Covid 19

[Flying Binghi]

On 19/08/2021 at 8:33 AM, Markdun said:

FB, even if the first two paragraphs are true...I haven’t checked the data for Gibraltar, it does not support or prove the claim in the third paragraph, putting aside why anyone would believe anything associated with a deluded, imbecilic narcissist like Trump.

Lets be clear.  The Covid vaccines have been designed to reduce (not eliminate) deaths and to reduce (not eliminate) hospitalisations.  And this has been substantiated in basket case countries (ie. ones that have let the virus rip) that then rely only on vaccination (look at the UK).  There is very reliable evidence that Covid vaccinations are very effective (in the short term) of massively reducing infection fatalities and hospitalisations.  Figures range from a minimum of a five fold to ten fold reduction in deaths and hospitalisations.  If that’s not ‘working’ as intended, I don’t know what is.

They were not designed, nor were they tested, to eliminate people getting the Covid infection or padding it on.  Yet they still reduce transmission of tge infection by around 50% or a bit more. unfortunately with the Delta variants higher transmissibility, a reduction by 50% from vaccination, just delivers us back to where we were with the original Covid strain, not ‘herd immunity’ as was hoped.
 

 I know there are many people who simply believe all vaccinations work the same....like polio, diphtheria, tetanus....but unfortunately this is not the case.  Some vaccines have marginal effectiveness, others only boost immunity for a short period (eg hepatitis).  
 

The main issues with vaccination programs from a public policy point of view is that they can divert resources away from other public health programs that may be more effective (think about potable water, sewerage systems, infant nutrition like breastfeeding, quarantine/isolation/treatment as for TB). Or in the case of Covid, shift collective responsibility to individuals (get vaccinated) instead of government (control the borders, have effective quarantine), or even worse, encourage people to get vaccinated by lying that this will mean other public health measures like distancing, travel, mask wearing etc can be relaxed, and thereby encouraging people to engage, or expect to engage, in risky behaviour once theyre vaccinated.

 

The last time I had me tetanus booster shot I knew it were well proven and I did not believe it to be a rushed experimental shot that the manufacturers will not provide without full legal indemnity...

 

 

 

 

.

Edited August 19, 2021 by Flying Binghi

[turboplanner]

7 minutes ago, octave said:

 

Yes.   

 

  FB you do tend to post claims and when they are refuted you change tack.    You made a post casting doubt on the efficacy of the vaccine using Gibraltar as an example.    I would suggest that your example does not hold water.  The data is freely available. 

Is that your "Yes" there Octave?

Is there any public information available to say that the unspecified manufacturers of the unspecified vaccines have a unique legal indemnity?

 

The Federeal Government indemnified health professionals vaccinating AZ subject to the patient receiving medical advice.

Edited August 19, 2021 by turboplanner

[Flying Binghi]

5 minutes ago, octave said:

 

Yes.   

 

  FB you do tend to post claims and when they are refuted you change tack.    You made a post casting doubt on the efficacy of the vaccine using Gibraltar as an example.    I would suggest that your example does not hold water.  The data is freely available. 

🤔

 

I am still in the middle of reading the posts and posting my reply’s. Some posts I have read just now will require further research before I can ‘fully’ attend to them..😎 

 

 

 

 

.

[Flightrite]

23 minutes ago, Flying Binghi said:

A question I have asked before. Do the vaccine manufacturers still have legal indemnity ?

 

🤔

 

 

 

 

.

 

Of course they do even if its thru the ones jabbing the guinea pigs!! What drug Co would produce an experimental drug for human guinea pigs without having a 'get out of jail' card? They would have to be crazy!

Edited August 19, 2021 by Flightrite

[turboplanner]

2 minutes ago, Flightrite said:

Of course they do! What drug Co would produce an experimental drug for human guinea pigs without having a 'get out of jail' card? They would have to be crazy!

Show us.

 

[octave]

Drug trials usually have  4 test phases which are done sequentially.  In this case they were all completed but in parallel.  The mRNA vax is not new has has been IN development for many years.  To date 4.84 Billion people have been vaccinated, that is a pretty big test.     Having said that if some p[people are afraid and anxious they are not compelled to have it.    

