Compulsory Vaccination?

[RJRB 688]

32 minutes ago, top4718 said:

Absolute nonsense.

 

A rhetorical scenario - you get on a train, only two seats are available, one is next to a fully vaccinated person, the other is next to an unvaccinated person who had Covid a few weeks ago and made a full recovery - which seat do you take and why?

As a vaccinated person I would sit in either.

As stated many times it is far from claimed or proven that transmission is controlled by vaccines.Nor is it impossible to contract the virus more than once.

[top4718 838]

1 minute ago, RJRB said:

As a vaccinated person I would sit in either.

As stated many times it is far from claimed or proven that transmission is controlled by vaccines.Nor is it impossible to contract the virus more than once.

Waste of time having it then.

[RJRB 688]

1 minute ago, top4718 said:

Waste of time having it then.

Wrong conclusion.

[Carbuncle 0]

20 minutes ago, RJRB said:

As stated many times it is far from claimed or proven that transmission is controlled by vaccines.

No, this is not right. The UK HSA is very clear that the covid vaccines do reduce transmission. For example, page 9 of their week 46 Vaccine Surveillance Report states ( https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1034383/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-46.pdf ) :

 

"An analysis from the ONS Community Infection Survey found that contacts of
vaccinated index cases had around 65-80% reduced odds of testing positive with the Alpha
variant and 35 to 65% reduced odds of testing positive with the Delta variant compare to
contacts of unvaccinated index cases (19)."

Edited November 25, 2021 by Carbuncle

[top4718 838]

2 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

No, this is not right. The UK HSA is very clear that the covid vaccines do reduce transmission. For example, their page 9 of their week 46 Vaccine surveillance report states ( https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1034383/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-46.pdf ) :

 

"An analysis from the ONS Community Infection Survey found that contacts of
vaccinated index cases had around 65-80% reduced odds of testing positive with the Alpha
variant and 35 to 65% reduced odds of testing positive with the Delta variant compare to
contacts of unvaccinated index cases (19)."

Stats can be twisted to tell you anything, highly vaxxed countries have had rising case numbers, so i'd take that with a pinch of salt.

[butlers 259]

Similar results in Singapore ,S.Korea and Israel.

In the context of a pandemic I would have thought even 20 percent would be very significant

[top4718 838]

1 minute ago, butlers said:

Similar results in Singapore ,S.Korea and Israel.

In the context of a pandemic I would have thought even 20 percent would be very significant

You need to quote the people you're replying to in your posts, at least your ramblings would make a bit of sense then.

[RollingJ 2,002]

52 minutes ago, top4718 said:

Absolute nonsense.

 

A rhetorical scenario - you get on a train, only two seats are available, one is next to a fully vaccinated person, the other is next to an unvaccinated person who had Covid a few weeks ago and made a full recovery - which seat do you take and why?

I keep well away from commenting on this topic, due to silly statements from both sides - but I have a question - how in Hells name do you know if either of these supposed people are vaccinated/had CV19 and recovered??

[top4718 838]

3 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

I keep well away from commenting on this topic, due to silly statements from both sides - but I have a question - how in Hells name do you know if either of these supposed people are vaccinated/had CV19 and recovered??

It was rhetorical, I could have said there was also an elephant on the train it's not true.

 

So pretending you do know which is the safer option?

Edited November 25, 2021 by top4718

[RJRB 688]

1 hour ago, Carbuncle said:

No, this is not right. The UK HSA is very clear that the covid vaccines do reduce transmission. For example, page 9 of their week 46 Vaccine Surveillance Report states ( https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1034383/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-46.pdf ) :

 

"An analysis from the ONS Community Infection Survey found that contacts of
vaccinated index cases had around 65-80% reduced odds of testing positive with the Alpha
variant and 35 to 65% reduced odds of testing positive with the Delta variant compare to
contacts of unvaccinated index cases (19)."

I could have worded it more specifically.

The point I tried to make is that my overriding reason for having the jab is to hopefully minimise serious complications from a virus that is persistent.

If it should have an effect on transmission I am more than happy.

However Ido know of a few cases ,including my own family of those who have tested positive after vaccination.

1 hour ago, top4718 said:

It was rhetorical, I could have said there was also an elephant on the train it's not true.

 

So pretending you do know which is the safer option?

Check the meaning of rhetorical.

Theoretical would be nearer the mark

[top4718 838]

2 minutes ago, RJRB said:

I could have worded it more specifically.

The point I tried to make is that my overriding reason for having the jab is to hopefully minimise serious complications from a virus that is persistent.

If it should have an effect on transmission I am more than happy.

However Ido know of a few cases ,including my own family of those who have tested positive after vaccination.

Check the meaning of rhetorical.

Theoretical would be nearer the mark

It wasn't a Grammar scenario and the person it was aimed at knew what it meant, they've not answered though.

[RollingJ 2,002]

23 minutes ago, top4718 said:

It wasn't a Grammar scenario and the person it was aimed at knew what it meant, they've not answered though.

Actually, how do you know I understood it? And to answer it - personally, I wouldn't care.