• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

breaking: whole of jiuhu on lockdown from may 12 to june 7. gxgx!

Quoted in mar 2020
Boss said this is childish mind thinking my uncle say bloody hell is only whether you want to do it KNN critical thinking is leequired in times of emergency KNN this is the leeson why my uncle always not humble to brag about his wisdom KNN
 
Lockdowns and masks don't work so all these measures are pointless and are also a huge over reaction to a virus that does not even cause any symptoms in the vast majority of those who catch it.

Wrong. Again. Call it 0 for 195 tries. All incorrect, and disproved by scientific facts.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/yes-lockdowns-do-help-slow-the-spread-of-covid-19

Yes, Lockdowns Do Help Slow the Spread of COVID-19

Male_Closed_Shop_1296x728-header-1296x729.jpg



  • Countries around the world turned to lockdowns to help stop the spread of COVID-19.
  • While lockdowns may not be 100 percent effective, studies show that they do help greatly reduce the transmission of the coronavirus.
  • However, studies also show that those who are able to participate in lockdowns benefit more from them than those who have to work in high-risk environments.
While countries around the world turn to lockdowns to help stop the spread of COVID-19, some people question the method’s effectiveness and even forgo the facts to spread misinformation.
For instance, a New York Post article misrepresented data from a UCSF study, in which the senior author of the paper Dr. Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, professor and chair of the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at UCSF, stated, “The early shutdown worked for California. Mortality rates that were rising early in the pandemic dropped substantially in a timeframe that coincides with the shutdown. But, importantly, not all Californians seemed to benefit.”
Bibbins-Domingo goes on to discuss that nearly 20,000 more Californians died in the first 6 months of the pandemic than would have been expected to die in a typical year, with a disproportionate number of those deaths occurring among older adults, Black or Latino residents, or those who had not completed high school.
The study shows that those who are able to participate in lockdowns benefit more from them than those who have to work in high-risk environments.
However, the New York Post article misinterprets this information to mean lockdowns do not work.
They do.
Dr. Bruce E. Hirsch, attending physician and assistant professor in the infectious disease division of Northwell Health in New York, says while lockdowns will never be 100 percent effective in eliminating the risk of exposure to COVID-19 because people have to grocery shop and care for people in need, that doesn’t mean they are pointless.
“The critics can point out the limitations to lockdowns and say, ‘See the lockdown isn’t perfect and the vaccine isn’t 100 percent effective.’ While they are correct, they are missing what’s important, which is that public health measures all reinforce each other and help reduce the risk of exposure to COVID-19 by a lot,” Hirsch told Healthline.
Lockdowns buy scientists time

Lockdowns have been used for centuries as a way to slow the spread of disease, all the way back to the 14th centuryTrusted Source, as a response to the Black Death plague that spread across Europe.
Dr. Scott Braunstein, medical director of Sollis Health in Los Angeles, explains that lockdowns are a temporary measure that are used to slow the spread of disease and help buy time for scientists to track the spread, learn more about the disease, and develop treatments.
“Lockdowns become imperative when our medical system is at risk of becoming overwhelmed, to prevent avoidable morbidity and mortality, as a result of lack of medical resources,” Braunstein told Healthline.
During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, this was the goal of lockdowns, which was referred to as “flattening the curve.”
“Lockdowns at that time were successful in preventing millions more cases of COVID-19, and saving thousands of lives,” said Braunstein.



The virus thrives on proximity

More than 552,000 people in the United States have died from COVID-19, and about 1,000 people per day continue to lose their lives from the disease caused by the coronavirus.
“We owe it to ourselves to be as aggressive as we can to contain this virus,” said Hirsch.
Because the coronavirus spreads both by droplets and aerosol, you can contract it when you breathe air into your respiratory passages that has the virus in it.
“We know that the ways to prevent SARS-CoV-2 from being transmitted from one person to the other is to not get exposed. The idea of avoiding the virus in the environment includes distance, and it’s not just 3 feet or 6 feet. We know aerosol travels much further, so social distance as a strategy is helpful, but so are other measures, such as wearing masks and ventilation,” Hirsch said.
The longer amount of time you’re in an environment where the virus is, increases your chances of being exposed.
“So if you have a mask on that is 50 percent effective and are in an environment for 15 minutes, your chances of exposure [greatly] increases if you are in that same environment for an hour,” Hirsch added.