 

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-19-vaccines-myth-versus-fact

[Markdun]

Yes, but FB has a valid point.  First, the approvals of the Covid vaccines are ‘emergency approvals’ under the WHO guidelines, and in Australia the TGA has given conditional approvals.  Also some of the vaccines are ‘novel’, eg. mRNA ones.  Hence the uncertainty over long term efficacy and safety. And there have not been the longitudinal studies of them over time. Second, in the USA for all its hopeless health system (probably the worst in OECD league tables), does have a public compensation scheme for people injured by ‘approved’ vaccines (which is very very rarely required to pay out).  Here in Australia, the federal non-government gave indemnity to medical doctors who were concerned about being sued for harm caused by the Covid vaccines (and therein lies the thought that the doctors view the risk is real), but as usual the government left the public citizens out in the cold.....just as they did in tort law reform which effectively makes it almost impossible now to sue a doctor for negligence (but was good as far as flying dangerous small aeroplanes).

[red750]

Covid hasn't been around long enough for the level of testing some people expect. This is a virus that has killed thousands. What do we do - let it kill millions more while we wait for failsafe proof? While no-one wants anyone to die, if these vaccines save even 80% of possible deaths, is that not better than none?

[octave]

3 minutes ago, Markdun said:

some of the vaccines are ‘novel’, eg. mRNA ones.

"Human trials of cancer vaccines using the same mRNA technology have been taking place since at least 2011. ‘If there was a real problem with the technology, we’d have seen it before now for sure,’ said Prof. Goldman."

 

Five things you need to know about: mRNA vaccine safety

 

4.84 Billion Covid vaccines administered.

 

I guess the individual has to rationally weigh up the odds.   I consider myself to been in a higher risk category  for a bad covid outcome.   I therefore have to consider the odds of contracting covid and the odds of a bad outcome.  Perhaps a couple of months ago I could have considered the fact that  covid numbers were low and the occasional short lockdown took care of the occasional breakout.     We now have a situation where in NSW they are admitting that they cant eradicate it and that we will just have to learn to live with it.   If this happens over the years inevitably most people will eventually get infected.   The question then is the risk of vaccine that has been administered pose a greater risk than the disease.   

[octave]

 

 

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

Is that your "Yes" there Octave?

Is there any public information available to say that the unspecified manufacturers of the unspecified vaccines have a unique legal indemnity?

 

The Federeal Government indemnified health professionals vaccinating AZ subject to the patient receiving medical advice.

it should be noted that this also applies the the influenza vaccination

Government indemnities

In the 2020-21 Budget Papers, the Australian Government announced that it has provided an indemnity to Oxford University/AstraZeneca, ‘covering certain liabilities that could result from the use of the vaccine’^[3]. However, it is unclear what this indemnity deal means in practice. The Government has provided similar deals to certain pharmaceutical companies that manufacture small pox and influenza vaccines for Australia^[4].

Unlike countries such as the US and UK, Australia does not have a no-fault vaccine compensation scheme or specific COVID-19 vaccine compensation scheme for rare side effects. Further, Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme does not compensate individuals for temporary vaccine-related injuries. However, the Australian Government may choose to introduce a no-fault compensation scheme as its COVID-19 vaccine rollout plan progresses.

Under the current arrangements there is no restriction on liability in Australia other than currently exists under civil liability legislation, for example, in terms of severity of loss as a threshold for general damages, caps on general damages and caps on economic loss. The Australian Government has provided an indemnity to the vaccine companies, likely in limited circumstances.

 

https://hallandwilcox.com.au/thinking/health-community-law-alert-liability-issues-with-covid-19-and-covid-19-vaccines-who-should-be-responsible-for-adverse-events/

 

 

[Flying Binghi]

1 hour ago, octave said:

.....

...if some people are afraid and anxious they are not compelled to have it.    

 

“...Afraid and anxious...”  Heh, that’d make a good bumper sticker fer me 190 horsepower Ducati Panigale (Motor bike)

 

While I’m thinking of vehicles, it reminds me of the Pangale’s first service. Bit longer then normal due to a recall notice they needed to attend to.

Then there’s me near ten year old Hiace van. I only recently had a recall notice attended to after a couple of years of reminders from Toyota. Legal liability must be a real pain fer them car manufacturers, if only they were in the business of selling vaccines. So much easier...🙂  

 

 

 

 

.

[octave]

12 minutes ago, Flying Binghi said:

if only they were in the business of selling vaccines.

Seems fair to me.

 

 

 

AstraZeneca is one of the shining stars of the pandemic. Not only did it produce a vaccine where other big players failed, the UK-Swedish company has pledged to sell it at cost until it is able to declare the pandemic over.

