Omicron vs. the Unvaccinated and the Vaccinated
The unvaccinated are 5 times more likely to be hospitalized when infected.
The highly contagious omicron variant of the COVID-19 virus often does an end run around the immunological protections of vaccination or prior infection. But recent data from the U.K. and Canada indicate that these breakthrough omicron infections are much less dangerous than first-time infections in unvaccinated people.
Ontario public health authorities report that as of yesterday, 2,093 and 288 people are being treated for omicron variant infections in hospitals and intensive care units (ICUs), respectively. The hospitalization rate per million among unvaccinated people stands at 532.7; it's 105.9 for folks vaccinated with at least two doses. This means that the reduction of hospitalization risk for those inoculated with at least two doses is 80.1 percent.
The ICU occupancy rate per million is 135.6 for unvaccinated people and just 9.2 for those who have gotten two doses of COVID-19 vaccines. So vaccination reduces the ICU risk by 93.2 percent.
An analysis by the United Kingdom Health Security Agency (UKHSA) similarly found that "the risk of being admitted to hospital for Omicron cases was lower for those who had received 2 doses of a vaccine (65% lower) compared to those who had not received any vaccination." The risk "was lower still among those who had received 3 doses of vaccine (81% lower)."
The UKHSA report also parses the effectiveness of the vaccines against both the delta and omicron variants. Two vaccine doses essentially maintain their effectiveness against the delta variant over time, but protection against the omicron variant wanes fast. That said, a third shot significantly boosts the immune system's ability to fend off and reduce the severity of omicron infections for about 3 months. The good news is that the vaccines' protection against hospitalization is much greater than their protection against symptomatic disease. And with a booster dose, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization is close to 90 percent.
These British and Canadian findings mirror those most recently reported by the New York State Health Department. It finds that the daily rate per 100,000 of COVID-19 hospitalizations stands at 4.56 for fully vaccinated people, compared to 58.27 for unvaccinated people. That means vaccinations are 92.3 percent effective at preventing hospitalization from COVID-19.
Other data from around the U.S. are in line with these findings. For example, in Greenville, North Carolina, The Daily Reflector reports that out of the 120 COVID-positive inpatients at Vidant Health hospitals, 101 had not been vaccinated; 30 out of the 34 COVID ICU patients were not vaccinated. Similarly, Block Club Chicago reports that 85 percent of people hospitalized for COVID in Illinois—and 90 percent admitted to ICUs—are unvaccinated. In Louisiana, the state health department says that 76 percent of the people hospitalized for COVID-19 infections were unvaccinated. In the Baystate Health system in Massachusetts, around 70 percent of COVID-19 patients are unvaccinated.
Some good news for both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated is that the omicron variant seems to cause less severe disease than earlier versions of COVID-19. Still, given the steep rise in the omicron wave, it would be wise for the medically eligible unvaccinated to now take responsibility to protect themselves, their families, their friends, and their fellow Americans by getting their shots.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
“The highly contagious omicron variant of the COVID-19 virus often does an end run around the immunological protections of vaccination or prior infection.”
And yet, somehow, government policies still treat only the unvaccinated as plague carriers when it comes to testing and admission to public spaces.
Science?
Testing!
My last pay check was $8750 just ecom working 12 hours for every week. My neighbor have found the estimation of $15k for a long time and she works around 20 hours for seven days. I can not trust how direct it was once I tried it information..
Visit this website……………… Visit Here
Gʀᴇᴀᴛ ᴊᴏʙ ғᴏʀ sᴛᴜᴅᴇɴᴛs, sᴛᴀʏ-ᴀᴛ-ʜᴏᴍᴇ ᴍᴏᴍs ᴏʀ ᴀɴʏᴏɴᴇ ɴᴇᴇᴅɪɴɢ ᴀɴ ᴇxᴛʀᴀ ɪɴᴄᴏᴍᴇ… Yᴏᴜ ᴏɴʟʏ ɴᴇᴇᴅ ᴀ ᴄᴏᴍᴘᴜᴛᴇʀ ᴀɴᴅ ᴀ ʀᴇʟɪᴀʙʟᴇ ɪɴᴛᴇʀɴᴇᴛ ᴄᴏɴɴᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴ…. Mᴀᴋᴇ $90 ʜᴏᴜʀʟʏ ᴀɴᴅ ᴜᴘ ᴛᴏ $22920 ᴀ ᴍᴏɴᴛʜ ʙʏ ғᴏʟʟᴏᴡɪɴɢ ʟɪɴᴋS CASHAPP NOW ᴀᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴏᴛᴛᴏᴍ ᴀɴᴅ sɪɢɴɪɴɢ ᴜᴘs….. Yᴏᴜ D ᴄᴀɴ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ʏᴏᴜʀ ғɪʀsᴛ ᴄʜᴇᴄᴋ ʙʏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴇɴᴅ ᴏғ ᴛʜɪs ᴡᴇᴇᴋ,go to tech tab for work detail,……….
Try it, you won’t regret it……..CASHAPP NOW
Racist!
Bailey is doing scaremongering, not journalism.
That’s objectively not literally true. For example, masking mandates for airline travel do not distinguish between vaccinated and unvaccinated.
Not entirely true, perhaps. The part about admission to public places is true in those locales that have implemented “vaccine passport” type rules.
Let alone entire plane loads full of people that have passed a pcr test before they could board. Still have to wear useless masks.
I’m having trouble with the numbers presented here.
I’ve been trying to prove that being fully vaccinated should keep you from being admitted to hospital, and almost definitely keep you out of the ICU and/or from pushing up daisy’s.
But the numbers I get from the Ontario Governments own web site listing Covid hospitalization stats, shows the exact opposite.
Eg: https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/hospitalizations
Example image. Note: Image here will be data from a previous day. https://i.imgur.com/N8vQ939.jpg
In the case of the data from the image on that day approximately 26% of the patients in hospital were unvaccinated or partially vaccinated. And 74% were fully vaccinated.
I can’t see any way this can be explained as “vaccinations are 92.3 percent effective at preventing hospitalization from COVID-19”
Add in the fact that the media isn’t telling us how many patients in hospital by vaccination status. (I had to go looking for the government data site.)
If the vaccine truly is 92.3% effective, I believe the number of unvaccinated should be much higher than the vaccinated. And it’s not.
537/1,000,000 = 0.000537% 107/1,000,000 =.000107%.
Yup. I doubt Elon Musk stops to pick up a quarter in a parking lot.
I doubt Elon Musk walks across a parking lot – – – – – – – –
True, he burrows beneath it and then rides across in a S3XY Tesla.
You have to multiply those percentages by 100.
But .05% of the population is a pretty small number when we are supposedly being overrun by a deadly virus.
I think we are to the point where it really is just a cold/flu that spreads easily.
Colds don’t generally mean death for an old person.
For a very ill old person they often do. And flu certainly does.
And particularly with the latest variants, I don’t think covid generally means death for an old person either. We’ll see what this winter brings, but I suspect it’s going to look like a fairly typical flu season in terms of death (particularly if you can filter out all the people who were in hospital dying of something else anyway).
I’m sure you are right, though I doubt it will be reported that way in the media.
D Boudreaux had a cartoon on cafehayek that was pretty good.
Found it.
https://cafehayek.com/2022/01/journalism-yesterday-and-today.html
Nice.
My grandfathers both died of a flu turned pneumonia. Secondary bacterial pulmonary infections taking advantage of a weakened immune system under attack from a respiratory illness.
With or of?
Wrong… The cold and flu season takes out 32,000 folks annually. The 2019 season took out roughly 65,000 folks. These people r (as usual) over the age of 80 and/or overweight. Stop with your freaking nonsense. NONE OF WHAT IS GOING ON TODAY IS NEW!! Just reframed language meant to induced fear in the public. As Covid-19 sounds much more fearsome then the common cold.
The Phucko Knows
Wrong, 0.06% and 0.01%. You have to multiply by 100 after dividing the numbers if you are expressing it as a percent.
Note I got the same answer as Ken below.
Teacher gives you a gold star.
Your math is correct…. But really…. .0006 or .06. BOTH scream that the reaction to this nonsense is completely overblown.
The Phucko Knows
I was told the masks were stopping the spread.
Face diapers are about as effective as a one-legged man in an ass kicking contest.
They stop ‘rona like cigarette filters stop lung cancer.
Ron, what are the actual hospitalization risks? Just from covid. Without including this you are being ignorant or disingenuous.
Why not both?
Risks to whom?
A public facing order taker at a restaurant?
A cook in that restaurant?
An unmarried remote worker coding away in his living room?
An executive in a private office?
A clerk in an open office?
A farmer driving a tractor?
Maybe, just maybe, in a free country, medical decisions should be made in your own doctor’s office, not in a political trading session.
Now that’s just crazy talk.
