well anyone that knows much about vaccinations will agree that it is importantBetter get that booster in.
well anyone that knows much about vaccinations will agree that it is importantBetter get that booster in.
Public health EnglandWhere did you get that scientific gem from?
You never answered Grainboys question - just more figures .I am bored now
No, they expected this:Is that what people expected when they got vaccinated?
So they didn't expect more higher positive test rate amongst vaccinated?
Well, you should know how it goes, if everyone is vaccinated then all positive tests will be among...So they didn't expect more higher positive test rate amongst vaccinated?
No I didn't think so
It's a rate of positive tests!!!!Well, you should know how it goes, if everyone is vaccinated then all positive tests will be among...
I know, but if 100% of people are vaccinated then 100% of cases would be among the vaccinated. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your reason for posting the graph?It's a rate of positive tests!!!!
As in a percentage
It's a rate of positive tests!!!!
As in a percentage
No!I know, but if 100% of people are vaccinated then 100% of cases would be among the vaccinated. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your reason for posting the graph?
No!
Out of a hundred vaccinated people aged40-80, there are more positive tests than among a hundred unvaccinated people.
Therefore the vaccinated should be kept out of events as more likely to test positive?
You make a good point. I was in the pub the other night after a meeting (some bloke in the pub coming up) and this some bloke in the pub who must have been 25 stone and was knocking back pints with scotch like it was going out of fashion was on about the unclean not being given NHS treatment. Why should I pay my NI for him? He's clearly going to be a long term liability for the NHS until something gets him.'Apatheid' is hardly the right word for it. OK, there are a small number of people who cannot have the jabs for medical reasons but for most, unlike what happened in South Africa, they actually have a choice in the matter.
At the end of the day, it's a choice and choices have consequences. My experience is that there is a major overlap between people worried about different treatment of the jabbed and unjabbed, and those who loudly demand that people in hospital due to drugs/alcohol/obesity should be made to pay for their treatment. Makes no sense when they are very very similar.
You make a good point. I was in the pub the other night after a meeting (some bloke in the pub coming up) and this some bloke in the pub who must have been 25 stone and was knocking back pints with scotch like it was going out of fashion was on about the unclean not being given NHS treatment. Why should I pay my NI for him? He's clearly going to be a long term liability for the NHS until something gets him.
i agree re likelihood of getting tested, as i have posted elsewhere, i think unvaccinated less likely to be tested and find it hard to believe actual infection rates(rather than positive test rates) would be much different.You'd possibly be correct if the positive test rate was all that matters. For starters, we don't know how many positive cases are not being caught in either the vaccinated or unvaccinated - you can't test positive if you don't do a test and I know multiple people, mostly unjabbed but some jabbed too, who had the symptoms and simply didn't bother to get tested.
You also ignore the facts that covid is less likely to be serious if you have been vaccinated against it, and that you are less likely to pass it on to someone else. A vaccinated person with covid faces a much lower risk to their life, and a lower risk to the public at whole, especially the unjabbed.
I was going to say they are less selfish, but there's nothing selfless about taking a quick plonker with a needle that poses far fewer risks than the disease itself when unjabbed.
if the jab is good for me and won't stop me spreading the virus then by taking it i am only looking out for number one i.e. being selfishYou'd possibly be correct if the positive test rate was all that matters. For starters, we don't know how many positive cases are not being caught in either the vaccinated or unvaccinated - you can't test positive if you don't do a test and I know multiple people, mostly unjabbed but some jabbed too, who had the symptoms and simply didn't bother to get tested.
You also ignore the facts that covid is less likely to be serious if you have been vaccinated against it, and that you are less likely to pass it on to someone else. A vaccinated person with covid faces a much lower risk to their life, and a lower risk to the public at whole, especially the unjabbed.
I was going to say they are less selfish, but there's nothing selfless about taking a quick plonker with a needle that poses far fewer risks than the disease itself when unjabbed.
if the jab is good for me and won't stop me spreading the virus then by taking it i am only looking out for number one i.e. being selfish
or is there a disbenefit to having it?
I know, but if 100% of people are vaccinated then 100% of cases would be among the vaccinated. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your reason for posting the graph?
It significantly reduces the odds of you spreading the virus.
There are of course some disbenefits, primarily very minor side effects that last for a few days, and some rare ones which are more serious. No point pretending the side effects exist, because they do. Benefits obviously still outweigh the ri
There is no data to show that vaccinated spread it less, in fact higher percentage of positive tests among vaccinated points to the opposite.It significantly reduces the odds of you spreading the virus.
There are of course some disbenefits, primarily very minor side effects that last for a few days, and some rare ones which are more serious. No point pretending the side effects exist, because they do. Benefits obviously still outweigh the risks though.
That said, it does make me chuckle to see people saying we cannot trust scientists, big pharma etc on the viruses when the positives are reported, then immediately trusting the same scientists when they report a side effect.
There is no data to show that vaccinated spread it less, in fact higher percentage of positive tests among vaccinated points to the opposite.
You agree that is of benefit to me to take it, thanks
Those studies are all out of date. Delta variant transmission is clearly getting through vaccinated.Mounting evidence suggests COVID vaccines do reduce transmission. How does this work?
Vaccination is likely to substantially reduce virus transmission by reducing the pool of people who become infected, and reducing virus levels in people who get infected.www.gavi.org
COVID vaccines slash viral spread – but Delta is an unknown
Studies show that vaccines reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 by more than 80%, but the Delta variant is creating fresh uncertainty.www.nature.com
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.www.cdc.gov
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."
One wonders how the rate of positive tests higher amongst the vaccinated than the unvaccinated in so many age groups?Mounting evidence suggests COVID vaccines do reduce transmission. How does this work?
Vaccination is likely to substantially reduce virus transmission by reducing the pool of people who become infected, and reducing virus levels in people who get infected.www.gavi.org
COVID vaccines slash viral spread – but Delta is an unknown
Studies show that vaccines reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 by more than 80%, but the Delta variant is creating fresh uncertainty.www.nature.com
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.www.cdc.gov
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."