Austria first country to make Covid vaccine mandatory

Status
Not open for further replies.

GeekyGuy

Professional loafer
Former Staff
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
4,990
Trophies
0
XP
1,858
Country
United States
If you want to convince people of something you can't say who knows. That's not a very good answer. You have to give exact reasons on how it affects everyone else. Because the "who knows" answer can be said to just about anything and be an abused response. That's just like telling someone do as I say because I said so. Both aren't very good responses at convincing people.

Higher Powers should never be the determining factor at deciding for you or for the smaller person. You need to take matters into your own hands. You need full autonomy over yourself and control over these decisions yourself.
Not trying to convince anyone of anything, so check there.
And...
I try to let my Higher Power determine EVERYTHING. Check there.
I don't have to take anything into my own hands. Check.
No, not really. Don't need to do any of those things. :rofl2:
 
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
4,742
Trophies
3
XP
7,245
Country
United Kingdom
Do pro-mandate people acknowledge that breakthrough infections are a thing? (especially with new variants, there were spikes for delta and probably will be a similar one for omicron) I'm not talking about the numbers, just that it happens.

Now imagine there are two people wanting to go to the library, one has a vaccine passport because they got jabbed 5 months ago, and the other has not but recovered from Covid recently so has some natural immunity still. Why would you decide which of those people presents the bigger risk based on a piece of paper, when you can instead find out the ACTUAL risk by TESTING both of them there and then? Refuse whoever tests positive, not the one without a piece of paper. Either one of them could be infectious at that point, it doesn't matter what the probability is if it's above zero, if I'm in there I don't want the virus entering via a vaccinated person either.. and It is just plain stupid to deny EITHER of them if they aren't even carrying the virus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cyan
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
13,842
Trophies
3
Age
51
Location
Austria
XP
2,650
Country
Austria
....3 Pages later and nobody seems to be interested in Biontech-Chef Ugur Sahin Statement yesterday:

Biontech boss Ugur Sahin assumes the need for a new vaccine in view of the Omikron virus variant. The only question is when this new vaccine will be needed, said Sahin today at the Reuters Next conference.

Biontech expects Omikron to develop as an "escape variant". That means that it can probably also infect people who have been vaccinated. But he is confident that vaccinated people are adequately protected from serious illness.



What makes me really worry:

"Some" People get now their BOOSTER (3rd Vaccination).
Why ?
According to Sahin it is not really effective (unnecessary ??)

Is nobody seeing what Mandatory Vaccination means in the Future ?
It is far,far,far,far away from "Now it is over,when 100% of the People are vaccinated with their 1st/2nd/3rd/4th.......Stitch...."

Are mankind really that blind......?
 
  • Sad
Reactions: Evilengine
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
13,842
Trophies
3
Age
51
Location
Austria
XP
2,650
Country
Austria
Finally also VALNEVA is in "Progress" with December 2nd:

Corona dead vaccine from Valneva in the rolling review of the EMA The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has started the rolling review of the COVID-19 vaccine from the French pharmaceutical company Valneva (VLA2001). It is an inactivated whole virus vaccine grown in Vero cells and inactivated with propiolactone.

VLA2001 is currently the only adjuvanted, inactivated whole virus vaccine in Europe.

and

The EU has already signed a contract with Valneva for the delivery of 60 million Doses of VLA2001 vaccines.





Unfortunately,NOVAVAX seems NOT to be the Vaccine we all hoped.....:sad:
 

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
5,404
Trophies
1
XP
4,038
Country
United Kingdom
Despite your attempt to rationalize this with your own racism, this is still stupid. A country is not a race, even if it is being blamed for a natural event.
race: any one of the groups that humans are often divided into based on physical traits regarded as common among people of shared ancestry

Obviously when I say "blame a country", I mean the people in the country. I'm not saying that people blame the land mass.

But nice to see you're back on trolling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dakitten

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
5,404
Trophies
1
XP
4,038
Country
United Kingdom
Do pro-mandate people acknowledge that breakthrough infections are a thing? (especially with new variants, there were spikes for delta and probably will be a similar one for omicron) I'm not talking about the numbers, just that it happens.

Now imagine there are two people wanting to go to the library, one has a vaccine passport because they got jabbed 5 months ago, and the other has not but recovered from Covid recently so has some natural immunity still. Why would you decide which of those people presents the bigger risk based on a piece of paper, when you can instead find out the ACTUAL risk by TESTING both of them there and then? Refuse whoever tests positive, not the one without a piece of paper. Either one of them could be infectious at that point, it doesn't matter what the probability is if it's above zero, if I'm in there I don't want the virus entering via a vaccinated person either.. and It is just plain stupid to deny EITHER of them if they aren't even carrying the virus.
You could test people on entry to the library, however putting a covid safe testing center outside every library is going to have a quite considerable cost. I'm happy for that cost to be paid for by those who refuse to be vaccinated.


