The Reality of Living in Australia and Covid

[boatman61]

Nice one Ann..

[Dockhead]

Oz just passed the U.S. in number of people with at least one dose -- 64.2% vs 63.7%. As I predicted or even sooner. Now people fully vaxxed is much less -- 42%, but that's a short-term effect.



Very impressive!! And still administering more than 1 dose per day per 100 people.



In our region, Denmark is the leader in vaccination with more than 75% or basically the entire adult population of the country fully vaccinated. Norway, Sweden, Finland not too far behind. In the Baltic States, however, the picture is very different. Latvia continues to be the laggard with only 49% with even one dose in them; Estonia not much better at 57% and vaccination rates very low in both countries, at .3 per 100 and .2 per 100 respectively. Both these Baltic countries are suffering big waves of infection, being ravaged by the Delta variant.

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Yes I had seen that. I'm easy with it.

Hi Ping
You are “easy with it”. On what basis?

This is why I am uneasy with it:

Mandating a medical procedure to retain jobs and having access to education is simply wrong in my book. Particularly as the procedure is experimental, particularly that in the healthy “young” (under 40ish) the risk of severe disease is minimal, and particularly that mass vaccination will not stop spread only slow it. This virus is now considered endemic.

mRNA technology is brand new. It had never before been tested in any way on humans prior to last year. It is nothing like any other vaccine or drug and it is strictly experimental still. There is no long term data. Its approval is conditional in Australia for this reason. This seems so far fetched for a vaccine that is now mandated for a large chunk of Victoria’s population that it is being totally dismissed by the public.

Doctors are literally forbidden to say anything that may contribute to vaccine hesitancy. Their careers are otherwise on the line. Loss of livelihood is a very powerful deterrent.

If you are going to mandate this vaccine then why not mandate it for the vulnerable if the only reason is to prevent the health care system from being overwhelmed. Let’s start with everyone obese, everyone with heart disease, lung problems, diabetes, COPD, cancer, chronic kidney or liver disease, let’s make it all the over 60 year olds as well just to be safe. That would nicely take care of not overwhelming hospitals and leave the bulk of the nation free to make its own medical decisions. As it is not possible to force anyone, let’s give them some incentive. Maybe just no access to beer for the unvaccinated would do it. Maybe throw in a few more restrictions for good measure. It would only be for their own good.

Unthinkable? No more so than the current situation.

Limiting a person’s ability to work or be educated unless a medical procedure is taken is the same as being forced.

SWL

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

. . .mRNA technology is brand new. It had never before been tested in any way on humans prior to last year. It is nothing like any other vaccine or drug and it is strictly experimental still. . .

Not to take away from your many intelligent and well-stated points, but how can you say mRNA vaccines are "strictly experimental"? Pfizer is fully certified in the U.S., and it has been nearly a year and a half since the first human clinical trials. Billions of doses of mRNA vaccines have been administered. Doesn't sound anything like "strictly experimental" to me.

Incidentally, Pfizer have now developed an mRNA vaccine against flu. See: https://www.euroweeklynews.com/2021/...a-flu-vaccine/. The technology seems to have huge potential, being much faster to develop than conventional vaccines, giving some hope that some high effectiveness against the rapidly mutating flu viruses could be achieved.

An interesting fact about mRNA vaccines is that they were originally developed for fighting not viruses, but -- cancer. They've been around since 2008, so mRNA vaccines are not as new as some people think. See: https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/ne...cer-tumors-too.


A possible silver lining of this pandemic is that it has given a tremendous push forward to this potentially world-changing technology.

[El Pinguino]

I'm really not fussed about these outliers. Not my problem, don't care .

88% of eligible pop in NSW have now had 1st shot, 92% in the ACT. I would suggest that 88%/92% of NSW/ACT populations agree with me.

Small businesses that don't have fully vaxxed employees are already finding their customers are voting with their feet and taking their trade elsewhere
If people aren't getting vaxxed because of some non sense fed to them on the internet - well what can I say.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

And I also extend my thanks for all the responses that have been cordial.



I strongly believe it is wrong to suppress even the wackiest thoughts. People need to be free to air their opinions. People don’t need to be “protected” from diverse opinions, particularly scientific or medical ones.



