See where this logic is going?

No.

A person with serious and possibly fatal COVID who is not being treated cannot be left in the public to deal with it themselves, even if it WERE their fault - quite apart from anything else, that's how the disease spreads even further.

That's why we're all rather anxious that y'all get your shots and get this thing under control. We don't want y'all to die, we want y'all to live and to stop spreading the disease so that you can pick a fight over something dumb another day.

But if you've been vaccinated, why are you afraid of it spreading to you?

Because I might give it to someone who's immunocompormised. I do what I can but the longer this runs for, the more limited I am in my efforts.

And they did NOTHING wrong. The immunocompromised community have been scared to death from the start of this. People who have done EVERYTHING right have been dying in tears going "it's not fair." BECAUSE IT ISN'T. Y'all are making people suffer for your selfishness and it's ALL COMPLETELY PREVENTABLE.

And we DO do this with the flu - THAT'S WHAT FLU SHOTS ARE!!!!!!!

If your wife worked with vulnerable people, you probably would. Or more likely, her boss probably would and you'd support her through it.

Covid is in a pandemic, which means we're now ALL responsible for limiting its spread. So get your shots.

Of course there's a difference - THE VACCINE SLOWS THE SPREAD and a slower spread IS NOT A PANDEMIC!!

To be frank, it's not really your life I care about. It's people who can't fight the infection so easily. Get your shots.

If you’re not worried about him, why are you lecturing him to get the vaccine?

You can still spread the virus to others even with the vaccine, so it basically gives you a slight advantage but you still put others at risk. If you’re concerned about the immunocompromised, tell them to get vaxxed first.

"If you’re not worried about him, why are you lecturing him to get the vaccine?"

Because HE WILL KILL PEOPLE WHO HAVE WEAKER IMMUNE SYSTEMS IF HE DOESN'T.

"You can still spread the virus to others even with the vaccine"

I have written in dozens of different places on this page that the vaccinated spread this slower than the unvaccinated. Slower means endemic means hospitals have space means doctors have resources means fewer people die AND BY THE WAY WE SAVE MONEY ON HEALTHCARE EXPENSES. It is sheer obstinance that you use this feeble excuse that the vaccine has no importance because all it does is slow the disease down to non-pandemic levels - it's absurd on its face.

"If you’re concerned about the immunocompromised, tell them to get vaxxed first."

They can't. They're immunocompromised. If you don't know how vaccines work, there are so many videos that explain this, many of which are really easy to understand because they're made for children. Vaccines work WITH your immune system, they can't magically give you one that you don't have. This is basic stuff you should have learned a long time ago.

“Because HE WILL KILL PEOPLE WHO HAVE WEAKER IMMUNE SYSTEMS IF HE DOESN'T.”

He will kill them if he does too. The chance may be lower, but it’s still a very real chance you will it and spread it even if vaccinated. It’s a valid reason to be skeptical, because many people have gotten and spread the virus even after being vaccinated, and they could spread it to someone who is immunocompromised.

No it's not a valid reason to be skeptical! A lower chance means it happens less often THAT'S WHAT CHANCE MEANS, and if it happens less often then fewer people die, lives are saved by the hundreds of thousands, and the people who do get it have more medical resources available to them when not everyone gets sick at the same time which is what happened last year.

I DON'T know why you keep insisting on ignoring rate of disease activity as a factor. It makes no sense to ignore exactly what the goal is just to make a nonsense argument.

But if you're vaccinated and you can still give it to someone who's immunocompromised, why do you insist that unvaccinated people take the vaccine when you're the one who spread it?

What do you mean I'm the one who spreads it??? We're ALL spreading it, but vaccinated people spread it less because their antibodies are faster at flushing the virus out. Because they HAVE antibodies. They don't have to build them from scratch on encountering an infection their bodies have never seen before.

And if the spread slows, it becomes endemic and it's generally easier to avoid and to get treatment and to survive AND BY THE WAY THAT WILL SAVE US ALL A TON OF MONEY ON HEALTHCARE.

If you're still struggling to understand this part, Sesame Street have run some excellent segments explaining how this works and it's easy to follow - I suggest you check those out.

But in the rationale you gave, you specifically mentioned a case when YOU, a VACCINATED person, spread the disease to an immunocompromised person.

So in your own example, the fault is with a vaccinated individual. But you want to blame the unvaccinated?

Yes. I do. Because you're not doing ANYTHING to even TRY to save lives. And this would all be over if you just did your parts to slow the spread down so that it's not a pandemic anymore.

For more information, Sesame Street.

But how would it "all be over" by getting vaccinated, if we have already established that vaccinated people can still get and spread the virus to others?

Because it slows the spread to below pandemic levels. Which part is confusing you still?

But how does that affect you if you've already been vaccinated? The people who are unvaccinated have had the opportunity to take it, but have chosen not to.

Any questions?

I know you understand this! You're doing this on purpose, I don't believe for once minute that you're honestly not understanding.

"And they're getting people who haven't made that choice sick and dead at more than twice the rate!

There's a lot more to this that we could discuss - you're STILL using the wrong number for the survival rate even after a year and a half, there's the R number to talk about and hospital capacity - but there's no way we can EVER get into that stuff if "less than half the rate" is still lost on you."

I'm not convinced you know these issues since you have made so many untrue statements. However, I'm going to press you on this issue, and you must answer. Failure to answer is grounds for me leaving this conversation, and muting you if possible.

The issue I'll press on is this: what do you think the COVID survival rate is? You stated that my number of over 99% is wrong.

So go ahead, and state the actual number, and please cite your sources.

Hahahahahaha!

Ok, now I KNOW you're trolling me.

So just to be clear, you are refusing to state actual numbers of COVID survival rate? Correct?

"Of course it would be over - IT WOULD BE LESS THAN HALF! Less than half the infections and less than half the deaths, that takes it to BELOW PANDEMIC LEVELS!

Less than half the deaths means MORE THAN HALF PREVENTED.

What's the confusion?"

I see you're going to ignore all the other claims you made that have shown to be false within this thread. You're also going to cite "MORE THAN HALF PREVENTED" in terms of death while ignoring the reality that the survival rate for COVID is well over 99%.

But let's go back to the original point: the people who are not vaccinated are those who are choosing to not get vaccinated, meaning they are assuming the risk, meaning they are choosing to take control over their own health care rather than taking it from you.

So there you go.

And they're getting people who haven't made that choice sick and dead at more than twice the rate!

There's a lot more to this that we could discuss - you're STILL using the wrong number for the survival rate even after a year and a half, there's the R number to talk about and hospital capacity - but there's no way we can EVER get into that stuff if "less than half the rate" is still lost on you.

So basically, we're in agreement that vaccinated people can still get and spread the virus, which means your claim that "this would all be over" if unvaccinated people got vaccinated is simply untrue. In fact, it also means that your claim that "Y'all are making people suffer for your selfishness and it's ALL COMPLETELY PREVENTABLE" is also untrue.

Of course it would be over - IT WOULD BE LESS THAN HALF! Less than half the infections and less than half the deaths, that takes it to BELOW PANDEMIC LEVELS!

Less than half the deaths means MORE THAN HALF PREVENTED.

What's the confusion?