Steveam wrote:If celibacy gives immunity and vaccination gives immunity does vaccination make you celibate?
Best wishes,
Steve
Or perhaps celibacy can be due to vacillation.
John
Thanks to Anonymous,bruncher,niord,gvonge,Shelford, for Donating to support the site
Steveam wrote:If celibacy gives immunity and vaccination gives immunity does vaccination make you celibate?
Best wishes,
Steve
redsturgeon wrote:Steveam wrote:If celibacy gives immunity and vaccination gives immunity does vaccination make you celibate?
Best wishes,
Steve
Or perhaps celibacy can be due to vacillation.
John
XFool wrote:I have a question.
I am curious why some are now deciding against the booster vaccinations. For those who are reluctant to have the latest COVID booster or speak of the need to weigh up "the balance of risks".
pje16 wrote:XFool wrote:I have a question.
I am curious why some are now deciding against the booster vaccinations. For those who are reluctant to have the latest COVID booster or speak of the need to weigh up "the balance of risks".
Me too
I had Covid back in April and had had all the vaccinations I had been offered, My symptoms were very mild and lasted 4 days
Of course there is no way of knowing whether that was the jabs at work, though I do know my blood tests showed positive antibodies as a result of having them.
I had my 4th jab last month and had no qualms about having it
For me there is no risk (as I see it) in having it
XFool wrote:I have a question.
I am curious why some are now deciding against the booster vaccinations. For those who are reluctant to have the latest COVID booster or speak of the need to weigh up "the balance of risks".
What actually is the issue here? Plus, how in practice do you "weigh the balance of risks"? By reading extensive literature and using spreadsheets? Or intuitively? What are these risks, how high do you think they are, and how do they compare, quantitively, with the risks of COVID itself?
One thought has occurred to me. For some, who are badly affected by vaccinations, the balance of risks might include the cost of these side effects whereas, for someone like myself who never seems to be affected, there is no immediately apparent cost to vaccination. Could this be a significant contributor to these 'cost'/benefit decisions?
redsturgeon wrote:I think I have been through it in my case and have stressed it is an individual decision.
redsturgeon wrote:It is impossible to be sure one way or another but the situation as I see it now is different to the early days.
- We now have the Omicron variant that is less virulent than earlier variants.
- Almost everyone has some level of immunity either natural, vaccine induced or both.
- treatments are more effective
Hallucigenia wrote:And just to hammer home the point that "less virulent than delta" does not mean "avirulent", an epidemiologist in charge of infection control at a major hospital felt driven to say this:
Some perspective for those who still don't get it:
If I were forced to be infected by either HIV or COVID, I would choose HIV without hesitation.
He goes on to explain himself thus :
COVID can cause many chronic diseases, data suggests that telomere damage ages the body by about 5 years, and it causes damage to the immune system.
HIV mostly just damages the immune system and is easily treated.
Finally, we don't know what else COVID might cause over time.
servodude wrote:not least because communicability of covid ceases pretty quickly
Hallucigenia wrote:servodude wrote:not least because communicability of covid ceases pretty quickly
But you don't care if you give someone a disease, he's looking at it from a personal POV as a risk management guy, seeing the possibility of severe delibilating disease that hits across the body, that we don't have good treatment for.
10 million cases with a 1% chance of severe consequences, or 100k cases where it's 50/50 - what's worse?
servodude wrote:Hallucigenia wrote:And just to hammer home the point that "less virulent than delta" does not mean "avirulent", an epidemiologist in charge of infection control at a major hospital felt driven to say this:
Some perspective for those who still don't get it:
If I were forced to be infected by either HIV or COVID, I would choose HIV without hesitation.
He goes on to explain himself thus :
COVID can cause many chronic diseases, data suggests that telomere damage ages the body by about 5 years, and it causes damage to the immune system.
HIV mostly just damages the immune system and is easily treated.
Finally, we don't know what else COVID might cause over time.
While i understand the point being made
THAT does seem like a very sensationalist and unusual view
which might be tending towards the "this will put me off listening to this guy" part of the spectrum
not least because communicability of covid ceases pretty quickly
-sd
When a person living with HIV is taking effective antiretroviral therapy and has a suppressed viral load they are no longer infectious.
Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests