Everton game off

[sacreblueits442]

On 16/12/2021 at 18:53, Chocolate Teapot said:

What a ridiculous post. What happens if you're all triple jabbed? We just sit around waiting for the end of time do we?

.. it is about the amount of bodies passing this around!!!

  The fact that it is airborne and can be transferred by surface contact makes it a big gamble to put yourselves in that situation. How many people in public toilets wash their hands, that percentage will be a lot lower that you think or want it to be.

[sacreblueits442]

21 hours ago, Fox92 said:

Smoking. A choice. Effects the smoker and also other non-smokers in society via passive smoking. You think smokers should then get no treatment when they get ill from it?

....we are all entitled to "free" medical treatment (the majority of us do or have paid national insurance)!!!

   Smokers are as entitled to treatment as anyone else, but you can see the problem  where a product showing harrowing photographs depicting illnesses which stems from its use, and people continue to use it on a daily basis. 

   The problem goes much deeper in respect of legalised drugs use and the revenues which flows into the Governments coffers.

  The big question would be what is stopping people from having the vaccine, is it down to religious beliefs, ignorance or the fear surrounding issues that have become associated with having the vaccine. 

Edited 20 December 2021 by sacreblueits442

[shade]

On 19/12/2021 at 17:28, sheffield_fox said:

It's a good example actually, as there is fair accountability for the reckless damage caused in that situation.

 

Where's the accountability for wilfully unvaccinated people recklessly endangering those around them?

This narrative has to stop, it has to. The government's own statistics show that per 100,000 of the population you are MORE likely to get infected with covid if you are vaccinated than unvaccinated. You also carry the same viral load if you are unvaccinated or vaccinated.

 

The idea that you are helping any other member of society by being vaccinated is a fallacy. You're less likely to be hospitalised, but even that isn't emphatically different. Approximately 65% of hospitalisations are amongst the vaccinated population.

 

You can verify everything I've said by looking at the report the UK government puts out every 4 weeks.

 

[Grebfromgrebland]

38 minutes ago, shade said:

This narrative has to stop, it has to. The government's own statistics show that per 100,000 of the population you are MORE likely to get infected with covid if you are vaccinated than unvaccinated. You also carry the same viral load if you are unvaccinated or vaccinated.

 

The idea that you are helping any other member of society by being vaccinated is a fallacy. You're less likely to be hospitalised, but even that isn't emphatically different. Approximately 65% of hospitalisations are amongst the vaccinated population.

 

You can verify everything I've said by looking at the report the UK government puts out every 4 weeks.

 

Yes but what about those that suffer severe complications and need ICU treatment?

 

You've missed that bit out which is probably the bit.

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

43 minutes ago, shade said:

This narrative has to stop, it has to. The government's own statistics show that per 100,000 of the population you are MORE likely to get infected with covid if you are vaccinated than unvaccinated. You also carry the same viral load if you are unvaccinated or vaccinated.

 

The idea that you are helping any other member of society by being vaccinated is a fallacy. You're less likely to be hospitalised, but even that isn't emphatically different. Approximately 65% of hospitalisations are amongst the vaccinated population.

 

You can verify everything I've said by looking at the report the UK government puts out every 4 weeks.

 

The statistics do not show you are more likely to get covid. More are vaccinated than not, hence why the more vaccinated people are getting covid. You cannot verify anything you just said.

[Harpenden Fox]

On 19/12/2021 at 15:44, TrickyTrev Benjamin said:

For the people saying if you don’t get vaccinated then you should pay for treatment. Are you actually insane ?! I’m double jabbed because it’s was my was choice however people who pay taxes and national insurance their whole life. Why in the hell should they pay for treatment? Shall we refund them for all the money they’ve paid in tax ? Some people have actually gone fully insane. Also to Cyprus fox who said something along the lines of anyone who contacts a-severe dose of omricon. Has anybody in the world contracted a a severe dose of omricon ? Like you’re just making things up to suit your argument. So far it’s been very mild and that’s fact. 

