Free To Fly

[Vsplat]

What gets me worked up is the appropriation of messaging and re-purposing of partial data.

From the web page link you provided.  Have a look at the case numbers distribution.  And that is not the whole story, either.

As much as you prefer to count the dead, they no longer are in the health care system.  It is the living who are seriously ill, the bulk of whom are unvaccinated, that are overtaxing the system, burning out health care workers and primary care providers and causing others to die of treatable illness.

What also seems to be lost in this discussion is that the unvaccinated population continues to spread illness and foment variants.  By the time we have enough pediatric death counts to satisfy whatever yardstick is needed, we will be behind the curve, as we have been, due to the same cycle of denial, all along.

Perhaps someone in the F2F group can explain why they feel it is their right to pass on vaccination, but not society's right to then force them to see that decision through when they get (predictably) sick.  This business of showing up in the ER and expecting the public dime to pay for a personal choice is BS, IMO.

Vs

[FA@AC]

15 hours ago, Seeker said:

The F2F group is saying that Covid is mostly about older, co-morbid people.

No, the F2F group is not saying that.  It is saying that ONLY the elderly and those with co-morbidities are at risk of serious disease from Covid.  That is inaccurate.  

[Seeker]

3 minutes ago, FA@AC said:

No, the F2F group is not saying that.  It is saying that ONLY the elderly and those with co-morbidities are at risk of serious disease from Covid.  That is inaccurate.  

I see.  It's an editorial objection - you're bothered by the fact that the 0.1% in children isn't being given enough prominence or maybe it's the 2.4% under the age of 50?

[FA@AC]

21 minutes ago, Seeker said:

I see.  It's an editorial objection - you're bothered by the fact that the 0.1% in children isn't being given enough prominence or maybe it's the 2.4% under the age of 50?

It isn’t an editorial objection.  It’s an objection to your mischaracterization of the organisation’s claims.

I’m bothered by the fact that the F2F group dispenses the kind of advice that when listened to leads to the kind of situation we see today in Alberta and in some of the U.S. states.  There are too many people in our ICUs with Covid as it is.

Fortunately, not everyone who becomes severely ill with Covid dies.  The percentages you’re throwing around thus don’t do anything to make sense of the nonsensical claim that only the elderly or those with underlying conditions are at risk of serious illness should they contract Covid.  

Edited September 18, 2021 by FA@AC

[Seeker]

34 minutes ago, Vsplat said:

Perhaps someone in the F2F group can explain why they feel it is their right to pass on vaccination, but not society's right to then force them to see that decision through when they get (predictably) sick.  This business of showing up in the ER and expecting the public dime to pay for a personal choice is BS, IMO.

Because our society values personal choice and personal freedom.  Some fat slob can eat MacDonalds every day and when he (predictably) shows up in the hospital with diabetes and heart disease we pay.  Do you also think that's BS? Do you think we should take away his freedom to choose?

What about the downhill skiers wasting all our precious medical dollars - also BS?  Close all the ski hills?

You're obviously convinced that people should 100% be forced to get vaccinated and too bad for their personal freedoms in order to meet the greater good.  You realize this is a significant change to our society?

[Vsplat]

2 minutes ago, Seeker said:

You're obviously convinced that people should 100% be forced to get vaccinated and too bad for their personal freedoms in order to meet the greater good.  You realize this is a significant change to our society?

We will do better if you stop trying to say what I must be thinking.  You haven't guessed right yet and it just leads to a time wasting line of posts. 

Easy fix.  If I didn't say something, don't say that I must have meant it.

Vs

[Seeker]

3 minutes ago, Vsplat said:

We will do better if you stop trying to say what I must be thinking.  You haven't guessed right yet and it just leads to a time wasting line of posts. 

Easy fix.  If I didn't say something, don't say that I must have meant it.

Vs

Yeah, or you could tell me.  Of course, then you'd have to defend it.  I'll admit it probably is easier to stand on the sidelines and make snarky comments.

