Most people see themselves as healthy and thus in the pool of "very unlikely to have complications from COVID-19" pool. Argue with that however you want (people being dishonest with their own perception of health), but that's how they see it. So taking preventative measures because it is forced down their throats seems hostile. Made worse that 1) vax won't stop the spread, or we would have seen that by now, and 2) we need to boost the vax every few months? That sounds highly suspect to a lot of people.

If you were at risk, you can get vaccinated, why force a healthy person? (The answer is mostly for the folks who can't vaccinate, but those folks are screwed any way you look at this pandemic if we are honest).

No, the vaccine is fairly detrimental to the spread of COVID.

Overwhelmingly, the numbers of people in Hospitals are unvaxxed.

In BC, the last report I saw for a region had almost 100% of people below 50 in intensive care unvaxxed, almost the same numbers for seniors.

Rates of spread are actually coming down even while business activity expands, vaccines are a potent part of this. Not perfect, but a major component.

So again: COVID is a community problem, less so an individual one. 'Stopping the Dominos' from dropping is much better than trying to lift all the dominos up after they fell with drugs.

"So taking preventative measures because it is forced down their throats seems hostile."

It's not hostile to the 80-90% of people in most advanced nations who have basic civil maturity. It's a mild distraction with obvious individual and group benefits, to the point where I have a hard time understanding lack of participation (yes, it's very easy to understand hesitancy and hostility to being required to do something, but not to the level where people actually would avoid doing something obviously beneficial).

I remember when smoking was banned indoors, I get that people were a begrudged, but I think in reality most people 'got it'.

+1

Not to mention, everyone I know knows at least one person who had a stroke within weeks of getting one of the "vaccines", I know three. Previous to this past year I've known one person in my entire life that had a stroke, and it was my wife's uncle who was in his 90s.

My friend's mom technically died in a clinical sense 5 minutes post first jab while still in the parking lot under observation. My other friend's brother dropped dead exactly 36 hours post 2nd jab. Both were zapped back to life. One of them had a pre-existing heart condition. I know at least one ER RN that readily admits they're seeing a high increase in ER cases of young (20s) people with various neurological and cardiac issues 1-14 days post vaccine (and are almost never treating them as vaccine-caused issues hence they stay unreported). The apologists will say things like "but you don't know it was the vaccine". Sure, you're never 100% positive about anything dealing with as complex system as a human body. What you should do is start with "what has changed recently", and almost always the patients that my RN wife handles say "I've been recently vaccinated.".

You can't do stats like this. Even if it seems like a small error or being overly pedantic, it doesn't work for a pretty large number of obvious and less obvious reasons.

Vaccine side effect tracking is done pretty thoroughly, so if what you see would be a real and generic phenomenon, it would have been noticed by now.

Right. The official estimate by the CDC is that 1 in 40 vaccine injuries is reported.

None of the 3 I personally know were (suppose that's just anecdotal also). The one received the second dose 3 days before a major stroke, and massive blood clots. I'm sure it was tOtAlLy UnReLaTeD.

Nobody can tell you based on one case whether it was related or not. That's the point. And that's why they have to report every death or serious injury within 30 days of vaccination. At least here, in the EU. No matter what. If you get hit by a bus, it should be reported and recorded. Exactly because there is no other way to find rare side effects.

> The official estimate by the CDC is that 1 in 40 vaccine injuries is reported.

Source?

All risks are relative, yes. Covid risk is also negligible for some groups (like small children), it is very likely very comparable or smaller than the tiny vaccine risk. There is a lot of propagandizing degrees of risk across all tribes -- democrats wildly overestimating risk of hospitalization and republicans wildly underestimating it.

But what about 75% vaccination (lots of countries are there already or very close) and 85% effective drug? How much effort much be spent on hunting down every last antivaxxer and how many side effects of that are acceptable? (like destroying public support for vaccine mandates in general, creating nice shiny tools for the next wannabe authoritarian, etc)

For endemic viruses that also spread through domestic pets 95% becomes unobtainable unless we start going after the 100,000,000 domestic pets in the US alone.

We don't know the likelihood that it spreads through pets, pets also have owners who make up the entirety of their interactions (ie pets don't take the bus, go to restaurants, go to work or school) so of owners are vaxxed we're kosher.

As for endemic, yes, a problem, but of a different kind.