How dare you! And on Jan 6, a date that will live in insurrectiony!!!
don’t be obtuse. democracy got totally attacked by a guy in a wolf hat.
“If this be treason, make the most of it!”
Shouldn’t a vaccine keep people from getting sick at all? Ron, don’t sprain your back moving that goal post for the Dems.
The vaccine definition not only had the goal posts moved, but also the field, sidelines, locker room, stands, concessions, ticket office and parking lot.
vaccine (countable and uncountable, plural vaccines)
(immunology) A substance given to stimulate the body’s production of antibodies and provide immunity against a disease without causing the disease itself in the treatment, prepared from the agent that causes the disease (or a related, also effective, but safer disease), or a synthetic substitute.
Even Wikipedia hasn’t yet changed the definition to include “or at least makes the disease less severe”.
A vaccine provides immunity. The mandated injections do not.
Science.
Oh yeah, and follow the money.
The COVID-19 vaccines “make the disease less severe” precisely by “stimulating the body’s production of antibodies” and other immune responses. That is a vaccine, with no change in definition.
Lol
Yes change in definition, because the jabs aren’t vaccines.
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article254111268.html
So how does one qualify this? If I test “postive” but don’t feel sick; “I get to say I could’ve gotten sick”. If I do get sick; “I get then say I could’ve been really sick”. If I get really sick; “I get to say I could’ve died”. If I die; I can then STILL put on my gravestone; “It could’ve been worse”. All of those senerios come with NOT A SINGLE scientific study that SAYS any of that is true. R u truly this much of an idiot? Do u also still believe in Santa? The vaccines don’t work…. PERIOD!!! Why? Because they’re NOT vaccines. They’re mRNA shots with a Gain of Function chaser. U r but a counted on fool.
The Phucko Knows
To be fair, there’s nothing in there about how effective it should be. See also flu vaccines–they’ve been around for years, are only somewhat effective at best, but nobody disputes that they’re vaccines.
Just because a vaccine doesn’t work and is actually dangerous doesn’t make it “not a vaccine,” it just makes it a bad vaccine that it’s unwise to take.
No, it literally would not have been defined as a vaccine because it failed to prevent illness. That was the definitive point – its a vaccine when it confers immunity.
But CDC changed the word definition to fit the jab.
Flu shots are not vaccines, have never been promoted as such and are encouraged on a yearly basis. The Covid Vax is similar in its requirement and is not a vaccine. A preventative shot, for some. Others, as with the flu shot, will have various reactions without the shot, but it will not kill them. As with the flu, if one’s health is compromised due to immunity issues or age frailty, a bout of the Covid may kill them.
No. Vaccines are never 100% effective and they are not expected to be.
Smallpox called and said you’re a liar.
Smallpox vaccine was 95% effective
That’s completely different. Smallpox vaccines didn’t work in a small minority of people. But most people got complete immunity from it. If they hadn’t, smallpox would still be a thing.
From the available data, it looks like the covid vaccines don’t provide complete immunity to hardly anyone. So while they may have value in reducing death and hospitalization, they do not have the potential to eliminate this virus as something people have to deal with (even if there weren’t tons of animal reservoirs for it).
I might be totally wrong because I’m not a doctor nor do I play one on tv, but my understanding of these mRNA vaccines is that they’re totally different from something like that for the flu. The latter is a dead virus vaccine that gets the body killing that virus if it ever sees it. But if the guys making the vaccine guess it wrong, it’s totally useless. So while the old vaccine guarantees that Guido and Nunzio don’t cause trouble, everyone else does what they want. The new vaccine seems to make the whole family retarded.
Which is better? I dunno.
Obviously I’m not an expert either. I’m not sure if the difference you point out is more about the vaccines or the nature of the virus. Seems like with omicron, the coronavirus has gotten to the point where it has mutated enough to significantly reduce the vaccine effectiveness. So maybe flu is just harder to nail down because of more variants being out there already. It would be like trying to make a vaccine for coronaviruses in general.
If there is really something more generally applicable about the mRNA vaccines, I haven’t heard anyone talking about it. Seems unlikely since they only generate one protein for the immune system to work with where a dead virus vaccine has more different things going on.
Vaccines confer immunity. Therapies reduce severity of symptoms.
Actually the all cause mortality between the Vaxed and unvaxed is the same. There is a reason pols are putting the double qualifier of the vaccine lowers the amount of people hospitalized with wuflu. Cancer researchers stopped using case treatment and started using all cause mortality a little over 2 decades ago, as does all other drugs. Except the wuflu drug that gets an exemption from the baseline medical practices, and free from double blind studies, and can hide any data that makes them look bad
Yep. Weird how they can determine who’s there with/because of covid in some advanced stats but won’t just put that number out there.
By the standard by which smallpox vaccines are considered effective, the covid vaccines are extremely ineffective. If smallpox vaccines were 95% effective in the same way the covid vaccines were claimed to be, we would still be dealing with smallpox. The definition of “effective vaccine” basically changed. That’s the point you don’t get.
Smallpox vaccine was a vaccine.
And it ended a disease as a threat.
But they are usually completely effective in most people. At least the vaccines that most people get (besides flu vaccines which are a crap shoot). And certainly any vaccine that has any chance of actually stopping the spread of a disease must prevent infection in most people who take it. When you get measles vaccine, you don’t expect to get a mild case of measles, you expect that you won’t ever get measles.
If COVID vaccines were using old technology, instead of worrying how effective the vaccine is against this new variant, there wouldn’t be a question because it would be zero. Each new change requires a new vaccine.
Vs something that’s a lot less effective than a targeted vaccine, but effective on its cousins.
I don’t know what the right answer is.
sarcasmic, may I suggest you look at efficacy data for the AZ vaccine? That was made the ‘traditional’ way.
I’m not sure that that is the difference. My impression is that the mRNA vaccines have been effective to some extent on variants because the protein they target hasn’t changed enough for the antibodies to be completely useless.
But I don’t know. I don’t think anyone really understands it. That’s one big thing I’ve learned a lot about through all of this. We (as humans in general) really don’t have a very complete understanding of how viruses or immune systems work.
That has to be true. I saw in 80% fully vaxed new york, they had the lowest case count
Maybe one day there will be a covid vaccine.
Maybe one day we will actually be able to see something called covid under a microscope. But probably not. As it is nothing more then a computer generated hoax.
The Phucko Knows
Vaccines are never 100% effective and they are not expected to be.
Strawman. The spread of COVID infections has occurred from vaccinated people, and vaccinated/boosted people are catching and showing symptoms to the point that even Branch Covidians are finally coming to grips with the fact that they’re going to catch it no matter how many shots they get. So the excuse has migrated to, “the vaccine doesn’t prevent you from getting sick, it just mitigates your symptoms.”
Polio and smallpox vaccines, on the other hand, were not given the same leeway. Imagine the same excuses here–“The polio vaccine doesn’t prevent all paralysis, it just ensures that when you get it, it’s not as bad.” “the smallpox vaccine doesn’t prevent all smallpox breakouts, it just ensures that they aren’t as prevalent.”
That’s basically what’s happening with COVID vaccines–because it’s a coronavirus, and no COVID vaccine in human history has ever wiped one out.
Diptheria: 99%
Tetanus: 100%
Polio: ~100%
HPV: 99%
FLU: Average: 40%. Low of 10% in 2004/’05, High of 60% 2010/’11
————————————————
Above are “preventing” infection. Not just “lessening impact”.
Covid vaccines are nowhere near this.
———————————————-
Flu, even worse: Average: 40%. Low of 10% in 2004/’05, High of 60% 2010/’11
————————————————
“Still, given the steep rise in the omicron wave, it would be wise for the medically eligible unvaccinated to now take responsibility to protect themselves, their families, their friends, and their fellow Americans by getting their shots.”
So if you’ve decided to take on the risk of being unvaccinated, a less severe form of the disease should make you reassess and do the thing you didn’t feel was necessary before?
That’d be like foregoing a shark cage when there’s a great white in the water, but then jumping in the cage because there’s a lot more goldfish in there.
Minor detail; based on science, the federal injections do not protect “themselves”, do not protect their families, do not protect their friends, do not protect their fellow Americans.
Right. Mr Bailey’s nonsense about responsibility is just that: nonsense.
There is one person this Vaccine allows you to take responsibility for, and that is yourself. And in fact, given my experience with the disease this Christmas, I am pretty certain that when you are fully vax/boostered, the likelihood is that YOU are the one walking around infecting other people because the symptoms are so mild.
Please, people, for your own good- especially if you are in a higher risk category- go get yourself vaccinated. And exercise. And maybe knock off the booze so much, and get healthier. Read a book. Turn off the TV and read the Iliad. But don’t for a second do it because you think you are helping society- you are doing this for yourself, and good for you on that. This idea that you owe it to society to protect yourself is stupid.