Some places allow proof of recent covid infection for passports, however there would have to be some way of preventing fraud.

Mail in ballots have a fail safe that the real person will turn up to vote, so fraud would be detected. But if they rely on your word that you took a test then there is no fail safe. There are A LOT of anti vaxxers who would love to be able to say that they got a vaccine passport by getting someone else to take their test, because they are just plain fucked up in the head. A few fraudulent votes won't swing an election, but fraudulent covid recovery could kill your grandma.
 

tabzer

RP
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
2,741
Trophies
1
Age
37
XP
2,149
Country
Japan
race: any one of the groups that humans are often divided into based on physical traits regarded as common among people of shared ancestry

Obviously when I say "blame a country", I mean the people in the country. I'm not saying that people blame the land mass.

But nice to see you're back on trolling.

Geopolitical landmasses are not people, and they are generally governed by few select people. Political ideology/policy is not a physical trait. If you feel the need to remind people that the Chinese people are generally politically oppressed every time someone mentions China, go ahead. Calling people racist because they blame China for something misses the mark.
 

Cyan

GBATemp's lurking knight
Former Staff
Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Messages
23,517
Trophies
2
Age
43
Location
Engine room, learning
XP
14,791
Country
France
Okay, another offtopic, this is not about mandatory vaccination or Austria.

The main purpose of a virus is to live in a host, not kill it ! if the virus kills the host, it's killing itself.
So, these "variation" are mostly adaptation of the virus to be less harmful to its host in order to continue living and duplicate and spread into another host, etc.

Apparently, the Omicron variant is more contagious, but gives less symptoms, effectively preventing its host from dying.
some doctors think Omicron is "the end of the tunnel", a way out of the pandemic, a sign that it's becoming more harmless.

https://www.ladepeche.fr/amp/2021/1...ut-du-tunnel-selon-un-immunologue-9963287.php
Google translated quote said:
According to Professor Zvika Granot, immunologist by trade, this is a sign that "as the coronavirus evolves, it will be less and less aggressive".
Omicron, being more contagious, will contaminate more people and will become progressively the main one, superseding Delta, making people less ill.

With the less harmful virus, less people will have symptoms... and all pro-vaccine will get credits for "see, we were right, mass vaccination worked!" while it's just the virus being less a killer to itself.
 
Last edited by Cyan,
  • Like
Reactions: Alexander1970

SG854

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
4,464
Trophies
1
XP
5,959
Country
Fiji
Okay, another offtopic, this is not about mandatory vaccination or Austria.

The main purpose of a virus is to live in a host, not kill it ! if the virus kills the host, it's killing itself.
So, these "variation" are mostly adaptation of the virus to be less harmful to its host in order to continue living and duplicate and spread into another host, etc.

Apparently, the Omicron variant is more contagious, but gives less symptoms, effectively preventing its host from dying.
some doctors think Omicron is "the end of the tunnel", a way out of the pandemic, a sign that it's becoming more harmless.

https://www.ladepeche.fr/amp/2021/1...ut-du-tunnel-selon-un-immunologue-9963287.php

Omicron will contaminate more people and will become progressively the main one, superseding Delta, making people less ill.
This is exactly what I said when covid first came out. It will eventually evolve to be less harmful for its survival. It can't spread itself if the person dies. Only less deadly variants can spread more easily.
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
17,340
Trophies
2
XP
16,526
Country
United States
In 2015, the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine, in its only award for treatments of infectious diseases since six decades prior, honoured the discovery of ivermectin (IVM), a multifaceted drug deployed against some of the world's most devastating tropical diseases. Since March 2020, when IVM was first used against a new global scourge, COVID-19, more than 20 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have tracked such inpatient and outpatient treatments. Six of seven meta-analyses of IVM treatment RCTs reporting in 2021 found notable reductions in COVID-19 fatalities, with a mean 31% relative risk of mortality vs. controls. During mass IVM treatments in Peru, excess deaths fell by a mean of 74% over 30 days in its ten states with the most extensive treatments. Reductions in deaths correlated with the extent of IVM distributions in all 25 states with p < 0.002. Sharp reductions in morbidity using IVM were also observed in two animal models, of SARS-CoV-2 and a related betacoronavirus. The indicated biological mechanism of IVM, competitive binding with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, is likely non-epitope specific, possibly yielding full efficacy against emerging viral mutant strains.
Ivermevtin Nobel prize winner 2015 for HUMANS, educate your self you dumb fuck.
I'm not sure why you're posting the abstract from a meta-analysis written by a gynecological oncologist as though it demonstrates that ivermectin is an effective COVID-19 treatment. In reality, the data and methodology this paper (and others) rely on has been discredited.

