Even if they were not vaccinated for a while, there’s always a percentage of immunity.
Sorry, but I’m not up to the fearmongering campaigns once again. The first response to Covid was totally out of measure in my opinion and they’re retrying it again.
I blame the combination of how over-hyped the (real) issue of Y2K was combined with how successfully we handled it (partly because everyone was so worked up about it) leading to the (common issue for IT professionals) take away of “well nothing went wrong, why did we put all that effort into trying to stop something going wrong?” for no small part of why people weren’t as willing to try to stop/minimise Covid as they otherwise might have been (of course it was always going to be a harder sell as Y2K mostly required from the general public that they don’t have a tantrum about organisations paying professionals to fix the problem directly whereas Covid required the general public to follow the advice of the professionals in taking action in their own lives.)
That’s not how any of the COVID vaccines were reported to work. No such thing as total immunity.
The virus is deadly depending on what conditions are met (underlying risk factors, etc.). Not all of those conditions are obvious or well-studied, so it always seemed to me like a lottery who gets killed by the virus.
Furthermore, I don’t believe the article is fearmongering. As I said in a separate comment, it’s more like “hey, there might be a bit of an outbreak in some places this flu season, so keep some N95s on hand just in case numbers go up.” I HIGHLY doubt we would see another shutdown.
With so much vaccination, how does people don’t have immunity yet?
Even if they were not vaccinated for a while, there’s always a percentage of immunity. The virus itself is not that deadly as well.
Did you read the article?
I did, hence i said:
Sorry, but I’m not up to the fearmongering campaigns once again. The first response to Covid was totally out of measure in my opinion and they’re retrying it again.
What? 7 million people died from COVID-19. How many more would it have been without all the safety measures?
https://covid19.who.int/
Bruh.
The curse of successful mitigation is skeptics will then say afterwards that ‘X was no big deal, look how few people died’
Don’t be one of those.
I blame the combination of how over-hyped the (real) issue of Y2K was combined with how successfully we handled it (partly because everyone was so worked up about it) leading to the (common issue for IT professionals) take away of “well nothing went wrong, why did we put all that effort into trying to stop something going wrong?” for no small part of why people weren’t as willing to try to stop/minimise Covid as they otherwise might have been (of course it was always going to be a harder sell as Y2K mostly required from the general public that they don’t have a tantrum about organisations paying professionals to fix the problem directly whereas Covid required the general public to follow the advice of the professionals in taking action in their own lives.)
That’s not how any of the COVID vaccines were reported to work. No such thing as total immunity.
The virus is deadly depending on what conditions are met (underlying risk factors, etc.). Not all of those conditions are obvious or well-studied, so it always seemed to me like a lottery who gets killed by the virus.
Furthermore, I don’t believe the article is fearmongering. As I said in a separate comment, it’s more like “hey, there might be a bit of an outbreak in some places this flu season, so keep some N95s on hand just in case numbers go up.” I HIGHLY doubt we would see another shutdown.