Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

[Ukiah]

-The earliest news that I can find on this illness. Of course, the epidemic began the year before:



(Later news articles talk about the 2019 Military World Games in Wuhan and the mystery illnesses from that time)


-When it was still possible to prevent this pandemic from becoming as severe as it is now:




-Omicron:

[TheDarkKnight]

And then all pesky anti-vaxxer relatives from anecdotal stories clapped, repented their evil sin of questioning government and kissed Fauci's portrait.

Oh how did you find out I had a portrait of Fauci right next to my portrait of Bill Gates? /s

This may come as a shock but there are more clever ways of saying my story is a lie. How dare I express concern about the effect this pandemic has had on the mental and physical health of people. How dare I not be selfish

Another fun anecdote that is actually happening, an update for my friend who lost his mom in October because she listened to rightwing lies about the vaccine: the rest of his family still hasn't gotten vaccinated. These people really are fine with maliciously killing their family members rather than just admitting they were wrong. I feel bad for my friend. He's suffered enough.

Hoping Omicron ends up being the thing to finally end this, one way or another. The cancerous mass that is rightwing lies has led to enough death and destruction and I just want it over now.

Edit: I forgot. Surprisingly Omicron hasn't been detected yet in my area. Unsurprisingly people at Walmart have abandoned masks. Pretty sure the only place I see masks now are at Safeway or Save Mart.

[irontaino]

Oh how did you find out I had a portrait of Fauci right next to my portrait of Bill Gates? /s

This may come as a shock but there are more clever ways of saying my story is a lie. How dare I express concern about the effect this pandemic has had on the mental and physical health of people. How dare I not be selfish

That's just the 5G trackers Bill Gates injected you with talking! Shake up weeple!

Edit: I forgot. Surprisingly Omicron hasn't been detected yet in my area. Unsurprisingly people at Walmart have abandoned masks. Pretty sure the only place I see masks now are at Safeway or Save Mart.

Your first mistake was expecting Walmart not to be a disgusting place filled with the trashiest people.

[Coughdrop addict]

The funniest thing to me is now that Trump has for the first time in his life said something truthful, vaccines are good and don't kill people, his ignorant cattle supporters are actually pushing back against him. These people were perfectly willing to die or kill for him, but get vaccinated? That's too far!

[Heathen Hammer]

I know a guy who knew a guy that got vaxxed and then he died. Guess all vaccines are bad now!

[Stario]

https://www.canadiancovidcareallianc...arm-than-good/
The Pfizer 6 month data shows that Pfizer’s COVID-19 inoculations cause more illness than they prevent. Plus, an overview of the Pfizer trial flaws in both design and execution.

Interestingly besides how flawed the study was in its design and execution, it showed less than 1% overall benefit between the control placebo group and the vaccinated group.

In the Pfizer trial 162 out of 18,325 in the unvaccinated placebo group developed covid19. In the vaccinated group 8 out of 18,198 developed covid19.
This demonstrates that even without the vaccine the risk of contracting covid19 was extremely low 0.88% which the vaccine then reduced to 0.04%.
So the net benefit or the Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) offered by the Pfizer vaccine is 0.88-0.04= 0.84%.

Of course, Pfizer only published the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR), while deciding to omit the ARR. So the number 95% (efficacy Pfizer claims) is merely referring to the relative difference between 0.88. and 0.04.
Here Pfizer is being dishonest w/ statistics. To the laymen, it looks like the vaccine offers 95% benefit. But the reality is that the overall benefit is 0.84% or less than 1%.

These people really are fine with maliciously killing their family members rather than just admitting they were wrong...

You really still believe that We already know the vaccinated can spread the virus, this is already a proven fact. As I keep saying if you don't trust your own immune system then get vaccinated. Interestingly, and in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from a lawyer, the CDC admitted that they have not had any documented cases of an unvaccinated individual w/ natural immunity spreading the virus.

