Covid booster | Page 8 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Covid booster

yes one treats the person and lowers death and hospitalisations , And one wanes very quickly and needs constant boosters and allows breakthrough infections at a very high rate while being touted and pushed by people who like to argue online and quote CBC headlines
I haven’t quoted a single CBC headline. However, you have parroted the conspiracy theory whack-a-doodle all-time-greats.

Vaccines are given to prevent….anti-virals are given to treat.

Would you rather take away the flammable material in the first place, or keep putting fires out?
 
I haven’t quoted a single CBC headline. However, you have parroted the conspiracy theory whack-a-doodle all-time-greats.

Vaccines are given to prevent….anti-virals are given to treat.

Would you rather take away the flammable material in the first place, or keep putting fires out?

what whack a doodle theory did I put forward? Name one …that right there is your cbc headline you keep quoting…anyone who disagrees with you is a conspiracy theorist. Up next you tell me I should take horse medicine and join a flat earth group.
everyone dies eventually , If you want to remove the flammable material from life you will be living a very boring protective life with no risk and you probably will die sooner than you think anyway.
 
yes one treats the person and lowers death and hospitalisations , And one wanes very quickly and needs constant boosters and allows breakthrough infections at a very high rate while being touted and pushed by people who like to argue online and quote CBC headlines. Do you walk in circles like you talk in circles?

Therapeutics have zero impact upon how quickly a disease spreads in the population, and they are absolutely not a magic fix that makes the disease instantly vanish should someone become infected. They are a part of how to address this pandemic, just as vaccines are. Neither one is a magic bullet.

I find it strange that some people are so resistant to having mystery substance A poked into them to reduce the risk of getting sick in the first place, while being so willing to have mystery substances B, C, D, E, ... administered in the hospital after they become sick.
 
Therapeutics have zero impact upon how quickly a disease spreads in the population, and they are absolutely not a magic fix that makes the disease instantly vanish should someone become infected. They are a part of how to address this pandemic, just as vaccines are. Neither one is a magic bullet.

I find it strange that some people are so resistant to having mystery substance A poked into them to reduce the risk of getting sick in the first place, while being so willing to have mystery substances B, C, D, E, ... administered in the hospital after they become sick.

It is indeed funny. As a medicinal chemist I’d rather take a vaccine than an anti-viral of this kind, unless I really had to.
 
Therapeutics have zero impact upon how quickly a disease spreads in the population, and they are absolutely not a magic fix that makes the disease instantly vanish should someone become infected. They are a part of how to address this pandemic, just as vaccines are. Neither one is a magic bullet.

I find it strange that some people are so resistant to having mystery substance A poked into them to reduce the risk of getting sick in the first place, while being so willing to have mystery substances B, C, D, E, ... administered in the hospital after they become sick.
So you’re more concerned about spread than hospitalizations and deaths? Could you please give me all your medical credentials that you base that position on?
I find it strange that you would walk around wearing a condom when your chances of getting laid are .0000001% or whatever the chance of catching Covid and dying are.
 
"Protect the vulnerable". That's straight out of the right-wing covid-denier playbook.
So only left wing people can have a position that you agree with. That’s another cbc headline right there ..So you’re saying you’re against protecting the vulnerable and you want children to die before their parents. odd positions to take but sure whatever works for you
 
So you’re more concerned about spread than hospitalizations and deaths? Could you please give me all your medical credentials that you base that position on?
I find it strange that you would walk away around wearing a condom when your chances of getting laid are .0000001% or whatever the chance of catching Covid and dying are.

are we going for all four corners now?
 
I think you’re fluent actually.

Let me ask you another question….what’s the difference between a pill you swallow and a vaccine injected into muscle.

we already went over that above .read it again . Let me ask you again, why do you think children should die before their parents..and do you have a plan or you think whats happening is perfect
 
"Protect the vulnerable". That's straight out of the right-wing covid-denier playbook.
I guess Trudeau is a right wing COVID denier whack a doodle…hahah you can’t even catch a break it seems

 
No we didn’t. Let’s phrase it another way….why is the vaccine injected into muscle?
Easy to google if you need an answer …

Most vaccines should be given via the intramuscular route into the deltoid or the anterolateral aspect of the thigh. This optimises the immunogenicity of the vaccine and minimises adverse reactions at the injection site. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of administering vaccines correctly.13 Clinical practice needs to reflect considerations about the right length and gauge of needles used to ensure that those vaccinated get the immunological benefit of the vaccines without local side effects.

What’s your point
 
So only left wing people can have a position that you agree with. That’s another cbc headline right there ..So you’re saying you’re against protecting the vulnerable and you want children to die before their parents. odd positions to take but sure whatever works for you

I am "for" whatever works and I am "against" what doesn't. I don't know if you've noticed, but there have been pretty significant restrictions concerning access to care homes through this whole pandemic. That IS "protecting [some of the most] vulnerable". Problems:
- You can't completely close off access. Totally locking grandma away from their families with no access allowed whatsoever is cruel and inhumane.
- It still wouldn't work.
- People in the prime of their lives, not in care homes, have still died from this disease.
- Not everyone "vulnerable" lives in care homes.

If you hypothetically locked all people over age X (Q: What number should "X" be?) in solitary confinement and allowed disease spread to run rampant among everyone else, you WOULD have children dying of covid19 before their parents!

What are the conditions that you propose for being "vulnerable"?

The situation is not black or white. It's shades of grey.

At this point, I would submit that the main condition for being "vulnerable" is that someone has not received a vaccination shot in the last 6 months (ish - again, that shades-of-grey thing).

I'm just beyond 6 months. Just need to hang in there another 11 days (plus a few more for the next one to kick in).
 
Easy to google if you need an answer …

Most vaccines should be given via the intramuscular route into the deltoid or the anterolateral aspect of the thigh. This optimises the immunogenicity of the vaccine and minimises adverse reactions at the injection site. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of administering vaccines correctly.13 Clinical practice needs to reflect considerations about the right length and gauge of needles used to ensure that those vaccinated get the immunological benefit of the vaccines without local side effects.

What’s your point

I don’t need to Google it thanks. But you searched for the wrong thing.
 
I guess Trudeau is a right wing whack a doodle…hahah you can’t even catch a break it seems


I never said we shouldn't "protect the vulnerable". But it can only be part of the picture, not the whole thing.
 
1. Build more hospitals, not entirely wrong. Hospitals have cosistently been operating at above 100% capacity for years prior to covid. Why didn't the government correct this years ago?
5. NOT EVERYONE is vulnerable. The government screwed this one up monumentally. When covid broke all we heard for the first month or two is how old people are dying in Italy. There's something spreading, old people are dying. Our governments response was to close schools and leave the elderly in retirement homes to fend for themselves. This single and blatant act of idiocy can account for probably half of all covid deaths in Ontario. To this day retirement home residents make up the majority of the death count.
9. Leave the kids alone. 0 - 19 make up ~17% of Canada's population and covid has less effect on this age group than the flu does. If you're aiming for herd immunity, there's a free 17% right there. And if you say 'what about Granny?' The kids could spread it to her! See the point above this one.
10. Closing gyms and leaving fast food and lcbos open is another mystery. Places where you go to obtain or maintain health are closed, but places that sell actual poison are open.
 
I never said we shouldn't "protect the vulnerable". But it can only be part of the picture, not the whole thing.
You guys are the biggest circle talkers in the world. You pointed out that I am putting forward right wing whack a doodle positions such as protect the vulnerable. Clearly it’s not a right wing whack whack a doodle position. So you’re just spouting off without having any sense of what you’re saying I guess?
 

Back
Top Bottom