Medically, the development on how best to treat stomach ulcers is a good lesson in keeping an open mind. Two Australian doctors, Marshall and Barry fought long and hard to convince the medical profession that stomach ulcers were caused by a bacterial infection, not simply excess stomach acid. They were ridiculed, and not in a minor way. Eventually Marshall infected himself to help support his convictions. To cut a long story short, subsequently antibiotic treatment was adopted as the worldwide standard. In 2005 Marshall and Barry were awarded a Nobel prize for their work.



Even “wacky” opinions need to be considered.



SWL

Society protects people from bad decisions all the time by laws , enforcement , societal norms and so forth. This is all because we are not exactly individuals , we are social animals that have a preponderance towards violence. To live in relative harmony we actively have to be protected from the consequences of bad decisions , and their unintended consequences on others also.

It’s naive to suggest otherwise.

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Not to take away from your many intelligent and well-stated points, but how can you say mRNA vaccines are "strictly experimental"? Pfizer is fully certified in the U.S., and it has been nearly a year and a half since the first human clinical trials. Billions of doses of mRNA vaccines have been administered. Doesn't sound anything like "strictly experimental" to me.

Hi Dockhead
Had it not been for the pandemic, human trials would have continued for years before approval was gained. No long term data makes a drug or vaccine experimental, still in its clinical trial stage. I know the FDA approved it recently and this has puzzled me, as it is unprecedented. The FDA website actually states long term effects are unknown. Has it been to encourage vaccination or because legally to enable a drug or vaccine to be mandated it should be an approved substance? What are your thoughts on this?

I know you dismiss the long term risks, but for what reason? We have no other similar drug or vaccine to compare it to.

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Incidentally, Pfizer have now developed an mRNA vaccine against flu. See: https://www.euroweeklynews.com/2021/...a-flu-vaccine/. The technology seems to have huge potential, being much faster to develop than conventional vaccines, giving some hope that some high effectiveness against the rapidly mutating flu viruses could be achieved.

An interesting fact about mRNA vaccines is that they were originally developed for fighting not viruses, but -- cancer. They've been around since 2008, so mRNA vaccines are not as new as some people think. See: https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/ne...cer-tumors-too.

I fully agree this new technology has huge potential. A lot of good may come from fast tracking these vaccines due to the pandemic. I mentioned this several times on the Northern European thread.

Work has been done on mRNA vaccines for several decades now. It has been mainly laboratory work though. mRNA vaccines were not considered ready for human trials prior to the pandemic. They were fast tracked last year. Without any long term data they are still experimental.

To balance this, these vaccines have been invaluable in protecting the vulnerable during this pandemic. Risk vs benefit is overwhelmingly in their favour for this group. Long term side effects are less of an issue for this group as they are mainly the elderly and in the final years of their life.

When vaccination rates increased in this group in the UK I was very relieved and thankful. Not so when it comes to coercing those at low risk of severe disease to be vaccinated, not just with hot dogs and donuts and raffle tickets, but making it mandatory if they wish to hold their jobs or be educated.

SWL

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

.......

mRNA technology is brand new. It had never before been tested in any way on humans prior to last year. It is nothing like any other vaccine or drug and it is strictly experimental still. There is no long term data. Its approval is conditional in Australia for this reason. This seems so far fetched for a vaccine that is now mandated for a large chunk of Victoria’s population that it is being totally dismissed by the public.
......

Let's for a moment consider the above is 100% boiler plate clad true.
Let's also consider every person will be exposed to the novel coronavirus 19 sooner or later (probably sooner). We have no long term data about the ramifications of getting Covid when unvaccinated. We have no idea of the consequences of long Covid (yet).

I suggest we know more about mRNA technology than we do about Covid. Crikey, we are still guessing about the genesis of Covid.

It seems like you can choose your own poison, Covid or nRNA or a conventional AZ style vaccine.

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Let's for a moment consider the above is 100% boiler plate clad true.
Let's also consider every person will be exposed to the novel coronavirus 19 sooner or later (probably sooner). We have no long term data about the ramifications of getting Covid when unvaccinated. We have no idea of the consequences of long Covid (yet).

True, but a cornerstone of medical practice is to do no harm. Medical procedures have never been mandated “just in case”. Why not present the data and let people choose?

Originally Posted by Wotname

It seems like you can choose your own poison, Covid or nRNA or a conventional AZ style vaccine.

I fully support choice. Resoundingly so.

In Victoria many can no longer choose if they wish to keep their jobs or be educated.

