the rate of infection in it. With the breakdown of the vaccinated vs non vaccinated currently, your chance to encounter a vaccinated carrier can indeed be higher simply due to the size of the group. Then there's a question of the rate of transmission in each group that we don't know much about either possibly because were so busy drumming and marching (and preaching foregone conclusions on TVs rather than finding out what is actually going on in reality).

The point is not that the infection rate is equal between the groups, it would be surprising given all the evidence so far. But that vaccinations do not eliminate transmissions and as it appears, by far. So there's no rationale and certainly no precedent for mandatory measures, especially with novel types of vaccines for which longer term effects are yet unknown.

[taxme]

4 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Still don't get it, eh? Is it that you don't understand or you're refusing to notice what I'm saying when it doesn't offer you what you a hope is a gotcha?

If the variant is equally transmittable in vaccinated and unvaccinated and the numbers start to show there are equal numbers of vaccinated and unvaccinated there is no "pandemic of the unvaccinated" and passports or mandates become nothing more than a scam.

I prefer to use the words "plandemic" and "scamdemic" because that is what all of this covid 1984 virus bullshit was all about. The promoting and pushing for vaccines-vaccines-and more vaccines with booster vaccines to follow. This can only end when people like beaver fever finally just go away. He can only offer fear and panic and paranoia and nothing more. We call them lefty liberal losers. LOL. 

I am sure glad that I do not have beaver fever like someone appears to have here. I will not mention any names. ?

[myata]

1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

Of the 601 cases (in Ontario) today with a known vaccination status:

Actually there's something interesting here. According to Ontario numbers, 10 million out of 12+ eligible population has been vaccinated with at least one doze, that is 1 : 5 non vaccinated to vaccinated ratio. Published peer reviewed studies tell us that the infection rate in non vaccinated for delta has to be 4.6 times higher. That makes 4.6 : 5 for the infected cases ratio, almost same expected number of cases between groups. Question: why in Ontario we have twice that (397 : 204)?

Is it a) different population in Ontario b) different delta variant in Ontario or c) another funniness with Ontario's numbers? Take your pick of the probabilities.

Edited September 16, 2021 by myata