Why lockdowns work in some areas and not others

Braunstein said that lockdowns were initially effective in slowing the spread of COVID-19 in many parts of the United States when the general public was in support of them and abided by them.
“However, the U.S. did not take advantage of this window to develop widespread and aggressive testing and contact tracing protocols that could have had more long-term benefit,” he said.
Braunstein also pointed out that this is in contrast to countries like Israel and Australia where there have been under 1,000 deaths from COVID-19 so far.
Those countries also continue to use targeted lockdowns to suppress local spikes of cases. They have robust systems of testing and tracing, and more widespread buy-in from their citizens too.
He added that the virus mutated quickly from its first outbreak in Wuhan, China, to the time it got to Europe.
Hirsch explained that if a virus has adapted to be more transmissible, then measures that might have been adequate for an earlier outbreak are no longer adequate.
“A lot of the people in the public health field are remarking on the fact that we are seeing more and more [of the U.K. strain] in the U.S., and the mitigation methods — wearing masks, social distancing — will have to be made more rigorous, if we’re going to have a chance of being able to contain a virus that is better adapted to be transmitted from person to person,” he said.
In addition, Braunstein added, that many other countries enacted national policies in terms of COVID-19 response, while the United States mainly left the decision to the discretion of each state.
In fact, some critics of lockdowns will compare cities or states in the United States where there were stricter quarantine measures to those that were more relaxed, and use this as evidence that the stricter measures were ineffective, Braunstein pointed out.
“There are many factors that are at play, and it is difficult to know what would have been the outcome in stricter states, had they not enacted those measures,” he said.
For instance, he said that in a state like California, where they have among the lowest number of hospital and ICU beds per capita, they were able to avoid completely overwhelming the medical system.
“Those of us on the front lines know exactly how close we were to the system failing, which would have led to a devastating outcome of thousands of unnecessary deaths,” he said.
Lack of national policy and politicization of the COVID-19 response are the main reasons lockdowns varied from state to state, according to Braunstein.
“Economic pressures led many governors to relax restrictions earlier than was advisable. People in certain parts of the country felt that acts such as wearing masks and social distancing were a symbol of political party, and willfully disregarded any precautions as a way to show loyalty to a party or leader,” he said.


Yes, there’s still room for improvement of lockdowns

While Hirsch and Braunstein believe lockdowns help curtail the spread of COVID-19, they both note that lockdowns also result in negative financial, psychological, and other health-related ramifications.
Braunstein hopes that going forward, the United States follows the lead of countries like Australia that use targeted, limited lockdowns (as short as 3 days), in areas where spikes occur, in order to prevent widespread disease.
Hirsch hopes society finds more creative and better ways to live with the virus that don’t require isolation.
“I’d be interested to see application of techniques that healthcare workers use in the hospitals more widespread throughout society, so we can be safe and interact with each other and be active and have our children and those coping with mental stress be supported during this time,” he said.
Cathy_Cassata_400x400_AuthorBio.jpg

Cathy Cassata is a freelance writer who specializes in stories around health, mental health, medical news, and inspirational people. She writes with empathy and accuracy and has a knack for connecting with readers in an insightful and engaging way. Read more of her work here.
 
Stop the spread is stopping the symptoms and stop the catch.... dumbtwit....

Lockdowns and masks don't work so all these measures are pointless and are also a huge over reaction to a virus that does not even cause any symptoms in the vast majority of those who catch it.
 
Stop the spread is stopping the symptoms and stop the catch.... dumbtwit....

Yes but lockdowns don't stop the spread all they do is postpone it.

In life we are taught from a young age that we need to confront adversity not hide from it.

Viruses have all the time in the world and all they do is wait for you to come out of your hiding place.
 
Yes but lockdowns don't stop the spread all they do is postpone it.

In life we are taught from a young age that we need to confront adversity not hide from it.

Viruses have all the time in the world and all they do is wait for you to come out of your hiding place.

u have not heard of the vaccine? what is matter with you?
 
u have not heard of the vaccine? what is matter with you?

The vaccine is not going to stop deaths. It will just reduce the numbers somewhat. People can still catch Covid despite being vaccinated and you need look no further than the recent cases in health care workers in Singapore.

When the vaccinated catch Covid they are then capable of passing it to the more vulnerable in society. Vaccines don't work very well in the elderly because the immune response in those over 65 is a lot weaker so many will still die despite being vaccinated.