[UpperDeck]

53 minutes ago, Vsplat said:

 

As much as you prefer to count the dead, they no longer are in the health care system.  It is the living who are seriously ill, the bulk of whom are unvaccinated, that are overtaxing the system, burning out health care workers and primary care providers and causing others to die of treatable illness.

What also seems to be lost in this discussion is that the unvaccinated population continues to spread illness and foment variants.  

 

Vs

Vsplat....

I have selected some portions of your post that are puzzling. Where do you get the information that it is the unvaccinated that are spreading the illness? It is my understanding that vaccinated persons can transmit the virus. I wonder how you know that it is the unvaccinated who are over-burdening our health care. Who are these burnt-out health care providers?

I have no doubt that in some areas in Canada there are primary health care providers who are very stressed. My niece is a pediatric oncologist. Caring for terminally ill children is beyond my limit. However, I continually caution against relying on News sources or anecdotal evidence. It serves no purpose.

 

Back to data interpretation. I know IHG could help me but I'm sure you also possess the technical expertise to analyze the data in the graph you provided.

It states that the total number of cases in Canada is 1,557,288 of whom 304,794 are between the ages of 20-29.

It then says that of the cases within that age group 3473 are hospitalized. That is stated to be 4.3%. Where do "they" come up with that percentage? Isn't it 1.13% ?

I note also that in the WSJ report of the UK study of infections/hospitalizations, the authors indicate that of the deaths, a significant percentage were of children who had other serious illnesses. I wonder then how many of that group of 20-29 year olds similarly presented with other life-threatening diseases and for whom Covid was a tipping point?

I have mentioned this before but never generated a response; if a Covid infected person walked into a room containing 100 persons all of whom were unvaccinated and none of whom were infected, we would expect contact with 20 people (for example) all of whom are vulnerable. Some would get the virus.

If instead of the above, the room contained 100 people of whom 70 were vaccinated or previously infected (and recovered), what is the probability that the "carrier" will encounter a vulnerable person? Obviously significantly reduced...and why isn't that of relevance?

Finally...yesterday, the FDA panel recommended against booster shots for most age groups. The same day, it was reported that there was a significant gap between the effectiveness of the Moderna vaccine compared to Pfizer. To what extent should the vaccinated be concerned?

In January, a medical advisor said to me that if given a choice, I should get the Moderna vaccine. How did he know that 9 months ago and it only now hits the "information circuit"?

There are a LOT of unanswered questions and I for one think the questions should continue to be asked.

[Jaydee]

England vaccine passport plans ditched

Plans to introduce vaccine passports for access into nightclubs and large events in England will not go ahead, the health secretary has said.

Sajid Javid told the BBC: "We shouldn't be doing things for the sake of it." 

It was thought the plan, which came under criticism from venues and some MPs, would be introduced at the end of this month. 

Just a week ago, the vaccines minister had defended the scheme as the "best way" to keep the night industry open.

No 10 stressed the plan - which had been set to be introduced at the end of this month - would be kept "in reserve" should it be needed over autumn or winter.

Under the scheme, people would have been required to show proof - whether of double vaccination, a negative Covid test or finishing self-isolating after a positive PCR test - in order to gain entry to clubs and other crowded events

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58535258?fbclid=IwAR2DIjqf-qcKzcvb43oJivP1IeXveyOck1RpJLUy0wpMa7BozUAFxDhwTH8

[Vsplat]

1 hour ago, Seeker said:

Yeah, or you could tell me.  Of course, then you'd have to defend it.  I'll admit it probably is easier to stand on the sidelines and make snarky comments.

Hmmm.  Hard for me to anticipate what you're going to say I was thinking.  Funny how you feel you are OK to attribute things to me but it's not OK for me to point it out.  Or better yet, I am somehow required to defend that I wasn't thinking what you thought I was thinking....

To my original point.  I really don't think any parent would be consoled hearing that their sick or dying child was statistically insignificant in the eyes of another.  That was my entire point.  The rest is just a tangent.

