To Vaccinate or Not---The Rat Flu Odyssey Continues

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

Just based on my knowledge of my employees, if the government offered them a direct $1000 tax cut for getting vaccinated, none of them would take it (for all kinds of reasons, none of which make sense). If the business offered them a $1000 bonus for getting vaccinated (which would be reimbursed to the business as a tax cut), I think a couple of them would probably take it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tor-tour

But why should they be rewarded for doing the right thing? I'd like to see a punitive option. Aren't vaccinated? Pull $1000 from their check for public health system overhead, return it when they get vaccinated.

---

On the human nature side I think this dumb meme hit the nail on the head throughout the pandumbic.

Attachment 383432

The bribe will always work better than the threat.

Also, going with a punitive approach will disproportionately harm the poor. The early twenties middle-and-up class kids can always get bailed out by the bank of mom and dad when they quit their restaurant job in a huff. The working poor and/or undocumented don't have that luxury.

And telling someone they're a dumbass will never smarten them up. Helping them gain knowledge just might.

My work just announced a discount on health insurance premium is you’re vaxed. Only applies to employees.

The GC that I know with the unvaxed executive assistant, while over 90% of employees are vaxed… the assistant, apparently, was spouting misinformation and disinformation for their reason for not vaxing in a company culture that is very straight forward in sharing the science and reasons for vaxing. The GC was questioning the ability for their employee to make good decisions based on critical thinking. It’s been a month since I spoke to them, but will likely get an update next month.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

.....

- Unvaccinated survivors are more than twice as likely to get reinfected, research indicates, dispelling belief that recovered are largely immune, particularly with new variants.

---

don't think that is true at all, natural immunity is as good as from vax , actually a % point higher from study I have seen. And may provide long term slightly more robust protection. That by no means means that getting the vax is not a far superior method of getting protection. We shouldn't over state an advantage of vax that has been proven by study not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DougW

don't think that is true at all, natural immunity is as good as from vax , actually a % point higher from study I have seen. And may provide long term slightly more robust protection. That by no means means that getting the vax is not a far superior method of getting protection. We shouldn't over state an advantage of vax that has been proven by study not true.

---

Whatever you do, don't link to the study. :rolleyes:

British Columbia released their rules (maybe this was already posted):

One dose of vaccine will be required for entry will be required as of Sept. 13.

By Oct. 24, officials said entry will require people to be fully vaccinated at least seven days after receiving both doses.

Here is a full list of where vaccine will be required:

-Indoor ticketed sporting events

-Indoor concerts

-Indoor theatre/dance/symphony events

-Restaurants (indoor and patio dining)

-Night clubs

-Casinos

-Movie theatres

-Fitness centres/gyms (excluding youth recreational sport)

-Businesses offering indoor high-intensity group exercise activities

-Organized indoor events (eg. weddings, parties, conferences, meetings, workshops)

-Discretionary organized indoor group recreational classes and activities

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DougW

don't think that is true at all, natural immunity is as good as from vax , actually a % point higher from study I have seen. And may provide long term slightly more robust protection. That by no means means that getting the vax is not a far superior method of getting protection. We shouldn't over state an advantage of vax that has been proven by study not true.

---

New August 2021 CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2...rotection.html


The problem with reports coming out of places like Israel is the dependency on bad assumptions and bad math. The status of individuals (i.e. uninfected, previously infected, unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, or fully vaccinated) is dynamic: with time, individuals move from one cohort to another, and between risk groups. The numbers need to account for these dynamics or they're going to overestimate the protection from previous infection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

I dunno. Everyone has their price. I'm sure someone could do some polling and work up a cost benefit analysis to figure out what dollar amount would yield the most vaccinations.

---

My guess is $20 cash per shot, maybe $50 per. People love cash, and many often find they need cash. Get poked, fill up the grocery cart or fill the gas tank. If the jab meets a need, people will get it.

