By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread

DroidKnight said:

So now we're going to control what a woman can or can not do with their body?

Getting vaccinated or not is affecting others, so not a good comparison.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

Around the Network
Runa216 said:

No moral question at all: If you are physically capable of getting the vaccine, get the shot. We have plenty of laws in place that people have to abide by for the collective health and safety of the common good, why would this be any different? Folks gotta drive speed limits, obey OHSA regulations, aren't allowed to drink and drive and have to wear seatbelts, you have to be licensed to do a tonne of dangerous things, etc. 

If you're capable of getting a vaccine, it should be mandatory. This 'my body my decision' argument makes sense on the surface but is grossly damning because it's not just your body. Just like it's not just you who's in danger if you drive drunk or operate heavy machinery without a license. If this truly was something that ONLY affected you and had no chance of affecting someone else in any negative way, sure! But that's not the reality of the situation. As long as not getting vaxxed does have a potential impact on others, it should be mandatory. Fullstop. This is not an ethical quandry, it's about as straightforward as can be. 

And the fact that people have actually convinced others that it's an issue of morals or personal liberty makes me sick to my stomach. This is just selfishness and ego and brazen heartlessness towards others masquerading as a battle for freedom. 

Doctors are actively recommending plenty of people (with underlying conditions) not to take the vaccine. The ethical question is, do you put these people in danger by letting the virus 'go' while many people that can get the vaccine don't have it yet.

However although you can make lock downs mandatory, it seems you can't make vaccinations mandatory? It's also a grey area whether you can prevent people access from certain things without a vaccine. That seems only possible at the border, only letting vaccinated people in. Work places can mandate vaccinations (with exceptions) though so I guess it has to come from employers.

Actually Turkmenistan is the first country to make it mandatory for all 18+
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n1766
Turkmenistan’s vaccine laws will be the strictest in the world, surpassing those of Saudi Arabia, which since March has operated a broad “no jab, no job” policy in both public and private sectors.

It's freedom on the individual (vaccinated or not) vs freedom of the group (lock down restrictions, having to isolate)

Just get vaccinated unless your doctor tells you not to.



SvennoJ said:
Runa216 said:

No moral question at all: If you are physically capable of getting the vaccine, get the shot. We have plenty of laws in place that people have to abide by for the collective health and safety of the common good, why would this be any different? Folks gotta drive speed limits, obey OHSA regulations, aren't allowed to drink and drive and have to wear seatbelts, you have to be licensed to do a tonne of dangerous things, etc. 

If you're capable of getting a vaccine, it should be mandatory. This 'my body my decision' argument makes sense on the surface but is grossly damning because it's not just your body. Just like it's not just you who's in danger if you drive drunk or operate heavy machinery without a license. If this truly was something that ONLY affected you and had no chance of affecting someone else in any negative way, sure! But that's not the reality of the situation. As long as not getting vaxxed does have a potential impact on others, it should be mandatory. Fullstop. This is not an ethical quandry, it's about as straightforward as can be. 

And the fact that people have actually convinced others that it's an issue of morals or personal liberty makes me sick to my stomach. This is just selfishness and ego and brazen heartlessness towards others masquerading as a battle for freedom. 

Doctors are actively recommending plenty of people (with underlying conditions) not to take the vaccine. The ethical question is, do you put these people in danger by letting the virus 'go' while many people that can get the vaccine don't have it yet.

However although you can make lock downs mandatory, it seems you can't make vaccinations mandatory? It's also a grey area whether you can prevent people access from certain things without a vaccine. That seems only possible at the border, only letting vaccinated people in. Work places can mandate vaccinations (with exceptions) though so I guess it has to come from employers.

Actually Turkmenistan is the first country to make it mandatory for all 18+
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n1766
Turkmenistan’s vaccine laws will be the strictest in the world, surpassing those of Saudi Arabia, which since March has operated a broad “no jab, no job” policy in both public and private sectors.