 

[Flying Binghi]

25 minutes ago, red750 said:

Covid hasn't been around long enough for the level of testing some people expect. This is a virus that has killed thousands. What do we do - let it kill millions more while we wait for failsafe proof? While no-one wants anyone to die, if these vaccines save even 80% of possible deaths, is that not better than none?

I have long been a supporter of people who have some severe and untreatable condition being able to try whatever novel and unapproved treatment they desire. Their body, their choice.

 

As to the current China virus. It is now fairly well documented just who is likely to have serious problems if they get the virus. If you determine that you are an at risk individual then the vaccine seems to me to be an acceptable risk even though we don’t know the long term effects of the vaccines. 

 

I do not believe I am currently in the at risk category so will not be getting vaccinated at this time.

 

Most, not all, of the people I know who have had the vaccine didn’t seem to care if I had the vaccine or not. The ones who wanted me to have the vaccine seemed to be caught up in the ‘all must be vaccinated’ hysteria and came across as the piss in pants type. I guess the way to justify their terror is to ensure all get the vaccine..😏

 

 

 

 

. 

 

 

[Flying Binghi]

11 minutes ago, octave said:

Seems fair to me.

 

 

 

AstraZeneca is one of the shining stars of the pandemic. Not only did it produce a vaccine where other big players failed, the UK-Swedish company has pledged to sell it at cost until it is able to declare the pandemic over.

 

Seems AstraZeneca also has a bridge fer sale in Sydney harbour..😏

 

“...AstraZeneca’s chief executive, Pascal Soriot, said last month that “at some point in the future” the company would raise its prices, adding: “We cannot be a non-profit forever, but we will never intend to make large profits.”...”

 

“We will never intend to make large profits” Gawd, I love it...😂

 

Buy now, pay later...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/11/covid-19-vaccines-the-contracts-prices-and-profits

 

😂😂😂

 

 

 

 

.

Edited August 20, 2021 by Flying Binghi

[octave]

Just now, Flying Binghi said:

Seems AstraZeneca also has a bridge fer sale in Sydney harbour..😏

 

“...AstraZeneca’s chief executive, Pascal Soriot, said last month that “at some point in the future” the company would raise its prices, adding: “We cannot be a non-profit forever, but we will never intend to make large profits.”...”

 

”we will never intend to make large profits” Gawd, I love it...😂

 

Buy now and pay later...

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/11/covid-19-vaccines-the-contracts-prices-and-profits

 

😂😂😂

 

 

 

 

.

 

Why would you expect a private company to forgo profit forever?  It is not a case of pay later it is a case of when the emergency is over the vaccine will be offered on the basis of a private company offering a product.

[octave]

2 minutes ago, Flying Binghi said:

Most, not all, of the people I know who have had the vaccine didn’t seem to care if I had the vaccine or not. The ones who wanted me to have the vaccine seemed to be caught up in the ‘all must be vaccinated’ hysteria and came across as the piss in pants type. I guess the way to justify their terror is to ensure all get the vaccine..😏

 

I have no interest in whether you get vaccinated or not.    I would however (at the point that everyone has access to the vax)    be resentful of anyone that could have been vaxxed taking up valuable medical resources.    We certainly don't want this situation here Florida ICU at 200 Percent Capacity as COVID Hospitalizations Spiral Out of Control

 

A question for you FB.   At what point would you consider these vaccines to be safe?  Do you consider the flu vax tp be safe?

 

 

 

 

[Flying Binghi]

17 minutes ago, octave said:

 

Why would you expect a private company to forgo profit forever?  It is not a case of pay later it is a case of when the emergency is over the vaccine will be offered on the basis of a private company offering a product.

If you know yer got the ‘B’ grade product though want to keep yer-self in the ‘game’ ...What do you do..🤔..😏

 

 

 

 

.

 

[red750]

FB, don't you read the news, or are you one of these "it's all a big conspiracy and lies" types. How many of these fit, healthy, "Im alright Jack", it won't happen to me people who catch the virus, go through hell then die will it take to convince you to take precautions? 

 

And I'm not one of those piss the pants hysteria types. I in my mid 70's, could die next week and it wouldn't worry me, but I'd rather die in my sleep than gasping for breath with tubes in every orifice.