With that said even if what you said was true (which it is NOT), here in Australia (I will bet this will be similar in most western countries), the right to self-determination is also a central tenet of Australian law.
In the medical context, this means that a competent adult patient has the right to refuse medical treatment for whatever reasons, rational or irrational.
A patient's body is his or her own & he or she may refuse or accept treatment as desired. The High Court has described this as "a right in each person to bodily integrity".

In other words, when it comes to my body I can be selfish /w regards to refusing or accepting any medical treatment for whatever reason.

[PointOfViewGun]

We should consider putting people on trial for propagating falsehoods and deceptions like Stario is doing above as they have the potential to cause casualties of unsuspecting people.

Let's look at an example. On page 11 of the report Stario is linking to, the anti-vaxxer group Canadian Covid Care Alliances (CCCA) claims that the Pfizer vaccine leads to more illness using these words: "A significant increase in illness, which the Pfizer inoculations were supposed to reduce". It refers to data from page 11 of an appendix of a study. Page 11 shows adverse effects for both trial groups; BNT162b2 and Palcebo groups. The CCCA report highlights 3 lines. Related and sever under Any adverse effects category and Any serious adverse event category. 5241 for related and 262 for severe sub-categories under BNT162b2 group and 1311 for related and 150 for severe sub-categories under Placebo group. These effects include effects like fatigue and fever that we experience temporarily with many vaccines. Yet, these charlatan doctors, see it in themselves to treat you guys as idiots to fool you into thinking that just because you get a fever after getting vaccinated means that the vaccine is hurting you.

[Ludicus]

It is very good. If somewhat provisional. It does seem to illustrate Covid heading in the expected direction. In parts of Aus, we've seen a 10 fold increase in Covid cases over less than two weeks... which is remarkable... even if starting from a low initial number. I'll be fascinated/anxious to see where it plateaus..

Omicron is (probably) the fast spreading contagious virus in the history of the world.It is less contagious than measles, but the time of infection is much faster. Here, there is a slow but steady increase in hospitalizations.But I’m cautiously optimistic. In recent days the number of patients in ICU care has not increased. The overwhelming majority are not vaccinated, and the overwhelming majority of non-ICU hospitalized COVID-19 patients are not being hospitalized because of COVID. In any case, there are hospitals that have already increased their inpatient capacity by 50%.I tempted to say that we are moving forward, from “epidemic” to “endemic”.Let’s wait for the next covid variant.*knock on the wood*

[Ludicus]

delete

[antaeus]

With that said even if what you said was true (which it is NOT), here in Australia (I will bet this will be similar in most western countries), the right to self-determination is also a central tenet of Australian law.
In the medical context, this means that a competent adult patient has the right to refuse medical treatment for whatever reasons, rational or irrational.
A patient's body is his or her own & he or she may refuse or accept treatment as desired. The High Court has described this as "a right in each person to bodily integrity".

In other words, when it comes to my body I can be selfish /w regards to refusing or accepting any medical treatment for whatever reason.

While this reading of the legal situation is not 100%, it is ballpark enough to be ok (even if the rest of your post is mostly actual lies). But what it ignores is that while you are free to make choices about your body, your society is also free to change your access to the wider community based on your choices. This was true before Covid. For example, you can smoke a cigarette, but you can't do it at your desk at work. You can drink a bottle of beer, but you can't have 4 and then go drive a car.

Your right to bodily autonomy is always part of a broader negotiation on how you interact with the community you share.

How's the legal case going?

[Cope]

Medical consent is not comparable to smoking or drinking, neither of which are treatments.

[antaeus]

Medical consent is not comparable to smoking or drinking, neither of which are treatments.

Here we go again.

Personal choice about what you put, or don't put into your body can impact on those around you. That's why society has the right to moderate your interaction with others based on what you choose or choose not to put into your body.

For alcohol, putting too much into your body can put others at risk. For a vaccine, not putting it into your body can put others at risk.

You and I might disagree over the principle at play here... but the majority of societies we live in agree with my perspective, so you're shouting into the wind.

[Cope]

Here we go again.

