We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

[Per]

Is there any analysis on which require hospitalization? Are they people with a health issue already or just healthy people? I think I am healthy but how will COVID19 impact me? I understand the elderly or people known to be high risk to get it first along with healthcare workers.

I drink a lot of whisky so maybe that kills all the germs?

A study in Sweden done on the first wave took note that nearly all covid patients that needed intensive care had vitamin D deficiency, compared to less than half of other hospitalised covid patients. This could indicate that vitamin D deficiency makes the disease worse.

So, yeah, I bought some pills. When it's dark outside you can't produce it yourself.

As for hospitalisation in general, it seems rather random. Most people who die are 80+, but there are lots of people in their 30's, 40's, 50's that need hospital care. They usually survive though, but not all of them.

They say obesity, diabetes and anything that impairs your lung functions are risk factors, but I haven't really seen any stats that confirm it.
Death rates are mostly tied to age.

[Strangelove]

I just downloaded Reefs neocortex data from YouTube....thats some weird ass shit youre beating off to buddy

Me?

Are they Asian ?

Dr Tam is

[Cousin Strawberry]

She looks like she can pack some serious wieiner into that yap

[Topper]

I just downloaded Reefs neocortex data from YouTube....thats some weird ass shit youre beating off to buddy

Me?

Are they Asian ?

Dr Tam is

Baubles, is that you?

[Strangelove]

Baubles, is that you?

Hey, I didn't change the wording, I merely snipped!

[Blob Mckenzie]

I just downloaded Reefs neocortex data from YouTube....thats some weird ass shit youre beating off to buddy

Me?

Are they Asian ?

Dr Tam is

Victor Tang?

[Strangelove]

They're gonna pump your neocortex full of nanobots man...

https://www.rt.com/news/509002-ontario- ... a-vaccine/

People who refuse ‘voluntary’ Covid-19 vaccination could face restrictions, Ontario govt warns

No one will be forced to receive a coronavirus jab, but people who refuse to get vaccinated could be deprived of certain freedoms, Ontario’s Health Minister Christine Elliott has cautioned.

The senior health official acknowledged that inoculation would be voluntary, but encouraged “everyone who is able to, to have the vaccination,” noting that there could be consequences for those who forgo the procedure.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford responded that it would be unlawful to “force every single person to take” the vaccine, but Elliott’s follow-up remarks seemed to suggest the government might rely upon coercive tactics to obtain ‘voluntary’ compliance.

The health minister’s comments come amid growing fears that mass vaccination programs being rolled out by governments around the world could lead to some form of health ‘passport’ which could be used to restrict travel and other activities.

[Meds]

There's a simple response to anti-vaxxers: dart guns.

To hell with the freedom of choice eh Per.

Just one more bit of proof that you are a fan of tyrannical alt-left communism.

Then maybe some mandatory training to re-educate them on the benefit of vaccines

Not a terrible idea.

However, as a healthcare worker I see minimal benefit in the seasonal vaccines that we currently push every year for the flu.

Last year we saw a flu vaccine that was a bit over 60% effective.....and that was considered a good year. A couple of years ago it was less than 25% effective.

Vaccines that are a one and done, or at least unnecessary for another 10 years seem, to me, to be no-brainers. MMR, Polio, TDap, Hep.....passing on these is height of stupidity. They are proven to work over the long term and really only require a booster as an adult if you are going to be working in a field or region where exposure is likely to be increased.

Something that is required every year, and will include guesswork as to what strain etc., I have no problem with people deciding not to get a needle in the arm every 12 months when there's only a 50/50 chance that it will be effective in keeping you from getting sick.

My wife's a school nurse and there are parents that opt out of the HPV vaccine for their kids. Nothing she can do.

There are studies now that show that those who got the vaccine before turning 17 has an 88% reduction of risk for cervical cancer compared to those who did not get a vaccine. Those that got it between age 17 and 30 had a 50% reduction of the risk, the lower rate probably because many of them were already infected, and thus got the vaccine too late. And of course this is based on the old vaccine that only protected against the three most common strands of the human papilloma virus, the shots they give now protects against seven, iirc, so it should reduce the cancer risk even more.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1917338

I really cannot understand what kind of parent wishes cancer on their kids.....

But yeah, dart guns was meant as tongue in cheek. I find anti vaxxers unbelievably selfish though. Those with compromised immune systems depend on the rest of us to get vaccines so they get protection through herd immunity as they can't take it themselves. But, sure, you cannot really force a person to take it. But I find it wrong that they are allowed to deprive their children of vaccines.

Flu shots are not really the issue here. Although I have had the flu twice, and damn it's tough on you.
It's more the truly lethal ones, like small pox, TB, polio, measles, HPV...

HPV is still a borderline hot topic among some circles. The initial roll out, and information (or is it disinformation) regarding the side-effects of the vaccine in developing countries makes for some fun conspiracies.