You do know that people are dying from the Omicron variant, right?

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, shade said:

This narrative has to stop, it has to. The government's own statistics show that per 100,000 of the population you are MORE likely to get infected with covid if you are vaccinated than unvaccinated. You also carry the same viral load if you are unvaccinated or vaccinated.

 

The idea that you are helping any other member of society by being vaccinated is a fallacy. You're less likely to be hospitalised, but even that isn't emphatically different. Approximately 65% of hospitalisations are amongst the vaccinated population.

 

You can verify everything I've said by looking at the report the UK government puts out every 4 weeks.

 

You’re not a mathematician are you ????

[Nod.E]

5 hours ago, shade said:

This narrative has to stop, it has to. The government's own statistics show that per 100,000 of the population you are MORE likely to get infected with covid if you are vaccinated than unvaccinated. You also carry the same viral load if you are unvaccinated or vaccinated.

 

The idea that you are helping any other member of society by being vaccinated is a fallacy. You're less likely to be hospitalised, but even that isn't emphatically different. Approximately 65% of hospitalisations are amongst the vaccinated population.

 

You can verify everything I've said by looking at the report the UK government puts out every 4 weeks.

 

WITH Covid though, right? I'm sure you'll have made the point before that those dying or being hospitalised with Covid just happen to have it, not being stricken with it. It's a point I've made as a restriction-sceptic observer and something I've heard many with your point of view make. 

 

But you can't have it both ways. With that being the case, the overly-vaccinated elderly are obviously going to account for a large chunk of the hospital presence. It's inevitable, they're the weakest in society.

 

So let's put them to one side for a second, shall we, and dive into the numbers. 

 

"For adults under 50, whilst the numbers admitted to hospital are lower, an unvaccinated individual is more than 10 times as likely to need hospitalisation from COVID-19."

 

"64% of adult COVID 19 inpatients aged under 50 are unvaccinated." 

 

64% obviously represents 'most' even without the context of the over-represented nature of the unvaccinated here, given many more people are vaccinated than are not.

 

This is direct from the horse's mouth. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/vaccination-status-of-deaths-and-hospitalisations

 

Granted, it's Northern Ireland data. No idea why this data is as difficult as it is to access and if this study has been replicated for England. It'll show the same thing of course, but it doesn't help to fend off the anti vaxxers when this data isn't openly available (maybe it is) and readily so (definitely isn't.) 

 

I can't speak to infection as I'm not well read enough on the subject.

 

One thing is there in black and white, clear as day and for all to see, though. The unvaccinated are causing undue stress on the health service. If more people got vaccinated, the health service wouldn't be nearly as stretched as it is and will become. If the health service wasn't as stretched, we wouldn't be looking at restrictions in January.

 

If my elderly relatives need care that they can't get and die early as a result of a stretched NHS, I'll be blaming anti-vaxxers. And years of NHS underfunding. 

 

When (yes when) I'm sat stuck inside with nothing to do (because we've been locked down again) on a cold, depressing January night, I'll blame anti-vaxxers.

 

I can't figure out if they're just willfully disobedient purely for the sake of having something to stand by and to live for. Like a sudden, unexpected sense of purpose injected into an otherwise meaningless life. Perhaps it isn't that and it's just pure stupidity? Or maybe, just maybe, they're just scared of needles? 

 

Whatever it is, I despise them. This from someone who has been anti-restriction the whole way through. They are what are stopping us getting out of this, and yet are doing so in the name of freedom. You couldn't make it up.

 

 

Fag packet maths...

 

20% of those aged 10+ haven't had a second jab.

 

20% of 10+ UK pop = 12.24m

 

152.8 - 39 = 113.8 (Rate per 100k at which non vaxxed will be hospitalised above vaccinated average.)

 

122.4 *  113.8 = 13,929 additional hospitalisations over the course of winter from Covid of non vaccinated that could have been prevented with a vaccine.