Personal choice about what you put, or don't put into your body can impact on those around you. That's why society has the right to moderate your interaction with others based on what you choose or choose not to put into your body.

For alcohol, putting too much into your body can put others at risk. For a vaccine, not putting it into your body can put others at risk.

I cannot think of a democratic country which ordinarily regulates how much alcohol a person can consume. Alcoholism is not an offense. Nor, as above, is drinking a treatment or medical procedure. C19 vaccines do not appear to reduce transmission of the Omicron variant. So there isn't even a case for protecting others (not that it would justify violating medical consent anyway).

You and I might disagree over the principle at play here... but the majority of societies we live in agree with my perspective, so you're shouting into the wind.

Appeal to popularity. The "majority of societies" (including, and increasingly, western democratic societies) have always fallen short of proper human/civil rights protections. The rush to denounce/violate basic freedoms in moments of mass hysteria is predictable.

[Vanoi]

I cannot think of a democratic country which ordinarily regulates how much alcohol a person can consume.

Well you can be ordered by a court to not consume alcohol. At least in the United States.

Alcoholism is not an offense.

Public intoxication and DUI definitely are. Or handling firearms. Hence how putting too much alcohol in your body puts others at risk.

Nor, as above, is drinking a treatment or medical procedure.C19 vaccines do not appear to reduce transmission of the Omicron variant. So there isn't even a case for protecting others (not that it would justify violating medical consent anyway).

These vaccines aren't as effective against the Omicron variant, but they still effective at preventing a severe reaction and hospitalization. So there much is a case for protecting others and preventing hospitals from being overwhelmed.

[Cope]

These vaccines aren't as effective against the Omicron variant, but they still effective at preventing a severe reaction and hospitalization. So there much is a case for protecting others and preventing hospitals from being overwhelmed.

If the standard for violating bodily/medical autonomy is insufficient hospital capacity, then we should be mandating diet plans/exercise regimes (80% of C19 hospitalizations/deaths are in the overweight), banning tobacco (a comparable number of people die from tobacco related illnesses annually as C19), alcohol, cars, social media, contact sports, firearms, stairs and just about any activity or behaviour which carries a risk of negative health outcomes.

Of course, claims that healthcare infrastructure is/was being "overwhelmed" or on the brink of being overwhelmed were common place (particularly among liberals), long before C19.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[antaeus]

Appeal to popularity. The "majority of societies" (including, and increasingly, western democratic societies) have always fallen short of proper human/civil rights protections. The rush to denounce/violate basic freedoms in moments of mass hysteria is predictable.

Thank you for your opinion. We disagree, but I appreciate it none the less.

[Cope]

Thank you for your opinion. We disagree, but I appreciate it none the less.

Sadly I cannot return the favour. I do not appreciate the opinion that human/civil rights violations and/or the construction of a biomedical security apparatuses are either necessary or justifiable. Given the gravity of the demands (that medical privacy and consent be cast aside) I might have expected some degree of reasoned explanation. As ever I am short-changed.

[Cyclops]

IIRC intoxication used to be a defence in car-related deaths. If I have the story straight, in 1950's Melbourne a drunk driver launched his vehicle into a bridal party killing the bride, but was acquitted of manslaughter as he had witnesses to show he had been legless drunk when helped into his vehicle, so he had diminished responsibility for his actions. I think the case I'm struggling to recall sparked law reform including blood alcohol tests.

[antaeus]

IIRC intoxication used to be a defence in car-related deaths. If I have the story straight, in 1950's Melbourne a drunk driver launched his vehicle into a bridal party killing the bride, but was acquitted of manslaughter as he had witnesses to show he had been legless drunk when helped into his vehicle, so he had diminished responsibility for his actions. I think the case I'm struggling to recall sparked law reform including blood alcohol tests.

But isn't that a medical procedure?

[PointOfViewGun]

Medical consent is not comparable to smoking or drinking, neither of which are treatments.

Getting vaccinated in this context is not a treatment either. It's a preventive measure that addresses a public health issue.