Mate, have you actually have read this Lancet paper (I assume this is the one you are referring to)?
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fulltext

"Findings

The SAR in household contacts exposed to the delta variant was 25% (95% CI 18–33) for fully vaccinated individuals compared with 38% (24–53) in unvaccinated individuals. The median time between second vaccine dose and study recruitment in fully vaccinated contacts was longer for infected individuals (median 101 days [IQR 74–120]) than for uninfected individuals (64 days [32–97], p=0·001). SAR among household contacts exposed to fully vaccinated index cases was similar to household contacts exposed to unvaccinated index cases (25% [95% CI 15–35] for vaccinated vs 23% [15–31] for unvaccinated). 12 (39%) of 31 infections in fully vaccinated household contacts arose from fully vaccinated epidemiologically linked index cases, further confirmed by genomic and virological analysis in three index case–contact pairs. Although peak viral load did not differ by vaccination status or variant type, it increased modestly with age (difference of 0·39 [95% credible interval –0·03 to 0·79] in peak log10 viral load per mL between those aged 10 years and 50 years). Fully vaccinated individuals with delta variant infection had a faster (posterior probability >0·84) mean rate of viral load decline (0·95 log10 copies per mL per day) than did unvaccinated individuals with pre-alpha (0·69), alpha (0·82), or delta (0·79) variant infections. Within individuals, faster viral load growth was correlated with higher peak viral load (correlation 0·42 [95% credible interval 0·13 to 0·65]) and slower decline (–0·44 [–0·67 to –0·18]).


Interpretation

Vaccination reduces the risk of delta variant infection and accelerates viral clearance. Nonetheless, fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts. Host–virus interactions early in infection may shape the entire viral trajectory."

I guess I have spent a lot of time on this discussion and my point remains - are you ever going to consider changing your mind? Do you seek evidence or just cherrypick bites and pieces that you like and and ignore parts you don't like? Internet is beautiful place and you will always be able to find your support group - even if it's total nonsense.

I know nothing about pro football so I kindly will show myself out.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

My question still stands: if vaccination does not prevent (but can reduce slightly (depending on the variant) for a period of time) transmission, do you think it should be mandatory for working with other people?

This question still stands regarding young people. Should they be discriminated against (work, education etc) if they refuse to take this injection against a disease that we know they stand very little chance of needing a hospital bed for? Or should it be optional - and without coercion?

As you and I both are aware, it is foggy with regard to vaccine side-effects and the findings of papers change with time as this great experiment moves forward. However, if you - or anyone else - can't find evidence of athletes collapsing in comparable numbers pre-vaccine - then I will not change my mind regarding my concerns. If they can, then I will: that is a promise.

Finally, frankly speaking - and this is a concession to you - I am sceptical about our great organisations. I think some have been captured by the Big Pharma companies (through donations and revolving doors), and I have seen what happens to scientists and doctors who break ranks (vilification, ridicule etc.). This won't convince you, and it will probably just confirm your suspicions, however, that is how it is: let me be honest.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

> My question still stands: if vaccination does not prevent (but can reduce slightly (depending on the variant) for a period of time) transmission, do you think it should be mandatory for working with other people?

Yes. Although I do not agree how you are making loaded questions. (prevent vs guarantee, sligthly vs significantly).

> This question still stands regarding young people. Should they be discriminated against (work, education etc) if they refuse to take this injection against a disease that we know they stand very little chance of needing a hospital bed for? Or should it be optional - and without coercion?

You are asking me - I would vote for optional vaccination for kinds under 16 (or 18). Or are you asking Boris or Kariņš? They have to make some short-term policy decisions (like lockdowns, mandates and discrimination measures) to balance surge of hospitalizations andeaths in older people (in many cases caused by transmissions from young people) with consequences that can affect long-term lives of many younger people. I don't envy them (whatever decision they take) and I'm certainly not qualified enough to speak for their medical advisors and scientists involved.d

> it is foggy with regard to vaccine side-effects

and with regard of getting sick with covid side-effects which you are very keen to dismiss/avoid to ask questions/think about?

>Finally, frankly speaking - and this is a concession to you - I am
sceptical about our great organisations. I think some have been captured
by the Big Pharma companies (through donations and revolving doors), and
I have seen what happens to scientists and doctors who break ranks
(vilification, ridicule etc.). This won't convince you, and it will
probably just confirm your suspicions, however, that is how it is: let me
be honest.

I'm sorry I wasted your and my time, trying to argue against your beliefs. You are sceptical about pharma so also about doctors & research (meanwhile not sceptical enough quoting parts of it when it matches your concerns). So be it. Live long and prosper, I'm out :)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Okay, bye.

For the record, I don't agree with you about mandatory injection. It should be encouraged, in my opinion, for those who are in risk groups as the sole argument for the state getting involved is the pressure on the health service. The govt should also do what it can to protect the risk groups as the virus works its way through the population (as much as possible through those with good immune systems who can deal with it much better).

The rest of us should be encouraged to eat well, exercise, and ensure we have plenty of Vitamin D in the winter months. This will help alleviate pressure on the health service. - much better than being constantly scared shitless by the TV and told that injection is the only answer (oh and stay home).

The virus will make its way through the vaccinated and unvaccinated whatever we do. The rate of protection it might give for a period of time is not, in my opinion, sufficient for it to be made mandatory. We are already seeing the reintroduction of restrictions and so on in heavily vaccinated states. People, who are healthy and/or already have naturally acquired immunity are being made second-class systems for not taking a concoction which does not effectively prevent transmission and which could have life-threatening side effects.

It should, clearly, by their choice.

I am sceptical about Big Pharma because it is a business, and if you look how much money is sent on organisations like the WHO and media outlets by the Gates Foundation and Gavi, you might be too.

But okay, you are not going to change your mind either. Live long and prosper, yourself - unless you play an active role in forcing this on me or my family: in which case, watch out.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Vecīt, nopietni? Tu izstājies pie visnekontroversiālākā punkta, kas ir pielīdzināms truismam, par Big Pharma un starptautisko organizāciju bezizmēra korupciju?

Še, atslābsti, brīvā brīdī iepazīsties ar beisikiem: https://brownstone.org/articles/the-pfizer-biontech-vaccine-monopoly-the-backstory/
Par farmācijas industrijas korupciju labi apkopots šeit otrā pusē https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/needle-points-vaccinations-chapter-two

Pfizers nesen samaksāja 2.3 miljardu dolāru sodu. Tā ir ceturtdaļa no LV gada budžeta.

(Reply to this) (Parent)