It's freedom on the individual (vaccinated or not) vs freedom of the group (lock down restrictions, having to isolate)

Just get vaccinated unless your doctor tells you not to.

Exactly. If you CAN get it, it should be mandatory. If you can't, that's what herd immunity is for. You shouldn't act like your selfish wants override the collective needs of everyone. You shouldn't be able to just decline the vaccine because muh freedumbs. If you don't get vaccinated, you shouldn't be allowed to mingle with the rest of us civilized people. 

I, personally, can't be vaccinated and I hate it. I get violently sick for weeks and have been hospitalized a handful of times. I want to be vaxxed, but I cannot. and selfish pricks who simply chose not to get it becuase they're too stupid to understand how this sort of shit can directly or indirectly affect folks like me and a handful of others who have immunodeficiencies make me want to commit acts of violence. I'm a pretty peaceful person, but I get infuriated when I hear about people who give so little of a shit about those who can't get vaccines that they're willing to put us at risk becuase they can't be bothered to make a small sacrifice for the greater good. 

They might as well be smearing their shit on every door handle I come in contact with, and that's just fucking disgusting. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Top 6 this generation: 
Bloodborne, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, God of War, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III, Red Dead Redemption II, Rock Band 4

LurkerJ said:
SvennoJ said:

This does raise a moral/ethical question.

Do you let the virus do 'its thing', no more restrictions, since the option is there to get vaccinated if you want / try hard enough. Basically let the anti-vaxers and other hesitant people fend for themselves. (with the risk of creating new strains in the process) And go for herd immunity the hard way.

What about the children though, below 12 aren't getting vaccinated yet and while low occurrence, there are problems with covid in children as well. Plus hospitals will stay busy with covid, pushing other things further and further back.

It seems the USA is done with restrictions, UK as well, the rest can fend for themselves. Canada might be next.

Anyway, instead of getting rid of it / numbers so low it won't flare up again with vaccinations, now it's a wait and see game again whether it's safe to send my youngest back to school. He has to go back regardless, not doing well socially. But how safe it will be, I don't know. There definitely no longer is any push to suppress the pandemic entirely, it's a collective fail in that regards.

I'm getting my second dose tomorrow, and my wife should have reached close to full immunity by now. Next, the kids, our oldest just turned 12, so he is eligible. It still feels like a gamble. Too many unknowns still and too much conflicting information. Anyway it's his decision to make and there is zero info made available for kids. Pretty poor going imo.

I think smokers, boozers, addicts, and those who are obese and don't exercise should pay more taxes. If those who don't wish to take the vaccine end up in the hospital, they should be taxed more. Obviously the issue here is that the majority of unvaccinated people won't need public services to support them unless they get severe or long COVID19, so only start taxing them if they fall ill? I truly believe there should be harsher consequences for anyone who thinks my taxes are there to fund their smoking-induced COPD/diabetes treatments, nothing more off putting than seeing a grown ass adult with a cigarette. 

The problem with this, is you'd end up with some rarer situations where people who'd rather not get vaxed, due avoiding extra taxation, out of necessity or not, are going to take the vax. For those few who get severely negatively impacted, or killed because of it, how does the system respond? Do you just turn a blind eye or pay their family reparations? How much if so? Would reparations be enough?

The problem is, who to sacrifice in what situations, and nobody wants the answer to be themselves or their loved ones, and it's understandable why. What's hard to understand is how exactly to deal with those problems, and the answer is always somewhat flawed.



Daily cases of new infected keeps riseing (in dk).
We re now upto 1200 today....

The good news, is it seems vaccinations are accelerateing.
We're now at 65% (with 1 jab) and 42% (with both).

This cant go fast enough.



Around the Network

It's a race against a 4th wave, which has already been lost, can't outpace exponential growth plus after 50% vaccine uptake slows down.

