CV and mad panic behaviour

[ElwoodBlues1]

I just wonder when people understand the new public health and well-being act or pandemic management plan has a huge effect on how we will live in 2022. It has been passed in the lower house, and will be up for grabs in the upper house 16th to 18th of this month. The new PHW Act 2021. 100 plus pages. Please read every page. Ignore 80% full vaccinated population. 90% population. 95% population vaccinated. We have been sold a certain level of vaccinated population of Victorians giving us a chance to live with a virus that can’t be held to zero levels. Like the old influenzas of past, it can’t be removed from the planet of the earth because it evolves. It mutates to exist. We will open up he flood gates by Dan Andrews promises. It won’t happen properly. He will allow 80,000 people at the Boxing Day test on day one. He will allow Christmas to exist as normal as possible for all to experience. I fear what this Pandemic Management bill will see for us all in 2022. I fear the worst. Not for me. I am an old Kent that could drop off the earth tomorrow and feelI have lived a life of freedom and fun for many years. So many fun years that I feel blessed. $20,909 fines for not wearing a mask. $90,000 for forgetting to check in a shop with QR codes. 2 years jail time for either, both or worse? Dan forgot his mask once. He paid a $400 fine. He announced it for all to hear on TV. Where does this new bill help see us in the future? It ignores the judicial system because it is a pandemic management plan. It has a special panel to set your complaints to a group to complain to. A selected panel that the Premier of the state has selected as an independent group. How independent is that?

I am not a pro Liberal party Victorian. I just need to hear and see what is real. Not the hidden fact that more than 13 teenagers have been diagnosed with Myocarditis after a vaccine in South Australia. Hard to see this as a once in a million case by studies. Not to forget those above that age that add to these statistics. I am not an anti-vaxer. I have been jabbed or I would have lost my job. My daughter which I love with all my heart tells me the figures stated in the media are not what she can see in her every day life at work. She is a nurse at the biggest hospital in Victoria. We are all fecked. Dan Andrews has screwed us all. The media tells us very little. If I have said something that states I can’t contribute to this site again, then I will say good bye and thanks for having me here. We are in big trouble next year and you heard first femme here.

Your daughter sees what my daughter does, if they ban you then they can ban me too...

[capcom]

Yeah, where are those beds?  Just more bu11sh!t

[LP]

It seems weird that health workers would comment on alleged unreported cases of myocarditis, and connect that to the political decision chain as causal.

Personally, to me that looks like a link that is a great outcome from some pretty good spin coming from trillion$ pharma, swallowed hook line and sinker by the people under their direct sphere of influence, the people working in health! Of course it does not mean the workers are complicit, just that they are influenced by those around them.

I've been saying right from the start, for all the vaccines there is no functional difference in side-effect levels or rates, people seem to want to believe otherwise for either personal motivation, be it wealth building or social media presence. The apparent bias in the reporting is stark, and people's willingness to accept the absence of criticism for some suppliers is a huge tell.

I don't know who to believe or why, but I will always look at all sides with equal levels of scrutiny and cynicism because there are far to many agendas to accept any of this as it is spoken!

[Thryleon]

Whats weirder is people on a forum ignoring what is possibly true and the fact that there is rather draconian measures put in place that are both harmful and dangerous.

Mantis has had very little to say on his subject and has raised some very real and serious concerns.  The myocarditis is possibly real.

Regarding the icus coping very well, the place I work at just re-opened 14 beds today that they had closed for staffing issues.  Thats out of a total of less than 70 across 3 sites to staff it properly at one. One of the other sites has come back online today. 

[ElwoodBlues1]

Whats weirder is people on a forum ignoring what is possibly true and the fact that there is rather draconian measures put in place that are both harmful and dangerous.

Mantis has had very little to say on his subject and has raised some very real and serious concerns.  The myocarditis is possibly real.

