Poll of the Day > Canada has now SURPASSED the USA in VACCINATIONS thanks to ANTI-VAXXERS!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

Despite a devastating lack of vaccine supply in Canada thanks to the United States BLOCKING companies from sending vaccines as well as a punishing 3rd wave in the country, Canada is now set to catch up and SURPASS the United Staes in vaccinations as the race for herd immunity intensifies among the 2 countries!!

Just a month ago it seemed the United States was on its way to herd immunity leaving Canada in the dust but now the tides have changed

Almost 38% of the US Population has been fully vaccinated and 48% has had at least one dose compared to Canada has only 4% fully vaccinated but 46% has had at least one dose.

But a COVID-19 vaccination database says Canada is administering 40% more doses per 100 people than the US on a 7 day average thanks to Conservatives and anti-vaxxers joining forces to reject vaccinations and a declining number of people refusing the shots

Canada has benefited the decrease in demand within the US and Pfizer's Michigan manufacturing facility began shipping more doses to Canada than previously scheduled since many states are not asking for more with less people signing up for the shot.

Canada has nearly 38 million people while the US is 9 times larger

At one point, it seemed like the US was poised to be the first in the western side of the world to reach herd immunity but Canada now seems to get there first

4.5 million doses will be sent over to Canada in a single week which is the largest shipment to date said Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau but he has a more cautious approach and a tougher benchmark who said the country needs at least 75% herd immunity before even thinking about reopening the borders with the United States which has been shut down for over a year..

The United States demand they reopen the borders so families can visit other families up north but Trudeau refuses to do so and mask mandates still remain a priority up north whereas down south social distancing and masks for "fully vaccinated" people can come off

Do you think anti-vaxxers are going to ruin this for everybody?

https://i.imgur.com/mjNcDTA.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/EjM1Bq9.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/mGdfran.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/zYuCpdZ.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/33E6bGZ.jpg
---

Yeah something needs to be done about the antivaxxers. Not only are they going to get us all killed with covid, they're also bringing back other diseases like measles.

---

Anti vaxxers will make herd immunity nearly impossible. Their stupidity and selfishness will ensure the selfless efforts and sacrifices made by the majority are fruitless. They are one of the biggest threats to modern society.

---

I live with a pretty hardcore conspiracy theorist, and even when I get a sentence I consider a 'breakthrough', it literally means nothing because he is also a lazy ass who contradicts himself constantly. I don't know what the best answer is. I think some people need kindness and support, but I think that approach honestly doesn't work for some more ornery folks - I honestly think confrontation with them is sometimes the easiest way to get through some rational thought.

---

Yes but also the CDC reverting to their pre pandemic ideological stance against mask wearing; epidemiologists have long supported mask wearing for outbreaks, epidemics and pandemics, but pushback from their political masters meant the official stance of the CDC was against mask wearing.

The goal is vaccinate the entire population, not just those in our own domestic borders; the rollback of the mask mandates will lead to vaccine resistant, or even vaccine immune strains.

---

I propose that if antivaxxers have decided they don't want to be part of society, then they don't have to be part of society. Make them useful, send them to Mars to build colonies. Then there will be colonies available and ready to go for responsible people to take over once Earth isn't habitable :D

---

I made a topic saying this would happen earlier this week

---

Ogurisama posted...

I made a topic saying this would happen earlier this week

I thought it was a Simpsons quote

---

We could've gotten herd immunity simply by refusing to go "back to normal" until the herd immunity % is reached, and requiring a vaccination card to travel by plane or go to sporting events, etc... And jail people who try to use fake cards.
Enough of the crazies would've eventually given up.

But...NOPE! Fucking CDC says masks no longer required, and we're doin' it on the honor system! Guaranteeing that the anti-vaxxers will never budge now, b/c there's literally no reason for them to.

faramir77 posted...

Anti vaxxers will make herd immunity nearly impossible. Their stupidity and selfishness will ensure the selfless efforts and sacrifices made by the majority are fruitless. They are one of the biggest threats to modern society.

Many people were exposed to covid, never exhibited symptoms of covid, and test positive for covid antibodies. Do they need a vaccine that isn't has good as their own immune system? Are they not a part of herd immunity?

---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Do they need a vaccine

Yes, as it provides better protection then what their immune system can provide.


---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Many people were exposed to covid, never exhibited symptoms of covid, and test positive for covid antibodies. Do they need a vaccine that isn't has good as their own immune system? Are they not a part of herd immunity?

Most observations are finding that natural immunity to Covid is only lasting about 3 months. Even if somebody's already immune due to having been infected, a vaccine will enhance that immunity to make it more effective and last longer. Natural infections can provide herd immunity, but it's much more reliable and measurable to establish it through vaccines than to rely on that.

