Relaxation of Restrictions, Part XII *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

With 90% of the "at risk" population vaccinated and delta no more deadly than a flu once vaccinated....are we not done with restrictions despite the 10% or 7%. Considering many have natural immunity .

Like surely we should be claiming victory and questioning the government's grip on these extra powers they have taken.

Why is it if the vaccine is so perfect that we are still be told to buckle down and get ready for a possible winter chaos in hospital figures?

What percentage of the unvaccinated with genuinely require ICU or hospital care. If 100% of the unvaccinated could make it through the Alpha variant phase without having to use the private hospitals for over flowing patients why are we at risk with 90% vaccinated?

Have the vaccines not worked to the 95% prevention level that they claim.

What's actually going on?

Also nobody is talking about our excess morality being 6-10% higher now in the population that it was in 2020.

Well no, governments created separate classes of people.

I mean we could apply that line to other things that are often a result of bad choices and refuse to help those people too (homelessness, drug issues, poverty etc).

How did she create these two classes of people? Are certain people in NZ not allowed to get vaccinated?

Are you really going down the road of suggesting that if you don't do something that is good for your health you lose any ability to live in a society freely?

How is this any different that saying if you are obese you are banned for fast food.

I think it expains in retrospect why there was such a push to keep somebody like Doug Ford in position as Premier of Ontario even after it became known that he was taking crack cocaine and threatening to murder people. He was even defended in the Irish Times by Donald Clarke.

Someone wants 'their people' in place.

So if 10% refuse the vaccine and they hugely contribute to our healthcare collapsing which would end up us all in lockdown because of those idiots you’re happy about that? I have 2 words to you but i won’t say it on here.

Regarding the obese analogy it’s not as staight forward. With the vaccine it’s only 2 little pricks and that’s it!

If 10% can cause a collapse of our healthcare system then the following would have to be true

A: Delta variant is 9x times more deadly to unvaccinated people than the Alpha variant (its not. By all accounts its slightly less deadly)

B: the vaccines aren't 95% effective against hospitalisation in the delta variant (in which case vaccine passes do nothing) so a large portion of vaccinated people will end up in hospital regardless. In which case we need to see the studies of its effectiveness against delta which appears to be much less than against alpha. Yet everyone still quotes the original Pfizer studies

C: our health care capacity is so lacking that a tiny portion of people can over run it despite 2020 nobody being vaccinated and a huge wave of cases didn't cause it to over run. (We can argue if lockdowns had an effect, not clear correlation between lockdown countries doing better than no lockdown countries proven)

I could argue that that there is a list of things that could be avoided to stop people clogging up our healthcare. All preventable and easy to do. Also all magnitudes more deadly. Ban alcohol. Ban fast food. Ban over eating.

All we have to do is look at countries with lower percentage of vaccinations and better healthcare. They are open and back to normal. Denmark Sweden etc.

So the question is would you rather Ban people from society for something that isn't in the top 10 list of causes of deaths in this country or Ban people from doing things in the top 10 list?

OR

Place the blame squarely where it belongs. On the HSE Government and Public servants that are living high off the hog as we all sit around pointing fingers at the tiny fraction of people who may end up in ICU.

And they are tiny because the remaining unvaccinated people who will need ICu are not in the age cohort that are the most unvaccinate (19-35)

So how many 50-65+ unvaccinated are there that could overwelm our hospitals ?

'Ban alcohol. Ban fast food. Ban over eating.'

I'm cutting down on fast food. Better to stay match fit if you know they could turn people away from hospitals and doctors' clinics as in 2020, and especially now that miscellaneous ignorami are pushing the idea that medical treatment is a social credit for correct behaviour.

The government is to blame for a health system that comes close to collapse each winter, money has been continually thrown at this problem with not much effect, a complete overhaul of the system is needed but last time that was mooted (by James Reilly) it was attacked and he lost his position. Opposition parties solely want to keep throwing more money at the problem, so a change in government is unlikely to do much to improve things there.

However, willfully unvaccinated are solely to blame for the 60% of ICU beds assigned to COVID patients that they are taking up, these are people who are at deaths door and thought they knew better and are now completely reliant on medical professionals to keep them alive, those medical professionals treating them despite the fact that the majority of these people wouldn't be there if they had followed public health advice (and these same people now demanding medical science save their life having previously rejected it).

The former scenario can't be fixed overnight or even within a a few years. The latter scenario can be remedied in under 5 weeks, it will be interesting to see how the latest vaccine push effects uptake.

Unvaccinated people in there 20s aren't going to end up in ICU. Should we only make vaccine passes for those in the actual at risk age groups?

Children aren't required to have vaccine passes are they? Why is that? Because they aren't at risk of ending up hospitalised.

I don't see you arguing that the passes should only apply to those in cohorts who usually end up in the ICUs.

I'm not twisting anything.. you're the one that seems to think 8% of the population is going to do the same amount of damage that the 100% of the population did in 2020.

Where is the logic in that?

I don't see anyone ever giving out about all the other icu patients who are there through their own choices and labeling them as "taking up beds"

Nobody in ICU is taking up beds. They are people that need care. Through their own choice or not. If you want to start assigning blame or to people in critical condition then I'd suggest we start with the people who are over weight, drinkers, young lads who drove like idiots and crashed their cars.

If you argument is that vaccine passes save people from themselves then why not expand it to include every other vaccine people might or might not have. Or to stop people from living a life style that goes that?

As I said before. A healthy 20 year old is at less risk than a vaccinated 70 year old. If its about protection then why is one banned and the other not?

There is a world of difference between treating someone with a vaccine and treating someone with obesity or cancer caused by smoking.

It seems that some anti-vaxxers don't see the difference and want us to ban smoking (mooted for the future) and reduce fatty food intake (already happening via sugar tax with more likely to follow) of everyone because they're afraid of medical science.

Smoking, alcoholism and obesity take time to solve, getting people vaccinated takes less than 5 weeks.

Smoking, drinking and eating are also addictive and are more difficult to treat, anti-vaxxers are purely uneducated or have been taken in by conspiracies or grifters.

The simple answer is that the 70 year old has followed medical advice to reduce the risk to themselves and others, the 20 year old hasn't, as a society we reward the behavior that reduces risk The 20 year old getting vaccinated reduces the risk to themselves even further and helps control the spread of the virus.

NZ have said they are aiming for 90% vaccination, so if they were where we are now they would be done.

Should we ban people from indoor dining every flu season unless they get vaccinated?

If they don't we aren't making them get vaccinated but choices have consequences right?

Serious question. Where do you draw the line and why

it’s up to you what you want to do. If you/anyone choose not to get vaccinated. Fantastic. If that choice means you have to eat your dinner at home; what do you want me to do. Own your choice.