Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–179 of 179 posts

Re: Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

#171

Post by switch007 »

mthoms wrote: post #165
switch007 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK healthcare system is constantly overwhelmed. What do you think it was overwhelmed by in the years 2019 and earlier? Every single winter he NHS is on the brink of collapse. You can easily find the stories. > do your part to save lives I know that’s what you’re saying. So what’s your diet? How much does your car pollute? And the statistics are stacked well against you in your accusation that an unvaccinated pers…

> overwhelmed You know very well the load on the health system is not the same now as it was pre-covid. Just stop with the word games, it's embarrassing (as is the whataboutism for that matter). For example: My dad's cancer treatment was never delayed pre-covid. It was after. That's entirely unprecedented. >your accusation that an unvaccinated person will kill you. Surprise! There you go with more words games instead…

> You know very well the load on the health system is not the same now as it was pre-covid

I never claimed it was.

Listen, this arguing style might work in your circles but not with actual informed grown ups. Do better. This is laughable.

You are ignoring everything in my replies and not engaging

Re: Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

#172

Post by rubyist5eva »

salamandersauce wrote: post #170
rubyist5eva wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The literal medical definition of invasive: ‘involving puncture or incision of the skin or insertion of an instrument or injection of foreign material into the body’ It’s not a subjective term. Not everyone that that isn’t vaccinated is infected by default, and people that are vaccinated can spread the disease as well.

Of course not, but vaccinated people are not spreading it or getting it at the same rates, nor are they filling up ICUs and hospital beds at the same rates. That's the problem. Unvaccinated people are a minority of the population taking up the majority of hospital space which has lead to procedures and care being cancelled for others . It's only when the healthcare systems stop being at risk of derailed can we actual…

Overwhelmed ICUs and hospitals has been Canadian tradition for decades, just google any year (ie. 2018) and "flu overwhelm hospitals" and you'll found countless articles of just seasonal influenza overwhelming the system.

The problem isn't the virus, it's the wholly inadequate socialized system.

Re: Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

#173

Post by mthoms »

switch007 wrote: post #171
mthoms wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> overwhelmed You know very well the load on the health system is not the same now as it was pre-covid. Just stop with the word games, it's embarrassing (as is the whataboutism for that matter). For example: My dad's cancer treatment was never delayed pre-covid. It was after. That's entirely unprecedented. >your accusation that an unvaccinated person will kill you. Surprise! There you go with more words games instead…

> You know very well the load on the health system is not the same now as it was pre-covid I never claimed it was. Listen, this arguing style might work in your circles but not with actual informed grown ups. Do better. This is laughable. You are ignoring everything in my replies and not engaging

Anyone who shamelessly changes their debate opponent's quote from "might kill" to "will kill" as a form of gotcha is either an asshole or stupid. If, after it was pointed out to them they don't even acknowledge it, then it could even be both.

You think the reader doesn't notice stuff like that? You think the reader doesn't notice when you disingenuously equated the current "overwhelmed" health care system with the pre-covid "overwhelmed" health care system? And then in your latest reply, never claimed that's what you did?

It's right there for anyone to read: You're not engaging in the conversation honestly.

Don't bother replying - I'm looking to converse/debate with only capable, intelligent people.

Re: Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

#174

Post by mthoms »

rubyist5eva wrote: post #166
mthoms wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing you just said changes the fact that no-one, not-ever, considers a needle an "invasive medical procedure". It's silly. Good rant though. Complete with childish swearing even!

The literal medical definition of invasive: ‘involving puncture or incision of the skin or insertion of an instrument or injection of foreign material into the body’ It’s not a subjective term.

No one, outside your anti-vax group would describe an everyday needle as an "invasive medical procedure".

But go ahead and keep using it for oh-so-dramatic effect. The rest of us will just keep rolling our eyes and laughing at you whining babies.

Edit: Here's the entire legal definition -

Invasive procedure means a procedure involving puncture or incision of the skin or insertion of an instrument or foreign material into the body including, but not limited to, percutaneous aspirations, biopsies, cardiac and vascular catheterizations, endoscopies, angioplasties, and implantations. Excluded are venipuncture and intravenous therapy.

You see that last sentence?

Source: https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/invasive-procedure

Re: Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

#175

Post by mthoms »

rubyist5eva wrote: post #167
mthoms wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's blatant and shameless fear mongering. And your description of - > the government has given itself vast power to perform warrantless search, confiscate property and conscript any person Is entirely misleading if not outright false. The "emergency powers" are written to support fighting natural emergencies (primarily). Read the entire thing for context (warning:PDF) https://www.saskpublicsafety.ca/-/media/projec…

Yeah because it's one thing we all know is that power tripping police don't abuse their power and get off easy. They are all constitutional scholars that would never infringe on our rights and use force unjustifiably. Nobody is entering my property without a warrant.

Nobody will. You're being ridiculous.

Did you actually read the legislation? Do you understand under what conditions officials are allowed to enter your property?