Also the drug is not effective at stopping the wuflu
Yeah, except your decision affects more people than just yourself — you are more likely to spread the virus to others, more likely to host a mutation, and more likely to take up and ICU bed or oxygen supplies.
That is true of just about everything = every decision you make affects someone else in some way
The high risk people can isolate (and vax if they want). Let the rest of society to get on with the business of living. Lockdowns failed. Masks are generally ineffective. The risk is people with comorbidities, and the elderly.
Maybe ‘they’ should self-isolate, Mike.
Actually, I’m not more likely to do any of those things in a way that is statistically significant. Even if it was 1,000 times more likely: 1,000 multiplied by virtually zero is still virtually zero.
You also have to factor in that there is an extremely small downside to getting vaccinated.
So, I’ll take the least intrusive option, the one that doesn’t involve multiple (and ever-increasing) injections of an experimental “vaccine”.
Chance of organ inflammation or death, but I can avoid the sniffles!
https://vaersanalysis.info
Time will tell the real story. But I guess all the folks over the last decade telling us that they’re r far to many humans in the world…, and then the SAME folks showing up on TV to now tell us WE need to take a vaccine to SAVE those same over eaters. Means nothing to a simpleton as yourself? Congrats on being on counted on idiot.
The Phucko Knows
1. The shots never stopped transmission.
Vaccine resistance is primarily cultured in the infected vaxxed.
2. Asymptomatic spreaders are more likely among vaxxed, as they have the same viral loads to share but reduced symptoms.
3. Hospitals run ~80% capacity and there are more fatties than flu.
4. Fuck off sealion.
There’s a town in rural Kansas that had a 33% increase in its Laotian population last year–which is another way of saying that the only Laotian couple in town had a baby. That’s not an influx of Laotians, exactly.
“The hospitalization rate per million among unvaccinated people stands at 532.7; it’s 105.9 for folks vaccinated with at least two doses.”
Getting vaccinated is the smart thing to do for all sorts of reasons–even if the vaccine only brings your likelihood of being hospitalized down from 0.05% (five hundredths of one percent) to 0.01% (one hundredth of one percent). Somebody check my math.
There are good reasons to get vaccinated that have nothing to do with your health. If you were frustrated in your job before the pandemic by a stagnant career, or you wanted to move to another part of the country, right now is a great time to be vaccinated and looking for a job.
I would check your math, but it would be racist.
He’s white. It’s OK to check his privilege. Doubly so if you’re of that persuasion.
Going from 2 Laotians to 3 is a 50% increase, no?
You added 1 to 2….and 1 is 50% of 2.
Unless the Laotians already had one kid in the house. Then it goes from three to four.
Thank you.
That wasn’t the one I meant, but, of course, you’re right.
Horseshit! not a vaccine
Not even a good therapeutic when it causes more harm than it mitigates.
Please continue to get shot up dude. As this is an IQ test. A test which u r failing miserably at. The good news is the stupid umongest us will soon be gone. So don’t let that coffin door hit u in the ass.
The Phucko Knows
2 boosters the flatten the curve!
How accurate are any of these numbers? Every study we hear about risk tells us that you are WAY less likely to be hospitalized or die after vaccination. However, after 80% of the 50+ population has been vaccinated, we are still seeing around 1000 deaths per day.
Maybe because the only difference in this form of flu and all the others is that the fascists finally decided this was the excuse they could use to come out in the open.
Well, that and the fact that this one was deliberately spread world wide by the Communist Chinese Party.
Who cares. Only racists, misogynists are dying from it now. Seems like a good way to cleanse society of undesirable rats and cockroaches.
Surprised there are any left. 2022 Mid-Terms should pretty much be a total blue wave the way deplorables have been wiped out.
I think the word you’re searching for is “deplorables”.
Man u do talk out of your ass don’t u?
The Phucko Knows
I’m not sure if they are still doing this but early on they would count all unvaxed deaths as wuflu deaths, and they would factor in comorbidity for the vaxed. Ie cancer patient vaxed is died of cancer, if they were unvaxed died of wuflu
dang if only I had a time machine I could go back a year and comply
The unvaccinated are 5 times more likely to be hospitalized when infected.
The hospitalization rate per million among unvaccinated people stands at 532.7; it’s 105.9 for folks vaccinated with at least two doses.
Chances of vaccinated being hospitalized: .0.001059%
Chances of unvaccinated being hospitalized: 0.00587%
Sorry, messed up the decimal numbers on that. Let me try again.
.01%
v s
.05%
I would have believed you
Clearly those who are only 99.95% safe are at risk, while those who are 99.99% safe are actually safe.
more horseshit. define “unvaccinated”.
hospitalized for what?
more horse shit.
define “unvaccinated”
hospitalized for what?
The ICU occupancy rate per million is 135.6 for unvaccinated people and just 9.2 for those who have gotten two doses of COVID-19 vaccines. So vaccination reduces the ICU risk by 93.2 percent.
Yes, it reduces the number from a very very low chance to a very, very, very, very low chance.
Those numbers are CURRENT numbers not cumulative you fucking asshole.
So very very very very very low chance?
We should get Bailey to write an article about Home Title Lock next. Did you know that getting Home Title lock reduces the chances of your home’s title being stolen from a tiny, tiny amount to an even tinier, tiny amoung?
Oooh, oooh, How about full time helmet wearing? I’ll bet that will reduce the injuries caused by falling apples by nigh on 100%!
Still, given the steep rise in the omicron wave, it would be wise for the medically eligible unvaccinated to now take responsibility to (1) protect themselves,(2) their families, their friends, and their fellow Americans by getting their shots.
(1) Absolutely.
(2) You can still spread the disease if you’re vaccinated so I’m not sure who you’re protecting. That’s why even though I’m vaccinated, I still have to wear a mask, social distance and not enter certain businesses.
“You can still spread the disease if you’re vaccinated”
True, but misleading, since you lie by omission by not saying that you are less likely to spread the disease if vaccinated.
It is unclear whether that is true. Even if vaccinated people shed less virus when infected (which I don’t think is clear either), you also have to consider behavior. If a person believes all of this about protecting those around them, then they would be likely to take less precautions against possibly spreading it and less likely to get a test if they are mildly sick.
This is a major problem with over-selling the benefits of vaccines and masks. It creates a false sense of security. If you are someone who really has to worry about catching the virus, then you need to be just as worried about vaccinated people and masked people.
Our “Covid Cluster” this christmas was ALL vaccinated people. And the Typhoid Mary was a super-vaxxed person who had a sore throat and thought it was just allergies. He only realized it was covid the next day when he had to take a test for other reasons.
I have been annoyed that public health officials apparently are unaware of risk compensation for a while now.
Another thought to add onto the pile: vaccinated who do get infected are much more likely to be asymptomatic. So, while the risk of infection is a bit lower (not much lower in the case of omicron) the risk of being asymptomatic might not be all that different between vax and non-vax. And it is the asymptomatic who are spreading the virus blissfully unaware.
Faith alone!
“True, but misleading, since you lie by omission by not saying that you are less likely to spread the disease if vaccinated.”
To borrow a mike-ism: “Citation please?”
You wanna know who lies? It’s Mike Laursen.
https://reason.com/2021/09/09/california-is-set-to-outlaw-unannounced-condom-removal/?comments=true#comment-9091773
That’s him pretending that he would “never” use Rolling Stone for any real news, a mere three days after spreading the Rolling Stone hoax article on Ivermectin. This guy will tell you shit one day and say the exact opposite literally 2 days later. Engage with this clown at your peril.
Prove it…
The Phucko Knows
it would be wise for the medically eligible unvaccinated to now take responsibility to protect themselves, their families, their friends, and their fellow Americans by getting their shots.
To late. I got it a few weeks ago, stayed home, got better and now have natural immunity. I did not need the jab and am happy for the decision I made.
These British and Canadian findings mirror those most recently reported by the New York State Health Department. It finds that the daily rate per 100,000 of COVID-19 hospitalizations stands at 4.56 for fully vaccinated people, compared to 58.27 for unvaccinated people. That means vaccinations are 92.3 percent effective at preventing hospitalization from COVID-19. Other data from around the U.S. are in line with these findings.
That’s similar to Colorado. 73% in hospital for covid are unvax (354 vax and 954 unvax) – with a massively different average age difference too – roughly 75 for vax and 52 or so for unvax. Age-adjust that and the vax is far more effective than raw numbers would indicate. Hosp rate/100,000 for the vax (in this case one dose rather than two-dose ‘fully’) is 8.35 – for the unvax 65.7
The worst part of this is gonna be the long-term effects. Respiratory therapists and ICU nurses are starting to quit in droves. They are not going to get back into the profession – and nor are younger people. Which means a ten-year or more staffing shortage.
It is NOT because a lot of unvax were fired (the unvax in hospitals tended to be orderlies and cafeteria and such – NOT nurses). It is because the unvax who got hospitalized for covid are as much assholes as many of the commenters here – and the nurses were the target of that bullshit while the unvax are in hospital.