The current state of the world, over 3.5 billion doses administered so far

The percentages are based on total population (instead of eligible what most countries report)

Canada is now at 69.25%/46.38% (first/second doses) or 78.8%/52.8% of 12+

So far very few signs we're getting another wave as well, but we probably will still get a bump.

And as usual, Africa is left behind.



SvennoJ said:

It's a race against a 4th wave, which has already been lost, can't outpace exponential growth plus after 50% vaccine uptake slows down.

The current state of the world, over 3.5 billion doses administered so far

The percentages are based on total population (instead of eligible what most countries report)

Canada is now at 69.25%/46.38% (first/second doses) or 78.8%/52.8% of 12+

So far very few signs we're getting another wave as well, but we probably will still get a bump.

And as usual, Africa is left behind.

Honestly, based on my recent research, Canada was the only country I encountered that did that.

Reporting them like that is pretty much pointless anyway as they can't be compared to other countries. In Germany for example, the eligible age is 18+. Therefore not comparable. Even less comparable for countries that have a different distribution of age groups (especially more young people).

Furthermore the eligible age could change at any time which will cause the percentages to suddenly drop even though you keep vaccinating more people. Just report it based on total population and accept that you can never reach 100% (which isn't the target anyway).



Barozi said:

Honestly, based on my recent research, Canada was the only country I encountered that did that.

Reporting them like that is pretty much pointless anyway as they can't be compared to other countries. In Germany for example, the eligible age is 18+. Therefore not comparable. Even less comparable for countries that have a different distribution of age groups (especially more young people).

Furthermore the eligible age could change at any time which will cause the percentages to suddenly drop even though you keep vaccinating more people. Just report it based on total population and accept that you can never reach 100% (which isn't the target anyway).

Ah, my incorrect assumption from the disclaimer below the graph.

They also put a table up
https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-vaccination-tracker-how-many-people-in-canada-have-received-shots-1.5247509

Gibraltar is at the top with 116% of the population having received a first dose, I guess people go over the border to get a shot? And the worst, lots of countries in Africa still only around 1%.

Gibraltar, Malta and Iceland are the top 3 for fully vaccinated (115%, 80% and 72%)



Chile has some interesting real-world data on the effectiveness of vaccines against a mostly Gamma/Lambda outbreak.

CoronaVac had 87% VE vs. hospitalizations, 90% ICU admission, 86% deaths. Meanwhile, Pfizer had 97% VE vs. hospitalizations, 98% ICU admission, 92% deaths. Limitation of the study: the Chilean healthcare system was rather strained during this period, so efficacy against hospitalization might have been overstated, and against deaths, understated.

It might seem not like a huge difference but it means 4 - 5 times more people end up needing a hospital/ICU bed after being double vaccinated with CoronaVac than Pfizer. This is the sort of discrepancy that might end up having a significant effect with a Delta variant wave (see Seychelles and Mongolia, where most adults were vaccinated with the similar Sinopharm vaccine).



 

 

 

 

 

haxxiy said:

Chile has some interesting real-world data on the effectiveness of vaccines against a mostly Gamma/Lambda outbreak.

CoronaVac had 87% VE vs. hospitalizations, 90% ICU admission, 86% deaths. Meanwhile, Pfizer had 97% VE vs. hospitalizations, 98% ICU admission, 92% deaths. Limitation of the study: the Chilean healthcare system was rather strained during this period, so efficacy against hospitalization might have been overstated, and against deaths, understated.

It might seem not like a huge difference but it means 4 - 5 times more people end up needing a hospital/ICU bed after being double vaccinated with CoronaVac than Pfizer. This is the sort of discrepancy that might end up having a significant effect with a Delta variant wave (see Seychelles and Mongolia, where most adults were vaccinated with the similar Sinopharm vaccine).

Im happy denmark was like... nope, we're not doing the astrazeneca vaccine, anyone wanna trade us, for some Pfizer?
After looking at the data, for how effective it was, and how many people were getting blood clots ect.

Almost everyone here, is vaccinated with pfizer.