 

Understand that's without taking age skews into account so it isn't perfect, but on the flip side that data only runs to 5th of December so doesn't factor in the Omicron effect of many, many more cases. Looks like it's more mild than Delta, but the high volumes of numbers mean that additional 14k needless admissions is likely to be well off the mark. Who knows by how much. If it's say double, then we're looking at 28k hospital admissions over winter from unvaccinated that could be avoided. 

 

For context we have 7,482 in hospital right now, so while my numbers are approximate, it is plain and simple not up for debate that the unvaccinated are going to limit our freedom. Not Blair. Not Bill Gates. Not the left. The unvaccinated.

Edited 21 December 2021 by Nod.E
Grammar

[PhillippaT]

5 hours ago, shade said:

This narrative has to stop, it has to. The government's own statistics show that per 100,000 of the population you are MORE likely to get infected with covid if you are vaccinated than unvaccinated. You also carry the same viral load if you are unvaccinated or vaccinated.

 

The idea that you are helping any other member of society by being vaccinated is a fallacy. You're less likely to be hospitalised, but even that isn't emphatically different. Approximately 65% of hospitalisations are amongst the vaccinated population.

 

You can verify everything I've said by looking at the report the UK government puts out every 4 weeks.

 

https://theconversation.com/no-vaccinated-people-are-not-just-as-infectious-as-unvaccinated-people-if-they-get-covid-171302

[Bryn]

6 hours ago, shade said:

This narrative has to stop, it has to. The government's own statistics show that per 100,000 of the population you are MORE likely to get infected with covid if you are vaccinated than unvaccinated. You also carry the same viral load if you are unvaccinated or vaccinated.

 

The idea that you are helping any other member of society by being vaccinated is a fallacy. You're less likely to be hospitalised, but even that isn't emphatically different. Approximately 65% of hospitalisations are amongst the vaccinated population.

 

You can verify everything I've said by looking at the report the UK government puts out every 4 weeks.

 

Edited 21 December 2021 by Bryn

[shade]

9 hours ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

The statistics do not show you are more likely to get covid. More are vaccinated than not, hence why the more vaccinated people are getting covid. You cannot verify anything you just said.

This is why people should actually do some research instead of blindly believing everything they are told.

 

The governments own statistics are very kindly broken down in to per 100,000 of the population for us, in almost every single age bracket, you are more likely to have covid if you are vaccinated.

 

I know many of you will jump in with "but they're more likely to mix, more likely to get tested" but you'll need to provide evidence for that. If we were just making unsupported statements I could equally claim that the vaccine may be damaging the natural immune response to infection, without evidence.

 

[shade]

5 hours ago, Nod.E said:

WITH Covid though, right? I'm sure you'll have made the point before that those dying or being hospitalised with Covid just happen to have it, not being stricken with it. It's a point I've made as a restriction-sceptic observer and something I've heard many with your point of view make. 

 

But you can't have it both ways. With that being the case, the overly-vaccinated elderly are obviously going to account for a large chunk of the hospital presence. It's inevitable, they're the weakest in society.

 

So let's put them to one side for a second, shall we, and dive into the numbers. 

 

"For adults under 50, whilst the numbers admitted to hospital are lower, an unvaccinated individual is more than 10 times as likely to need hospitalisation from COVID-19."

 

"64% of adult COVID 19 inpatients aged under 50 are unvaccinated." 

 

64% obviously represents 'most' even without the context of the over-represented nature of the unvaccinated here, given many more people are vaccinated than are not.

 

This is direct from the horse's mouth. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/vaccination-status-of-deaths-and-hospitalisations

 

Granted, it's Northern Ireland data. No idea why this data is as difficult as it is to access and if this study has been replicated for England. It'll show the same thing of course, but it doesn't help to fend off the anti vaxxers when this data isn't openly available (maybe it is) and readily so (definitely isn't.) 

 

I can't speak to infection as I'm not well read enough on the subject.