The 8.35 and 65.7 translates to CURRENT vaccine efficacy for reducing hospitalization is 87% for even a single jab.
right, from a very very low number to a very very very low number.
65.7/100,000 is current hospitalization not cumulative. If you assume an average 2-week stay in hospital, then multiply that by 26 for an annual rate. And since the first year of covid was mostly unvax, double that and you have the rough hospitalization rate for covid for the unvax – roughly 3.4%. Roughly 20% of those hospitalized will die – which is about a 0.7% fatality rate. Which is actually about right – maybe a little high because vax did come earlier than Feb of this year for the vulnerable.
Is that a very very low number? Well the % of US soldiers in WW2 who were killed in combat was 1.8%. So a bit less than half that. Except that the unvax are assholes not freedom-fighters maybe deserving of some memorial for veterans.
Well the % of US soldiers in WW2 who were killed in combat was 1.8%. So a bit less than half that.
ROFLMAO! “Is that a very very low number? Well, let me select a relevant number that I think you might not know but might care about, divide it by a whole integer greater than one, round that number down… and then we get to *the* number. Whaddyathink about that! Huh?”
In the entirety of the Star Wars universe you’ve clearly distinguished yourself as C3PO. Congrats on avoiding the Jar Jar label.
Jar Jar was a Sith lord.
Damn. Always Yoda I wanted to be.
How many times did Yoda tell anyone the odds?
Well the % of US soldiers in WW2 who were killed in combat was 1.8%.
What was the death rate of those who were actually in combat?
The unvaxed r the intellectual folks in the world. The vaxed folks r but the sheeple of the world. The Harvest is here numb nuts. Thank GOD u r on the side of the idiots. As the Golden Age of man can only occur AFTER the stupid r gone. Be it from a needle full of poison or the end of a rope. Either way idiots such as u will soon be gone. Yippee ki-ya mother- fer.
The Phucko Knows
“It is because the unvax who got hospitalized for covid are as much assholes as many of the commenters here – and the nurses were the target of that bullshit while the unvax are in hospital.”
That’s funny, because I spent about a week in Colorado hospitals this week, and everything in this sentence is absolute bullshit.
Well I know many dozens of nurses who have already ‘checked out’. They have become traveling nurses for the pay for the duration of the extreme shortage and where they get to opick and choose where/when they work. They will not be employees again. The average age of nurses is 48-50 – so they are close to the point where they can retire early. And that’s exactly what they are now planning on.
Plus – you have said repeatedly that you are vax so what the fuck do you know?
What’s it like to wake up every morning knowing that if you committed suicide the world would be a better place?
“Plus – you have said repeatedly that you are vax so what the fuck do you know?”
I know how to spot when JFree is full of shit, that’s for damn sure.
It starts with Jfree making broad and generalized statements like “All them nurses are quitting because I think anti-vaxxers are just like the anti-vaxxers on this comment board!” And then he follows up with, “No really guys, I know many dozens of nurses, all of them who have become traveling nurses.”
Really JFree? How many is many dozens? 36 Nurses? 48 Nurses? Do you actually know 48+ nurses who quit their jobs to become traveling nurses. And are all of them real good friends who confided in you that they quit because some anti-vaxxer was mean to them? Is that what happened?
My sister-in-law in Colorado is an actual traveling nurse, and she can confirm that all these shortages are about 70% due to the hospitals getting rid of their staff in 2020. The rest are a combination of quitters due to burnout and staff members who didn’t want to get the jab.
She migrated from her nursing admin position to becoming a traveling nurse a couple months ago specifically because they’re getting paid like royalty, especially for night shifts. She’s going to absolutely clean up this coming year, and I couldn’t be more jealous.
I have family on the boards of hospitals in rural Colorado, and this is exactly what I meant when I said JFree is full of shit.
In fear of COVID these hospitals shut down every line of business possible, and the government did the rest, scaring the public to stay away. In Nov, 2020, I walked into the Emergency Room in Steamboat with 2 other patients (we had come in together). All three of us walked right into three empty ER rooms with no wait in the middle of a busy morning. On my way out I looked around, and other than the one of my party who needed to stay the night, the entire ER was empty. The. Entire. ER.
You do know that the population of Steamboat drops a lot during mud season (idk when ski season actually started) when almost everything is closed.
What happens during hunting season, JFree? Do you think you could find many dozens of hunter friends to tell you what Steamboat looks like during the 3rd Rifle Season?
So were you expecting the ER to be full of Dick Cheney’s victims?
No, just a little contrition from someone who tried to blame the entire hospital shortage on the figment strawmen in his head. Instead, as usual, you ignore how foolish you look and keep acting all self righteous.
You are the one jousting with windmills. The 2020 hospital layoffs could have been directly offset (by magnitudes) by federal grants to hospitals with the CARES act. Or the multi billion endowments built up in ‘non-profits’. Instead, those grants went to hospital admin who want to pretend that elective surgery (which is what generates revenues in our medical system – mostly from gummint) would not have been affected at all by covid but only by gummint. When that shit had nothing to do with anything except the venality and corruption of our medical system. But hey – that’s all fine by you ennit.
What is interesting in a way is that the covid pandemic exposed serious structural problems in the US medical system – just like the 1918 pandemic did. In 1918, the problem turned out to be that hospitals and their wealthyish elective surgery and convalescent patients had no interest in letting the contagious riffraff into their hospital. So they were kicked out or not admitted and told to go home. Which is a big reason, we don’t actually know how many people died in the US of that flu. We just know the excess deaths. The result back then was that munis started building/expanding muni hospitals – where residents would be admitted. And by the beginning of WW2, it was muni hospitals that were full and private charity hospitals that were about half-full.
Will the covid pandemic result in any sort of restructuring of our medical system? idk – but it certainly showed how poorly managed with crappy outcomes our system can be. But hey – blame it all on gummint.
“The 2020 hospital layoffs could have been directly offset (by magnitudes) by federal grants to hospitals….”
Here goes JFree on another long winded screed about stuff he read online. Spoiler for anyone who doesn’t care: It is about as believable as the many, many dozens of Nurses who confess their troubles to him.
“But hey – blame it all on gummint.”
Probably will. Meanwhile you will be blaming it on rednecks and…um…hospital administrators or something. Again, you are blowing smoke out your ass, and everyone can see it. But please, go read the policy papers from the American Socialists for Nationalized Healthcare or some shit again. Please, it is quite entertaining.
No, what happened was the hospitals laid off a bunch of staff in 2020, which led to “shortages” that were entirely self-inflicted because there weren’t enough people on hand to handle the surges, which led to the use of traveling nurses, which led to burnout by the permanent staff, which led to nurses quitting, which led to even greater staff shortages, which led to even greater reliance on traveling nurses, and on down the line.
The “shortages” had nothing to do with actual available bed space–it had to do with available staff per bed. Less staff = fewer beds to serve.
Stupidly laying off all that staff in 2020 led to a waterfall effect that the hospitals may not ever recover from until after about 75% of the Boomers die off, and they were already short-handed before the pandemic started because Boomer and Gen-X politicians didn’t bother to ask, “Hey, there’s going to be a lot of fucking old people needing healthcare through about 2040, what can we do to increase the supply of healthcare workers?”
A bunch quit or retired early at the start of the entire thing when hospitals stopped doing normal stuff.
There was an additional batch in Colorado this year that quit due to mandates.
Every government intervention made it a little worse. Those add up over time.
You can see the dual drop in the available beds for the state.
This isn’t just Healthcare, BTW. They call it The Great Resignation for a reason. 2 years of pent up demand to change jobs, go on long vacations, retire, and just live life all got opened last summer, and it was a massive shock to the system.
We went from near 0 Attrition from Feb 2020 – Apr 2021 to 250% normal for the rest of the year.
No it is because JFree knows dozens and dozens of them and they said anti-vaxxers are hurting their feelings. Every day at the hospital is like spending a week talking to Tulpa. It is known.
Any layoffs in 2020 did not lead to nurses leaving the profession. They got unemployment plus a bit – and came back to work very quickly. Yeah some may have gone into travel nursing then – but again they aren’t leaving the profession when this ends.
The people who are leaving are the ones who were forced out because of mandate and those who have been burned out. The former was just not significant in Denver area. Maybe rural areas – but they don’t have ICU’s. The burn out has accelerated in the last month when delta peaked out (Oct/Nov/Mar/Apr are the problem months for respiratory stuff here in CO). Delta in particular was last straw even if there were many reasons building over years. Nursing is a relatively old demographic and getting close to retirement age makes it much easier to consider retirement as an option. It’s why the Great Resignation is mostly about the youngest boomers (Obama age rather than Nam-era age) and oldest Xers leaving the workforce. Nurses are simply picking the end of delta as that time to resign.
