Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 13^th, 2022 at 10:36am:


Yes they did but the CDC is still saying different. You know the people who do the science.

Quote:

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 13^th, 2022 at 3:25pm:


I wasn't making any comparisons at all. I was asking the poster, how is doing nothing worse than almost destroying a nation? How does doing nothing compare to a multi-fold increase in the numbers of those infected, and dying from this virus? Many people claimed that by wearing masks, distancing, and being vaccinated, that this would reduce, or prevent you from becoming infected, hospitalized, or even dying from this virus? Or, that doing these things was better than doing nothing?

But how do they know that mandates and protocols, are better than doing nothing? If we had 1M Australians being infected every day, we could still make this same claim. Or, that these protocols would still reduce our chances from the above.

I simply want to know, how do they quantitatively know this to be true? And if they do know this to be true, then how much better than doing nothing have these protocols achieved(20%, 50%, 80%)? Because the real stats are showing no reductions in deaths and infections at all. But, since we are NOT doing nothing,  THIS POINT BECOMES ACADEMIC AT BEST!

Dnarever wrote on Nov 13^th, 2022 at 10:12am:


Maybe this is just an unsupported assumption/opinion that you just want to believe is true. Remember, we have done nothing(other than treatment and education) for all other viruses since the 60's. And, we're all still here. Why is a virus less lethal than the measles, given so much airtime?. And, the influenza virus, which kills mostly the young, very little?

I'm really just highlighting an obvious fallacy(an argument from ignorance).

ShellShilo wrote on Nov 13^th, 2022 at 6:09pm:

Which I agreed with way back when, and which I agree with today.

These "people" you cite are an aggregation of virologists, epidemiologists,
scientists, and pharmacologists from all over the world.  They're not simply
a bunch of non-qualified, random people making unevidenced claims or
unsubstantiated guesses on forums.  They have literally millions of pages
of data to draw upon, from hundreds of global, clinical metastudies.

EG:  In April 2022, adults who had received fewer than two vaccines made
up 5% of all people in NSW, but they made up 25% of people in NSW intensive
care units.  The chances of being in an ICU bed in any given week if you’re
unvaccinated is 60 per 1 million people, compared with 8 per 1 million people
who've had two or more doses of the vaccine.

—Australian Academy of Science, 24 June 2022.

I've lost track of the number of times I've posted these
sort of data, but it's becoming increasingly obvious that
the single-minded, inward-looking stubbornness of the
anti-vaxxer mindset is proving difficult to overcome.

Got any proof that Kym's death was caused by the Covid vaccines, Sir Nail?

(I need to get a rubber stamp made up with this on it - with a blank spot to fill the names in)

AusGeoff wrote on Nov 13^th, 2022 at 9:21pm:


I doubt that anyone with a few working brain cells would disagree, that if someone coughs or sneezes in your unprotected face, that this would increase your chances of becoming infected to almost a certainty. Assuming of course, that the person is infected with this virus in the first place. But lets look at the science in more detail.

In a cough there can be up to 3,000 droplets produced. In a sneezed, there can be up to 20,000 droplets produced. There are up to 10^8 virions in 1 ml of droplets. So a mask with a 99.9% protection rating, would still allow up to a 100K virions to get through its pores(it only takes 100-200 virions to infect any human).

You would need a mask with a 99.9999% protection rating to actually protect you from becoming infected. No such mask exist with this level of protection.

Also, masks can't protect you from the droplets that land on different surfaces. And, you can't washaway most of the virions in/on your skin(not just on/in your hands).

Will wearing masks reduce the chances of you becoming infected? YES. Will mask prevent you from becoming infected? NO. Do masks reduce the spread of respiratory virions? YES. Do masks prevent the spread of respiratory virions? NO. Will vaccines reduce your chances of dying? NO. Only the condition of our immune system can do this. Will vaccines reduce the severity of the symptoms of this disease? YES.

You stated that "something" explains why unvaccinated people are dying at 3 times the rate as vaccinated people. What explains this? The actual comment from your reference is,

"South Australian health authorities have released COVID vaccination statistics showing people who are unvaccinated are more than three times AS LIKELY to die from the virus than those who've had THREE doses.".

So these deaths included not only unvaccinated people, but also people who have had 1 and 2 doses of this vaccine(vaccinated). Looks as though they just changed the goal post to give this false perception. I think this is just more clever wording by the media, to allow some people to hear exactly what they want to hear.

I'm curious. Do you think the unvaccinated don't wear masks or practice safe distancing? Or, do you think that some people just don't want to inject themselves with anything that will force normal muscle cells, to start producing viral spike proteins? I think the latter is more plausible.

ShellShilo wrote on Nov 13^th, 2022 at 11:16pm:


Quote:


The main reason for the mask is not to protect yourself but to protect others from you. i.e. you cough directly into your own mask.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 13^th, 2022 at 10:48pm:


Just because you have received a vaccine for something, doesn't mean that the vaccine will prevent the disease. There may be many reasons why the numbers of influenza cases are down. It could be an old strain that people already have resistance to. There could be other environmental factors directly affecting the virus. Again, correlation does not mean causality. I could claim that more white skin people are more likely to die from this virus, than dark skin people. 

When you say significantly down from previous numbers, what does this mean? If vaccines are to prevent infections, out of those 10M vaccinated, how many are still being infected?

Finally, how do you know that the flu was nearly stopped by distancing, masks, and isolation? These measures were to contain the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Not the Influenza virus. Since there is no evidence that can demonstrate that these measures were effective, why would you assume they were effective against the influenza virus? 

I also agree that we have done everything, short of destroying our own country for this virus. But, we have done nothing(other than treatment and education) for all previous viruses.