To all the vegans who get their covid 19 vaccines

[Empiricist-Bruno]

I am a vegan and as such I have the power and even duty (if I care to be worth my designation as vegan) not to use animal products for myself.

I presume you have other duties as well. Might it not be the case that those other duties are more important than your supposed duty to be vegan? Do you not, for example have a duty to try to avoid catching a killer virus and passing it on to vulnerable people?

I'm vegetarian. But that's not all I am. I'm also a human living in close proximity to other humans, and I've no wish to be responsible for killing any of them by catching an avoidable virus and passing it on.

If I refused the vaccine, my refusal would have no effect at all on any of the decisions that led to the creation if the vaccine, including how it was tested. However, my refusal might lead to people around me dying. So my actual choice is between making an empty gesture, and doing something that might save a life.

I've had my two jabs. I'm sorry about the monkeys, but I think I've done the right thing.

As a vegetarian, I can't hold it against you to use animal-tested products because that is what vegetarians do. I agree that you have done the right vegetarian thing but the right thing to do is doing the true vegan thing.

Generally, vegetarians aren't concerned about animal welfare issues and won't be sorry about the monkeys killed in the legally mandated experimental COVID-19 vaccine trials. So, if you truly are sorry about the dead monkeys, it suggests that you are leaning towards veganism. Given that, I feel that I can/should explain to you where you went wrong.

First, you need to understand that COVID-19 is a zoonotic disease and that means a disease that is passed on from animal to human (and even if it is the byproduct of a bio warfare lab, there are other sets of arguments a vegan can use, but I won't go into that right now). Zoonotic disease have been associated with farm animals and with wild animals hunting. Pandemic predictions, such as the one we are in, stemming from zoonotic disease have been made by scientists for a long time. We shouldn't be surprised at all about what is happening right now. So, if I were to use your logic, people who eat meat have been exposing you to a deadly pandemic of their making. Do they love you? Do they care for you as a human being? My impression is that they certainly do not care. What they care about is their life style their dominance and their recklessness. The COVID-19 is their disease but just like with alcoholics, others are affected by them. So, caring for people who would be happy to kill or torture you if it served some purpose for them is something that you should not feel obliged to do. You have a right to attempt to preserve yourself. Adopting the ways of those who have created this mess is an admission of defeat in this respect. By using animal tested products, you too become responsible for this pandemic, even if you didn't eat meat. That's my opinion because vegetarianism does not make a stance for the animals like veganism does. So although you didn't yourself directly helped much with the breeding of this virus due to your vegetarianism, you never really stood up against those who prepared this pandemic for all and who continue to prepare the next one as well.

I do feel it as a duty to try and avoid a killer virus for myself and to pass it on to others and I wear a mask in indoor settings and follow guidelines in this matter. The use of vaccine against this disease would be great but those who made it don't take the vegans into consideration. They actually can't take vegans into consideration because it is the law to test such products onto animals. Why are there laws that make it impossible to come up with a vegan COVID-19 vaccine? Why haven't these law been set aside in anticipation of such an event to ensure that everyone can be vaccinated? These laws form a slightly disguised murder attempt on the community of true vegans. But now, looking at your argument, I see that it is us, the true vegans, who have to defend ourselves as acting like cold blooded indifferent killers!! It's a clear case of blaming the victim, and that's what is referred to as bullying. "Suck on your own disease" is my response to people who feel I should get a non-vegan COVID-19 vaccine.

Uummm... it ain't gonna be the vaccinated folks who are going to be sucking on the disease, my friend.

Skip it if you want, but it is at your own peril, not mine.

Que sera sera.

There is peril in taking the shots too as some people get very sick from doing that.

Perhaps the COVID-19 virus is a biological warfare weapon invented by China to kill true vegan activists. Knowing that they will never take a vaccine tested on animals and that there are legal requirements to test the vaccine on animals, China managed to find the perfect murder weapon specifically against them.

I hope they will be happy when we're all gone, as surely they will appreciate fewer protesters for social justice.

But no, this disease can only kill a very small fraction of the vegans that are out there, so it would not make sense to construct such a weapon against us. And further more, this ongoing world vaccination campaign is revealing who the true vegans are and in the end, this may help the vegan movement and social justice movement.

There is peril involved in not standing up for what you believe in. Your self-esteem can take a hit. If you are only a friend of animals so long as it involves only a good time to you, it really shows where they stand with you, and you will have trouble fooling other true vegans afterwards. I am now preparing to keep my distance from quite a few of the fake vegan friends that I had and that I didn't know I had. This should make me better.

[LuckyR]

The CDC here has documented that 99.2% of Covid deaths now that the vaccine is widely available, are among the unvaccinated. What's your guy's experience?

Does this mean that one political faction will be affected more than any other?

Will it result in fewer voters from the affected political persuasion?

Well since 6% of Democrats say they won't get vaccinated compared to 36% of Republicans, yes.

The most vaccine hesitant are white, male, rural Republicans.

[LuckyR]

Uummm... it ain't gonna be the vaccinated folks who are going to be sucking on the disease, my friend.

Skip it if you want, but it is at your own peril, not mine.

Covid is worse that he thinks too.
In the UK alone there are a million people with persistent symptoms. A million people continue to have "LONG COVID". Research is currently looking itnto the possibility that some of it might hopefully be an auto-immune response; whilst muchof it might be permanent organ damage, if it is an autoimmune problem then there is some hope of allieviating the problem.
Many of these people have had long covid for over a year with no respite thus far.

The CDC here has documented that 99.2% of Covid deaths now that the vaccine is widely available, are among the unvaccinated. What's your guy's experience?

I'd love to know where you get that. The difficulty here is that when 100% of people are vaccinated; then 100% of deaths are going to be people who are vaccinated. So the number is probably false or meaningless. And the meaningless figure is actually 61% in the UK. This does not relfect on how good the vaccine is.

87% have had one dose; 34% have had two doses. And death rates are down, though infection rates are rising rapdily.
But this means that people who would other wise have got seriously ill or died are only getting mild symptoms.

But the next big thing is Long Covid, which is about survivors. Vaccinations mean fewer hospitalisations and deaths, and hopefully less long coivd. But currently 1 million are diagnosed with long term symptoms.
Has long term consequences of Covid infection hit the media in the USA yet?? Because I think it shall.

It is a Center for Disease Control number. It made the news and was reported all over.

Are those numbers among adults or the total population?

Long Covid, though a big deal, is a horse already out of the barn. Though is just another reason to get vaccinated (as if anyone needed another reason).

[Sculptor1]

Covid is worse that he thinks too.
In the UK alone there are a million people with persistent symptoms. A million people continue to have "LONG COVID". Research is currently looking itnto the possibility that some of it might hopefully be an auto-immune response; whilst muchof it might be permanent organ damage, if it is an autoimmune problem then there is some hope of allieviating the problem.
Many of these people have had long covid for over a year with no respite thus far.

The CDC here has documented that 99.2% of Covid deaths now that the vaccine is widely available, are among the unvaccinated. What's your guy's experience?

I'd love to know where you get that. The difficulty here is that when 100% of people are vaccinated; then 100% of deaths are going to be people who are vaccinated. So the number is probably false or meaningless. And the meaningless figure is actually 61% in the UK. This does not relfect on how good the vaccine is.

87% have had one dose; 34% have had two doses. And death rates are down, though infection rates are rising rapdily.
But this means that people who would other wise have got seriously ill or died are only getting mild symptoms.

But the next big thing is Long Covid, which is about survivors. Vaccinations mean fewer hospitalisations and deaths, and hopefully less long coivd. But currently 1 million are diagnosed with long term symptoms.
Has long term consequences of Covid infection hit the media in the USA yet?? Because I think it shall.

It is a Center for Disease Control number. It made the news and was reported all over.

Are those numbers among adults or the total population?

Long Covid, though a big deal, is a horse already out of the barn. Though is just another reason to get vaccinated (as if anyone needed another reason).

For long covid to be taken seriously the media needs to get behind it.
IN the UK it took a while to start to understand. The more publicity it gets the more people will get the jab..

Can you cite your course please. It looks more like the number attributed to the vaccine efficacy.
I hope you understand that the %age number can be misleading.
With a vaccine that is 98% effective in a population where 100% of the population have been vaccinated; then 100% of the deaths will still be vaccinated people!!!

[AverageBozo]

With a vaccine that is 98% effective in a population where 100% of the population have been vaccinated; then 100% of the deaths will still be vaccinated people!!!

More realistically you’ll have a vaccine that is 94% effective in a population where 50 - 70% have been vaccinated.

Let’s say that you have a population of 10,000. There would be 6% of the vaccinated population who could be expected to become infected and of those, a half might die, or about 300 souls.

Of the unvaccinated group, with 0% of the effectiveness of a vaccine, 3,000 - 5,000 would be at risk.

[AverageBozo]

The reality could be that > 99% of the deaths occurred in the unvaccinated individuals.

[AverageBozo]

The reality may be that 99.1 of ICU admissions and 100% of ventilator patients are unvaccinated.

[LuckyR]

The CDC here has documented that 99.2% of Covid deaths now that the vaccine is widely available, are among the unvaccinated. What's your guy's experience?

I'd love to know where you get that. The difficulty here is that when 100% of people are vaccinated; then 100% of deaths are going to be people who are vaccinated. So the number is probably false or meaningless. And the meaningless figure is actually 61% in the UK. This does not relfect on how good the vaccine is.

87% have had one dose; 34% have had two doses. And death rates are down, though infection rates are rising rapdily.
But this means that people who would other wise have got seriously ill or died are only getting mild symptoms.

But the next big thing is Long Covid, which is about survivors. Vaccinations mean fewer hospitalisations and deaths, and hopefully less long coivd. But currently 1 million are diagnosed with long term symptoms.
Has long term consequences of Covid infection hit the media in the USA yet?? Because I think it shall.

It is a Center for Disease Control number. It made the news and was reported all over.

Are those numbers among adults or the total population?

Long Covid, though a big deal, is a horse already out of the barn. Though is just another reason to get vaccinated (as if anyone needed another reason).

For long covid to be taken seriously the media needs to get behind it.
IN the UK it took a while to start to understand. The more publicity it gets the more people will get the jab..

Can you cite your course please. It looks more like the number attributed to the vaccine efficacy.
I hope you understand that the %age number can be misleading.
With a vaccine that is 98% effective in a population where 100% of the population have been vaccinated; then 100% of the deaths will still be vaccinated people!!!

Well, you're right... in a 100% vaccinated country. The 99.2% of deaths are unvaccinated stat was compiled in the US where only 48% of folks have been fully vaccinated. That's why the stat is such a bid deal.

[Sculptor1]

With a vaccine that is 98% effective in a population where 100% of the population have been vaccinated; then 100% of the deaths will still be vaccinated people!!!

More realistically you’ll have a vaccine that is 94% effective in a population where 50 - 70% have been vaccinated.

Let’s say that you have a population of 10,000. There would be 6% of the vaccinated population who could be expected to become infected and of those, a half might die, or about 300 souls.

Of the unvaccinated group, with 0% of the effectiveness of a vaccine, 3,000 - 5,000 would be at risk.

You are jumping in to the middle of a conversation so have missed the point, which was that the %age of vaccinated people amongst the dead is not telling us anything and is misleading.

[Sculptor1]

I'd love to know where you get that. The difficulty here is that when 100% of people are vaccinated; then 100% of deaths are going to be people who are vaccinated. So the number is probably false or meaningless. And the meaningless figure is actually 61% in the UK. This does not relfect on how good the vaccine is.

87% have had one dose; 34% have had two doses. And death rates are down, though infection rates are rising rapdily.
But this means that people who would other wise have got seriously ill or died are only getting mild symptoms.

But the next big thing is Long Covid, which is about survivors. Vaccinations mean fewer hospitalisations and deaths, and hopefully less long coivd. But currently 1 million are diagnosed with long term symptoms.
Has long term consequences of Covid infection hit the media in the USA yet?? Because I think it shall.

It is a Center for Disease Control number. It made the news and was reported all over.

