Covid-19 Wuhan Coronavirus (COVID-19) - Part 4 - Ivermectin doesn't work either.

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Continued in Part 5:



 
We have just seen it with AstraZeneca. People scared of blood clots that are as rare as winning tattslotto. there are lots of irrational people in society who don’t know how To understand probabilities. They read one story of a kid having vaccine complications and dying and that’s all it takes to change their mind. The misinformation that all kids vaccines were tested for a decade before used on kids also is a major problem.

government doesnt control the message anymore with social media.

I think this is exacerbated by genuine trust issues society has with all levels of government (and their health advisers).
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ah ok. Still on an upwards trajectory.

Nowhere near as bad as before though.

Yeah, it's good news. The cases peaked on July 17 and have declined considerably, so hopefully the deaths will start to tail off soon too. There's usually about a 12 to 14 days lag between the two charts.
 
The AstraZeneca vaccine got a lot of bad press for its reported adverse reactions, in particular blood clots. The US has still not approved it. Many European countries suspended its use. The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation changed its advice a number of times. First recommending that Pfizer was preferred for those under 50, then later for those under 60. You could easily get the message that the Pfizer vaccine was the one to get.

But what is the evidence that the AstraZeneca vaccine has greater risk than the Pfizer vaccine? How much did politics and money play in the story?

The Europeans saw Astrazeneca as a British solution and blocked it. Why is not approved for emergency use in the US when Pfizer is? Could it be that the Pfizer vaccine has generated massive profits, but the Astrazeneca vaccine not so much.
 
1st target 70% doesn't really mean sh*t.
2nd target is 80%, same as Doherty institute. That's when things start changing.
no not the same as dohertys. Doherty had 80 percent of the entire population. the stage 3 is 80 percent of eligible adults. Massive difference. It’s under 70 percent of total population.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I‘m all for giving everyone the chance to get the jab and letting the unvaccinated fend for themselves. Trouble is, here and elsewhere were seeing these people ending up in hospitals. This indirectly effects others who need those services for unrelated matters. If ICUs are clogged up with covid patients they are unavailable for others.

Solution: charge unvaccinated covid hospital patients for their stay. See if the prospect of 4 grand a day not picked up by the taxpayer gives them a change of heart. If not, at least we can claw some money back for the more deserving.
 
I‘m all for giving everyone the chance to get the jab and letting the unvaccinated fend for themselves. Trouble is, here and elsewhere were seeing these people ending up in hospitals. This indirectly effects others who need those services for unrelated matters. If ICUs are clogged up with covid patients they are unavailable for others.

Solution: charge unvaccinated covid hospital patients for their stay. See if the prospect of 4 grand a day not picked up by the taxpayer gives them a change of heart. If not, at least we can claw some money back for the more deserving.
I'm OK with that as long as we charge people who have preventable diabetes, hypertension and cardiac disease. Obesity is a massive drain on the health system.
 
So if discrimination is workable it's okay?
Call it incentivisation. The French have a better idea- keep the mouth breathing anti vax halfwits from going to restaurants or football matches.

But I’m willing to be a bit more conciliatory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top