I have no problem with anti-vaxxers. There are days I feel like putting my foot in their pond. My argument is that if the majority of the population is vaccinated (and really anti-vaxxers are still a small percentage overall) then technically the vaccinated shouldn't have anything to fear from the un-vaccinated.

Yes I realize that vaccines aren't foolproof, and that anyone can still be infected if continually exposed or hit with a large one time exposure to a heavy viral load.

Anyways.

Freedom means everyone has a right to choose for themselves.

[Meds]

https://www.rt.com/news/509002-ontario- ... a-vaccine/

People who refuse ‘voluntary’ Covid-19 vaccination could face restrictions, Ontario govt warns

No one will be forced to receive a coronavirus jab, but people who refuse to get vaccinated could be deprived of certain freedoms, Ontario’s Health Minister Christine Elliott has cautioned.

The senior health official acknowledged that inoculation would be voluntary, but encouraged “everyone who is able to, to have the vaccination,” noting that there could be consequences for those who forgo the procedure.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford responded that it would be unlawful to “force every single person to take” the vaccine, but Elliott’s follow-up remarks seemed to suggest the government might rely upon coercive tactics to obtain ‘voluntary’ compliance.

The health minister’s comments come amid growing fears that mass vaccination programs being rolled out by governments around the world could lead to some form of health ‘passport’ which could be used to restrict travel and other activities.

This is where I begin to have major problems with the process.

[Per]

Freedom means everyone has a right to choose for themselves.

Absolutely. No argument there.

But should nut cases also have the right to deprive their children of good preventive health care?

Today they do, but I'm not convinced that it is in the best interest of the child.

My wife has had a number of kids ask if they can't have the vaccine anyway, even though their parents have not signed the consent form, but she's not allowed to do that.

[5thhorseman]

I have no problem with anti-vaxxers. There are days I feel like putting my foot in their pond. My argument is that if the majority of the population is vaccinated (and really anti-vaxxers are still a small percentage overall) then technically the vaccinated shouldn't have anything to fear from the un-vaccinated.

Yes I realize that vaccines aren't foolproof, and that anyone can still be infected if continually exposed or hit with a large one time exposure to a heavy viral load.

... or they're immunocompromised and can't take the vaccine, or they're a baby that's too young to be vaccinated, or one of the unlucky few percent who've been vaccinated but it was not effective in them (for covid that will be 5%).

So yes, the vaccinated do have something to fear from the un-vaccinated, especially since those anti-vaxxers tend to cluster in affluent neighbourhoods, leading to outbreaks.

I think for covid we are going to have a lot more people holding out, especially in the US. The future will not be covid-free, even with vaccines available.

[Cousin Strawberry]

So yes, the vaccinated do have something to fear from the un-vaccinated, especially since those anti-vaxxers tend to cluster in affluent neighbourhoods, leading to outbreaks.
.

Is a double-wide indicative of affluence now?

[Topper]

Are virus's Earth's vaccine against humans?

[Meds]

Freedom means everyone has a right to choose for themselves.

Absolutely. No argument there.

But should nut cases also have the right to deprive their children of good preventive health care?

Today they do, but I'm not convinced that it is in the best interest of the child.

That's where your way of thinking begins to overstep. If I were to ask you if you would want someone to have the right to provide a medical service to your children against your consent you would probably say no. If I presented the suggestion by saying it was in your child's best interests, you might say yes in regards to this topic. However, if you actually were convinced that said medical service was NOT in your child's best interest, you would say no.

When we start to force things on people against their will because we believe that it's in their best interests, that's where we go wrong. This applies to medical services, religion, limiting artistic expression, or just about anything you can think of.

The counter argument can be made that we should base this on what is empirically best for the greater good of all people. However, until we're willing to say nobody is allowed to drive an automobile because there is a chance they will get in an accident and harm or kill someone else, then that school of thought doesn't hold the water people think it does.

My wife has had a number of kids ask if they can't have the vaccine anyway, even though their parents have not signed the consent form, but she's not allowed to do that.

This is an interesting one though. I would advocate that the required age of the child should be lowered so that younger children could make that choice. However it's a fine line. I'm not sure how things are over on your side of the planet, but here in North America, the public education system has basically turned schools into conditioning factories for children. Overall the curriculum has been dumbed down substantially over the last 20-30 years, free thinking is encouraged on the surface, however anything that doesn't fall in line with the narrative is steered and directed back to the currently accepted model. So at what point is a person truly "free thinking" enough to make their own informed decision

Could make for quite the debate.

[5thhorseman]

So yes, the vaccinated do have something to fear from the un-vaccinated, especially since those anti-vaxxers tend to cluster in affluent neighbourhoods, leading to outbreaks.
.

Is a double-wide indicative of affluence now?

Oh, don't confuse the anti-vaxx crowd with the nanobot conspiracy nutters (though there is some overlap). No offence