Are those numbers among adults or the total population?

Long Covid, though a big deal, is a horse already out of the barn. Though is just another reason to get vaccinated (as if anyone needed another reason).

For long covid to be taken seriously the media needs to get behind it.
IN the UK it took a while to start to understand. The more publicity it gets the more people will get the jab..

Can you cite your course please. It looks more like the number attributed to the vaccine efficacy.
I hope you understand that the %age number can be misleading.
With a vaccine that is 98% effective in a population where 100% of the population have been vaccinated; then 100% of the deaths will still be vaccinated people!!!

Well, you're right... in a 100% vaccinated country. The 99.2% of deaths are unvaccinated stat was compiled in the US where only 48% of folks have been fully vaccinated. That's why the stat is such a bid deal.

Thanks. But I can only repeat my request for you to cite the number you gave.

[Steve3007]

Well since 6% of Democrats say they won't get vaccinated compared to 36% of Republicans, yes.

The most vaccine hesitant are white, male, rural Republicans.

That's an interesting stat. If it's true, I guess it could be used to make a reasonably accurate assessment of its effect on US election outcomes. If the virus kills about 1% of the unvaccinated that it infects and if full vaccination gives, say, 90% protection, then it kills about 0.1% of the vaccinated. So, by my calculations:

Number of Democrats killed by covid: 1% of 6% + 0.1% of 94% = 0.06% + 0.094% = 0.154% of all Democrats.
Numper of Republicans killed by covid: 1% of 36% + 0.1% of 64% = 0.36% + 0.064% = 0.424% of all Republicans.

So I guess it would only make a difference in very marginal seats, or swing states or whatever you call them, where the difference is less than 1%. As I recall, in the 2020 presidential election, there were some like that.

Also, if I were a Republican with a taste for abusing statistics, I might try saying: "Look! More vaccinated Democrats are killed by the virus than unvaccinated ones! Suckers! Don't be fooled into taking that evil, big-government, big-pharma, communist poison folks!".

[CIN]

Generally, vegetarians aren't concerned about animal welfare issues and won't be sorry about the monkeys killed in the legally mandated experimental COVID-19 vaccine trials.

This is a lie.

people who eat meat have been exposing you to a deadly pandemic of their making. Do they love you? Do they care for you as a human being? My impression is that they certainly do not care. What they care about is their life style their dominance and their recklessness. The COVID-19 is their disease but just like with alcoholics, others are affected by them. So, caring for people who would be happy to kill or torture you if it served some purpose for them is something that you should not feel obliged to do.

My family are all meat eaters, and so are many of my friends. I've known them very well for decades. None of them 'would be happy to kill or torture me if it served some purpose for them,' so this is another lie.

You have a right to attempt to preserve yourself.

Which I do by taking the vaccine.

Adopting the ways of those who have created this mess is an admission of defeat in this respect.

An intelligent person knows when they can't win a fight.

By using animal tested products, you too become responsible for this pandemic, even if you didn't eat meat.

You are more responsible for the pandemic than I am, at least potentially, because you refuse the vaccine and so are more likely to catch it and pass it on.

The use of vaccine against this disease would be great but those who made it don't take the vegans into consideration. They actually can't take vegans into consideration because it is the law to test such products onto animals. Why are there laws that make it impossible to come up with a vegan COVID-19 vaccine? Why haven't these law been set aside in anticipation of such an event to ensure that everyone can be vaccinated?

Because in the opinion of the lawmakers, more good will be served by testing on animals than by not doing so. It is actually impossible to work out whether this is true or false, because to do so, you would need work out total net happiness across all sentient beings for the rest of time resulting from the two different courses of action. The sensible and practical thing to do is to try to create other ways of testing drugs that do not require testing on animals, and there are organisations that work towards that, such as the Humane Research Trust and FRAME.

"Suck on your own disease" is my response to people who feel I should get a non-vegan COVID-19 vaccine.

This is not an intellignt response to the situation, because in fact you are more likely to have to suck on it than they are, not having had the vaccine.

