Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
That has only been a recent development with Omicron. Wasn't the case before as vaccines offered greater protection for transmission with other variants.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread
- Thread starter GingerBeerMan
- Start date
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
The problem with this Government you knew it was never going to happen.
Pointless to threaten it
The time to do it was in sept and a blanket over everything.
Pointless to threaten it
The time to do it was in sept and a blanket over everything.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
Already said omicron evades current vaccines for transmission. Unless boosted. And even without boosting, it's very effective protection against hospitalisation.
Maybe someone should inform Israel of this fact. Thank god they're all wearing face masks.
View attachment 144549
dsr-burnley
Well-known member
- Aug 15, 2014
- 2,625
There's no question of the vaccine stopping you catching the disease. You catch the disease (primarily) by breathing it in. No vaccine can stop that.
The vaccine works by fighting it once you've got the virus, and if all goes well you have fought off the virus before you even know you have it. But, if the virus is (as they say) at its most infectious in the early days, then you can spread it before you know you have it and then still never find out you had it. If you see what I mean.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
Indeed. It means that vaccine passports and compulsory vaccinations are pointless, which is the point I'm trying to make.
In principle, I believe that frontline NHS staff should be jabbed and so do the vast majority of their colleagues at all levels of hierarchy and I do believe that most of the general public believe it is the right thing to do as well.
As ever with mandates, there are those who for whatever reasons dig their heels in and say no, and in this case, the naysayers have a very strong hand being in demand and short on the ground. That doesn’t make them right in my mind, but the Government are between a rock and a hard place. They really haven’t got much option but to perform a U turn.
Personally, I wish the staff would get jabbed and therefore be in a better position to protect those for whom they are caring.
It really is exasperating to be told by the NHS to get jabbed and comply, when some of their number don’t comply themselves.
Hmm, now that reminds me of something else.
Cake, cheese, wine and garden parties whilst us lot did what we were told, maybe?
As ever with mandates, there are those who for whatever reasons dig their heels in and say no, and in this case, the naysayers have a very strong hand being in demand and short on the ground. That doesn’t make them right in my mind, but the Government are between a rock and a hard place. They really haven’t got much option but to perform a U turn.
Personally, I wish the staff would get jabbed and therefore be in a better position to protect those for whom they are caring.
It really is exasperating to be told by the NHS to get jabbed and comply, when some of their number don’t comply themselves.
Hmm, now that reminds me of something else.
Cake, cheese, wine and garden parties whilst us lot did what we were told, maybe?
But if the vaccine fights the virus, doesn't that at the very least reduce the window I am infectious?
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
Fat Boy Fat
New member
- Aug 21, 2020
- 1,077
Just a gentle reminder for the Covid vs Flu protagonists.
https://www.medscape.com/answers/219557-3459/what-is-the-global-incidence-of-influenza
This first link indicates the number of people, worldwide likely to get and die from flu. (deaths 250,000 to 500,00 a year).
The second link the number of worldwide Covid cases/deaths. Brings sharply into focus the lie that "its just like flu"... (deaths, currently circa 5.6 million).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-51235105
Stark numbers...
https://www.medscape.com/answers/219557-3459/what-is-the-global-incidence-of-influenza
This first link indicates the number of people, worldwide likely to get and die from flu. (deaths 250,000 to 500,00 a year).
The second link the number of worldwide Covid cases/deaths. Brings sharply into focus the lie that "its just like flu"... (deaths, currently circa 5.6 million).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-51235105
Stark numbers...
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
And this is the point. There's a world of difference between recommending something and making it a legal requirement.
The net result would've been lots of pain for no gain whatsoever.
So would it be ok if a health trust made it a condition of employment as opposed to being a legal requirement?
I think a vaccine is a controllable measure to restrict Covid and catching it isn't.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,014
in deed it does. its unfortunatly not completely sterilising, but does dramatically reduce the amount of virus available to be passed on.
whats bizzare is we have nurses administering a treatment they themselves refuse to take. i wonder what treatments they'd they refuse if admitted? after all the fuss with PPE, some refuse the best protection available, leds to questions about motivation why.
dsr-burnley
Well-known member
- Aug 15, 2014
- 2,625
But nothing like as bad as the implication. The flu deaths figure is the estimate of future deaths and ignores past deaths eg. Spanish flu, Hong Kong flu and so on. The covid deaths does include all past deaths. Obviously the covid deaths on original variant with no vaccine are far more recent than their Spanish Flu equivalents, but they are no more relevant to what is likely to happen in future.
Covid at its peak can be validly compared to flu at its peak, and covid now with omicron and vaccines can be validly compared to flu now with its variants and its vaccine.
dsr-burnley
Well-known member
- Aug 15, 2014
- 2,625
Probably. Many studies suggest that vaccinated people are less likely to spread the disease than unvaccinated. But the point about covid is that the virus appears to be at its most infectious in the very early days of the disease, so it's before the immune syste has really got going in getting rid of it.
Suppose the virus is at its most infectious in the first 5 days.
A vaccinated person may breathe in the virus on day 0, the virus starts multiplying but the immune system starts to get a grip on day 3, by day 6 the virus has gone before you ever knew it was there. An unvaccinated person has the same trajectory till day 3 but then the virus keeps on growing and by day 6 they feel pretty ill.
The point is for at least 3, perhaps 4 of the 5-days infectious period, there is little difference in transmission risk of the vaccinated v unvaccinated because the infectious period comes so early.
(This isn't an exact position re. coronavirus, just an illustration of how it might be that vaccination makes little difference to transmission. All day numbers are guesses based on what I have heard, not based on scientific study.)