Vs

[Vsplat]

1 hour ago, UpperDeck said:

I wonder how you know that it is the unvaccinated who are over-burdening our health care. Who are these burnt-out health care providers?

That's an odd question.  Alberta provincial triage statements?  CTV news?  All of the interviews with burnt out health care workers? 

I believe you can see for yourself the percentage of cases in hospital and ICU that are vaccinated and not.

Vs

[UpperDeck]

45 minutes ago, Vsplat said:

That's an odd question.  Alberta provincial triage statements?  CTV news?  All of the interviews with burnt out health care workers? 

I believe you can see for yourself the percentage of cases in hospital and ICU that are vaccinated and not.

Vs

I understood you to say that " the great unwashed" ( the unvaccinated) were spreading the disease and single-handedly over-whelming the health care system.

I reviewed the sources you quoted which primarily consisted of news reportage. I don't believe the triage plan has yet been implemented. 

In any event....nothing about over-whelmed nurses etc. Tired? Yes. Objecting to delayed vacations and overtime? Yes....as expressed by their union.

There are 322 ICU beds available in Alta. Of those, 215 are occupied by "Covid cases". Lord knows how many have ancillary serious medical conditions. Of the 215, ICU beds are occupied by 15 fully vaccinated individuals.

There is a total of 19,200 active cases in Alta.

It seems that you pick and choose amongst the points presented to you and respond only to some, re-packaging to facilitate your response. Nothing unusual in that; most do but I trust you will appreciate that I showed you respect by actually researching the arguments you made.

[Vsplat]

UD I am not trying to pick and choose, but frankly, I find your response highly selective.  The alberta triage plan not implemented yet?  So what?  The need is being discussed.  Look to the US.   Look around the world.  One almost has to put effort into not seeing health care infrastructure crumbling.

The 'great unwashed'.  What is wrong with you?  That is a corrosive inflammation of what I said.  Who would not be offended being framed that way?

I find your characterisation of the nurses' situation beyond belief.  After the stupidity with the harassment at the health care institutions and just how destructive that was to people who were already beaten down, I thought the press coverage was more thorough than you acknowledge.  It wasn't just unions doing the talking. 

It's not just nurses BTW.  You might want to check into the retirement curve of the docs in Ontario, for example.  There is a curve that's not flattening.   

It feels like Kellyanne Conway was contagious.  Play with this all you like.  At the end of the day, there are real people getting sick, and some of them are getting sick because they are following misinformation.  Some of them are getting sick at work, trying to save people who could have avoided being there altogether. 

Vs

[UpperDeck]

Vsplat....please let me expand upon a point in my earlier post. 

I have taken the numbers that follow from both the Alberta government website and Stats Can.

72% (+) of the population of Alberta have been fully vaccinated. The Alta pop is 4,400,000 so 3,168,000 residents have been vaccinated. There are approximately 600,000  people 12 and under who are ineligible for vaccination. Therefore, almost 3,800,000 of the population are either vaccinated or ineligible.

There have been a total of 278,000 cases.

So....of the over-12 pop of Alta...there are 354,000 "vulnerable" residents spread, of course, across the entire Province.

Given those numbers, you'd almost be compelled to agree that the most likely sources of new infections are; 1) the vaccinated; 2) children under 12; 3) unvaccinated (least likely).

The same information definitely confirms...say again...CONFIRMS....that those now most at risk are persons who are unvaccinated.

The decision by Mary to refuse vaccination places her at greater risk of infection, serious illness and hospitalization and of becoming an unnecessary burden upon health resources.

Now...that's not hyperbole or opinion based on news reports....that's simply fact.

[J.O.]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-severe-outcomes-covid-vaccination-1.6178449
 

Quote

Recent rates of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death among unvaccinated Albertans have been at least eight times higher — and as much as 60 times higher — compared to the fully vaccinated population, depending on which age range you look at.

That's according to a new CBC News analysis of data published by the provincial government.

Data experts with Alberta Health reviewed the analysis and confirmed the methodology as an effective way to compare severe outcomes relative to both vaccination status and age — while also accounting for the population sizes of each group.