Regarding the icus coping very well, the place I work at just re-opened 14 beds today that they had closed for staffing issues.  Thats out of a total of less than 70 across 3 sites to staff it properly at one. One of the other sites has come back online today. 

The Myocarditis issues Mantis raised are real, one Melb ER was clogged with vaccine side effect patients with imaginary and real symptons all wanting ECG's and Blood tests.

[Mav]

Given that I haven't bothered to read the Bill, I can't comment on specifics. But my impression is that it takes away the CHO's sole power to impose health orders and instead places it in the hands of the government. In reality, that will temper the severity of health orders as the CHO's almost exclusive focus is on controlling pandemic outbreaks. The Government will have to take into account other interests such as the needs of the business and sports/entertainment sectors.  The Government of the day will also have no ability to shift the blame for restrictions onto the CHO and will have to answer for any restrictions on a political level (even more than is currently the case).

Rather than being worried that it's too draconian, my concern would be that a future Liberal Government would use it to hobble any attempts to counter future pandemics as has been the case in Florida where Governor De Santis has attempted to ban mask mandates that mayors have sought to impose. But at least from a governance point of view, it makes sense to ensure health decisions are appropriately balanced against other interests.

[LP]

The Myocarditis issues Mantis raised are real, one Melb ER was clogged with vaccine side effect patients with imaginary and real symptons all wanting ECG's and Blood tests.

The point I was making was related to apportioning of blame to politicians as opposed to just openly discussing the real world side-effects of Pfizer, in context of it's almost complete absence of discussion in mainstream media.

Liberal, Labor or Monster Raving Looney, it's not their fault if Myocarditis cases do not appear in the official record.

It's most likely to do with the threat of willing litigation against hospitals and authorities by some pharma for wrongly apportioning blame in the absence of an established scientific link. This litigious behaviour of some pharmaceutical companies probably has more to do with the trend in discussions and reporting than the actual science. Note, some are making vaccine for immediate great profit, while others have waved profit in the short term to allow a chance for the pandemic to be controlled across all economies!

[Mantis]

LP. The point I am trying to make is that we the people have the rights of full disclosure. We have the rights to hear what happens in the real world including our country and state. News cane announced as a coincidence and people be told it is not proven fact that side effects are a result that contributes to serious health issues. Let us not paint over a potential issue like a lick of paint on a mould infested wall in a house to get a better sale result by hiding what might be a damp issue which could cause serious respiratory issues to a buyer. The media should be held accountable to present information to the people. The government should not hold them to ransom to keep their trap shut. We the people pay taxes, yes? These taxes pay politicians in some shape or form, yes? We elect people into power, yes? We do so so that they have a chance to voice what the people need and want in parliament, yes? They represent us, the people, yes? I might have agreement on one or two of these above.

Now more importantly, the government is doing what they feel is required by the best advice they find to protect the health and well-being of the people they represent, yes? They state this at state and federal levels, yes? So it is apparent that everything is working fine by the greater community. However if something should appear to be a slight concern to the health of the constituents that the government represent, should it be investigated? No, because it is a known side effect to a vaccine. Should at an absolute minimal level be looked at that with multiple vaccines available, that the age group, gender type, or any other reason be a reason to reconsider an alternative vaccine? No because they are trying to achieve the same result? To get more than 80% of the population fully vaccinated? Hang on a second and back the truck up. Now I am getting p1ssed off and excuse my very fluent French. Is the percentage of fully vaccinated people more important than what it may do if somehow a certain vaccine suits age groups better? No just take the jab as 40,000 people have been tested and these are the statistics. Wait a moment. We are nor operating in the real world. We are vaccinating millions of people in our state. The trend appears to vary from what initial test may have shown. Maybe we should offer an alternative and monitor those with any side effects and offer them our full support. No because the government is not responsible for side effects of any medical process.