 

One thing is there in black and white, clear as day and for all to see, though. The unvaccinated are causing undue stress on the health service. If more people got vaccinated, the health service wouldn't be nearly as stretched as it is and will become. If the health service wasn't as stretched, we wouldn't be looking at restrictions in January.

 

If my elderly relatives need care that they can't get and die early as a result of a stretched NHS, I'll be blaming anti-vaxxers. And years of NHS underfunding. 

 

When (yes when) I'm sat stuck inside with nothing to do (because we've been locked down again) on a cold, depressing January night, I'll blame anti-vaxxers.

 

I can't figure out if they're just willfully disobedient purely for the sake of having something to stand by and to live for. Like a sudden, unexpected sense of purpose injected into an otherwise meaningless life. Perhaps it isn't that and it's just pure stupidity? Or maybe, just maybe, they're just scared of needles? 

 

Whatever it is, I despise them. This from someone who has been anti-restriction the whole way through. They are what are stopping us getting out of this, and yet are doing so in the name of freedom. You couldn't make it up.

 

 

Fag packet maths...

 

20% of those aged 10+ haven't had a second jab.

 

20% of 10+ UK pop = 12.24m

 

152.8 - 39 = 113.8 (Rate per 100k at which non vaxxed will be hospitalised above vaccinated average.)

 

122.4 *  113.8 = 13,929 additional hospitalisations over the course of winter from Covid of non vaccinated that could have been prevented with a vaccine.

 

Understand that's without taking age skews into account so it isn't perfect, but on the flip side that data only runs to 5th of December so doesn't factor in the Omicron effect of many, many more cases. Looks like it's more mild than Delta, but the high volumes of numbers mean that additional 14k needless admissions is likely to be well off the mark. Who knows by how much. If it's say double, then we're looking at 28k hospital admissions over winter from unvaccinated that could be avoided. 

 

For context we have 7,482 in hospital right now, so while my numbers are approximate, it is plain and simple not up for debate that the unvaccinated are going to limit our freedom. Not Blair. Not Bill Gates. Not the left. The unvaccinated.

brother, can you do fag packet maths on this, whilst unvaccinated are indeed over represented, it's hardly a damning indictment of them or even a blazing success for vaccine efficacy?

 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

40 minutes ago, shade said:

This is why people should actually do some research instead of blindly believing everything they are told.

 

The governments own statistics are very kindly broken down in to per 100,000 of the population for us, in almost every single age bracket, you are more likely to have covid if you are vaccinated.

 

I know many of you will jump in with "but they're more likely to mix, more likely to get tested" but you'll need to provide evidence for that. If we were just making unsupported statements I could equally claim that the vaccine may be damaging the natural immune response to infection, without evidence.

 

So you can provide some stats which demonstrate a mixed approach and no context on the severity of cases or nuance of the actual numbers involved (despite 9 out of 10 adults being fully vaccinated here) but anything you don't like to hear requires solid evidence?

Edited 21 December 2021 by Chocolate Teapot

[shade]

1 minute ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

So you can provide some stats which demonstrate a mixed approach and no context on the severity of cases or nuance of the actual numbers involved (despite 9 out of 10 adults being fully vaccinated here) but anything you don't like to hear requires solid evidence?

No, my man, it's irrelevant how many are vaccinated or not, it's broken down in to per 100,000 of that subset.

 

per 100,000 vaccinated aged 40-49, X have covid.

 

per 100,000 unvaccinated aged 40-49, X have covid.

 

Yes I'm aware that it doesn't give evidence of severity of infection, it's just an exercise in critical thinking.

 

In my age bracket 40-49 sadly, approximately 75% are vaccinated, but they make up just under 50% of hospital admissions, so yes, it's somewhat effective at stopping serious illness but not effective enough for me to get vaccinated on the balance of risk/outcome.

[LibertyFox]

Why am I reading this drivel in what is supposed to be a football thread? 