 

These types of comparisons can be tricky, because the risk of severe outcomes increases with age, but so too does the rate of vaccination. As such, population-wide comparisons don't tell the full story.

 

[Don Hudson]

We all know that many (not all) here have been vaccinated against small pox, polio, measles, tetanus, perhaps yellow fever, cholera for those flying to Asian countries, (India, for me), & maybe some took cloroquinone to reduce the effects of malaria as there is still no vaccine against it.

Let me ask then, of those who do not desire to accept COVID-19 vaccines, be they Astrazenica, J&J, Pfizer or Moderna, do you regret taking any of the above, or have any long-term effects from any of these above-mentioned vaccines which are both ongoing (present today) and significantly affecting normal life for you. The Canadian Dept. of Health long ago issued their yellow vaccine record booklet and some here have mentioned that they still have theirs - I still have mine.

I would not equate outcomes from taking the above vaccines but I seek a pattern of science-based evidence about how our potpourri...the millions of wonder drugs available to all of us today, came about - I mean, we injest artificial & biochemical molecules sold by the thousands to each and we do so every waking moment and never think twice about the long term risks of say, smoking (normal tobacco, or weed), for example, or megadoses of Vitamin D.

Why is this? If we mandated say, Vitamin D because not enough sunlight is getting through for some reason, (I know...), would the same resistance obtain? Is it that we don't like a mom-or-pop gov't telling us what we already know, or is it a more intellectually-mature comprehension of such an order, where we have done lots of homework and examination and then made up our own mind, to Vit B or not 2B?

I'm nearly 74 and like many here can recognize forms of argument whether calling on evidence/experience or one rumour/ideology or another and generally make up my own mind. I am not persuaded by the raised eyebrow & a "Surely, you don't think that..., etc.", arguments and I think most of us are like that and wish to be left alone. But by definition, we do not have the privilege of being alone in a pandemic and as a member among millions, (or billions) of potential carriers of disease, we must encounter and then confront the question of personal responsibility to ourself and to others. We will come up with an answer - we always do but when a disease threatens life, and we, each of us, can threaten the life/lives of others, our answer to this question must account for this risk no matter what we happen to believe in. The difference arrives either as a descriptive or a prescriptive approach. Whether voiced or not, we must each give an accounting of our decision, first to ourselves and our loved ones, whether implied by our behaviours or by our various arguments for or against.

I have good friends who are heading out with their two small children, (2 & 5) to sail the Caribbean for a year. They are not vaccinated and do not intend to do so. Science and empirical evidence provides ample basis for caution and prophylactics, notwithstanding what we want or feel we must do to retain some semblance of self-consistency and self-respect for our own ideas. There it is - a decision and an accounting. We visited with them, outside & distanced to learn of their plans and wished them well. As always, we never know what is just around the corner in life.

I thought the following might be of interest on the "mandate" question, from The Economist.

Don

 

---

Sep 16th 2021

ON SEPTEMBER 11TH 2001, when al-Qaeda attacked America, almost 3,000 people died. In response the government overhauled national security and, for better or worse, struck a new balance between liberty and security. On the 20th anniversary of 9/11 roughly 3,100 people in America died because of covid-19. Another 3,100 died on September 12th. And again on the 13th.

Listen to this story  

Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.

By our estimates, based on excess deaths, the pandemic has claimed 860,000 lives in America. Yet measures to curb the virus by mandating vaccination, which the Biden administration announced on September 9th, are being treated by senior Republicans as a terrifying affront to liberty. “This is still America,” tweeted Tate Reeves, the governor of Mississippi, “and we still believe in freedom from tyrants.” That is fatally wrong-headed. The details of the Biden mandate could be improved on, but in democracies public health sometimes requires some coercion.

Across the world, governments from France to Australia are using pressure of one sort or another to boost vaccination. That should be no surprise. Ever since vaccines were invented, the state has asked some people to be jabbed to keep viruses such as yellow fever at bay. The justification for this intrusion was set out by America’s Supreme Court as long ago as 1905: even if in most cases you are free to refuse treatment, you are not thereby free to infect other people.