Side benefit is it requires the bureaucracy knows everyone's jab status, and be able to provide it at a moment's notice.

Really? We have to pay these assholes to get jabbed? More like tell them they are not covered for Covid related hospital bills that can't be eliminated through doing a BK.
Fuck those stoopid people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by huckbucket

Whatever you do, don't link to the study. :rolleyes:

---

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....20.21255670v1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

New August 2021 CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2...rotection.html


The problem with reports coming out of places like Israel is the dependency on bad assumptions and bad math. The status of individuals (i.e. uninfected, previously infected, unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, or fully vaccinated) is dynamic: with time, individuals move from one cohort to another, and between risk groups. The numbers need to account for these dynamics or they're going to overestimate the protection from previous infection.

---

The attack on that KY study that I've seen is that it's relatively small and looks at a somewhat arbitrary timeframe. I'm not disagreeing with it--the same Covidiot making that claim also said "there has never been a recorded case of a person becoming sick a second time" which seems like a pretty obvious lie. But unlike DougW I know a lot of people who are deciding whether to get the delta or the vax, so further discussion on this would be helpful. My own take was that if the 95% CI starts at 1.59x then the chances that this study is wrong because it's underpowered are vanishingly small, but I don't know how to make any better presentation of it than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liv2ski

Really? We have to pay these assholes to get jabbed? More like tell them they are not covered for Covid related hospital bills that can't be eliminated through doing a BK.
Fuck those stoopid people.

---

Pay everyone to get it and pay the early adopters more. The fearful will still own their share of the debt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mofro261

Nice to see another convert for increased funding of Global Health! If you would like to contribute personally to the effort I can provide some links.

It's 5 billion doses administered worldwide at current BTW.

---

As Americans, we contribute between $400-$500 million annually to the WHO through our tax dollars, so I already contribute personally. Thanks, it feels great. :self hug:
We will still be in COVID 10th wave lockdowns by the time the next pandemic rolls around.

https://gizmodo.com/another-major-pa...y-s-1847541120

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liv2ski

Really? We have to pay these assholes to get jabbed? More like tell them they are not covered for Covid related hospital bills that can't be eliminated through doing a BK.
Fuck those stoopid people.

---

Yep. Or we could continue with PSA's and asking them nicely.

Or selectively closing them off from the society in which they refuse to participate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

New August 2021 CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2...rotection.html


The problem with reports coming out of places like Israel is the dependency on bad assumptions and bad math. The status of individuals (i.e. uninfected, previously infected, unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, or fully vaccinated) is dynamic: with time, individuals move from one cohort to another, and between risk groups. The numbers need to account for these dynamics or they're going to overestimate the protection from previous infection.

---

Ok but is it that clear cut? We all know that natural and vaccination immunity wanes over time so is it a fair comparison to compare someone infected sometime in 2020 with someone vaxxed in 2021 with the probability of being infected in 2021?
But yes seems to be majority of studies show greater with vac.

US is the largest funder of WHO, but Bill Gates contributes nearly as much as the US, and more than every other country on earth besides the US. He really wants to get those microchips implanted on a worldwide scale.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles...-us-government

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asspen

That's correct. And our global vaccine rollout is anemic while first world countries citizens are about to get their 3rd booster shots, against the advice of the WHO.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asspen

As Americans, we contribute between $400-$500 million annually to the WHO through our tax dollars, so I already contribute personally. Thanks, it feels great. :self hug:
We will still be in COVID 10th wave lockdowns by the time the next pandemic rolls around.

https://gizmodo.com/another-major-pa...y-s-1847541120

---

So we are doing fine and and making enough contribution to get vaccination completed throughout the world or is our effort anemic, and could use more funding? You seem conflicted.


From you own link:

Quote:

---

The basic message here is that large-scale pandemics are relatively likely to happen, the authors say. And because of that, we should be doing more to prevent them or to blunt their impact when they do arrive. “We obviously show the potential threat of global pandemics, but the real implication here is how do we invest more effectively in global health and pandemic preparedness?” Pan said.