Here in CO, it’s real easy to see the impact on acute care beds (which includes staffing requirements):
Apr 2020 – 8100 acute care beds
Oct 2020 – 9200 acute care beds
Apr 2021 – 9300 acute care beds
Sept 2021 – 9100 acute care beds
Oct 2021 – 8800 acute care beds (this may be the mandate effect
That was roughly the same until late Nov. It became 7600 or so in Dec and is now 7100. Some of that is hospital staff who are now off sick in self-isolation. But more than you think is senior care staff who aren’t coming back.
Did your quick google search determine which nurses leaving did so because Tulpa was mean to them?
It wasn’t a random google search. It is the CO covid data dashboard. They have tracked data really well the whole pandemic.
And the stories about the unvax that have tipped the nurses over the edge are:
An unvax person with covid is explaining why they didn’t vax and they’ll do it now. While the nurse can’t tell them – you’re not gonna be leaving the hospital. Your lungs are shot and you’re gonna die.
An unvax person with covid is explaining why they don’t have covid because covid is just the flu. Why are you people misdiagnosing me? Are you trying to kill me? You are trying to kill me. Get away from me.
This has become insane. And since there are a ton of people who have quite deliberately been deceiving other people about covid, vax, etc, it has become murderously insane. The commenters here – the Rockwell crowd – you assholes are MUCH worse than the victims of your deceit and lies.
JSlave, are you getting upsot that nobody will Chicken Little with you?
If you wanna actually follow real science you can find us having a good time at the end.
Because we need to get the unvaxxed vaxxed so they can’t spread it to the vaxxed, whose dose of the not-vaccine doesn’t actually prevent infection.
THE SKY IS FALLINGGGGGG!!!1!!
“you assholes are MUCH worse than the victims of your deceit and lies.”
Again with the collectivist bullshit. You will forever find exactly the enemies you seek if you forever seek that one example to represent a population. You for a fact know that I never once lied about the data- my arguments have almost exclusively been moral. That isn’t lying. But because Tulpa is mean to you, All of us are the same.
Because 1 or 2 examples you heard, now MANY DOZENS of nurses are all leaving for the same reason.
You are emoting, Jfree, and it makes you look a bit unhinged. But your “I have lots of nurse friends. Really!” just makes you look pathetic.
Wow dude.. Everything u f-ing type is nonsense. U r literally a clown show. U know and understand so little of the world around that little box u reside in. U need to be locked up for the betterment of society. U should be with your peers in a nut house.
The Phucko Knows
Any layoffs in 2020 did not lead to nurses leaving the profession.
I’m not talking about nurses “leaving the profession,” I’m talking about actual hospital staffing figures.
It is hilarious that he talks about MANY DOZENZ!! of nurses he knows going into mobile nursing that (if true) means that they didn’t er, leave the profession.
Well I know many dozens of nurses who have already ‘checked out’.
I have many dozens of nurses that check me out too! They all give me a sponge bath every afternoon right before we board my private yacht for our lobster dinners! Don’t worry, everybody except me is masked and vaxxed, so it’s OK.
Do they all live in Canada, too, like my girlfriend?
Colin Powell, fully vaccinated, died of COVID-19.
FYI, we’ll soon be moving out of this pandemic now that they’ve requested the hospital systems to update the accounting methods for hospitalization cases.
It would have been worse.
You know who else is clogging these places up? Fucking morons who tested positive despite being asymptomatic and then going to the ER when they aren’t even fucking sick with real actual ailments.
This was reported in Vermont, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s happening everywhere else, too.
For fuck’s sake, people, if you get sick, just stay home until you feel better, and don’t test if you aren’t actually sick. This is a variant we WANT becoming the dominant strain, because it’s so fucking mild. It’s basically the Spanish Flu all over again.
https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2021/12/31/new-jersey-emergency-room-no-covid-tests/?amp
New Jersey residents are being warned not to go to the emergency room to try to get COVID tests.
State health officials say they are being flooded with requests and want to remind the public emergency departments are for emergencies only.
That includes those experiencing shortness of breath, chest pain or other severe COVID symptoms.
——
They aren’t even going because they test positive, they are going TO GET THE TEST! LOL!
I’ve wondered about that for a while. How many people go to the hospital for covid who don’t need to? With the inflated sense of the danger that a lot of people have, I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a lot. I personally know of several instances where someone went to the hospital because they had asthma or something and wanted to be extra safe or something.
I’ve also heard that a lot of it is fucking morons who get a little bit sick and can’t find a test so they go to the ER to get tested.
If you need to go to the hospital do see if it’s COVID or a cold, then what’s the point of calling this thing deadly?
You’re joking right. A guy with cancer died of COVID and you think that’s an appropriate factoid to bring up to prove a point?
I do want to point out that a lot of hospitals are now counting people who are admitted for covid from people admitted with covid. In many cases it’s about 50/50.
If these numbers are true, then we will have to reevaluate what the hospitalization rate truly is.
Unvaxxed idiots gymnastics competition here today. How many ridiculous avoidances can they construct in order to not face the obvious.
Get your shot, dummies.
That’s with a vaccine.
And it’s irrelevant. We need to start separating “Admitted with covid” and admitted “Because of covid”.
How about all the vaccinated people here who are skeptical of this nonsense? You really think that the only objections are from people refusing the shot? That no one has a brain or any principles?
Count me in that camp. I got the experimental vaccine-adjacent gene therapy in April and May of 2020. Sort of a reflexive thing from a lifetime habit of getting all my vaccines on schedule, including annual flu vaccines.
But given what I know now, I’m not sure I’d get the MRNA shots again. And I certainly don’t think anyone should be pressured to get them. They really don’t seem to do much, especially compared to the propaganda about how awesome they’re supposed to be.
There is a huge difference between being skeptical/opposed to mandates/etc – v simply lying about the basic facts of covid/vaccine/etc.
If you can’t see that difference, it’s because you’re a nihilist not a libertarian.
Bitch, I’ve had more vaccines put in my body than you have in the last 20 years, including TDaPs, Hep and MMR boosters, the adult polio booster, and my smallpox shot, plus the occasional flu shot when I felt like it.
How many different kinds of vaccines have YOU had in that time frame?
Got my immunities, no need for the vax, dummy. And no, I’m not anti-vax, got many vaxes over my life, just not this one brand new jab.
My reasoning was that a rushed to market product rarely lives up to the hype and the communication shutdown by anyone trying to express alternate opinions than the Big Pharma/Government Goon’s approved script. When the government and their sycophants try to keep information from the people, they’re hiding the dirt. Want to convince me then have a fair and open discussion; otherwise fuck off slaver.
“My reasoning was that a rushed to market product rarely lives up to the hype”
Well I bet you feel a bit foolish then. The Vaccines ended COVID over night!
I agree for once. Only dummies get the shot. That’s sarcasm boy wonder.
The Phucko Knows
For the most accurate, reliable and eye popping report on what really happened at the Capitol last year on Jan 5 and 6, go to
https://www.revolver.news/2021/12/damning-new-details-massive-web-unindicted-operators-january-6/
It appears increasingly likely that FBI agents and/or paid informants planned and executed the original breach of the Capitol grounds, quickly removed the barriers so none of the protestors realized they were illegally entering the Capitol grounds, and then urged/ushered (with identical bull horns) thousands of naive Trump supporters to walk into the Capitol grounds.
So, suppose two individuals interact, and one individual has the potential to cause harm to the other. Who bears the greater burden in order to try to prevent that harm from occurring? The person who might cause the harm? Or the person who might suffer from that harm?
Normally, we would tend to argue that the person who is potentially causing harm bears the greater moral burden to try to stop that harm, rather than the person who might be injured by that harm.
For example, if a person is shooting guns at the range, we would normally place a higher expectation on the individual shooting the gun to make sure he/she does so responsibly, than on all the bystanders around the shooter. Of course the bystanders should be aware of the surroundings, but the shooter bears the greater responsibility to not accidentally shoot bystanders.
If the bystanders aren’t doing anything reckless, but the shooter recklessly discharges his/her gun and accidentally shoots a bystander, we would typically not tolerate a defense of “but the bystander should have known better to get out of the way in time”. We would tend instead to lay blame at the feet of the shooter for being responsible for the harm, and that seems right.
I argue that a similar principle ought to apply to viruses and diseases in general. The higher burden should be placed on those who have a higher likelihood to spread the disease to others to try to minimize that spread, rather than on those who might unwittingly catch that disease from someone else. Of course all who are at risk at all bear some burden to try to limit their exposure. But if a sick person coughs on a stranger, and the stranger gets sick, it shouldn’t be a valid defense to say “well the stranger should have known better than to go out in public”. We would instead tend to lay blame on the sick person for not doing more to try to stop the spread of the disease.