SWL

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Let's for a moment consider the above is 100% boiler plate clad true.
Let's also consider every person will be exposed to the novel coronavirus 19 sooner or later (probably sooner). We have no long term data about the ramifications of getting Covid when unvaccinated. We have no idea of the consequences of long Covid (yet).

I suggest we know more about mRNA technology than we do about Covid. Crikey, we are still guessing about the genesis of Covid.

It seems like you can choose your own poison, Covid or nRNA or a conventional AZ style vaccine.

What vanishingly small number of people are not wishing to get vaccinated for valid reasons ? How many of them are avoiding the vax because they get their advice from the like of Alan Jones and Craig Kelly and how many just don't like being told what to do?
In my small circle I know one of the former but a number of the latter - this is rural Victoria.

Meanwhile - anyone who fails to get a shot is delaying *my* return to a normal life.
Stuff Em!

Speaking of normal - 75 year olds in Australia can now get international travel insurance including covid coverage from reputable underwriters.
Well almost - they will give a quote but won't sell policies until our borders open - which depends on wonks like those on The Tan today behaving themselves.
Quoted me $1600 for 3 months in South America.

I saw somewhere that Scotty won't go to Glasgow cos he is tired of doing quarantine at the Lodge.. its tough at the top.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

.......

Limiting a person’s ability to work or be educated unless a medical procedure is taken is the same as being forced.

SWL

25+plus years ago it was possible to get your children into Kindy (and then school) without having any vaccinations by jumping through a few hoops and becoming a conscientious objector. !0 years ago it was extremely difficult as they raised the bar for objecting. Dunno what it like now but AFAIK, you can only government child assistance payments on proof of vaccination.

So maybe the horse has already bolted.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

True, but a cornerstone of medical practice is to do no harm. Medical procedures have never been mandated “just in case”. Why not present the data and let people choose?




I fully support choice. Resoundingly so.

In Victoria many can no longer choose if they wish to keep their jobs or be educated.

SWL

Victoria would have had over 90% with a first shot if Scotty hadn't starved the state of vaccine while favouring Gladys.
The number of genuine objectors is very small - tiny in fact.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

True, but a cornerstone of medical practice is to do no harm. Medical procedures have never been mandated “just in case”. Why not present the data and let people choose?




I fully support choice. Resoundingly so.

In Victoria many can no longer choose if they wish to keep their jobs or be educated.

SWL

Hey, they only removed one option, there still two other choices

[Wotname]

SWL
...
Always thought there were too many Victorians anyway...

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Wotname

. . . I suggest we know more about mRNA technology than we do about Covid. Crikey, we are still guessing about the genesis of Covid. .

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

True, but a cornerstone of medical practice is to do no harm. Medical procedures have never been mandated “just in case”. . .

The Precautionary Principle.


I'm not arguing in favor of mandates, but I will sure argue against the Precautionary Principle as applied to this situation. I'm with Wotname -- why should we presume that the vaccine is riskier than the virus?



The Precautionary Principle seems to me to be aimed not at the benefit of people, but to save the consciences of members of the medical profession.


Can you imagine running a military operation (what this pandemic is like in many ways) on the basis of something like the Precautionary Principle?


Of coures not. In war, you weigh the risks and try to come up with the best outcome. Perfect example of the misapplication of the Precautionary Principle was the kerfuffle over the AZ vaccine in Europe where a tiny risk of blood clots kept millions of people from getting vaccinated, causing God knows how many COVID deaths -- certainly orders of magnitude more than the number of people who might have died from blood clots.


It's the same with hypothetical long term side effects of the mRNA vaccines. Weigh that against the known risk of death from COVID, not even getting to long COVID and other semi-known and unknown long term consequences of the virus.


The Precautionary Principle presumes that you have a risk-free choice -- and in all aspects of the medical profession, there is no risk-free choice except with respect to doctor's consciences. Certainly not with regard to the patient's life or health.


Is there any reason to think that there is a material risk of long term side effects from mRNA vaccines? We DO have reason to think that there is a material risk of long term side effects from the virus. And although young healthy people are much less affected than older and unhealthy people, there is a still a significant risk of death and long COVID from the virus.


So I don't see any logical reason to withhold the "experimental" vaccines even from young people -- it's a better bet than letting them get infected based on everything we know, and looking like a better bet with every passing month.


Now that is not an argument for mandating vaccination for young healthy people; you've made a powerful argument for choice and I think you may have actually persuaded me on that.