Basically what is wrong with your view is that you are allowing a single moral issue to dominate your moral thinking to the extent that you fail to take any other moral considerations into account. In order to support this irrational approach, you have created in your own mind the fantasy that all meat eaters are murderers and monsters. This just isn't true. What is true is that our society, by industrialising the abuse of animals, has got the balance between human and animal interests badly wrong. If you really want to help the animals, you should spend less time berating people for not being morally perfect (as you mistakenly believe yourself to be), and more time helping organisations that are working towards a better deal for non-human animals.

[Empiricist-Bruno]

You are more responsible for the pandemic than I am, at least potentially, because you refuse the vaccine and so are more likely to catch it and pass it on.

You cook up a zoonotic disease by supporting animal use and abuse and when it leaves your kitchen to infect others, you open up the window and scream at the pandemic sick vegan (with the disease you made) out there that he is more responsible for the disease than you are (because you have had both your shots). To me that's sheer shameless hypocrisy. It's also bullying.

The vaccine isn't refused; it's the animal cruelty that's refused. Give me a vegan vaccine and I will have it. Maybe it doesn't get into your head that I am a vegan, a true vegan? Why can't this be assimilated, understood and accepted? I suspect that the reason is along the lines spoken by Jesus, long ago: "You hate me because there is no room in you for me." Maybe it's time for you to make some room?

True vegans' approach to stopping animal cruelty is by not supporting organizations that get involved in animal abuse as much as possible. That's generally effective but when there is a pandemic, it's not fun anymore to be a true vegan so you can go ahead and make an exception? That might work for some people who claim to be vegans but it would not work for me. Veganism is standing up for friends but you stop doing that as soon as it gets a little unpleasant or risky? No way, at least not for me. And it isn't about being smug or superior; it is about preserving both my friends and my self-esteem.

[LuckyR]

It is a Center for Disease Control number. It made the news and was reported all over.

Are those numbers among adults or the total population?

Long Covid, though a big deal, is a horse already out of the barn. Though is just another reason to get vaccinated (as if anyone needed another reason).

For long covid to be taken seriously the media needs to get behind it.
IN the UK it took a while to start to understand. The more publicity it gets the more people will get the jab..

Can you cite your course please. It looks more like the number attributed to the vaccine efficacy.
I hope you understand that the %age number can be misleading.
With a vaccine that is 98% effective in a population where 100% of the population have been vaccinated; then 100% of the deaths will still be vaccinated people!!!

Well, you're right... in a 100% vaccinated country. The 99.2% of deaths are unvaccinated stat was compiled in the US where only 48% of folks have been fully vaccinated. That's why the stat is such a bid deal.

Thanks. But I can only repeat my request for you to cite the number you gave.

Dude, the news broke on June 24th. Pick any English-speaking newspaper on that date and they will have covered it.

[Sculptor1]

For long covid to be taken seriously the media needs to get behind it.
IN the UK it took a while to start to understand. The more publicity it gets the more people will get the jab..

Can you cite your course please. It looks more like the number attributed to the vaccine efficacy.
I hope you understand that the %age number can be misleading.
With a vaccine that is 98% effective in a population where 100% of the population have been vaccinated; then 100% of the deaths will still be vaccinated people!!!

Well, you're right... in a 100% vaccinated country. The 99.2% of deaths are unvaccinated stat was compiled in the US where only 48% of folks have been fully vaccinated. That's why the stat is such a bid deal.

Thanks. But I can only repeat my request for you to cite the number you gave.

Dude, the news broke on June 24th. Pick any English-speaking newspaper on that date and they will have covered it.

My name is not "Dude", and unless you can cite the number it is pretty meaningless to use the media. They never report facts properly and this looks like one of two things. EIther they have not reported it correctly or you have misheard it.
FOr the reasons I gave, more people dying of COVID are now vaccinated. You seem to have misquoted, or misunderstood.
Scott will not let my cite.
But I can quote;
"More vaccinated people are dying of COVID than unvaccinated people, according to a recent report from Public Health England (PHE). The report shows that 163 of the 257 people (63.4%) who died of the delta variant within 28 days of a positive COVID test between February 1 and June 21,..."