i covered that already in the last line.
Their immunity level = 95% after COVID
Your immunity level = 95% after vax
Why does it matter how you got there? If anything you took the easy route.
Maybe a better argument for your side is that those with natural immunity could/should remove themselves from the registers of re-infected people completely by becoming super-immune and that those who are vaxxed without natural immunity should be number 2, not number 1.
The counter could be data that shows even vaxxed COVID survivors get reinfected. I personally know someone who has been vaxxed to the 3rd injection, survived COVID and still has a low antibody count.
But those COVID survivors who won't get vaxxed don't believe you have a leg to stand on since they believe they are as immune as you, so no more dangerous to society than you. We could all do more, but what's really reasonable?
Last edited by DMC; 12-04-2021 at 11:46 AM.
You keep treating it like a compe ion for how much immunity person a has over person b.
im looking at the big picture of how safe the population is. If there is a group of people who are willingly staying unvaccinated, whether or not they already have natural immunity, we are unnecessarily avoiding easy steps to up our level of herd immunity.
& blue state Pennsylvania starts us off of a Saturday morn with 133 new deaths.
Let us proceed...
DMC can't see the forest, just individual trees.
Last edited by Winehole23; 12-04-2021 at 12:44 PM.
I keep treating it like it should be a personal choice if they are no more dangerous than you. It's their body.
You haven't defined your goal in any terms other than effort, everyone should do everything they can to mitigate the spread of the virus but that doesn't address what actually mitigates the spread. You've discounted social distancing when your own personal life is impacted, as unreasonable. So it must then be the level of immunity to the virus itself. But then you indicate that's not good enough either if there's more they can do. For them, there is no "unreasonable" but for you there is.
He says about the individual tree
you're either being dense or intentionally obtuse about population level effects of general behaviors.
It comes down to what's reasonable and that happens to be an individually subjective concept. You don't have to like it.
The administration of public health comes down to population level effects of policy. You don't have to like it.
Another blue state reporting in of a Saturday afternoon. The land of coyotes, of NBA Old Maid Phoenix Suns, the land of $2.29 a gallon turned $3.96 a gallon. Yes, the great state of Arizona lodging 164 dead of COVID!
Let us proceed...
Don't argue with science goy!
Do you have a PhD from an (((approved))) university?
https://nomoresilence.world/miscella...erse-reaction/
How is it fascist logic? expectations don't force anybody to do anything. Lay off the whisky in the morning.
It’s not an individual concern though. It’s a public health concern.
And social distancing doesn’t mean the same thing as quarantining yourself non your home and never seeing family. But you know this, and are dishonest
How's that working for you?
That's what I thought.
The public is made up of individuals. The strength of public health relies on the strength of individual health. You pretend the strength of the structure doesn't rely on the strength of individual components because you have a simplistic view of the issue. You won't convince these people to do things they consider risky and unnecessary with the reasoning being that it's good for the public. You have to show them how it's good for the individual. But keep your blinders on and pretend you have the answer and no one will listen to you. You're arguing public health from an admin perspective and I am arguing individual choice from an individual perspective. You cannot be the entire public and you're not the admin, but I am the individual. So you're just creating a windmill to joust and screaming "dishonesty" when you cannot topple it. Good luck with it.
DMC just pretended he had the answer.
Worked great April and May of 2020, ditto masking and social distancing, back when broadly observed.
Vaccination has protected the country significantly against morbidity and mortality, so another big win for public health there. Could have been better for sure, but policy, like people, is imperfect
Last edited by Winehole23; 12-04-2021 at 10:24 PM.
Whinehole probably jealous of Australia's "camps".
Nope.Whinehole probably jealous of Australia's "camps".
South Korea and Taiwan.
Didn't work so great for people who lost loved ones. You're a chart watcher and you assign credit or blame without knowing facts. You rely on tweets to get your information.
Record COVID cases, deaths in heavily vaccinated South Korea
https://nypost.com/2021/12/04/south-...-cases-deaths/
I cite a great variety of sources, far more than most posters here, tbh.
boosted antibooster vaxxed antivaxx Snakeboy checks in....
Triple dosed Chump still mad his friends won't listen to him
The Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency said that there were 5,352 new cases of COVID and 70 deaths over the past 24 hours, each a record high for the country in the nearly two-year-long outbreak.
South Korea’s COVID death toll now stands at 3,809, while new daily cases topped 5,000 three times this week.
The troubling numbers come despite a high vaccination rate and widespread compliance with mask policies among South Koreans.
First world problems I guess... would kill for the US to have those record highs, tbh...
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