Covid deaths will be ongoing from now on. There is no such thing as zero cases and zero deaths from Covid. A certain number will have to become acceptable and part and parcel of life. What that number will be is guesswork at the moment but if the virus continues to mutate there will be years when the death toll is high and years when it is a lot lower depending upon the nature of variant and its rate of spread.
 
The vaccine is not going to stop deaths. It will just reduce the numbers somewhat. People can still catch Covid despite being vaccinated and you need look no further than the recent cases in health care workers in Singapore.

When the vaccinated catch Covid they are then capable of passing it to the more vulnerable in society. Vaccines don't work very well in the elderly because the immune response in those over 65 is a lot weaker so many will still die despite being vaccinated.

Covid deaths will be ongoing from now on. There is no such thing as zero cases and zero deaths from Covid. A certain number will have to become acceptable and part and parcel of life. What that number will be is guesswork at the moment but if the virus continues to mutate there will be years when the death toll is high and years when it is a lot lower depending upon the nature of variant and its rate of spread.
The truth is within indeed.
 
Yes but lockdowns don't stop the spread all they do is postpone it.

In life we are taught from a young age that we need to confront adversity not hide from it.

Viruses have all the time in the world and all they do is wait for you to come out of your hiding place.

Wrong. Again. Call it 0 for 206 tries. All failed


Fact check: Studies show COVID-19 lockdowns have saved lives
By Reuters Staff
12 MIN READ

As many states enter a new wave of more stringent measures to limit the spread of COVID-19, users on social media have been sharing posts that question the purpose of so called “lockdowns”. Some posts falsely claim that these measures “don’t save lives”. This article examines some of the reasons why lockdowns have been called, and how effective they have been.



Reuters Fact Check. REUTERS
An example of a lockdown-sceptic post circulating on social media ( here ) features the screenshot of an entry in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary on the word “lockdown”, which includes a definition that reads: “the confinement of prisoners to their cells for all or most of the day as a temporary security measure”. The image has an overlaid text that reads: “Never forget where the word LOCKDOWN comes from… A loving government isn’t trying to save you from COVID…it is using COVID to justify MARTIAL LAW”
While this definition is indeed included in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary entry here , the screenshot fails to show two further definitions. According to Merriam Webster, the term also stands for a “temporary condition” imposed by authorities, for example, during the outbreak of an epidemic disease, “in which people are require to stay in their homes and refrain from limit activities outside the home involving public contact (such as dining out or attending large gatherings)”.
An article by The Guardian delves into the evolution of the meaning of the word lockdown here .
In April, Reuters debunked a similar claim that the U.S. coronavirus response was “slowly introducing” martial law and found it to be false ( here ) .
LOCKDOWNS
Reuters has reported on international studies that have determined that lockdowns potentially have saved millions of lives here .
However, it is also true that some lockdown measures may have a direct impact on a person’s income and mental health. Further reading about short, mid and long-term effects of lockdowns are visible here .
The World Health Organization (WHO) explains here that such measures can have “a profound negative impact on individuals, communities and societies by bringing social and economic life to a near stop”, something that according to the organization, disproportionately affect vulnerable groups.

But evidence also suggest that stringent but temporary restrictions, could actually benefit the economic recovery because they reduce the spread of the disease. The International Monetary Fund, for example, determined here that while lockdowns “impose short-term costs” they may lead to “a faster economic recovery. The organization states that “by bringing infections under control, lockdowns may thus pave the way to a faster economic recovery as people feel more comfortable about resuming normal activities” ( bit.Iy/2UXoIUy page 74).
Reuters contacted two experts, Dr. Elizabeth Stuart, Associate Dean for Education at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health ( here ) and Dr. Stuart Ray, infectious disease expert with the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine ( here ) . Both confirmed that lockdowns do reduce transmission of the SARS-Cov-2 and highlighted that a more “targeted” or “proportional” approach of restrictions can mitigate the risk of infection, while balancing other concerns about the economy and mental health.
WHY LOCKDOWNS?
Without a treatment or vaccine available, Stuart said, the world had to rely on “really core behavioral factors”, such as physical distancing, hands washing, wearing masks, that have been used as “effective ways” of preventing transmission of infectious diseases in the past. “They do help”, she said.
Ray pointed to evidence ( here and here ) that has suggested that the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is mitigated by “progressively stringent measures”, such as stay-at-home orders.
A MORE TARGETED APPROACH
“In March we had all had to lockdown because so little was known”, Stuart said. But she added that as experts have learnt more about the disease and how it spreads, it has appeared there are ways to implement a more targeted approach to this measure.
“I wouldn’t even call them lockdowns, but more ‘targeted interventions’, that restrict the higher risk activities but allow lower risk activities to precede”, Stuart said.