The question is whether each country’s requirement is proportionate. That depends on the threat and the costs and benefits of pressure. The calculus differs from one place to another.

What should not be in doubt is the danger posed by the Delta variant of covid-19. It is too infectious to be stopped simply by tracking cases. Vaccinated people, especially the elderly, gradually lose protection. If infected they can die, albeit at only one-tenth the rate of the unjabbed. Waves of infection overwhelm hospitals. Treating the unvaccinated cost $3.7bn in America, or $20,000 a patient, in August—a waste of resources.

For all these reasons, your choice over vaccination is everyone’s business. It matters that only 63% of Americans aged over 12 have had two doses of a vaccine, compared with 76% of French and 85% of Danes. Delta’s rapid spread through the population can be slowed by vaccination, sparing hospitals from overload and protecting vulnerable vaccinated people—for instance, the residents of old-people’s homes.

Academics worry that mandates merely sort the hesitant from the hardliners. You get a rapid increase in vaccination, but only to a level at or below what it would anyway have reached. One reason for this is that those convinced of a government plot see coercion as proof. That is why it is wise to keep punishments light and to offer free tests as an alternative to jabs—something the Biden plan fails to provide, but should.

However, the evidence from France is more encouraging. In July, to much grumbling, the state required a vaccine passport or negative test for a range of activities, including visiting bars, restaurants, sports stadiums and shopping centres (see Europe section). A month later nearly 10m people had rushed to be vaccinated—and today the total share is 20 percentage points higher. Our World in Data reports that the share of French who say that they definitely will not be vaccinated fell from 35% in mid-June to 23% in mid-August, the most recent figures.

A survey of over 50 countries in August by Johns Hopkins, an American university, found that over half of unvaccinated respondents said they definitely or probably will not get a jab. Governments cannot rely on mandates alone to get them to change their mind. Instead they also need to focus on their country’s particular hang-ups: Turks doubt covid-19 vaccines will work, Czechs don’t like vaccines in general, Americans worry about side-effects. The one thing elected officials should not do is to reinforce vaccine hesitancy by falsely presenting all mandates as an attack on constitutional liberties. ■

Dig deeper

All our stories relating to the pandemic and the vaccines can be found on our coronavirus hub. You can also find trackers showing the global roll-out of vaccines, excess deaths by country and the virus’s spread across Europe.

[UpperDeck]

DH....I personally have not had any discussions with anyone who made a conscious decision to refuse vaccination.

I assume that your sailing friends are intelligent and well-informed.

Did you boldly go where no man (etc)? Did you engage in "the" conversation "why not"? 

You posed the question here about reticence though I suspect most participants are vaccinated. Would that question not best be posed to good friends?

I for one would very much like to read their explanation.

[Seeker]

10 minutes ago, UpperDeck said:

DH....I personally have not had any discussions with anyone who made a conscious decision to refuse vaccination.

I assume that your sailing friends are intelligent and well-informed.

Did you boldly go where no man (etc)? Did you engage in "the" conversation "why not"? 

You posed the question here about reticence though I suspect most participants are vaccinated. Would that question not best be posed to good friends?

I for one would very much like to read their explanation.

I know quite few who are not vaccinated and will not be if they can manage it.

Their concerns (in no particular order);

The slippery slope of government exerting control by mandating vaccines, passports and restricting the free movement within the country.  Many feel that it's worth the fight against government over-reach irregardless of the "benefit" of the vaccine.

The unknown possible long term side effects to the mRNA technology balanced against a perceived small benefit.

The comparison to the little "yellow book" is a total red-herring.  The vast majority (I would guess 98%) of those opposed to the Covid vaccine are fully vaccinated against all the standard threats (polio, measles, diptheria, etc).  They are not "anti-vax", they are against the Covid vaccination specifically.  They believe the threat from Covid is over-hyped.  They believe the injuries and side-effects of the vaccine are under-reported.  Most people against the Covid vaccination are very well researched, intelligent and informed.  This is in contrast to how they are portrayed in the media  - as a bunch of ignorant hillbillies.  They believe that Covid is a threat for certain age groups and would even recommend vaccination for those groups but feel that the blanket "vaccinate everyone" protocol is akin to killing mosquitos with a sledge hammer.