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news...-in-meta-analysis-methodology/4014477.article

https://www.theguardian.com/science...vid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns

Currently available data does not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19, and taking certain doses of ivermectin (like what's commonly suggested by science-deniers) has been demonstrated to be dangerous.

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consu...-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19

https://emergency.cdc.gov/han/2021/han00449.asp
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dakitten
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
4,742
Trophies
3
XP
7,245
Country
United Kingdom
You could test people on entry to the library, however putting a covid safe testing center outside every library is going to have a quite considerable cost. I'm happy for that cost to be paid for by those who refuse to be vaccinated.
Most people say you should get vaccinated for others not just for yourself, so if we're being that altruistic then cost shouldn't be an issue. Having a vaccine passport is not 100% guaranteed (isn't it something like 65% effective after 6 months? Boosters would have to be much more often to keep it over 90%) whereas I'm sure a quick pin-prick style blood test could be developed that was both quick and effective - and more importantly actually tell you if you should be allowing a person to be in a public place.
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
17,340
Trophies
2
XP
16,526
Country
United States
Do pro-mandate people acknowledge that breakthrough infections are a thing? (especially with new variants, there were spikes for delta and probably will be a similar one for omicron) I'm not talking about the numbers, just that it happens.

Now imagine there are two people wanting to go to the library, one has a vaccine passport because they got jabbed 5 months ago, and the other has not but recovered from Covid recently so has some natural immunity still. Why would you decide which of those people presents the bigger risk based on a piece of paper, when you can instead find out the ACTUAL risk by TESTING both of them there and then? Refuse whoever tests positive, not the one without a piece of paper. Either one of them could be infectious at that point, it doesn't matter what the probability is if it's above zero, if I'm in there I don't want the virus entering via a vaccinated person either.. and It is just plain stupid to deny EITHER of them if they aren't even carrying the virus.
Natural immunity has been shown to be at least less consistent than vaccine immunity, so if the timing of when each person was exposed (through the vaccine or illness) is the same, I would definitely prefer to be around the vaccinated person.

I don't oppose the mass testing approach, but as you've described it, it's very time and resource intensive, and the fallback should be proof of vaccination. The fallback to proof of vaccination is compulsory mask-wearing.

Okay, another offtopic, this is not about mandatory vaccination or Austria.

The main purpose of a virus is to live in a host, not kill it ! if the virus kills the host, it's killing itself.
So, these "variation" are mostly adaptation of the virus to be less harmful to its host in order to continue living and duplicate and spread into another host, etc.

Apparently, the Omicron variant is more contagious, but gives less symptoms, effectively preventing its host from dying.
some doctors think Omicron is "the end of the tunnel", a way out of the pandemic, a sign that it's becoming more harmless.

https://www.ladepeche.fr/amp/2021/1...ut-du-tunnel-selon-un-immunologue-9963287.php

Omicron, being more contagious, will contaminate more people and will become progressively the main one, superseding Delta, making people less ill.

With the less harmful virus, less people will have symptoms... and all pro-vaccine will tell "see, we were right, mass vaccination worked!" while it's just the virus being less a killer to itself.
It's complicated, but as long as the virus is as equally infectious as it was before, there's no selective pressure for being more or less deadly, and it could go either way.

We obviously want Omicron to be less deadly, but we don't know yet for sure if that's the case. It might be equally or more deadly. It is also possible that future variants can become more deadly.

Most people say you should get vaccinated for others not just for yourself, so if we're being that altruistic then cost shouldn't be an issue. Having a vaccine passport is not 100% guaranteed (isn't it something like 65% effective after 6 months? Boosters would have to be much more often to keep it over 90%) whereas I'm sure a quick pin-prick style blood test could be developed that was both quick and effective - and more importantly actually tell you if you should be allowing a person to be in a public place.
Even if everyone in a public space were only 65% protected, that makes the odds vanishingly small that there will be an outbreak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dakitten
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
4,742
Trophies
3
XP
7,245
Country
United Kingdom
Even if everyone in a public space were only 65% protected, that makes the odds vanishingly small that there will be an outbreak.
We could go a step further and make the odds pretty much zero by testing (assuming an effective test, I'm not convinced by those self-administered lateral flow ones). I could see a future with Covid breathalysers..
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
17,340
Trophies
2
XP
16,526
Country
United States
We could go a step further and make the odds pretty much zero by testing (assuming an effective test, I'm not convinced by those self-administered lateral flow ones). I could see a future with Covid breathalysers..
Sure, I agree with you. However, the existence of mass testing should not be confused with an excuse for not getting vaccinated.
 
