Why did you link to the above? I assume that you disagree with it. Certainly it doesn't apply to Delta given that the article is from May. So nobody can use it to justify vaccine mandates and I'm sure that you agree.
Knock yourself out…Where are you getting those efficacy rates from?
Correction….as your source indicates, vaccination slows the rate of transmission.This is an example of what happens when we are told what to think! Why are unvaccinated people a threat to vaccinated people? Are we talking about maybe threats, probable threats, or possible threats? Are we not just making the assumption, that unvaccinated people, IF INFECTED, will be MORE symptomatic than those vaccinated? This is a blatant fallacy. Especially since it is ONLY the condition of the immune system, that determines just how symptomatic you will be. NOT whether we are vaccinated or not!! I thought that the only people who are a threat to anyone, were only those infected with Covid-19. Period! So again how does vaccinated and unvaccinated people pose a threat to each other??
Both groups can, and do go through the same symptomatic and asymptomatic stages when infected. Both groups can, and do catch the disease. Both groups can, and do recover or die from the disease. Both groups can, and do spread or transmit the disease. And, both groups can, and do develop immunity to the disease.
Unless we are referring to the term "immunity" in the legal sense(protection and exemption), PROTECTION/PREVENTION does not apply in the biological/specific sense. NO VACCINE IN THE WORLD CAN PROTECT/PREVENT YOU FROM BEING INFECTED, TRANSMITTING, OR DYING FROM ANY INFECTION!! NONE! Holding your breath may also provide some small level of protection. So "protection is too vague a term. Also "significant" is another vague term, that could mean different things to different people.
"Immunity" simply means that the body has acquired the ability to resist anything that didn't come with it, or is trying to attack it. As far as studies showing decreased transmission rates, here are some more facts for you to deny and dismiss. Using more semantics or questions.
The ONLY purpose of vaccines is to prevent people from getting really sick with a viral infection. Vaccines trick(by different means) our immune system into producing antibodies to fight against a fake pathogen/antigen. So that when the real pathogen/antigen enter the body, these antibodies will respond sooner(since they are already in the bloodstream). I call this acquired immune ability, "increased spontaneity". But if your immune system is fucked or otherwise compromised, it doesn't matter how soon the system can respond!
What ignorant and gullible people fail to understand, is that as long as you breathe air, you can catch this virus. Nothing can prevent this. Unless, you live at the bottom of the ocean, in a self-contained suit. Or, that vaccine-induced antibodies are ONLY specific to ONE pathogen/antigen. Which will leave fewer of our normal broad-spectral antibodies to fight against all other pathogens that attack.
Vaccine mandates are only based on getting the best returns out of the government's drug company investments. The more men, women, children, and pets that are forced to get vaccinated, the more profits are to be made.
Sit. Stay. Good Boy.
Because it is relevant to your question. And the studies demonstrate that there IS certainly a shred of evidence that supports, that vaccines can reduce viral transmission. Why else would I post this article?Why did you link to the above?
This is your major problem. Making assumptions and just assuming everything else. Whether I agree or disagree is irrelevant. These are simply the results of the studies. Are these studies all wrong? Are their results, simply NOT significant enough for you? So why do you think there is no evidence that will show that vaccines don't significantly reduce viral transmissions? Or, is it only the absence of proof, that is your proof?I assume that you disagree with it.
Did you just change the goal posts again? Weren't we only talking about the transmission of Covid-19? Why did you mention the Delta strain?Certainly it doesn't apply to Delta given that the article is from May.
I agree that there is NO JUSTIFICATION FOR VACCINE MANDATES, PERIOD!!So nobody can use it to justify vaccine mandates and I'm sure that you agree.
"People who had two doses of Comirnaty were about 95 per cent less likely to get symptomatic COVID-19 than people who did not get the vaccine." www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021/08/covid-19-vaccination-information-on-covid-19-pfizer-comirnaty-vaccine.pdf
What is the title of your post?? Where is the Delta strain mentioned in the title? We WERE only talking about the transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus! We were only talking about the current vaccine for Covid-19! Who was talking about the studies being down on the Delta strain? Or, was comparing the Delta strain to the normal strain? NO ONE!Because Delta is the predominant strain. Studies on Delta do not have the same findings.
Yeah, which includes Delta. My point is that if the vaccines do not significantly protect against infection/transmission of all of the possible variants, then vaccine mandates are not justified.What is the title of your post?? Where is the Delta strain mentioned in the title? We WERE only talking about the transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus!
Yeah, which includes Delta. My point is that if the vaccines do not significantly protect against infection/transmission of all of the possible variants, then vaccine mandates are not justified.
I agree that EVEN IF these vaccines were 100% effective against transmission that it would STILL not justify a vaccine mandate. However, what I am doing is challenging those who justify vaccine mandates on the false basis that it very much protects people from the unvaccinated - something that both you and I know is absolute bullshit!From a social and human perspective, I would have thought that our individual rights to make an informed choice, of what goes into our bodies, would be enough to stop vaccine mandates!! NOT WHETHER WE CAN PROVE IF THESE VACCINES ARE 100% EFFECTIVE AGAINST THIS PATHOGEN(L-variant), ANY OTHER VARIANT, OR ANY OTHER PATHOGEN KNOWN AND UNKNOWN TO MANKIND!!
No mandate anywhere in Australia? Are you actually being serious?oh my gosh so much drama over a mandate that no one has mandated
COVID tablets?relax, in another month or so they'll approve the covid tablets, and then the vaccine will become irrelevant for most people except the elderly and the immuno compromised