What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Seasons 2020 - 22 COVID-19 discussion thread

strider

Post Whore
Messages
72,987
Any vaccination, like every other medical intervention isn't perfect, some less than others obviously. Where this kind of statement is poorly rooted in fact, is that it's attempting to deal in absolutes, rather than degrees. The basis being you can contract the virus, and then pass it on despite being vaccinated, ergo being vaccinated only protects the individual that is vaccinated.

That's simply not the case though, and is a misrepresentation of how vaccination works, it doesn't eradicate the risk of disease, it lessens it. In order to eradicate the disease from a community, you need enough folks vaxxed so as to reduce the risk of infection to the point where anyone who contracts the disease isn't passing it on to enough folk for it to grow in prevalence. At some point, depending on the efficacy of the vax it's self, and the number of folks vaccinated, prevalence will drop in accordance with risk.

If vaccination rates aren't high enough in relation to efficacy, then the disease will continue to spread ( all else being equal ) This is where we are now.

If you stop and think about exactly how a vaccine "works", you can easily see the the flaws in these kind of arguments. Vaccines create "memory" in your immune system in order for it to be able to deal with a virus if it detects it in your system. In other words, for a vaccine to do what it does ( deal with a disease ) it must detect the virus in your system, and in order for there to be a virus to detect, there must be transmission of that virus.
I understand how a vaccine works .... I don't think its as clear as people seem to suggest that its not being spread around .......... you only know what you find
 
Messages
4,671
as always, the the people who "get it" are just the ones we know of who get tested .... how many "have it" but never get tested - cos they think they are bullet proof

there's been studies that show vax spread like unvaxed - when you actually test them all
Ok, but Strides, how many now will get it and not know they have it because they are vaxxed. And therefore put no pressure on the health system.
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,161
as always, the the people who "get it" are just the ones we know of who get tested .... how many "have it" but never get tested - cos they think they are bullet proof

there's been studies that show vax spread like unvaxed - when you actually test them all
You're assumption is that many of the infected are 100% asymptomatic. Is this likely ?
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
72,987
You're assumption is that many of the infected are 100% asymptomatic. Is this likely ?
Its what we have been told for 2 years right? ..... I mean they made ads about it and drummed it into you for 3 months at 11am daily, "suspect everyone has it"

I don't think they are 100% asymptomatic - I would bet most people might have a sniffle or whatever but think nothing of it .... but its no different to the last 2 years
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
72,987
Ok, but Strides, how many now will get it and not know they have it because they are vaxxed. And therefore put no pressure on the health system.
Thats the narrative ..... I'm not entirely clear its the reality ..... I still believe there's plenty of people ending up putting pressure on the health system as a result of getting it too ....... but hey I'm sure this just means I'm a nutter
 
Messages
4,671
but hey I'm sure this just means I'm a nutter
mate I would never say this. I'm not unsympathetic to your view, I just have landed in a different place. I know what a strain this issue has placed on many relationships between families, friends, workmates etc. There's no black and white.
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,161
Its what we have been told for 2 years right? ..... I mean they made ads about it and drummed it into you for 3 months at 11am daily, "suspect everyone has it"

I don't think they are 100% asymptomatic - I would bet most people might have a sniffle or whatever but think nothing of it .... but its no different to the last 2 years
Based on the fact that an average of 50,000 NSW people are still getting tested each day, I think that people with a "sniffle" are not thinking nothing of it.

 

keithy's eels

Juniors
Messages
159
Any vaccination, like every other medical intervention isn't perfect, some less than others obviously. Where this kind of statement is poorly rooted in fact, is that it's attempting to deal in absolutes, rather than degrees. The basis being you can contract the virus, and then pass it on despite being vaccinated, ergo being vaccinated only protects the individual that is vaccinated.

That's simply not the case though, and is a misrepresentation of how vaccination works, it doesn't eradicate the risk of disease, it lessens it. In order to eradicate the disease from a community, you need enough folks vaxxed so as to reduce the risk of infection to the point where anyone who contracts the disease isn't passing it on to enough folk for it to grow in prevalence. At some point, depending on the efficacy of the vax it's self, and the number of folks vaccinated, prevalence will drop in accordance with risk.