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
4,742
Trophies
3
XP
7,245
Country
United Kingdom
Sure, I agree with you. However, the existence of mass testing should not be confused with an excuse for not getting vaccinated.
I was using it more to suggest a better method than passports rather than instead of vaccinating.

Also, now that I'm not on my phone I wanted to post something about natural immunity since I'm convinced it is deliberately downplayed in the US for some reason. There is some compelling data in this review of studies

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00676-9/fulltext

As I'm sure you will see this as an attack on vaccination I might as well state that it's not meant to be, try to read it as simply additional information. It should be entirely possible to be pro-vaccine without feeling like you have to constantly downplay the effectiveness of natural immunity.. I know the media doesn't see it this way but they aren't burdened with the ability to actually understand scientific evidence.
 

SG854

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
4,464
Trophies
1
XP
5,959
Country
Fiji
I was using it more to suggest a better method than passports rather than instead of vaccinating.

Also, now that I'm not on my phone I wanted to post something about natural immunity since I'm convinced it is deliberately downplayed in the US for some reason. There is some compelling data in this review of studies

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00676-9/fulltext

As I'm sure you will see this as an attack on vaccination I might as well state that it's not meant to be, try to read it as simply additional information. It should be entirely possible to be pro-vaccine without feeling like you have to constantly downplay the effectiveness of natural immunity.. I know the media doesn't see it this way but they aren't burdened with the ability to actually understand scientific evidence.
Natural immunity only works after you're been infected, and it's also after you spread covid to other people. Vaccines reduces the rate of infection and spreading it to other people. Vaccine is better then natural imunity for that reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lacius

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
17,340
Trophies
2
XP
16,526
Country
United States
I was using it more to suggest a better method than passports rather than instead of vaccinating.
It's a potentially better way to prevent specific outbreaks, not a better way to lessen infection overall. Vaccination, and vaccination mandates, are still the best tools in that regard.

Also, now that I'm not on my phone I wanted to post something about natural immunity since I'm convinced it is deliberately downplayed in the US for some reason. There is some compelling data in this review of studies

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00676-9/fulltext

As I'm sure you will see this as an attack on vaccination I might as well state that it's not meant to be, try to read it as simply additional information. It should be entirely possible to be pro-vaccine without feeling like you have to constantly downplay the effectiveness of natural immunity.. I know the media doesn't see it this way but they aren't burdened with the ability to actually understand scientific evidence.
I'm unaware of anyone seriously saying that natural immunity can't be significant. However, there are a few issues that need to be considered:
  1. In order for someone to have natural immunity, they had to contract and potentially spread the virus. It is not something anyone should aim for, since contracting the disease comes with significant risks.
  2. Natural immunity has been demonstrated to be less consistent than vaccine immunity. What that means is someone could suffer a COVID-19 infection and have robust protection for 6+ months, while someone else could suffer a COVID-19 infection and have very little protection afterwards. There are a lot of variables like the nature of the infection that contribute to the quality of the natural immunity. Studies suggest, for example, that an asymptomatic infection results in a lot less of a natural immunity than with someone who suffers severe illness. Oppositely, vaccine immunity is a lot more consistent. It's for this reason that saying "I previously had COVID-19" is not comparable to proof of vaccination.
  3. Natural immunity is not an excuse for not getting vaccinated. A person who relies on natural immunity alone is 2-3 times more likely to suffer another COVID-19 infection than someone who was vaccinated after recovering from the disease.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dakitten
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
4,742
Trophies
3
XP
7,245
Country
United Kingdom
A person who relies on natural immunity alone is 2-3 times more likely to suffer another COVID-19 infection than someone who was vaccinated after recovering from the disease.
That's not what the studies I posted show, I'd be interested in reading the studies you're quoting.

Edit: Nevermind, I missed where you said vaccinated AFTER recovering from Covid.

Studies suggest, for example, that an asymptomatic infection results in a lot less of a natural immunity than with someone who suffers severe illness.
The duration of viral shedding is shorter in people who remain asymptomatic, so they are probably less infectious than people who develop symptoms anyway.
 
Last edited by subcon959,
Status
Not open for further replies.
General chit-chat
Help Users
    Sonic Angel Knight @ Sonic Angel Knight: The Bell notify me that "The Real Jdbye" mentioned me.