Medical Apartheid in the state of Victoria

Pasty

Member
Location
Devon



To quote the last one from the CDC, "A growing body of evidence indicates that people fully vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) are less likely than unvaccinated persons to acquire SARS-CoV-2 or to transmit it to others. However, the risk for SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection in fully vaccinated people cannot be completely eliminated as long as there is continued community transmission of the virus."
Who are the major funders of the CDC and GAVI? Who owns the domain nature.com and who's book did that firm publish? Always comes back to the same people.
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
Why do you wonder so much ?
Surely its just the impotance of protecting people who are vaccinated ?
All this toing and froing about who tests positive for it in each group ,non or vaccinated is immaterial
It's not immaterial it relates to the phony justification of passports, which is what this thread is about.
 

Highland Mule

Member
Livestock Farmer
It's not immaterial it relates to the phony justification of passports, which is what this thread is about.
There could be plenty reasons.
1. It’s a statistical anomaly - the difference is very small and shows nothing
2. As very few seniors are unvaccinated, the numbers for them reflect those who are unable for medical reasons and are taking more care with sheltering
3. As very few seniors are unvaccinated, the numbers for them reflect those who are being deliberately contrary and refuse to participate in testing regimes
4. Those who are vaccinated are more relaxed about catching the virus, and hence aren’t taking as much care with things as they did before.

Personally, I suspect a bit of all of them. I’d also say anyone highlighting the trivial differentiation in case rates and choosing not to mention at the same time the vast difference in hospitalisation and mortality rates are a public health liability themselves.

Unless you have a significant and specific medical issue that prevents you taking the vaccine, you should take it.
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
e plenty reasons.
1. It’s a statistical anomaly - the difference is very small and shows nothing
2. As very few seniors are unvaccinated, the numbers for them reflect those who are unable for medical reasons and are taking more care with sheltering
3. As very few seniors are unvaccinated, the numbers for them reflect those who are being deliberately contrary and refuse to participate in testing regimes
4. Those who are vaccinated are more relaxed about catching the virus, and hence aren’t taking as much care with things as they did before.

Personally, I suspect a bit of all of them. I’d also say anyone highlighting the trivial differentiation in case rates and choosing not to mention at the same time the vast difference in hospitalisation and mortality rates are a public health liability themselves.

Unless you have a significant and specific medical issue that prevents you taking the vaccine, you should take it.
My issue is that it is of no benefit to me or anyone else for me to have it, long term effects/risks are unknown, whilst short term acute effects are low chance, they still exist.
 
Last edited:

Highland Mule

Member
Livestock Farmer
My issue is that it is of no benefit to me or anyone or else for me to have it

Incorrect, and if you actually read the rest of the PHE report you selectively quote from, you would see that. The probablity of vaccine induced complications are orders of magnitude less than the probability of complications from actually catching covid and, given where you live, the likelihood of catching it is close to unity. The fact that you use words like 'chance' tells me that you don't understand risk, so let's not pretend you have the ability to properly evaluate your own.
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
Incorrect, and if you actually read the rest of the PHE report you selectively quote from, you would see that. The probablity of vaccine induced complications are orders of magnitude less than the probability of complications from actually catching covid and, given where you live, the likelihood of catching it is close to unity. The fact that you use words like 'chance' tells me that you don't understand risk, so let's not pretend you have the ability to properly evaluate your own.
Oh dear, from the man who doesn't understand mortality figures !
 

The Agrarian

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Northern Ireland
The implication is of course that the risk premium on non vaxxers is higher, all other things being equal. In a state run system, everyone pays the same premium, despite non vaxxers being more likely to avail of public services. I think the governor's principle is fine in theory. In practice, he would need to also prioritise healthcare away from the overweight, smokers, drinkers etc. And that's really not straight forward. There can be lots of reasons why people end up in those three categories.
 

The Agrarian

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Northern Ireland
Binning the emergency laws as well now.


Is that a surprise? I'm not surprised. The emergency is over.

I think perhaps what the government sees, that our own devolved administration in Northern Ireland hasn't yet spotted, is that it is really important not to flog the dead horse of special measures once they are not yielding adequate returns. Much better to promptly kill them and have them for reuse, should the need arise, than to have people take the pi55 out of them as they lose respect for their benefit.
 

Pasty

Member
Location
Devon
I think Boris maybe looking what is going on in other cities with a huge push back against restrictions. You won't see it much on the BBC, Sky, C4 or ITV news of course. Plus the poll that has just put Labour 1 point ahead. He's probably looking at Sweden which was his first instinct.
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
I think Boris maybe looking what is going on in other cities with a huge push back against restrictions. You won't see it much on the BBC, Sky, C4 or ITV news of course. Plus the poll that has just put Labour 1 point ahead. He's probably looking at Sweden which was his first instinct.
Ending the great give away(pandemic) is clearly unpopular
 

kiwi pom

Member
Location
canterbury NZ
Why is vaccination in NZ so far behind the UK, with only 30% fully vaccinated?
The government fecked around and didn't order any to arrive early so started jabbing really late. To be fair their argument was it didn't seem fair for a country with no Covid to get early delivery when other countries were struggling.
Then they decided on just using Pfizer, which again is probably fair because there was talk of AZ having issues at the time. So they just had small deliveries arriving each month and started the rollout slowly.
They managed to get some more from Denmark and Spain last week so they can keep going at an increased pace.
It does look like we may end up with a high percentage of folk jabbed eventually.
No virus in the South Island anyway🤞👍
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 77 43.5%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 62 35.0%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 28 15.8%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 4 2.3%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,285
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top