15
Comments (29)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
3
BritPedeMEGA [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Wasn't promoting nothing. It's a study that made the news and relevant to MetaCanada because its from the U of AB. I posted the quotes directly from someone I could find that was in the high visibility public sphere that wanted to obviously comment, rather than just posting a dry link and not putting any publicly available comments.

No comment was made by me, or if you should, or shouldnt, or like or not like the quotes directly taken from steve. I didn't even say it was true or not. Thats for others to judge for yourself. As you did.

As for this:

"Note that they conveniently left out some information: "among citizens of 60 years or older. 89.821 occurred among the fully vaccinated (89.7%)" Since we already know Omicron spreads through both vaccinated and unvaccinated, and over 90% of the population over 60 the UK is fully vaccinated, most of the infections that occur in people "60 years or older" are going to occur in vaccinated people. Duh!"

So the message remains the same. Get vaccinated so you don't become one of the people in the hospital unnecessarily."

Yes, you keep saying that. "get vaccinated! Get vaccinated! Get vaccinated!". People have done. There is no "more" "get vaccinated!" to get.

  1. We are at 90% jabbed. How much higher do you posit the country should go?
  2. Should everyone get jabbed, if so, why?
-4
tuchodi -4 points ago +1 / -5

OP will, when challenged, sidestep

Wasn't promoting nothing

See?

We are at 90% jabbed. How much higher do you posit the country should go?

There are some .win community members who sound like they could get vaccinated but choose not to.

Should everyone get jabbed, if so, why?

Unvaccinated people are over-represented in the hospitals and ICUs

2
BritPedeMEGA [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

The only thing "challenged" was Steve Kirch's commentary. Which you did.

I presented the article as Canadian content, due to it being from U of A, which you have not commented on that study, just Steve's comments.

I even put a disclaimer in it about the paper being A. A preprint, and B. saying "alledgedly".

Its a forum where one posts Canadian angled content about current events.

"There are some .win community members who sound like they could get vaccinated but choose not to."

Oh? Whom?

"Unvaccinated people are over-represented in the hospitals and ICUs"

This board can argue back all day wether it is or isnt. If it is,

So what? It's already been shown on other posts and from Ontario numbers alone that the hospitals are hardly "stretched" Bed wise.

-3
tuchodi -3 points ago +1 / -4

OP will, when challenged, sidestep

I presented the article as Canadian content

See?

Oh? Whom?

You can't find any? I believe that falls under "willful blindness"

hospitals are hardly "stretched"

And the elective surgeries?

1
BritPedeMEGA [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

See? See? See? You can keep using that word. Doesnt make it true. Did I say the articles or even Steves comments were true? No.

See? Back.

I was expecting usernames. For whom.

I don't count. Ive already had corona. I'm immune. Maybe Ham? Pussy Whiskers?

More to the point....so?