 

Step 1. Get Vaccinated

Step 2. Mods, close thread please

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

13 minutes ago, shade said:

Yes I'm aware that it doesn't give evidence of severity of infection, it's just an exercise in critical thinking.

Firstly you're comparing vastly different sample sizes and behaviours. Secondly, there are certain groups which disprove your hypothesis. Lastly, you're comparing it in a 4 week sample size and taking the information to suit your position and then taking to the Internet to make a point which makes out you're very clever.

 

It's an exercise in spreading misinformation without any context or actual analysis of the information but if it makes you feel clever then go crazy.

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

Just now, LibertyFox said:

Why am I reading this drivel in what is supposed to be a football thread? 

 

Step 1. Get Vaccinated

Step 2. Mods, close thread please

Because one bright spark keeps going into every thread and saying the same stats, presumably because his wife has stopped talking to him so he needs to tell someone.

[shade]

8 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Firstly you're comparing vastly different sample sizes and behaviours. Secondly, there are certain groups which disprove your hypothesis. Lastly, you're comparing it in a 4 week sample size and taking the information to suit your position and then taking to the Internet to make a point which makes out you're very clever.

 

It's an exercise in spreading misinformation without any context or actual analysis of the information but if it makes you feel clever then go crazy.

it's the same for every single week, look at every report, but I would expect any dissent to be stifled to be honest, certain things aren't even up for debate. That's the modern world unfortunately. 

 

the joke about my wife not listening was actually quite funny though, fair play.

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

13 minutes ago, shade said:

it's the same for every single week, look at every report, but I would expect any dissent to be stifled to be honest, certain things aren't even up for debate. That's the modern world unfortunately. 

 

the joke about my wife not listening was actually quite funny though, fair play.

How are things not up for debate? What you can't do in the 'modern world', as you describe it is take a view based on an incredibly small group of data in a point of time, post in every thread on a football forum and expect not to be questioned on it as people are a bit fed up of people spouting bullshit. 

Edited 21 December 2021 by Chocolate Teapot

[shade]

3 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

How are things not up for debate? What you can't do in the 'modern world, as you describe it is take a view based on an incredibly small group of data in a point of time, post in every thread on a football forum and expect not to be questioned on it as people are a bit fed up of people spouting bullshit. 

Mate, this thread had descended in to vaccine related madness long before I entered the fray, just go and look at the previous page. I think I've only posted in two threads anything related to the vaccine in the years I've been on this forum, you can can check my posting history.

 

The data isn't small  it's the governments figures for the whole country, it's massive data, yes it's a point in time but it's the same for every single point in time. I was just trying to add some facts and context to the debate instead of hysteria and hyperbole.

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

1 minute ago, shade said:

I was just trying to add some facts and context to the debate instead of hysteria and hyperbole.

Really?

[shade]

Just now, Chocolate Teapot said:

Really?

Yes, debate about the vaccines efficacy and safety shouldn't be shut down if it's based on real world data, not facebook conspiracies about microchips. I'm not an anti vaxxer, myself and my young children have had all necessary vaccines.

[CyprusFox]

7 hours ago, Nod.E said:

WITH Covid though, right? I'm sure you'll have made the point before that those dying or being hospitalised with Covid just happen to have it, not being stricken with it. It's a point I've made as a restriction-sceptic observer and something I've heard many with your point of view make. 

 

But you can't have it both ways. With that being the case, the overly-vaccinated elderly are obviously going to account for a large chunk of the hospital presence. It's inevitable, they're the weakest in society.

 

So let's put them to one side for a second, shall we, and dive into the numbers. 

 

"For adults under 50, whilst the numbers admitted to hospital are lower, an unvaccinated individual is more than 10 times as likely to need hospitalisation from COVID-19."

 

"64% of adult COVID 19 inpatients aged under 50 are unvaccinated." 

 

64% obviously represents 'most' even without the context of the over-represented nature of the unvaccinated here, given many more people are vaccinated than are not.