Stuart referred to Michigan as an example. On Nov. 15, in response to a surge in COVID-19 cases, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer announced new restrictions for the state and asked people to be cautious, to avoid a stay-at-home order ( youtu.be/WQi001dquQo?t=751 ) . As reported here by CBS Detroit, the new order states that “high schools and colleges must halt-in person classes, restaurants must stop indoor dining” as well as limitation of gathering sizes and a temporary closure of entertainment businesses. See new emergency order bit.Iy/39eb0oS .
Ray dismissed the need for a national stay-at-home order but rather referred to “staged or proportional” measures depending on the risk, in which “things are more restrictive when the prevalence of new infections is higher”. He highlighted the need for “really clear national messaging” and said that not all places needed the same measures at the same time. To limit the impact of this pandemic, he said, “we have to have everyone understand the status where they are and where transmissions are happening nearby”.
SURVIVAL RATE
Some posts that attempt to dismiss the role of stricter measures to reduce the spread of the new coronavirus argue that COVID-19 has a survival rate of over 99% ( here ).
While the exact mortality rate of COVID-19 is still not known, a hypothetical rate of 1% would still result in a massive number of deaths if left to spread unchecked.
When asked about this claim, Stuart told Reuters that one out of a hundred was still a “high mortality”, adding that there was a “ripple effect of consequences” for a lot of people, not just the deceased individual. “If there are reasonable preventive strategies that we can take in order to reduce that even further we should do that”, she said.
While it appears that a high percentage of people recover from the disease, Ray noted that “there are also non- lethal complications of COVID-19 that are important, so it is challenging to relax control measures when the spread is high”. Further reading about the lingering known effects of COVID-19 is visible here , here and here .

MENTAL HEALTH
Other posts also argue that these restrictions “don’t save lives”, citing an alleged increase in suicides here.
instagram-image-CH3zY-Zg8t4

Earlier this year, experts warned here that COVID-19 might increase suicide rates, citing adverse effects on people with mental illness and the population in general “might be exacerbated by fear, self-isolation, and physical distancing” and “well-recognised risk factors for suicide” like loss of employment and financial stressors.
Richard Dunn, associate Professor of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of Connecticut ( here ), who has studied the relation between mental health and the economy, told Reuters by email that arguments for why lockdowns may increase suicide risk present valid arguments, but that “they are selective” and that some of these arguments “ignore important countervailing effects”.
According to Dunn, such countervailing effects include technology that facilitates social contact ( here ), and a “locus of control” ( here ) through which individuals can take proactive steps to help prevent the spread of COVID-19. “Suicide risk increases as individuals feel they lack control over their life and what control they do have is without worth,” said Dunn.
In addition, Dunn said, is the concept of “social connectedness”, which tends to increase in the face of a communal threat, such as a pandemic. “During wars and natural disasters, despite their great economic upheaval, suicide rates tend to drop because people rally to a common cause,” he said. To exemplify this, Dunn referred to the numerous scenes from around the world of people cheering health workers from their balconies ( here , here ).

VERDICT
Some posts on the issue of lockdowns are missing context, and some present information that is contradicted by international studies. While it is true that more restrictive measures that aim to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 can have an impact in income and mental health, multiple studies suggest that stay-at-home orders and other nonpharmaceutical interventions have a determining role in reducing the transmission of the virus. Experts highlight that a more “targeted” approach rather than a “nationwide” lockdown, can limit the impact of the pandemic while balancing other economic, mental health and social concerns.
 
The vaccine is not going to stop deaths. It will just reduce the numbers somewhat. People can still catch Covid despite being vaccinated and you need look no further than the recent cases in health care workers in Singapore.

When the vaccinated catch Covid they are then capable of passing it to the more vulnerable in society. Vaccines don't work very well in the elderly because the immune response in those over 65 is a lot weaker so many will still die despite being vaccinated.