This argument isn’t about mandates, it is about moral responsibility. Who bears the moral responsibility to try to prevent harm – the person that might cause the harm, or the person who might be the victim of the harm? In virtually every case, libertarians would answer in favor of the former. It ought to be the same when it comes to diseases as well.
So immuno compromised should do what then?
Die. They should just die.
Who bears the moral responsibility to try to prevent harm – the person that might cause the harm, or the person who might be the victim of the harm? In virtually every case, libertarians would answer in favor of the former.
There is no libertarian Hippocratic oath. You are just making shit up.
An actual libertarian would answer: to the extent that I do not deliberately violate your bodily integrity, I bear no moral responsibility for your health under any circumstances. Lose some weight, fatty.
This has to be the third time I’ve seen this argument from you, and you never seem to respond to criticisms. But let’s just be clear:
1) A person who is unvaccinated is not the same as a person who is walking around with a loaded firearm. If you want to make these analogies fit, then you should compare an INFECTED person to a person carrying around a loaded firearm. Yes, a person who knows they are infected has a duty to refrain from doing things likely to get others infected.
2) There is no “moral responsibility” for ANYONE to protect you from nature. The virus is nature. The fact that it uses you, or your property, to propagate does not make it your responsibility. Let’s say you leave your car unlocked, and someone steals it, drives it into a school. You aren’t responsible that someone else, operating under their agency used your property to do harm- even if we assume that perhaps that harm might have been mitigated by locking your door. Unlocked cars don’t harm anyone. Only cars stolen and driven by psychos. We assign responsibility to the proximate cause.
But wait! If the person had just locked their door, none of this would have happened, right? Wrong. This is where the term “Proximate Cause” comes in. A million things could have prevented the harm- from locking up that thief on his first offense, to his mom aborting him, to you sitting on your porch guarding the car with a shotgun. But it was his act of stealing and deciding to hit a school that makes HIM and HIM ALONE responsible. This is why we don’t hold gun manufacturers responsible for school shootings, btw.
I know for a fact that you have seen any number of threads where we discussed this. I have no moral responsibility to protect you from a virus than you have a responsibility to shelter me from the cold. If we live next to each other and a stream runs through my property to yours, it is not my responsibility to build a water treatment plant to ensure upstream contaminants don’t come to you.
3rd and finally: Vaccination for COVID does *not* prevent you spreading it to others. Indeed, I am vaccinated and caught it from my wife, who is vaccinated, who caught it from a family member who is double vaxxed and boostered early. So your entire premise fails. Vaccinating doesn’t even prevent a person from being infected, so the idea that I have a “moral responsibility” to stick needles in my arm to NOT protect you from a virus is even MORE wrong.
Clearly COVID is guilty of violating your property rights.
That it is. My immune system has orders to kill it on sight.
It’s not a loaded firearm, it’s a loaded firearm that you’re shooting in random directions.
Humans are from nature too. This is a fundamental fallacy of all conservative belief: that human agents are the only threat worth paying attention to.
That is monkey talk. It’s caveman talk, at best. It’s just a fallacy. It’s just wrong.
This is a non answer, and I bet Tony doesn’t even understand why.
Spell out why government should only concern itself with threats from human agents but not “natural” ones.
Forget the fact that humans are part of nature. Forget the fact that humans have way less free will than you think they do, and that all systems of justice are predicated on an erroneous faith in the existence of human free will.
A tornado leaves me just as dead as a guy with a gun. What possible difference does it make whether the agent of my destruction had a considering mind? Why is that instrumental in my well-being at all?
Thanks for proving my point.
I’m feeling charitable, though Tony:
” why government should”
Take a look at that fragment. That fragment alone demonstrates how completely off topic you are. Chemjeff and I are talking apples here and you are talking Regulation Girder Widths. You are so off left field that Elon Musk would like to figure out how you got there.
I have no moral responsibility to respect your so-called property claims.
There, I’m more libertarian than you.
I have no moral responsibility to respect your so-called property claims.
Don’t worry, I’ll still blow your head off if you walk on it.
Not if I get you first. I’m stealthy.
LOL, you can’t even go anywhere without shrieking about whatever is bothering you at that moment.
Giving you the full Matthew Shepherd would be a piece of cake.
1) A person who is unvaccinated is not the same as a person who is walking around with a loaded firearm. If you want to make these analogies fit, then you should compare an INFECTED person to a person carrying around a loaded firearm. Yes, a person who knows they are infected has a duty to refrain from doing things likely to get others infected.
I agree with you here. But, now let’s proceed down the hierarchy of moral obligations then. Let’s compare a vaccinated individual vs. an unvaccinated individual. Between these two, who has a greater moral obligation to reduce harm caused to others via the virus?
2) There is no “moral responsibility” for ANYONE to protect you from nature. The virus is nature. The fact that it uses you, or your property, to propagate does not make it your responsibility.
Welllll. If we are going to go to a strictly libertarian analysis, then in Libertopia, all of nature would be divided up into spheres of privately owned property, and the owners of said property would be responsible for that property. If you get infected with a virus, and the virus uses your body to replicate and multiply, how is it wrong, from a libertarian perspective, to say that you “own” those replicated viruses, just like you own every other part of your body? And that if those replicated viruses then cause harm to others, how is it wrong, from a libertarian perspective, to argue that you should be held responsible, at least morally, for your property (the viruses) being used to harm others?
Let’s say you leave your car unlocked, and someone steals it, drives it into a school. You aren’t responsible that someone else, operating under their agency used your property to do harm- even if we assume that perhaps that harm might have been mitigated by locking your door. Unlocked cars don’t harm anyone. Only cars stolen and driven by psychos. We assign responsibility to the proximate cause.
I agree! But there is still the concept of negligence. Which is, broadly, a failure to execute a duty to take reasonable steps to mitigate foreseeable harm. If I open a restaurant, I have a duty to maintain it as a clean place to serve food, even in the absence of state health regulations mandating such. If you come to my restaurant, eat tainted food, and get sick, then you would very legitimately hold me responsible for your illness. It would not be a legitimate defense for me to claim “well, it wasn’t ME that made you sick, it was the bacteria in the food, and since bacteria is ‘nature’, no one really is responsible, sorry!” I have a duty to take reasonable steps to serve disease-free food. I argue that a similar argument ought to apply to individuals interacting in public. Each of us has a minimal duty that, when we go out in public, we aren’t actively causing harm to others, whether that harm is caused by ‘nature’ residing in our bodies, or not.
Vaccination for COVID does *not* prevent you spreading it to others.
Vaccination reduces the probability. It is not a black/white thing.
Vaccines. Do. Not. Prevent. Transmission.
Viral. Loads. Are. Identical. In. Unvaxxed
Or. Vaxxed.
Do I need to change languages before you get this?
“Let’s compare a vaccinated individual vs. an unvaccinated individual. Between these two, who has a greater moral obligation to reduce harm caused to others via the virus?”
Neither. We both agree that the person with the true potential to cause harm is the INFECTED person. While you are infected you are responsible for acting like you “have the loaded weapon”, so to speak. Now: An unvaccinated person may have the virus longer, so they may be in that position of responsibility longer, but they are no more or less morally obligated by virtue of vaccine status.
“Welllll. If we are going to go to a strictly libertarian analysis, then in Libertopia, all of nature would be divided up into spheres of privately owned property, and the owners of said property would be responsible for that property.”
That’s just not true. It’s functionally nonsense. That would imply that someone have to own the Sun- charging for its light and paying damages for drought. What would happen if a meteor were discovered about to hit Libertopia? Does someone suddenly have to buy it and assume damages? Or do we charge all property owners a portion of the damages proportionate to their land mass as owners of gravity? Does someone own the damages caused by entropy? Cosmic rays! Who do I sue for cosmic rays?!
No. That is all silly. Being a grown up in Libertopia we recognize that somethings are beyond the scope of human cause. Again, if water ran through my land, I am not obligated to treat it for pathogens before it reaches your land. Some things are acts of nature, and expecting someone to protect you from acts of nature is morally wrong.
“But there is still the concept of negligence. Which is, broadly, a failure to execute a duty to take reasonable steps to mitigate foreseeable harm.”
Yes, and we already agreed that that duty begins when you realize you are infected. But you want- for some reason- to extend the definition of negligence to “take reasonable steps to mitigate a POTENTIAL harm”. It’s like demanding someone take firearm training because one day in the future they might find themselves holding a firearm. Potential and Foreseeable are not the same.
“If I open a restaurant, I have a duty to maintain it as a clean place to serve food, even in the absence of state health regulations mandating such.”
Yes, you gave this post a few weeks ago, right? I answered you: You have a responsibility not to pass contagions onto your customers. If you have reason to believe your restaurant is a vector for disease, it is incumbent on you to close, and clean up. If you were taken to court, the customer would be expected to prove that 1) you were the source of disease and 2) you had reason to credibly suspect that your restaurant was infected.