Pan said scientists should be studying the ongoing global response to covid-19, in order to determine the approaches that should be followed or avoided in the future, while recognizing that some interventions may not work for all future pandemic threats (masks may not be needed, for instance, depending on how the hypothetical pandemic spreads). We also need more teamwork between countries, ideally aided by existing structures like the United Nations and World Health Organization.

---

On reinfection, this looks larger (seems to roughly agree with the KY study if you squint at them both):

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...575-4/fulltext

"Among eligible PCR-positive individuals from the first surge of the epidemic, 72 (0·65% [95% CI 0·51–0·82]) tested positive again during the second surge compared with 16 819 (3·27% [3·22–3·32]) of 514 271 who tested negative during the first surge (adjusted RR 0·195 [95% CI 0·155–0·246]). Protection against repeat infection was 80·5% (95% CI 75·4–84·5). The alternative cohort analysis gave similar estimates (adjusted RR 0·212 [0·179–0·251], estimated protection 78·8% [74·9–82·1]). In the alternative cohort analysis, among those aged 65 years and older, observed protection against repeat infection was 47·1% (95% CI 24·7–62·8). We found no difference in estimated protection against repeat infection by sex (male 78·4% [72·1–83·2] vs female 79·1% [73·9–83·3]) or evidence of waning protection over time (3–6 months of follow-up 79·3% [74·4–83·3] vs ≥7 months of follow-up 77·7% [70·9–82·9])."

47.1% in the 65+ age group is downright scary.

^ The only way to know for sure is with complete genomic data. We know patients are reinfected despite prior positive antibody tests. What we don't have a good handle on is whether it's COVID-19 reinfection, relapse, or PCR repositivity.

The most important takeaway is natural infection has orders of magnitude higher risk than vaccination. If reinfection is the main concern then getting reinfected after vaccination is the way to go about it.

So everyone complaining about being forced to take the vaccine being a loss of freedom realizes that the US had been mandating vaccines in schools since the 1850s. Right? Right??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by funkendrenchman

So everyone complaining about being forced to take the vaccine being a loss of freedom realizes that the US had been mandating vaccines in schools since the 1850s. Right? Right??

---

Yea, but stupid shit that has been around for centuries isn’t questioned, like religion.

It the new stuff dammit!!!

Dam your science.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liv2ski

Really? We have to pay these assholes to get jabbed? More like tell them they are not covered for Covid related hospital bills that can't be eliminated through doing a BK.
Fuck those stoopid people.

---

While I'm perfectly happy to gloat over people with my moral superiority, I'm also about ready to be done with this whole pandemic thing. If getting there requires paying people, then so be it. Threats of hospital bills are pretty obviously not going to get us there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

While I'm perfectly happy to gloat over people with my moral superiority, I'm also about ready to be done with this whole pandemic thing. If getting there requires paying people, then so be it. Threats of hospital bills are pretty obviously not going to get us there.

---

I've been thinking about how to make this point without coming off like a dick. You don't need the government or anyone else to pay your employees to get vaccinated if you think that is what should happen. You can make that decision on your own as their employer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jono

But unlike DougW I know a lot of people who are deciding whether to get the delta or the vax, so further discussion on this would be helpful. .

---

That seems like a easy calc as the death rate from covid is .1 to 2% depending on country testing rate etc but the death rate for getting vaxxed is .002% so about the same as driving into town and back each time trip made.

My mussing would lead me to the thought of getting covid /exposed while my immunity from the shot is very high but that would entail logistical challenges and having to have conversations with the unvaxxed which would be tiresome. Then trying to get some of that Tom Brady poop ( South park ref) and really going for the complete Kwisatz Haderach vibe.

^ Just to make your intent clear, you mean the death rate due to a breakthrough infection after getting vaxxed is much much lower than natural infection.