[Markdun]

9 minutes ago, octave said:

  I would however (at the point that everyone has access to the vax)    be resentful of anyone that could have been vaxxed taking up valuable medical resources.   

Do you have the same moral indignation towards people injured in small recreational plane crashes taking up scarce hospital resources, or football players, kids injured at pony club, people who smoke cigarettes or women getting pregnant (or the men that ‘seeded’ the pregnancy), all of whom have made choices that impose public health costs and take up scarce hospital resources?
 

I note the quote you put about the safety of mRNA vaccines, but that’s still just someone arguing a case drawing a parallel, not empirical research.  I, like FB, was cautious (hesitant) about the Covid vaccine, and would have much preferred to wait and see how things developed, giving time for a more orderly and morally defensible vaccine roll-out to those in most need first (eg. health workers, other countries more afflicted than us) as per NZ, but because of the total failure of our federal government to have effective quarantine (which initiated the Sydney cluster) and the NSW’s belated Claytons lockdown which let it spread, I re-assessed my risk and brought forward having the AZ vaccine.  In my view it’s a bit rich to damn someone for having a different assessment of the balance of risks.
 

Australia being an isolated island had the opportunity to have effective quarantine....an opportunity not available to many nations...eg Europe, Africa etc.  However our hapless PM seems to think a quarantine system that literally guarantees releasing  contagious people out ( ie,98% effective means that for every one hundred people going through quarantine, two emerge infectious!).  It’s like having a light switch that is 98% effective in preventing a user getting electrocuted, just 2 in every hundred uses of the switch results in death.

 

I also think FB is correct about the mass pro-vaccine hysteria.  It’s as unhinged and irrational as many of the irrational and unhinged anti-vaxxers.

[kgwilson]

For some years before the Covid pandemic the annual Flu shot was offered to all and sundry with it being free to pensioners and emergency service workers and possibly others I don't know. Generally the vaccines were developed for the annual variant that occurred in the Northern hemisphere Winter so we got the benefit of that development. The problems that arose were generally that the Flu virus had mutated into a slightly different variant by the time it got to Australia. This had varying efficacy results depending on the mutation. Generally efficacy hovered around the 50% mark but in 2018 it was around 20%.

 

Very few people bothered to look at the issues including efficacy, side effects etc because the medical advice was if you were very young or very old you should get the shot. People got sick and died after getting the flu shot but that never made it into the news. It has been widely reported that there are 2500 to 3500 influenza deaths per annum in Australia but that is simply not true. The 5 year average from 2014 to 2019 is 403. 2017 was the highest year with 1181 and 2018 the lowest with 149.

 

https://www.immunisationcoalition.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/1-Barr-ASM-2020-presentation.pdf

 

Now there is media and government driven hysteria about Covid-19 vaccines and everyone has an opinion. The vaccines were developed very quickly and the normal 3-5 year testing period was not an option. New studies are appearing weekly showing different and often confusing and contradictory information. Astra Zeneca got a particularly bad rap because of media hysteria over rare blood clots and bumbling government advice. Pfizer comes to the rescue only there is hardly any supply. 

 

Now new case studies in Europe have found the blood clot risk with Astra Zeneca and Pfizer are virtually the same. Side effects of both vary because every persons immune system reacts differently.

 

Astra Zeneca advised they would not profit from the vaccine during the Pandemic. Pfizer made no such commitment and their last quarterly profit was $US 19.2 billion, a 92% increase on the previous quarter. The Pfizer PR machine is very keen to downplay any issues surrounding its product while ensuring their rivals get the loudest possible publicity with theirs. Pfizer also hold undue influence over the US government and CDC and ensured that Astra Zeneca did not get approved for use in the USA.

[octave]

1 minute ago, Markdun said:

Do you have the same moral indignation towards people injured in small recreational plane crashes taking up scarce hospital resources, or football players, kids injured at pony club, people who smoke cigarettes or women getting pregnant (or the men that ‘seeded’ the pregnancy), all of whom have made choices that impose public health costs and take up scarce hospital resources?

 

In actual fact I believe we should care for all even people who contribute to their own condition.   Your example of pilots taking up scarce resources I think the difference is this, will there ever be a time when ICU is full to capacity with injured pilots.  I don't think this is comparable.    