Even further, the restaurant analogy is a step too far. You are running a business where you are combining multiple inputs under your direct supervision to create a new product that you are marketing as quality. No such transaction is happening when you walk to the market. You are not managing the production of cells and antibody response in your body.
“Vaccination reduces the probability. It is not a black/white thing.”
I am not saying that it is. You are saying that somehow vaccination is a moral obligation even if it reduces the risk by some small amount.
Riddle me this: By your argument, we are responsible for what our body does in Libertopia. So, if you do vaccinate, and you do nevertheless end up infecting someone, are you EQUALLY responsible for damages as if you had not vaccinated in the first place?
The fact that anyone is saying the “vaccine” lowers your probability of contracting the virus tells me that it’s not a vaccine. Vaccines immunize you by introducing a deactivated virus or a piece of one into a body so your body has the ability to learn how to stop it from infecting you. How does that work with mRNA exactly? mRNA cant be engineered to do or be something else or even mimic something. So what is the immune system learning to fight off? There are no vaxxed or unvaxxed people because there is no vaccine. I’m asthmatic with an overactive immune system, so by all logic I should get a vaccine because otherwise I’ll die? But wouldn’t you know I have covid right now. I must say that 3 hours I had a fever and headache sucked but ibuprofen and tylenol saved me. Should I start my living will? Also if someone is supposedly vaccinated what are they so worried about since they are supposedly safe? I don’t think mRNA works the same as stem cells.
Going into public without having that shot is not the same as opening a restaurant. The person opening the restaurant is bound by law to not poison people and it’s an actual responsibility by law. Me not having that shot is not irresponsible and even if it was, it’s not my responsibility to keep other people from getting a virus. I seem to keep thinking if everyone jumped off a bridge, I would stand and watch the outcome before I did something so reckless without seeing results before I did it. The shot doesnt do any good at all. The adverse reactions would be worse than the virus. I think that’s a big no from me.
No gays in public! We must have mandated calorie counters and ration cholesterol! No more bacon!
Fuck off you craven totalitarian shitweasel.
Dude… Prove Covid-19 exist. Show us the the peer-reviewed studies that have isolated this supposed virus. Also show us all the mask studies and the asymptomatic spreaders research. Guess what jackass. YOU CAN’T show us all anything. U’ve got nothing but nonstop bullshit coming out of your ass. U r one gross ass human.
The Phucko Knows
Overt above writes:
This idea that you owe it to society to protect yourself is stupid.
Is it?
Suppose we live in Libertopia. No mandates, no welfare state, no coercion. We are free to live our lives as we see fit. Sounds great, right? But there are still collective problems. Poverty still exists, homelessness, hunger, etc. So how will the poor be fed in Libertopia? The answer is, of course, that individuals will choose to volunteer to donate to charity to feed the poor. And that is terrific. But that decision to choose to volunteer, to choose to donate, to choose to help others, must come from somewhere. It cannot be nonexistent. One might call it an “obligation to help society”. Individuals have to internalize this obligation in order for the libertarian ideal of a society that is free from coercion to be possible.
And if that is the case with the welfare state, why can’t it be the case with spreading disease?
I agree with Stossel in that there is some room for government force when it comes to the environment and with pandemics. Assuming the pandemic is an actual pandemic.
Are there property rights in this version?
It just doesn’t make sense to me how the collective problem of poverty is less important than the collective problem of people not having government-issued land titles.
“But that decision to choose to volunteer, to choose to donate, to choose to help others, must come from somewhere. It cannot be nonexistent. One might call it an “obligation to help society”.”
No, I would absolutely not call it an obligation. I call it a “choice” and I call it a choice because to call it an obligation is to rob a virtuous act of all virtue.
Let me unpack that a bit. If I give to charity because the law requires, or because my parents told me I must, or because society pressures me with scolds and stern looks, then what I did wasn’t virtuous at all. I did it to check a box and clear a debt- whether it is fulfilling a “social obligation” or staying clear of a taxman.
In order to be a virtuous man, your first step is to understand that there are morally good, morally bad, and morally neutral acts in life. The morally good things- charity, helping a person with their house work, jumping into a river to save a drowning child- these are good because they ARE NOT OBLIGATIONS. You don’t have to do them- it isn’t a debt to be fulfilled- but because you did, it was a virtuous thing that should be celebrated as such.
Calling these obligations isn’t just wrong, it is corrosive to creating exactly the society of free thinking individuals you claim to want. It is a tactic that has been used by preachers, nationalists, dictators and communists for centuries, but it is decidedly anti-libertarian. I want to live in a libertopia where that guy who saved a drowning kid is lauded *as a hero* not as someone who did what was “obligated.” The same to the person who lives their life donating to charity, or going to the front line to defend us from invaders. To say those people were “obligated” is to rob them of their virtue and their sacrifice- to deny the choice they made in an attempt to trick other people into doing the same thing.
This is a wonderful explanation that is guaranteed to make a Progressive’s eyes glaze and blood pressure rise.
Remember, words are harm. And that’s an obligation.
The morally good things- charity, helping a person with their house work, jumping into a river to save a drowning child- these are good because they ARE NOT OBLIGATIONS. You don’t have to do them- it isn’t a debt to be fulfilled- but because you did, it was a virtuous thing that should be celebrated as such.
I think we just disagree on what is the origin of the obligation in this scenario. An obligation could be internalized by a requirement from an external body, such as a mandate, or social pressure. Or, it could arise from an internal body, such as the dictates of one’s own conscience. That is the type of obligation that I am referring to. That the decision to help others voluntarily is just seen as “the right thing to do” not because any external force mandated it, because one’s own conscience dictated it.
Fuck you and your totalitarian imposition of subjective values.
Yes this is a fundamental difference that Collectivists like yourself are going to have to reconcile with Individualists like myself should we ever hope to form a libertarian fusion.
“I think we just disagree on what is the origin of the obligation in this scenario.”
But this is where we disagree. I am straight up telling you, THERE IS NO OBLIGATION. We are only obligated to do no wrong. That is what it means to be a libertarian. I can do me, you can do you, and as long as we do not breach the NAP, everything is fine.
I don’t think people ought to do drugs. They are terrible for your future and rob you of productivity. I don’t think that people are OBLIGATED to abstain, though. If they do drugs, they aren’t in breach of an obligation. They are doing something entirely morally neutral- as long as they don’t harm another person through their drug use.
I am a huge philanthropist. I do not do it because I feel an obligation. I do it because I want to see some causes advanced, not because I feel an obligation to do it. And the last thing I want is for someone to look at me and say, “Thank you for fulfilling your social obligation.” Fuck that! I gave above and beyond what I needed to. I don’t expect thanks, but I sure as hell don’t want someone telling me I was under some sort of obligation.
The requirement to internalize an individual’s mindset in order for a particular societal vision to work/succeed seems like the requirement dooms the philosophy.
You can’t change people beyond the age of 6 or so. And any philosophy that requires people to change can’t work. Gotta deal with people as they are and figure out how to get from there to the vision of how people generally interact with each other.
If that means some coercion to achieve a free society – well that’s better than a Fuck All Of You mindset that creates a pure Fuck All of You interaction with everyone.
I never thought that libertarianism really relied on a Fuck All of You mindset. I thought the most useless element of it was a whole bunch of Look at Me See How Free I Am mindset. But at least re the Mises crowd and this pandemic – I now believe that Fuck All of You is the core of the Rockwell/’Mises’ crowd.
This is the part that really galls me about collectivists is this notion that it is “selfish” to deny that we are “obligated” to give to charity.
Obligations are things we MUST do. They are debts we MUST pay. There is nothing selfless about doing what you already have to do. I see a difference between paying your restaurant bill and donating your time to Habitats for Humanity. The former is fulfilling an obligation YOU placed on yourself by incurring a debt. The latter is doing something YOU DIDN’T HAVE TO DO IN THE FIRST PLACE. That is why it is special, and that is why society ought to praise volunteers.
Turning charity into nothing more than a chore isn’t exactly selfish, but it is sure as hell lazy, and counter productive to a self-governing population.
I have done a lot of work with charities over the years. Libertarians have never been a significant part of any of them. Had they been part of any of that, then they would be credible re that. Many religious groups are very credible re that. Not libertarians. If they ever had been involved – anywhere – then libertarians would spend a ton of attention on things like AJ Nock’s ‘social power’ or deToqueville’s ‘civic associations’ or the other things that charities actually are. Where government actually gains power by filling the vacuum when those associations diminish.
You all are just full of bullshit aren’t you.
That still doesn’t make it an obligation, dumbshit. Libertarians are supposed to be more individualist, and charities are about collective support. Either way, the people working with them are doing so voluntarily, unless they’re crooks trying to work off a sentence through community service.
“Where government actually gains power by filling the vacuum when those associations diminish.”
