If we take Omicron as a case study:
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/232698/omicron-largely-evades-immunity-from-past/
This seems very similar numbers to me even if you factor in past infection being 19% (upper range), two jabs doesn't give you the reduced transmission you are implying. Only booster dose gives you better rates (55-80%), but then again that's absolutely not given in the case of a new variant of the virus.
The third dose isn't a booster. It is a changed vaccine regime. Vaccines often have different number of shots at different intervals. Boosters are typically when memory cells decline to a very low level which isn't currently the case. When we get a stable variant and a vaccine tweaked to deal with it then we will see what the final regime is and if/when boosters are required. And are you saying that 55-80% protection isn't worth having? In fact it looks like the thrid shot gives up to a 90% protection against hospitalisation.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022...ective-against-omicron-hospitalisations-study
This is also confirmed with Australian data which suggests an even higher level of protection with 3 shots.
https://www.afr.com/politics/chance...close-to-zero-for-the-boosted-20220121-p59q5h
There are many double jabbed who get reinfected (not just me) and many that have the full immunization cycle that also got reinfected. On top of that many vaccinated people have already encountered the virus and have immune reaction to it alongside the vaccine.
Didn't you look at that diagram. infection/reinfection gives you little protection without vaccination. Triple vaxed is very good and only triple vaxed plus an infection is better. Anything other than triple vaxxed and you are playing with ither people's lives without their permission.
I don't think that's an apt example and we're yet to see the long term effects of getting jabbed every three months.
It is a good analogy (none are perfect or they wouldn't be an analogy). Seat belts and airbags don't stop all injury or death but they do significantly reduce them just as vaccination significantly reduces covid infections, transmisson and severity of disease.
And why would you think there would be long term effects of being vaccinated. if you didn't have any of the incredibly rare severe side effects the odds of having them with further shots vastly reduces to almost vanishingly rare.
there are multiple reasons why masks aren't effective and people are wearing 2 year old masks, or washing them on daily basis (not the cloth ones) and reusing them when they are intended to be used only once. Not to mention half are not wearing them right or giving them false sense of security, or touching their faces and masks numerous times this allowing even more germs on their face, but that's where we digress.
You don't need to use masks only once. That has been standard advice for a long time now. Let them air between uses and having a number of them that you rotate daily is a good idea. Covid doesn't persist in mask for very long at all as t=long as they are dried between uses. Less than idea use is still better than no use at all because there is a benefit and just because some people wear them as chin nappies doesn't mean they don't work overall. One person wearing their seatbelt incorrectly doesn't mean seatbelts are useless.
The percentage of hospitalized people under the age of 40 is really low compared to those above 40. Let alone 30 and 20. The majority of those people don't really need those jabs as they have no symptoms. You can't simply make every flu jab out there required for all people it's madness. There are also some very rough flu seasons that are deadly for many people over the years and carry the same percentage of hospitalization in terms of age segregation.
You get vaccinated for yourself and you get vaccinated to protect others, the old, those with other conditions, the immune compromised and those to young to get vaccinated - current deaths are almost exclusively in these demographics plus the unvaccinated. Protecting others also protects yourself further because there is less infection about so you are less likely to catch it.
As I've said, I'm not opposed to vaccines - everyone is free to take it. If we're talking about mandatory jabs - then only the people at risk IMO should be the ones that should be required to take it. That's my take on it and you might disagree with it so it's pretty fine.
I don't propose holding someone don and sticking it in their arm but I have no problem with those who choose not to also choosing to live with the consequences. I don't want to be in a workplace where there may be unvaccinated people. I only got to pubs and restaurants where staff and customers must be vaccinated. If people don't like the consequences of not being vaxed tough luck. There are lots of things I don't like in society that I do because it is the norms of the society I live in. That is life.
That's really impossible on many ways to keep doing it on year to year basis (and get at least 75% of the population to do it). In terms of logistics, supply and actually 75% of the people wanting to go ahead with it. It's not really a sustainable way to target the virus IMO.
Why? In most countries it just needs people to stop being snowflakes and go and get the shots.
Yes, this was what I was saying on both points - vaccines are effective to some variants and less to others. And yes if you begin vaccinating people in the midst of an endemic or pandemic new variants pop up due to the way virus circulates. At least this is how it has always been so far - you get vaccinated prior to the outbreak to happen, not after it.
That makes no sense. How do you get vaccinated for something that doesn't yet exist? All vaccines were introduced when the thing they protect against were widespread. If you never vaccinated in case a new variant arises then you would never ever get vaccinated for anything. Ever.
At the end of the day your immune system is pretty well equipped (along with other medications if needed) to cope up with most viruses.
So why did we bother developing vaccines for anything? Perhaps these gravestone here in Sydney might provide the answer.
If you look at the graves after the various vaccines for these diseases were developed magically there are almost no deaths due to them.
Our immune system is great but without help lots and lots more people die.
It should be a personal and educated choice whether or not you should take one every season. Once again I have no problems with jabs, have taken them in the past for various purposes, most likely will in the future too especially traveling to some specific countries, but my opinion on the current ones is that I'm not really convinced they are effective enough to warrant making them mandatory and limiting other civil rights in terms of free movement and destroying economies. That's my take on it.
The trouble is that people aren't educated and they are appalling at comparing the risk of things which is why society has to impose rules, regulations and laws to protect people from themselves and from inflicting harm on others.
And why do you keep making baseless statements that vaccines aren't effective enough. The shit show without them would be unbelievable.
Here in NSW 95% of adults are double or triple vaxxed. 50% of people in ICU a week or two ago were unvaccinated adults. That means the unvaccinated are 19 times more likely to end up in ICU where close to half die. And more recent figures seem to suggest even greater protection if you have the third shot. Seems convincing to me.