 

This is direct from the horse's mouth. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/vaccination-status-of-deaths-and-hospitalisations

 

Granted, it's Northern Ireland data. No idea why this data is as difficult as it is to access and if this study has been replicated for England. It'll show the same thing of course, but it doesn't help to fend off the anti vaxxers when this data isn't openly available (maybe it is) and readily so (definitely isn't.) 

 

I can't speak to infection as I'm not well read enough on the subject.

 

One thing is there in black and white, clear as day and for all to see, though. The unvaccinated are causing undue stress on the health service. If more people got vaccinated, the health service wouldn't be nearly as stretched as it is and will become. If the health service wasn't as stretched, we wouldn't be looking at restrictions in January.

 

If my elderly relatives need care that they can't get and die early as a result of a stretched NHS, I'll be blaming anti-vaxxers. And years of NHS underfunding. 

 

When (yes when) I'm sat stuck inside with nothing to do (because we've been locked down again) on a cold, depressing January night, I'll blame anti-vaxxers.

 

I can't figure out if they're just willfully disobedient purely for the sake of having something to stand by and to live for. Like a sudden, unexpected sense of purpose injected into an otherwise meaningless life. Perhaps it isn't that and it's just pure stupidity? Or maybe, just maybe, they're just scared of needles? 

 

Whatever it is, I despise them. This from someone who has been anti-restriction the whole way through. They are what are stopping us getting out of this, and yet are doing so in the name of freedom. You couldn't make it up.

 

 

Fag packet maths...

 

20% of those aged 10+ haven't had a second jab.

 

20% of 10+ UK pop = 12.24m

 

152.8 - 39 = 113.8 (Rate per 100k at which non vaxxed will be hospitalised above vaccinated average.)

 

122.4 *  113.8 = 13,929 additional hospitalisations over the course of winter from Covid of non vaccinated that could have been prevented with a vaccine.

 

Understand that's without taking age skews into account so it isn't perfect, but on the flip side that data only runs to 5th of December so doesn't factor in the Omicron effect of many, many more cases. Looks like it's more mild than Delta, but the high volumes of numbers mean that additional 14k needless admissions is likely to be well off the mark. Who knows by how much. If it's say double, then we're looking at 28k hospital admissions over winter from unvaccinated that could be avoided. 

 

For context we have 7,482 in hospital right now, so while my numbers are approximate, it is plain and simple not up for debate that the unvaccinated are going to limit our freedom. Not Blair. Not Bill Gates. Not the left. The unvaccinated.

100% this. Keep the great unvaccinated out of the public domain and out of hospital. 

[Nod.E]

54 minutes ago, shade said:

No, my man, it's irrelevant how many are vaccinated or not, it's broken down in to per 100,000 of that subset.

 

per 100,000 vaccinated aged 40-49, X have covid.

 

per 100,000 unvaccinated aged 40-49, X have covid.

 

Yes I'm aware that it doesn't give evidence of severity of infection, it's just an exercise in critical thinking.

 

In my age bracket 40-49 sadly, approximately 75% are vaccinated, but they make up just under 50% of hospital admissions, so yes, it's somewhat effective at stopping serious illness but not effective enough for me to get vaccinated on the balance of risk/outcome.

What are the risks, then, 'my man'? Demonstrate, using numbers, how these risks outweigh the risks associated with Covid hospitalisation. 

 

Try using the latest data if you can this time, won't you?

Edited 21 December 2021 by Nod.E

[shade]

19 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

What are the risks, then, 'my man'? Demonstrate, using numbers, how these risks outweigh the risks associated with Covid hospitalisation. 

 

Try using the latest data if you can this time, won't you?

The risks from covid definitely outweigh the known risks from the vaccine, even in the younger population.  As a 40 year old, perfect BMI, non smoker, active and handsome man that takes good care of himself I made my personal choice, I currently have covid and I feel like my choice was definitely right for me.