Coronavirus thread

[Florestan]

I don't understand how you came to that conclusion. I wrote above about my own situation and my own need for protection, seen from a medical point of view. This has nothing with politics or conspiration theories to do. I don't think I would be particularly at risk of serious complications (which are very rare and mostly affects younger individuals) from the A-Z vaccine, but the vaccines act differently and the A-Z vaccine doesn't fill my need for protection from a medical point of view. Given my preexisting disease the A-Z vaccine is supposed to give me as well as no protection at all. So it would be waste to give me that vaccine. Read my post above once more - or twice if you still don't get it.

Got it now, thanks.

[prémont]

If you've had COVID then surely the T cells in your body were activated - yes?

Yes, but apparently not enough T-cell reaction to create much immunity.

I've always wondered about levels of immunity to various viruses being a result of the severity of the infection. When I was 23 I got a dose of the flu that came close to hospitalising me. (I probably should have been). Since then I have never had the flu (and rarely get colds) and I attribute it to the fact that the this bout of the flu was so strong it produced an extreme reaction from my immune system that has lasted 56 years.

No influenza vaccine have so far been made, which protects against all varieties of influenza vira and varieties to come, and given the fact that influenza vira mutate frequently, your argument doesn't hold true.

[prémont]

Is Britain sleepwalking into a highly controlled society, with Covid passports the thin end of the wedge?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/02/senior-tories-join-jeremy-corbyn-to-oppose-covid-passports-ahead-of-trials

Yes, good arguments, and also given the fact, that a corona passport only provides a false safety, we have every reason to be opposed to its introduction.

[MusicTurner]

A pass will certainly minimize risks in the spaces where it's required, no matter what, so that's one reason not to be against it ...

Among the precautions for making the pass more reliable, having already had Covid - with the assumption that some immunity has been gained - will only qualify for 12 weeks in the pass, here in DK.

Other qualifiers will of course be vaccines, or a recent test.

[prémont]

A pass will certainly minimize risks in the spaces where it's required, no matter what, so that's one reason not to be against it ...

Among the precautions for making the pass more reliable, having already had Covid - with the assumption that some immunity has been gained - will only qualify for 12 weeks in the pass, here in DK.

Other qualifiers will of course be vaccines, or a recent test.

What risks? The risk of being infected or the risk of infecting others?

Even if you are vaccinated you may all the same contract covid19 and infect others. And vaccinated individuals are supposed to exert a more risky behavior, making their chance of becoming infected higher.

So a corona passport isn't going to minimize the risk of infecting others sufficiently to ensure that vulnerable individuals (in principle all >50 years of age) aren't infected. And the only way to minimize the risk of getting seriously ill if you contract the disease, is to become vaccinated yourself. And you don't need a passport for that.

If you you have a negative test you may still infect others if you are infected yourself (false negative quick tests).

If you have a recent positive antibodies test it is presumed that you are not reinfected yet, so this may be the best test for corona passports. But the antibodies disappear with time - sometimes rather fast, so this test can't always be used.

[MusicTurner]

Reports are that vaccines reduce the risks of infecting others, it was reported even today as well. Needs further studies, but maybe up to 90%.

Tests can be inaccurate, but they are mostly correct, PCRs up to 95%.

So even if there's still a risk, it is significantly lowered. That's the whole point.

Besides, due to work, I've had to use public transport for 3 days with half a dozen of daily hours in metropolitan trains etc., and it was very umpleasant how corona fatigue and lack of control have made an increasing number of people irresponsible or downright provocative, say as regards wearing masks, keeping distance, approaching people and shouting etc. I did not feel safe. As a result, I've had to order another PCR, my 6th, on Sunday. With a lower infection rate due to the pass in certain public spaces, even such behaviour there would pose less of a risk.

Like it's been the case, I won't be taking public transport unless absolutely necessary, but with a pass, I'd be able to do some cultural activities, eating out, tourist accommodation and possibly travels abroad etc., in a safer environment. Obviously, also safer for people working there, if places are allowed/supposed to open to the public.

[71 dB]

What risks? The risk of being infected or the risk of infecting others?

