I don't understand, if the vaccines work then why the issue? However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus, so why is this banning of the unvaccinated a thing? Very odd.
[deleted]
Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
81–90 of 600 posts
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vaccines reduce spread because of lower viral load. Also reduces severity. Antivaxxers can be execrated for all I care - dumbest way to enforce your freedom
I was sick with 101.5F for a week, excruciating headaches, confirmed by a positive PCR after Moderna vaccination. My girlfriend as well, two months after the second dose. How much higher would our viral load be without Moderna?
It’s hard to say, maybe the vaccine didn’t work on you.
Or maybe it saved yours and your girlfriend’s life.
It’s hard to say on a case-by-case basis which is why we depend on population-level data.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#83Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#84I don't understand, if the vaccines work then why the issue? However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus, so why is this banning of the unvaccinated a thing? Very odd.
If a seatbelt doest stop you from dying in 100% of car crashes, I don't understand why they're mandatory?
No one is going to fire you, no store would deny you entrance for that, and no government will deny you basic services if you don't wear your seatbelt.
That's the difference.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#85It seems we are heading in a direction where those who don't take the jab will be blocked from receiving government services, prevented from patronizing various businesses, and even restricted from traveling and the ability to work. Are most citizens really okay with this medical apartheid, or are they afraid of speaking out against it?
I'm pretty fine with that. I'm also fine with taking driving rights away from people caught driving drunk.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#86In other festive COVID news from Canada: >Canada's Justin Trudeau on the unvaccinated: >“They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist....This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?" https://twitter.com/KevinBardosh/status/1476838517007257600 My patience with COVID cultists is starting to run quite thin.
There is no science if doubts aren’t allowed.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding is that the vaccines aren’t completely effective at stopping you catching/spreading, but they are a whole lot better than being immune naive altogether. Casual googling has given me some Washington state pdf data that says even in the most robust cohort (13-29 year olds) unvaccinated folks get Covid at 3x the rate of unvaccinated and the differences only get more dramatic from there. If you have more…
Quoted post unavailable.
If you look, the article I linked was in December 29 published. So it accounts for omicron and still shows a 3x difference at the minimum.
However this is again a casual Google for a single state. If you have more information that says otherwise please let me know. Thank you!
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a seatbelt doest stop you from dying in 100% of car crashes, I don't understand why they're mandatory?
> If a seatbelt doest stop you from dying in 100% of car crashes, I don't understand why they're mandatory? Interestingly, your comparison is relevant, but you are responding to an argument which I don't think is being made. The OP is _not_ arguing that vaccines shouldn't be mandatory because they aren't 100% effective. On the contrary, the OP's argument is that since vaccines are relatively effective, one person's c…
It's a great analogy because the no-harm-to-others argument doesn't apply in either case.
In an incident, an un-seat-belted occupant can turn into a projectile and harm or kill others in the vehicle that might be wearing seatbelts.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uh, source? Media very much likes to simplify these things, but if you think of this in a probabilistic/continuous manner, rather than a "yes spread vs no spread" approach, the vaccines obviously reduce spread?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risk-of-vacci... You're right that there's no definite answer to this, but the general consensus among doctors is that it doesn't prevent the virus from spreading.
You really don't see how you're playing into exactly the fallacy they're critiquing?
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
Horrible logic. Seatbelts are in the same position. They are mandatory and greatly reduce harm done in an accident. Same thing for the vaccines, you won't die and won't likely be using an ICU bed that other patients need. Go spread your FUD elsewhere.
Seat belts shouldn't be mandatory either.
Why? Seatbelts greatly reduce deadly harm for people in the cars and outside of it.
There are many occurrences where someone died because the body of a person in a crash who wasn't wearing a seatbelt just crashed into them.