-
@kid-chocolate Shanghai is easing restrictions slightly. If no one in your household has had symptoms in the past 14 days you have limited access to your immediate neighbourhood.
Authorities saying they expect the outbreak to tail off over the next week
Zealous officials in some local municipalities are chaining doors to apartment complexes shut to prevent residents exiting. Hope there's not a fire.
said residents are chanting from their windows calling for supplies to be delivered as they have now gone weeks without being able to shop for provisions.
-
Looks like China has about 50% vaxxed in over-80s. Low, but a bit better than Hong Kong (30%)
According to this:
From: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-61023811Hong Kong:
From: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/18/hong-kong-covid-crisis-why-is-the-death-rate-so-high -
more surprising the people have a choice about vaccination!
-
@taniwharugby that choice means not being allowed to leave their house.
-
-
-
Xi is in a big-time pinch.
China’s Campaign to Wipe Out Covid Is Crushing Its Economy
Juicing growth is again the government’s top priority as lockdowns drag on and the Party Congress looms this fall.
-
“The Stanford professor and Great Barrington Declaration coauthor stands up to COVID-19 autocrats and disastrous lockdowns by following the science.
----------------- ”Lengthy sit-down interview with Reason editor Nick Gillespie.
Video is cued to 49-min mark where Gillespie asks Bhattacharya why he’s pro-vaccine but against Covid vaxx and lockdown mandates.
He mentions here that vaccines are 20% effective after three months. I knew they were weak, but did not know it was so awful and pathetic.
-
Regarding the vaccine efficacy, he mentioned somewhere about 20% effective in preventing infection but did not mention the effectiveness of preventing any infection becoming serious enough to hospitalise or cause death. Given that the early vaccines were anywhere between about 60% and 85% effective at the former but about 99% effective against the latter, you’d think that to be fair, balanced and actually informative he might have distinguished this a bit more. Moreover, his whole argument about natural immunity being just as effective as the vaccine does not address several issues. Firstly in that in getting that natural immunity you are risking death or serious illness. Secondly in obtaining this holy grail you are highly infectious yourself and will most likely spread the virus further, risking the aforementioned death and serious illness to others. Thirdly you cannot choose when to get the virus, nor necessarily be able to prove it.
As so often with these people, they cherry pick the absolute best case scenario to try and prove their point whilst rubbishing the alternative by cherry picking the very worst case scenario.
Stereotypical anti vaxx procedure - despite of course him not being anti vaxx. 🙄
-
@Catogrande said in Coronavirus - Overall:
Regarding the vaccine efficacy, he mentioned somewhere about 20% effective in preventing infection but did not mention the effectiveness of preventing any infection becoming serious enough to hospitalise or cause death. Given that the early vaccines were anywhere between about 60% and 85% effective at the former but about 99% effective against the latter, you’d think that to be fair, balanced and actually informative he might have distinguished this a bit more. Moreover, his whole argument about natural immunity being just as effective as the vaccine does not address several issues. Firstly in that in getting that natural immunity you are risking death or serious illness. Secondly in obtaining this holy grail you are highly infectious yourself and will most likely spread the virus further, risking the aforementioned death and serious illness to others. Thirdly you cannot choose when to get the virus, nor necessarily be able to prove it.
As so often with these people, they cherry pick the absolute best case scenario to try and prove their point whilst rubbishing the alternative by cherry picking the very worst case scenario.
Stereotypical anti vaxx procedure - despite of course him not being anti vaxx. 🙄
No one is anti-vax. Just pro choice.... 😉
-
@Catogrande said in Coronavirus - Overall:
Regarding the vaccine efficacy, he mentioned somewhere about 20% effective in preventing infection but did not mention the effectiveness of preventing any infection becoming serious enough to hospitalise or cause death. Given that the early vaccines were anywhere between about 60% and 85% effective at the former but about 99% effective against the latter, you’d think that to be fair, balanced and actually informative he might have distinguished this a bit more. Moreover, his whole argument about natural immunity being just as effective as the vaccine does not address several issues. Firstly in that in getting that natural immunity you are risking death or serious illness. Secondly in obtaining this holy grail you are highly infectious yourself and will most likely spread the virus further, risking the aforementioned death and serious illness to others. Thirdly you cannot choose when to get the virus, nor necessarily be able to prove it.
As so often with these people, they cherry pick the absolute best case scenario to try and prove their point whilst rubbishing the alternative by cherry picking the very worst case scenario.
Stereotypical anti vaxx procedure - despite of course him not being anti vaxx. 🙄
That's an excellent summary.
-
@Catogrande said in Coronavirus - Overall:
Regarding the vaccine efficacy, he mentioned somewhere about 20% effective in preventing infection but did not mention the effectiveness of preventing any infection becoming serious enough to hospitalise or cause death. Given that the early vaccines were anywhere between about 60% and 85% effective at the former but about 99% effective against the latter, you’d think that to be fair, balanced and actually informative he might have distinguished this a bit more.
In the video he talks about how effective the vaccines were at preventing serious infections. It's central to his position.
He praises the covid vaccines at several points. His controversial position is that he is against a mandate. He actually is for mandating other vaccines (so it's not idealogical) but he thinks the correct public health policy for this particular vaccine would have been a targeted program
The bulk of the video is not about vaccines (it's more about cost/benefit analysis of lockdowns etc)
-
@canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:
No one is anti-vax. Just pro choice.... 😉
Precisely. I’ve had three shots, now being recommended by my physician to get a 4th, 5th, 6th and coming soon 7th shot, and I’ve made my choice and politely told him nope, I’m done. Spare mine and gift it to somebody wearing a mask.
-
@Kid-Chocolate said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:
No one is anti-vax. Just pro choice.... 😉
Precisely. I’ve had three shots, now being recommended by my physician to get a 4th, 5th, 6th and coming soon 7th shot, and I’ve made my choice and politely told him nope, I’m done. Spare mine and gift it to somebody wearing a mask.
I always find it best to ignore doctors when they give health advice, I mean what would they know?
-
@muddyriver said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@Kirwan when you need pills doctors are good.
For overall health there are better options
I believe that people need to take responsibility for their own health, as it's better to prevent poor health than to treat it.
But to ignore expert advice, particularly about "pills" or vaccines puts you into the same category of people that wear crystals IMO.
Coronavirus - Overall