Mainly the risk of being infected because you know others around are vaccinated.

Even if you are vaccinated you may all the same contract covid19 and infect others. And vaccinated individuals are supposed to exert a more risky behavior, making their chance of becoming infected higher.

It looks like the risk for vaccinated people infecting others is much lower. So we CAN take the risk and OPEN the damn society again! What's the point of getting vaccinated if the society can't be opened? We can't live like this forever. This damn pandemic has already lasted for too long.

So a corona passport isn't going to minimize the risk of infecting others sufficiently to ensure that vulnerable individuals (in principle all >50 years of age) aren't infected. And the only way to minimize the risk of getting seriously ill if you contract the disease, is to become vaccinated yourself. And you don't need a passport for that.

It is enough if we get the infection levels down so that the epidemic dies away. The World is not 100 % safe. You can get hit by a car or something. At some point the risks are low enough for the society to open and passports help in that.

If you you have a negative test you may still infect others if you are infected yourself (false negative quick tests).

Yes but probability is low. There will always be risks and danger even long after corona. The key is to keep those risks low.

[prémont]

Reports are that vaccines reduce the risks of infecting others, it was reported even today as well. Needs further studies, but maybe up to 90%.

This is much disputed by the experts. The present "evidence" is not sufficiently convincing.

Tests can be inaccurate, but they are mostly correct, PCRs up to 95%.

But it hasn't been mentioned that a corona passport specifically presupposes a PCR test, and besides it takes at least 24 hours (sometimes more) to get the answer, which makes the practical use of it more inconveinent.

So even if there's still a risk, it is significantly lowered. That's the whole point.

My point is, that the risk still is too large, particularly for people at risk not only to acquiring covid19 but also prone to a serious course if infected (I  am one of those persons).

.... I won't be taking public transport unless absolutely necessary, but with a pass, I'd be able to do some cultural activities, eating out, tourist accommodation and possibly travels abroad etc., ...

Your corona passport doesn't protect yourself as such against covid19, only if you got it because you were vaccinated, not if you just got a test. The decisive factor  is, that all your possible contacts have got a corona passport. In the same way as it is true for face masks.

[MusicTurner]

(...)
Your corona passport doesn't protect yourself as such against covid19, only if you got it because you were vaccinated, not if you just got a test. The decisive factor  is, that all your possible contacts have got a corona passport. In the same way as it is true for face masks.

Of course, we agree on that. And an environment where they all have it will give positive effect.

Btw, my doctor and hospital require testing before visiting them too. I understand that the situation can be different in the provinces regarding doctors, but I'm glad it's the case.

[DavidW]

Reports are that vaccines reduce the risks of infecting others, it was reported even today as well. Needs further studies, but maybe up to 90%.

That is not really the truth.  The clinical trials didn't assess that.  There is not evidence at this point, so even fully vaccinated people should still wear masks.  More research needs to be made.  See here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/health/coronavirus-vaccine-walensky.html

I think Walensky by now has probably learned the danger of quoting statistics out of context on public channels.  And this time it is very dangerous because if people stop wearing masks things can go south very quickly.

[MusicTurner]

That is not really the truth.  The clinical trials didn't assess that.  There is not evidence at this point, so even fully vaccinated people should still wear masks.  More research needs to be made.  See here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/health/coronavirus-vaccine-walensky.html

I think Walensky by now has probably learned the danger of quoting statistics out of context on public channels.  And this time it is very dangerous because if people stop wearing masks things can go south very quickly.

I'm pro masks, of course, also after vaccines, until the pressure is off.

[prémont]

Mainly the risk of being infected because you know others around are vaccinated.

It looks like the risk for vaccinated people infecting others is much lower. So we CAN take the risk and OPEN the damn society again! What's the point of getting vaccinated if the society can't be opened? We can't live like this forever. This damn pandemic has already lasted for too long.

It is enough if we get the infection levels down so that the epidemic dies away. The World is not 100 % safe. You can get hit by a car or something. At some point the risks are low enough for the society to open and passports help in that.
Yes but probability is low. There will always be risks and danger even long after corona. The key is to keep those risks low.