Re: Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

#176

Post by helloworld11 »

mthoms wrote: post #174
rubyist5eva wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The literal medical definition of invasive: ‘involving puncture or incision of the skin or insertion of an instrument or injection of foreign material into the body’ It’s not a subjective term.

No one, outside your anti-vax group would describe an everyday needle as an "invasive medical procedure". But go ahead and keep using it for oh-so-dramatic effect. The rest of us will just keep rolling our eyes and laughing at you whining babies. Edit: Here's the entire legal definition - Invasive procedure means a procedure involving puncture or incision of the skin or insertion of an instrument or foreign material…

If anyone is speaking childishly, it's you, with smug condescension thrown right in. As should be obvious, an injection's level of invasiveness is dependent on context, and what is being injected. A needle into the body isn't just a silly little needle if it contains something that can kill or harm. I doubt you'd argue against it being invasive if some doctor in a psychiatric hospital where you were placed against your will decided to inject you with heavy doses of sedatives against your will as well, and against your insistence that you don't clinically need them. I'm not anti-vax or against the covid vaccines. I indeed believe they've done enormous good so far, but your arguments are absurdly absolutist in this context. People certainly deserve a fundamental right to choose if they're injected with certain medicines or not, and to impose injections of only recently created vaccines is certainly invasive under many circumstances, especially when it involves making such choices for minors despite their parents' wishes or even certain clinical recommendations..

Re: Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

#177

Post by switch007 »

mthoms wrote: post #173
switch007 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know very well the load on the health system is not the same now as it was pre-covid I never claimed it was. Listen, this arguing style might work in your circles but not with actual informed grown ups. Do better. This is laughable. You are ignoring everything in my replies and not engaging

Anyone who shamelessly changes their debate opponent's quote from " might kill" to " will kill" as a form of gotcha is either an asshole or stupid. If, after it was pointed out to them they don't even acknowledge it, then it could even be both. You think the reader doesn't notice stuff like that? You think the reader doesn't notice when you disingenuously equated the current "overwhelmed" health care system with the…

I didn't quote, first of all. And I didn't change the meaning.

The difference in will vs might is of no significance in my sentence. You just saw saw red, picked a tiny little thing to go off the rails about as an excuse not to engage.

I said: "the statistics ... that an unvaccinated person will kill you". If I had written "the statistics ... that an unvaccinated person might kill you" the meaning is exactly the same. The 'statistic' we're /both/ referring to is the statistic of spreading, someone catching, and dying. Not "might die", the actual incidence of dying. Studies wouldn't measure the incidence of "might" deaths. But you know that

So now that's cleared up: what is the chances of the unvaccinated "might" killing you? Which statistics have you seen? (I'm double vaccinated btw ;-)

Re: Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

#178

Post by mthoms »

switch007 wrote: post #177
mthoms wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone who shamelessly changes their debate opponent's quote from " might kill" to " will kill" as a form of gotcha is either an asshole or stupid. If, after it was pointed out to them they don't even acknowledge it, then it could even be both. You think the reader doesn't notice stuff like that? You think the reader doesn't notice when you disingenuously equated the current "overwhelmed" health care system with the…

I didn't quote, first of all. And I didn't change the meaning. The difference in will vs might is of no significance in my sentence. You just saw saw red, picked a tiny little thing to go off the rails about as an excuse not to engage. I said: "the statistics ... that an unvaccinated person will kill you". If I had written "the statistics ... that an unvaccinated person might kill you" the meaning is exactly the same…

As I said, I'm not interested in word games. So far you've needlessly conflated using the healthcare system with overwhelming the healthcare system (then denied it), implied that the health care system was comparably overloaded before Covid (then denied it), and then introduced a needless debate around whether or not being around in an un-vaxed person could kill you.

What is it about that sentence you are debating exactly? Are you saying it's false, or that me and my loved ones have too low risk of death tolerance? Those are the only two options.

Understand: The degree to which this risk is acceptable is not up to YOU to decide.

Go ahead, put yourself at risk all you want, you have no right to put the safety of others at risk. So do what you want. But we, the rest of society, would like you to stay away from us until this boils over.

Re: Canada's 'gamble' on delaying, mixing and matching Covid-19 vaccines paid off

#179

Post by switch007 »

mthoms wrote: post #178
switch007 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't quote, first of all. And I didn't change the meaning. The difference in will vs might is of no significance in my sentence. You just saw saw red, picked a tiny little thing to go off the rails about as an excuse not to engage. I said: "the statistics ... that an unvaccinated person will kill you". If I had written "the statistics ... that an unvaccinated person might kill you" the meaning is exactly the same…

As I said, I'm not interested in word games. So far you've needlessly conflated using the healthcare system with overwhelming the healthcare system (then denied it), implied that the health care system was comparably overloaded before Covid (then denied it), and then introduced a needless debate around whether or not being around in an un-vaxed person could kill you. What is it about that sentence you are debating ex…

Master grandstander, playing to the gallery.

You aren't even the person I originally replied to.

You went straight for an ad-hominem ("snowflake", "selfish", "jerk")

Troll, nothing more. Just pure troll :-)

Post reply on HN