Now, my blood pressure is rising. You political blood sucking leeches are really about to do my f@cking head in. I like many the people of Victoria have endured lockdowns. 5km for your place of residence as they state. I am sure as a dumb f@ck that is interperatated as stay home. Unless you meet 5 needs to do so. Out of this boundary distance. To buy food. Sure enough this old bastard needs to eat and I can buy food very close to my sh1t hole I live in. Medicine from a chemist. Fine, like vitamin pills or ventolin as there is nothing of interest there.  Kathy is a very hot young girl, with such a polite attitude that she could sell tampons and I would buy them just because she might get a commission for the sale. Back off guys I saw her first. I mean she is my daughters age and has such a nice personality that it is impossible to not buy more than you need just to talk to such a pleasant person.

Care giving. I really have no person who really cares for me and no person who needs my care. Then there is work. This is one I will come back to soon. I like many required a permit to work. Why? The reason was that it was 27km away from my sh1t hole (place of residence). Last but not least, to go to a doctor or be tested for the covid 19. I never see doctors because I haven’t had a sick day in almost 4 years and 6 months. 2 of those years during the peak of the virus. The virus that spreads at light speed as Dan Andrews claimed. It is contagious so please ignore that comment. So I followed all the rules, including that mask. The one that makes asthmatic people feel like they are suffocating. Hang on a second. That is me. Hey, I am someone in this story. So I have followed all rules and tried to do the 1.5m distancing everywhere I go for a long, long time.

Then it happened. I was told it was my choice. Jab or job. Get a jab or lose your job. Really? I have paid my taxes that pay those that I elected into power to RULE my life. Those that are there to represent my views, opinions and hear my voice. Like the old system of a shop steward of a company representing my union. The union I paid my hard earn dollars for. So why do I pay taxes? To have someone decided what is best for my life? To decide what will be best for my future? Have I not paid enough taxes in my life? Have I not paid for the wages of those I have elected? When will they finally listen to the constituents and remember that they represent the people. Be the voice of those that put them into power. Those that can vote another person to sit in their seat next time elections take place. I took the jab by the way, so don’t hate me as an anti anything or a conspiracy theorist. I need to eat. I need to live. So does my dog who I love to bits. He has been my rock over the last 8 months. More than family or friends. This whole issue is dividing family and friends. Dividing people that is causing turmoil and hate because people have different views. Separations in relationships. Hate between family members. Problems in the workplace. It is f@cked and don’t take my word for it.

Just look at it from perspective. You elected people into government. No crystal ball there to know what would happen. Would any other candidate have done better? Who knows. Just promise me one thing in life. Love those that matter. Stand by your opinion even if if might be wrong. Voice your opinion. Don’t be rude about it but don’t hesitate to be heard. I hear it is your given right. Just don’t get locked up in jail. I hear it isn’t a great place to sleep. On a personal note it isn’t, but I will always make you feel welcome.

Sorry but I can’t comment on the Pharma companies. Kickback theories will get me in trouble. Sorry LP.

[Mav]

You keep raising the possibility you'll be booted for expressing your feelings about the pandemic response, Mantis. I can't see how that would happen as you're just expressing honestly the emotional toll it has taken on you. Even those of us who may disagree with you about the governance issues wouldn't have a problem with that. I'm sure you have everyone's sympathy. Even though everyone would have been detrimentally affected by the pandemic and pandemic response to some extent, the effects and the emotional toll would fall on people unevenly.

An article that goes to the heart of the public benefit of vaccine mandates is:  How Easily Can Vaccinated People Spread COVID?, The Atlantic.

Vaccinated people spread the virus less overall because they are significantly less likely to get infected in the first place. In early September, the CDC found that six unvaccinated people were testing COVID-positive for every one vaccinated person. But there are plenty of reasons to be optimistic beyond that. Some recent research shows that even once they’ve been infected, the vaccinated are less likely to spread the coronavirus than the unvaccinated. “We’re back in this category of, Yeah, it can happen, but it seems to be a very rare event,” Ross Kedl, an immunology professor at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, told me.