I agree with most of this  above, but my starting point for this discussion was the question of the need to introduce a corona passport. I think the passport still provides a false sense of security, especially for the particularly vulnerable like me. The crucial things will for a long time to come still be distance and hand hygiene and so on, and one can fear that the passport will make people who think they are not at risk relax on these precautions. which is a paradox, because with these precautions we first and foremost protect the others and in return expect the others to protect us by the same precautions. 


Finally, I believe that the corona passport will lead to unwanted forms of discrimination in society

[DavidW]

I'm pro masks, of course, also after vaccines, until the pressure is off.

Oh I didn't assume you had an agenda.  My main concern is that people feeling safe (and not even from Walensky) 2 weeks after the last shot will just wearing masks, and then people with covid fatigue will also follow suit before they are even fully vaccinated and next thing we know the pandemic is raging out of control again.  And I'm saying this because I am feeling the fatigue.  Everyone wants to return back to normal now.

[MusicTurner]

That is not really the truth.  The clinical trials didn't assess that.  There is not evidence at this point, so even fully vaccinated people should still wear masks.  More research needs to be made.  See here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/health/coronavirus-vaccine-walensky.html

I think Walensky by now has probably learned the danger of quoting statistics out of context on public channels.  And this time it is very dangerous because if people stop wearing masks things can go south very quickly.

There is evidence, but it's being disagreed upon how final it is. There are other sources finding it likely convincing. Of course, authorities don't want people to become too relaxed in their attitude. We'll see more results in the coming months.

[prémont]

Of course, we agree on that. And an environment where they all have it will give positive effect.

But so far you can get a corona passport just after a quick test - and as far as I understand this will be the case (hope I am wrong) - there will be an infinitesimally small positive effect.

Btw, my doctor and hospital require testing before visiting them too. I understand that the situation can be different in the provinces regarding doctors, but I'm glad it's the case.

This is the case (PCR test) at many hospitals in the province. But then discrimination already shows up. Because the patient has no right to see if the staff has been tested and when. Also in small shops e.g. hairdressers, which are to open soon. The hairdresser may demand a fresh test from the costumer, but what about the hairdresser's test?

[MusicTurner]

But so far you can get a corona passport just after a quick test - and as far as I understand this will be the case (hope I am wrong) - there will be an infinitesimally small positive effect.
This is the case (PCR test) at many hospitals in the province. But then discrimination already shows up. Because the patient has no right to see if the staff has been tested and when. Also in small shops e.g. hairdressers, which are to open soon. The hairdresser may demand a fresh test from the costumer, but what about the hairdresser's test?

I agree that the quick test allowance represents a loosening up of demands, but I disagree that it reduces the effect to almost nothing.

There's a certain frequency among hospital staff for tests, obviously. That the hairdresser's customers are tested, does introduce an element of security. As regards the hairdressers themselves, I think there's mainly just a general recommendation for frequent testing, even several ones weekly, from the authorities, like for all people on the labour market. Some hairdressers might choose to present their recent tests in public to customers, though it may be few, at least for a start.

[DavidW]

I don't know about all of you but this second shot kicks like a mule.

[prémont]

I agree that the quick test allowance represents a loosening up of demands, but I disagree that it reduces the effect to almost nothing.

One of the weak points of a corona pass is that it is primarily required in places where many people are gathered, and in such a place only one single person with active covid 19 will be able to cause great spread of the virus. Of course, the probability of the presence of a sick person is somewhat less, but only one is enough, and for that reason it is dangerous to rely on a general probability calculation regarding the infection. The people with risky behavior are the ones who are most likely to get the virus and also the ones who are most likely to infect others.

[prémont]

I don't know about all of you but this second shot kicks like a mule.

Congratulations  , you probably have a good immune response from the vaccine.

[Stürmisch Bewegt]

I don't know about all of you but this second shot kicks like a mule.

How so, DavidW?  I rec'd mine yesterday AM, and upper arm hurts real bad still, perhaps a slight rise in temp. last night (I didn't measure it to be sure, but strongly suspected).  Certainly felt warm on a chilly night and also, very, very tired.