6 minutes ago, Markdun said:

 I, like FB, was cautious (hesitant) about the Covid vaccine, and would have much preferred to wait and see how things developed,

 

Yep so was I, I am definitely not arguing against weighing the evidence.   I accept that some will not get it and that is there right although I don't quite understand the undermining efforts of some.    The none vaccinated surely should be supportive of all those who do get vaccinated since it affords them some protection.   

 

One of the problems we face is that of mutations.   We have already observed that Delta is a much bigger problem.   The more active cases we have the more likely it is that we will see more mutations which could be better or worse. 

 

16 minutes ago, Markdun said:

In my view it’s a bit rich to damn someone for having a different assessment of the balance of risks.
 

 

I don't think criticized anyone for deciding against having the vax.  Unless I have slipped up in one of my posts I have only criticized factual statements in fact.     My problem isn't those who decide to make the personal decision not to get vaccinated.   My problem with here is those who go beyond their personal decision and  actively try to undermine with misinformation,

 

23 minutes ago, Markdun said:

Australia being an isolated island had the opportunity to have effective quarantine....an opportunity not available to many nations.

 

Sure we can stay isolated for the future and rely on lockdowns but at what cost?

 

26 minutes ago, Markdun said:

I also think FB is correct about the mass pro-vaccine hysteria.  It’s as unhinged and irrational as many of the irrational and unhinged anti-vaxxers.

 

I don't see myself as being irrational or unhinged.    

[skippydiesel]

Reference: Australian Quarantine

 

I also believe it would be feasible & desirable, both in implementation & in cost/economic terms, for Australia to aim for zero CV19 circulating within its population;

 

• Australia has the good luck to be an island. With the exception of its northern boarder with PNG, its watery boundary is a great defence against natural spread of the virus
• The CV19 vaccines are not the "golden bullet" that will allow us to return to normality, without on going improved quarantine systems/responses.
• Israel is already experiencing reduced vaccine efficacy in those that were vaccinated 6 months ago. It is fare better not to unnecessarily challenge your vaccinated & unvaccinated population by "opening the boarders"
• Proper and rigidly applied, to ALL incoming travellers, quarantine systems (including CV vaccination) would need to be implemented. Sure there would be some "escapes" through human error and criminal behaviour, however immediate strong action (ie NZ response, dont put the Gladys team in charge) to contain the outbreak would see minimal disruption to the econamy and community.
• In the event of an escape, PROPERLY EXECUTED lockdowns would likely only last a few days- 2 weeks, minimising the impact on the econamy & society. 
• I do not see that it is desirable that we add another endemic virus (eg flue) to what is already circulating, when clearely we dont need too.
• Neither do I see the unnecessary cost of increased hospitalisation, lost work hours, as being acceptable. We still do not have a full understanding of how this virus will impact us (national/individual) in the long term (Long Covid?)
• It may be desirable to reduce the cost, to the tax payer, of having a large elderly/retired population, by increasing mortality rates (eugenics?), but as a 69 year old, I like to think I have quite a few good years ahead of me to enjoy life/flying

 

Edited August 20, 2021 by skippydiesel

[Markdun]

Octave, I think we are mostly in agreement.  But you did use the word ‘resentful’ of those individuals who choose to defer getting vaccinated at this time.

I also think you will find I’m definitely not against vaccination, nor am I am against promoting it.  Where I think I differ, is that I think we have to do both....vaccinate AND the maintain the other measures like lockdowns, quarantine etc.  sure vaccination may reduce the frequency, extent and length of lockdowns, but I expect we will need these into the future to avoid unecessary deaths and serious illness.  The idea of getting back to relaxed international travel just with vaccination, I think, is dangerous and delusional.  I also think that promoting vaccination by saying it will eliminate lockdowns and restrictions on mass gatherings, wearing masks can be counterproductive because it supports the view, ‘I’m vaccinated, I don’t need to be careful of spreading the disease to others’.

I accept I’m probably in a very small minority who think getting back to normal is not a desirable objective.  But with climate change people are not going to really have any say, because our normal is no more.

[red750]

I'm of the opinion that for people coming into the country in particular, 14 days quarantine is insufficient. How many times have we heard that "he did his 14 days but tested positive after coming out." It might require 21 days. It's going to be tough, but if you are going to travel, that's the price you may have to pay. A week in Bali may be a thing of the past.

[spacesailor]

ARE WE LOOSING OUR DEMOCRASY ..

Now not only lockdown but. We're now in a ' military curfew  '  ( has to be with soldiers ).

Just like a Dictatorship.

spacesailor