If vaccination rates aren't high enough in relation to efficacy, then the disease will continue to spread ( all else being equal ) This is where we are now.

If you stop and think about exactly how a vaccine "works", you can easily see the the flaws in these kind of arguments. Vaccines create "memory" in your immune system in order for it to be able to deal with a virus if it detects it in your system. In other words, for a vaccine to do what it does ( deal with a disease ) it must detect the virus in your system, and in order for there to be a virus to detect, there must be transmission of that virus.
 

keithy's eels

Juniors
Messages
159
And that refutes anything I've stated in that post how mate?
well mate you stated the following:-

"In order to eradicate the disease from a community, you need enough folks vaxxed so as to reduce the risk of infection to the point where anyone who contracts the disease isn't passing it on to enough folk for it to grow in prevalence. At some point, depending on the efficacy of the vax it's self, and the number of folks vaccinated, prevalence will drop in accordance with risk.

If vaccination rates aren't high enough in relation to efficacy, then the disease will continue to spread ( all else being equal ) This is where we are now."

They certainly had enough people vaccinated.

So i guess the efficacy is rubbish?
 

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
32,006
well mate you stated the following:-

"In order to eradicate the disease from a community, you need enough folks vaxxed so as to reduce the risk of infection to the point where anyone who contracts the disease isn't passing it on to enough folk for it to grow in prevalence. At some point, depending on the efficacy of the vax it's self, and the number of folks vaccinated, prevalence will drop in accordance with risk.

If vaccination rates aren't high enough in relation to efficacy, then the disease will continue to spread ( all else being equal ) This is where we are now."

They certainly had enough people vaccinated.

So i guess the efficacy is rubbish?

No, the only rubbish here is taking a single statistic and laying claim that it means anything beyond what it directly represents.

For example, What is the breakdown of cases between vaxxed and unvaxxed, and how does that compare to the rates of vaccination in the population?

Can we break down the demographics further, IE, is there an increase in case numbers in sub groups of the population that have different behaviors ( like itinerant workers ).

Is there a decrease or increase in case numbers from a previous outbreak where there was a lower level of vaccination in the community?

See the problem here is you're drawing an unqualified conclusion from an incomplete set of inputs, you have no idea whether the inputs you have are meaningful or not. You obviously think ( sic ) they prove something, but that's mostly because you'd like them to.

Your feels is not reason mate
 

hindy111

Immortal
Messages
42,822
Its what we have been told for 2 years right? ..... I mean they made ads about it and drummed it into you for 3 months at 11am daily, "suspect everyone has it"

I don't think they are 100% asymptomatic - I would bet most people might have a sniffle or whatever but think nothing of it .... but its no different to the last 2 years

I reckon a lot of vaxxed if had little symptoms like a sniffle etc wouldn't even bother getting a test and just carry on with their life as normal.
 

hindy111

Immortal
Messages
42,822
Thats the narrative ..... I'm not entirely clear its the reality ..... I still believe there's plenty of people ending up putting pressure on the health system as a result of getting it too ....... but hey I'm sure this just means I'm a nutter


🥜🥜🥜🤯🤯🤯
 

hindy111

Immortal
Messages
42,822
Based on the fact that an average of 50,000 NSW people are still getting tested each day, I think that people with a "sniffle" are not thinking nothing of it.


Have sniffle, get tested. If have stop work for 2-3 weeks for no money.
Or just keep going to work and ignore the sniffle. I've never had a day off for a little sniffle. Should I now take 2 or 3 weeks off if have one?
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,161
Have sniffle, get tested. If have stop work for 2-3 weeks for no money.
Or just keep going to work and ignore the sniffle. I've never had a day off for a little sniffle. Should I now take 2 or 3 weeks off if have one?
What are you rambling on about ?
 

Latest posts

Top