Covid deaths will be ongoing from now on. There is no such thing as zero cases and zero deaths from Covid. A certain number will have to become acceptable and part and parcel of life. What that number will be is guesswork at the moment but if the virus continues to mutate there will be years when the death toll is high and years when it is a lot lower depending upon the nature of variant and its rate of spread.

wrong. Again. Call it 0 for 209 tries. You cannot fight facts, and your opinion is stupid.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)01018-7/fulltext

COVID-19 vaccine impact in Israel and a way out of the pandemic

Published:May 05, 2021


In December, 2020, Israel initiated a national campaign to vaccinate its population with Pfizer–BioNTech's mRNA COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 (tozinameran). Israel's Ministry of Health recommended a two-dose schedule with a 21-day interval between doses. Israel delivered more than 10 million doses within 4 months; by April 19, 2021, 54% of the entire population of 9·1 million people, and 88% of people aged 50 years or older, had received two doses.
1
Factors contributing to Israel's rapid roll-out include its small geographical and population sizes; advanced information technology that allowed prioritisation, allocation, and documentation of vaccines for eligible individuals; effective cooperation between government and community-based health funds, which were charged with providing vaccines to those they insured; and experience in rapid large-scale emergency responses.
2
Vaccines were rolled out around the time of Israel's third and largest wave of SARS-CoV-2 infections, with a peak 7-day moving average of 8328 new infections per day, which resulted in a 2-month national lockdown. Thus, Israel's setting provided a robust platform on which to examine vaccine effectiveness and the impact of high vaccine coverage in real-life conditions at a national level. From March, 2021, onwards, Israel reported a rapid decline in COVID-19 cases across all age groups, despite the easing of lockdown restrictions and reopening of education and commerce. By April 19, 2021, the 7-day moving average of new cases dropped to 149 per day, indicating effective control of the pandemic within the country's borders.
1
,
3
The marked reduction in new cases prompted the Israeli Government to ease nationwide restrictions, including the discontinuation of face covering use in open spaces.
View related content for this article
In The Lancet, Eric Haas and colleagues report on a nationwide observational study of the impact and vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 in Israel.
3
Israel's Ministry of Health used aggregated data from the national SARS-CoV-2 surveillance and vaccination programme dataset to compare infection and disease incidence between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. Overall, of 232 268 SARS-CoV-2 infections during the study period (Jan 24 to April 3, 2021), 154 648 (66·6%) occurred in people aged 16 years or older and were included in the analyses (of which 20·4% were in the Arab sector, 15·7% in the ultra-Orthodox sector, and 63·9% in the general Jewish [non-ultra-Orthodox] sector). Adjusted estimates of vaccine effectiveness at 7 days or longer after the second dose were 95·3% (95% CI 94·9–95·7) against SARS-CoV-2 infection, 91·5% (90·7–92·2) against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, 97·0% (96·7–97·2) against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, 97·2% (96·8–97·5) against COVID-19-related hospitalisation, 97·5% (97·1–97·8) against severe or critical COVID-19-related hospitalisation, and 96·7% (96·0–97·3) against COVID-19-related death. Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalisation, and COVID-19-related death exceeded 96% across all age groups, including older adults (aged ≥75 years and ≥85 years). These results closely mirror the efficacy estimates of the BNT162b2 vaccine reported in the phase 3 trial.
4
The strengths of the study include its nationwide design, mandatory routine reporting of new infections and of vaccination status to the national dataset, large sample size, exclusive use of BNT162b2, and occurrence of a highly efficient vaccine roll-out during peak transmission of SARS-CoV-2, which resulted in high vaccination coverage of most of the adult population. However, several limitations should be considered when interpreting the results. First, social desirability bias affecting symptom questionnaire respondents and presymptomatic infections at the time of questioning could have contributed to an overestimation of vaccine effectiveness against asymptomatic infection. Additionally, patients with COVID-19 who reported symptoms were defined as asymptomatic if they did not report fever or respiratory symptoms. This unorthodox case definition might have resulted in a substantial overestimation of vaccine effectiveness against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.
5
Second, during early 2021, the B.1.1.7 variant of SARS-CoV-2 was estimated to account for 95% of cases in Israel, and the results thus indicate that the vaccine was effective against this variant of concern. However, the study did not report on effectiveness against other variants of concern, such as B.1.351 and P.1. Concerns regarding breakthrough infections were recently raised as a case-cohort study from Israel reported a disproportionally high infection rate with the B.1.351 variant in fully vaccinated compared with unvaccinated individuals.
6
Nevertheless, the incidence of B.1.351 infection in Israel to date remains low. Rapid mass vaccination coupled with non-pharmaceutical interventions
7
might have successfully controlled its spread.
Haas and colleagues' findings from Israel suggest that high vaccine coverage rates could offer a way out of the pandemic.
5
,
8
Regrettably, rapid population level coverage cannot be easily replicated in many other countries. The global use of the BNT162b2 vaccine is limited by supply issues, high costs, and ultra-cold chain storage requirements. Global COVID-19 vaccine roll-out has been sluggish, and vaccine distribution is inequitable despite the achievements of COVAX, mainly due to the lack of adequate manufacturing scalability.
9
,
10
Rapid expansion of deployment of other effective vaccines with more achievable cold chain storage requirements remains an urgent global priority.
9
Facing such challenges, alternative approaches must be considered to allow rapid protection of at-risk populations against severe COVID-19. One such approach is deferring the second dose to accelerate and maximise coverage of the first dose in the population. Indeed, the situation in Scotland looks promising: the first dose of BNT162b2 was associated with a vaccine effectiveness of 91% (85–94) for COVID-19-related hospitalisation at 28–34 days post-vaccination.
11
Israel's robust dataset could allow further assessment and corroboration of first-dose short-term effectiveness and lead other countries to considering deferring the second vaccine dose.
3
Post-introduction vaccine effectiveness studies such as those from Israel
3
and the UK
5
,
11
will gain increasing importance in augmenting the current evidence, which has so far been based only on data from phase 3 efficacy trials. WHO has published a best practice guidance document on how to conduct vaccine effectiveness assessments using observational study designs.
12
Israel's experience provides impetus for countries to proactively pursue high vaccine coverage to protect the population;
8
however, rollout would need to follow the WHO prioritisation roadmap to maximise the public health impact, in light of vaccine supply constraints. More post-introduction vaccine effectiveness studies will be required. Timely reporting of vaccine effectiveness against variants of concern, the duration of protection across age groups and geographical settings, and the effectiveness of alternative dosing regimens is crucial to provide data-driven immunisation policies.
12
Figure thumbnail fx1