He pointed me to two studies, neither of which has been peer-reviewed, to make his point. One shows that although transmission did occur among the vaccinated in Provincetown, those cases represent what Kedl calls a “very limited” proportion out of the total number of infections that occurred as part of that outbreak. In the other study, researchers in the United Kingdom found that the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines consistently reduced transmission downstream of breakthrough cases. Much of the original Delta concern was based on something called “viral load”—the amount of virus a person carries while infected. But the researchers concluded that viral load is just one of many factors correlated to transmission reduction. In other words, even if vaccinated and unvaccinated people have the same viral load, it may not necessarily mean they are just as likely to spread the virus.

One reason for this may be that vaccinated people carry less infectious virus particles, as (not-yet-peer-reviewed) research from the Netherlands has recently illustrated. Although it’s widely assumed that virus particles carried by the vaccinated and unvaccinated are the same, basic principles of immunology actually predict otherwise, Kedl told me. Virus particles expelled by a vaccinated person are thought to be coated in antibodies—some of which are produced in the nose and mouth and are considered part of “mucosal” immunity—so “we can expect less of a downstream transmission,” he said.

Other researchers have come to similar conclusions. “The data are very clear that vaccinated individuals are less likely to spread the virus to others than unvaccinated individuals,” Christopher Byron Brooke, an assistant professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, told me in an email. A recent paper Brooke co-wrote showed that vaccinated people shed less virus, stop shedding virus sooner than the unvaccinated, and shed particles that are less infectious—supporting the notion that they’re less likely to transmit disease. One study from the Netherlands found a 63 percent reduction in household transmission among the vaccinated. That’s a testament to our vaccines: Homes are a “setting where the deck is heavily stacked towards transmission since members of a household are in extremely close contact for long stretches of time,” Brooke said. (However, another recent study didn’t find a statistically significant difference in household transmission between vaccinated and unvaccinated people.) Ultimately, Brooke said, you can certainly say the transmission risk for vaccinated people is lower, “but I don’t really know how you define ‘low.’”

It's best to be cautious about the use of preprint studies. Where they relate to a slow-moving scientific field, no one would even bother with them until they've been validated by peer review and/or their results have been reproduced. In a fast-moving, life-and-death pandemic, they are a bit of a necessary evil. But accepting them as evidence runs the risk of accepting fraudulent, faked or biased studies or simply those that have poor methodology. Those risks have been exemplified by the rash of studies touting Ivermectin which have been withdrawn, retracted, or dismissed. But the experts quoted and the preprint studies referenced do at least show that there may well be quantitative and qualitative differences in the way infected vaccinated people spread Covid compared to infected unvaccinated people. And this may well amplify the differences in the likelihood of vaccinated and unvaccinated people contracting Covid, which seems to be established quite clearly by real world evidence.

As the article also shows, just being vaccinated isn't enough. Being vaccinated doesn't mean we're back to 2019. The vaccinated need to be behave cautiously and social distancing and masking inside will continue to be recommended. MBB has on a number occasions slammed the Govt for allowing mass gatherings at big events like the Melbourne Cup with the sole apparent precaution being that they're limited to the double-vaccinated. I also worry about that, but I can see why the Government needs to loosen the reins at this point.   

[LP]

[member=98]Mantis[/member]‍ I understand the stress the lockdowns and mandates have caused and I don't question those effects on individuals, they are what they are as [member=122]Mav[/member]‍ has pointed out. But it's clear to me from what you have written is that some of your concerns seem to far outweigh the risks, perhaps it is a miscalculation of the the risk of one action versus the risk of another action or even a miscalculation of the risk of inaction.

In the era of a pandemic, doing nothing is not safe, doing nothing kills more people than doing something, so those who have to make a decision have no choice, be they politicians or health officials. We can all debate what to do, what is good what is bad, what might have been better, but doing nothing is never an option!