Citations please. Last I checked, institutions like schools were doing quite well- not “diminished” or “vacuums”- when the government decided to come in and nationalize. Indeed, it was the success of catholic religious schools that was one of the main driving calls for government education- because the WASPs couldn’t stand that the Church was educating kids. They needed a a counter to that system and instead of ponying up their own money, they made the government do it.
“I have done a lot of work with charities over the years. Libertarians have never been a significant part of any of them.”
Sure you have JFree. Is that where you met your many, many dozens of nurses who all left to be traveling nurses? Are they all in Canada?
Even if I didn’t believe you were blowing smoke out your ass, this proves nothing. Libertarians represent like 5% of the population. I guarantee you that in any charity, you can find 1 or 2 out of 20 people who are actually libertarian. But you never tried, because you were too busy ascribing collectivist, generalized characteristics to everybody so you could make yourself feel important.
The requirement to internalize an individual’s mindset in order for a particular societal vision to work/succeed seems like the requirement dooms the philosophy.
You are right in a sense, I think pure anarcho-capitalism is as doomed as pure communism, because both make too many presuppositions on how an individual is “supposed” to behave.
“I think pure anarcho-capitalism is as doomed as pure communism, because both make too many presuppositions on how an individual is “supposed” to behave.”
I know this thread is dead, but this statement has been gnawing at me for the past day or so.
1) You don’t think this- you have accepted it in your heart of hearts.
2) This supposition will never be challenged if you don’t actually engage with people other than your Amen crew on team Left.
Only SleepyJoe can save us now.
No you ignorant cunt. You do not own me, you do not own my labor or health. I can see value in adding to the community without your marxist fat ass dictating it, and make no mistake you are dictating terms.
Is it?
Yes. Do collective rights overrule individual rights in your world?
But that decision to choose to volunteer, to choose to donate, to choose to help others, must come from somewhere. It cannot be nonexistent.
Religion. Embarce it.
Serving food and supplying shelter in no way puts my health at risk. Shooting up a mRNA shot with a Gain of Function chaser is but an experiment on humans. U can go ahead and trust the “experts” on the safety of such a shot. Experts that have a DIRECT connection to making millions off of the experiment. Me…. I’ll wait and see how many fools up and die from it first. Remember jackass…. If under 70 the CDC says u have a 99.97% chance of taking a good crap and moving on with life. So WHY r u such a scared little boy?
The Phucko Knows
The propaganda and fear porn are everywhere it seem. So much for Reason.
Are there a bunch of people here rationalizing their poor choices instead of thinking about the facts of the world self-interestedly? Don’t feel bad, you’re only human.
Sad the guy who takes it up the ass.
Well, God only sees it when it’s P in V.
In exchange for dinner with unattractive old men. Tony is a whore for many things.
What are you mewling about? I’ve had the Covid vaccine, and lot more others besides that.
Give it time pawn boy. Give it time.
The Phucko Knows
I will readily accept that vaccination makes hospitalization less likely if you admit that it does not prevent infection or transmission, making any passport scheme useless for the purposes of public health.
Well, I actually don’t accept the first premise without the caveat that it may diminish the odds of hospitalization from Covid; the original (believe it was Pfizer data) trials saw the vax group have an increase in overall illness vs placebo.
Soon the “vaccinated ” will start dying and we won’t need to have this argument anymore.
https://vaersanalysis.info
I’ll protect myself as I see fit, you should do the same. If I’m wrong the risks are on me as you’re vaccinated and axiomatically you should be immune from harm unless of course you’re lying about, well everything.
I bet you expect doctors and nurses to take care of you.
Fatties expect doctors and nurses to take care of them.
A lot of fatties’ last Facebook post is “I should have taken the vaccine.”
Cites?
To bad they didn’t see the reason to lose Wright.
The Phucko Knows
The guys who got AIDS through their own bad choices certainly did.
Ron promised us the jabs would be 100% effective at preventing hospitalizations and death, but now he has to twist the data to explain why it isn’t working. There is virtually no risk of death from regular covid and much less so from Omicron. Yet there are all sorts of dangerous and deadly side effects from these experimental jabs.
Ron never said any such thing.
Can you ever type something without flagrantly being full of shit?
And the CDC was claiming the shot couldn’t prevent transmission in early August, long before Omi was a thing.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/06/cdc_director_vaccines_no_longer_prevent_you_from_spreading_covid.html#!
If they want people to have faith in the vaccines, see them as safe and get them, then return all liability for damages to the manufacturers for any short or long term damage the vaccines do, retroactively to day one. Like every other vaccine.
Until then people will be skeptical.
“The hospitalization rate per million among unvaccinated people stands at 532.7; it’s 105.9 for folks vaccinated with at least two doses.”
Considering that prior infection is about as effective as vaccination, and maybe more than half of the unvaccinated have previously had some variant of Covid, the difference between the outcomes for the immunologically naive and those with immunity is about twice that big.
That’s the real dividing line: Not whether you’ve been vaccinated, whether you’ve got immunity.
It’s a rapidly mutating flulike virus. Immunity is an illusion.
Finally. A terse, interesting article containing some useful data. Well done!
Hmmm, yet data from the Government of Ontario says otherwise.
As of this morning, there were 1,868 people hospitalized (but not in ICU) with Covid, 76 percent of them injected.
It was approx. a 50/50 split of injected/un-injected in the ICU.
https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/hospitalizations
That tracks with what I thought. Knowing the rate of hospitalization and the rate of using the ICU only tells you the likelihood of using the ICU. In the numbers above, about 1 in 12 for the vaccinated and 1in 4 for the unvaccinated, so 3 times more likely to end up in the ICU if you are unvaccinated. Your numbers have 3 times as many vaccinated in the hospital but about even in the ICU.
What’s the hospitalization rate for folks taking ivermectin?
And they continue to ignore the elephant in the room.
Absolutely no mention of natural immunity or its rate of re-infection.
Finally, I found interesting and trustable data. W’ll protect ourself as We see fit. Everyone should work on himself to protect from virus . Very good information Thanks
I’m confused. We’re told that vaccination doesn’t prevent people from getting Covid, that the symptoms from the new variant are less severe than the original Covid virus. But we should still get vaccinated to reduce the symptoms and protect other people from the virus? Exactly how does that work? It sounds like the vaccination is neither reducing the symptoms, nor protecting other people.
why does RONALD BAILEY even speak?
RONALD BAILEY is a willingly ignorant buffoon.
They forgot to mention what percentage of the people “five times more likely” to be hospitalized are otherwise healthy individuals, not obese ect. Have we stopped talking about the fact that some people are still at near zero risk and should not be vaccinated? They are making erroneous generalizations when it comes to “risk assessment” For some people, the fact remains that the vaccines are more likely to harm them than the virus. But of course we still don’t know how safe the vaccines are in the long run, so there is no valid risk assessment and therefore there is no informed consent. Vaccine coercion is a war crime. Time to enforce the Nuremberg code.
Bailey quotes from “reports” which supposedly analyze scientific data, but he does not look behind the reported data to see what it is based on. He apparently does not realize that hospitals typically report Covid-positive tests on a patient counting as a Covid patient, even if the patient has mild or no symptoms. Hospitalized for a broken leg but test positive for Covid, with no symptoms, and you are a Covid patient taking up hospital space. Dishonest use of statistics presents a totally dishonest picture. If Bailey would learn to think for himself, rather than repeating what some “expert” says, he would be more useful. There are no experts, just people with opinions, none of whom have opinions that are entitled to be accepted on blind trust.
Hospitals don’t
Since day 1. I just love how Bailey keeps trotting out info that never seems to pan out.
Stop it. There is not a shread of science to any of this nonsense. All the ACTUAL science calls it all out as bullshit. U pawn boy… Believe in your Science-ism Religion. Everything u believe is based in that nonsense.
The Phucko Knows
No. 7 should be removed from that list. Coffee is a wonder drug and there is no such thing as “too much coffee.”
Remove number 3, they found out that smoking inhibits the wuflu
Take vitamin d
Step 10 is the most important step. Please.
Damn, what gave me away?
if it’s @body temp why not? caffeine infusion lol
He bailey remembers penning that.
But does his Philosophy degree help him with writing about how there is no science but The Science, and Fauci is its prophet?
Horseshit! If you need a therapeutic get one that has fewer side effects.
Well yeah. Propagandists don’t point out the party flaws. Ron is nothing but a leftist shill.
When it comes to comparing vaccinated vs unvaccinated, comparing hospitalization with the virus (rather than of) would dilute the measured effectiveness. Between that and the fact that the numbers aren’t age adjusted (the vaccinated population has more seniors who are the main ones at risk of hospitalization), it adds up to the vaccine is doing even better than those numbers make it appear, and boosting would appear to be unnecessary, particularly with the healthy non-senior population.
+1
He really doesn’t get it.
Smoking grass or fags?