Copyright © 2021 Amir Levy/Stringer/Getty Images
EL reports personal fees from Sanofi Pasteur for participation in a global advisory board of influenza vaccination, outside the area of work commented on here. AW-S serves as a consultant to WHO's Immunization and Vaccination Department. The authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this Comment, and they do not necessarily represent the decisions or policies of WHO.
 
The vaccine is not going to stop deaths. It will just reduce the numbers somewhat. People can still catch Covid despite being vaccinated and you need look no further than the recent cases in health care workers in Singapore.

When the vaccinated catch Covid they are then capable of passing it to the more vulnerable in society. Vaccines don't work very well in the elderly because the immune response in those over 65 is a lot weaker so many will still die despite being vaccinated.

Covid deaths will be ongoing from now on. There is no such thing as zero cases and zero deaths from Covid. A certain number will have to become acceptable and part and parcel of life. What that number will be is guesswork at the moment but if the virus continues to mutate there will be years when the death toll is high and years when it is a lot lower depending upon the nature of variant and its rate of spread.
no lah you are wrong

vaccine is good for serious sickness and death prevention what

go back to school u dun know
 
The vaccine is not going to stop deaths. It will just reduce the numbers somewhat. People can still catch Covid despite being vaccinated and you need look no further than the recent cases in health care workers in Singapore.

When the vaccinated catch Covid they are then capable of passing it to the more vulnerable in society. Vaccines don't work very well in the elderly because the immune response in those over 65 is a lot weaker so many will still die despite being vaccinated.

Covid deaths will be ongoing from now on. There is no such thing as zero cases and zero deaths from Covid. A certain number will have to become acceptable and part and parcel of life. What that number will be is guesswork at the moment but if the virus continues to mutate there will be years when the death toll is high and years when it is a lot lower depending upon the nature of variant and its rate of spread.

Ah, but they need the elderly to get vaccinated because they wouldn't get closer to the '70-80% vaccinated population milestone for herd immunity' if the old farts were excluded. The old farts who are infatuated with the PAP regime (e.g. those who wear their Tracetogether token like an Olympic medal) would also be upset at being denied the opportunity to 'get protected'. :biggrin:

For reference, China only vaccinates those aged 60 years and below. And they only have the Sinovac and Sinopharm vaccines.

There's a cure for Covid but it requires the regime change of China. After all, it was developed in a laboratory in China. This virus did not come from nature.

There is no other option. :cool:

https://twitter.com/LawrenceSellin

Worrying new clues about the origins of Covid: How scientists at Wuhan lab helped Chinese army in secret project to find animal viruses
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...inese-army-secret-project-animal-viruses.html

Islamic perspective

 
Back
Top