The above statements are not necessarily my POV - simply a summation from those I have spoken with.

 

 

 

[UpperDeck]

Thank you, Seeker. I was aware that despite media characterizations, many intelligent and informed individuals are opposed to the Covid vaccination. Hence my reference in a post to Vsplat to the "great unwashed"....tongue firmly in cheek.

However, as stated I have never discussed the issue with someone opposed and hoped that DH took the opportunity.

While in Florida last season, a number of people I knew said they believed they had the infection in Dec/Jan of 19/20. I don't know whether they got vaccinated so never had that conversation but I suspect that if they did not, their natural immunity might have been relevant.

I think that if I had been infected and was asymptomatic or only mildly ill, I would have been very reluctant to submit to the vaccine. However...if it was a pre-condition to travel, I would likely have submitted. 

 

Lol..and yet here we are 8 months later and I STILL can't go anywhere!!

[UpperDeck]

At times when I was young, my mother told me I was a little piggie.

Later and in adolescence (and older), I had a few women suggest that I was something of a pig.

 

I am pleased to now read that pigs may have immunity to Covid. I may not need that booster!!

[J.O.]

1 hour ago, Seeker said:

Most people against the Covid vaccination are very well researched, intelligent and informed.

This is the part I struggle to agree with. In fact, I’d say no, they’re not. 

There was a day when expertise was earned through decades of study, research and dedication to the craft. When experts spoke, the vast majority listened because faith in our fellow humans was engrained. Today by contrast, there are far too many experts who are anything but; who’ve put in nowhere near enough time and skin in the game to have developed expertise. They pronounce themselves as such and are crafty enough with their words to draw in the easily swayed. In truth, they are no better than a Jim Jones or a Jimmy Swaggart, and people are dying unnecessarily because of it. 

[UpperDeck]

26 minutes ago, J.O. said:

This is the part I struggle to agree with. In fact, I’d say no, they’re not. 

There was a day when expertise was earned through decades of study, research and dedication to the craft. When experts spoke, the vast majority listened because faith in our fellow humans was engrained. Today by contrast, there are far too many experts who are anything but; who’ve put in nowhere near enough time and skin in the game to have developed expertise. They pronounce themselves as such and are crafty enough with their words to draw in the easily swayed. In truth, they are no better than a Jim Jones or a Jimmy Swaggart, and people are dying unnecessarily because of it. 

JO.....Seeker can obviously speak for himself but may I point out that his remarks were prefaced; 

I know quite few who are not vaccinated and will not be if they can manage it.

Their concerns (in no particular order);

 

 

I understood his following comments to be a characterization of the people HE knows....not the "marketers".

[UpperDeck]

By the way...anybody here watching college football...today and last week?

I'm guessing I have seen a total of at least 6-7 stadiums.....70,000+ people.

The absence of masks and distancing is remarkable. Does that make a vaccine-hesitant person more questioning as to the necessity of injection?

[FA@AC]

2 hours ago, Seeker said:

Many feel that it's worth the fight against government over-reach irregardless of the "benefit" of the vaccine.

The unknown possible long term side effects to the mRNA technology balanced against a perceived small benefit.

 

 

 

Perceived small benefit.  Many people regard lowering their own risk of infecting others to be a huge benefit.

[UpperDeck]

From where I sit, there appears to be a group of participants prepared to cheer each other on in their mutual support of every step urged by government to suppress Covid.

Although a worthy goal, why are some so reluctant to buttress their position or support their expression of opinion?

I note that I asked a simple question of DH. He didn't deign to reply but did offer up a cheer for a later poster questioning Seeker.

People are resisting vaccination. At least some of them are intelligent and informed. Don't you want ( and need) to understand why? Isn't that potentially in your own best interests?