Perhaps more saliently, though, it's significantly easier to just vaccinate everyone that can be vaccinated than to test everyone for Covid antibodies and vaccinate the ones that turn up negative, especially considering that those antibodies will fade and people that test positive for them would need to be retested regularly to ensure they still have immunity. The worst that redundantly vaccinating people will do is make them feel like they have a bad cold twice instead of once, which is really a pretty trivial cost.

---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Many people were exposed to covid, never exhibited symptoms of covid, and test positive for covid antibodies. Do they need a vaccine that isn't has good as their own immune system? Are they not a part of herd immunity?

You either went to a private, christian school or slept through all of your science classes. Which was it?

Yes. I'm sure some people will get vaccinated just to spite them, but they'll probably cause more harm than good.

---

Hey China, got a virus that causes infertility?

It could maybe accidentally get out, just make sure to have a vax prepared ahead of time k thanks

Couple generations and there would be no more anti-vaxxers

---

Yellow posted...

Hey China, got a virus that causes infertility?

It could maybe accidentally get out, just make sure to have a vax prepared ahead of time k thanks

Couple generations and there would be no more anti-vaxxers

Unfortunately, anti-vaxx ideologies aren't genetic. Sterile anti-vaxxers could continue to spread their ideology well beyond the end of that epidemic, preventing it from actually killing off the idiocy.

---

adjl posted...

Unfortunately, anti-vaxx ideologies aren't genetic. Sterile anti-vaxxers could continue to spread their ideology well beyond the end of that epidemic, preventing it from actually killing off the idiocy.

If you ask me everything is genetic when you swing the blunt hammer enough

---

Yellow posted...

If you ask me everything is genetic when you swing the blunt hammer enough

That's factually untrue

---

Blightzkrieg posted...

That's factually untrue

Being alive is genetic.

Having arms is genetic.

From a faraway enough distance literally everything about you is genetic and if natural selection decided to get rid of something cultural it would make it happen. There's probably a gene that makes you susceptible to a certain culture. The most dedicated UFO (spaceship) people are very clearly mentally ill. Of course we don't care about those people, just the vaxxers.

---

Yellow posted...

Being alive is genetic.

Having arms is genetic.

From a faraway enough distance literally everything about you is genetic and if natural selection decided to get rid of something cultural it would make it happen. There's probably a gene that makes you susceptible to a certain culture. The most dedicated UFO (spaceship) people are very clearly mentally ill. Of course we don't care about those people, just the vaxxers.

It is clear you have no knowledge of genetics and if you had been paying attention to the news not much more about UFO's either. The Navy seems pretty convinced along with any other military and most likely most civilian pilots about UFOs.


---

KodyKeir posted...

Yes, as it provides better protection then what their immune system can provide.

Do you even know what a vaccine is?

---

Nichtcrawler X posted...

Do you even know what a vaccine is?

Enough to know that I would call them inoculations, and not a vaccine per se; it's easier to call it a vaccine, but it's really more a primer, hence inoculation.

---

Arcturusisnow posted...

You either went to a private, christian school or slept through all of your science classes. Which was it?

Worked in pharmaceutical and biotech for 20 years.

---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Worked in pharmaceutical and biotech for 20 years.

And subsequently avoids any shampoo with SDS in it because he read on its MSDS that it's classified as an irritant, while still working quite happily with capsaicin in his daily life.

---

adjl posted...

And subsequently avoids any shampoo with SDS in it because he read on its MSDS that it's classified as an irritant, while still working quite happily with capsaicin in his daily life.

I avoid SLS, an extreme soft tissue/skin irritant present in most liquid soaps/shampoos and toothpaste. Capsaicin, which is typically only consumed, is much safer, has health benefits and not rubbed on your genitals, gums and the largest organ of the body.

---

SunWuKung420 posted...

I avoid SLS, an extreme soft tissue/skin irritant present in most liquid soaps/shampoos and toothpaste. Capsaicin, which is typically only consumed, is much safer, has health benefits and not rubbed on your genitals, gums and the largest organ of the body.

Did... did you really just say that something you eat doesn't get rubbed on your gums? And that capsaicin isn't an extreme irritant?

Yes, SDS (which is also SLS) is an irritant. Virtually all detergents are (including even the most natural soaps you can find), simply by virtue of being amphipathic. Like literally everything with any sort of toxicity, though, the degree to which you experience that irritation depends entirely on dosage. Rubbing pure SDS on your skin is going to be a major problem. So is rubbing pure capsaicin on your skin (that's basically what pepper spray is). Rubbing a small amount of SDS on your skin and rinsing it off once it's done its job and dissolved the non-polar compounds you're trying to clean off, however, is going to be pretty harmless, much like eating capsaicin in the quantities you find it in most foods. It's all about dosage.

---

adjl posted...

It's all about dosage.

And Americans are over exposed to SLS, while many avoid capsaicin.

Honestly, trying to compare the 2 is a huge false equivalency. SLS has no benefits.

Eating hot sauce or a pepper is not the same as using a brush to rub SLS into your gums. Ffs

---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Honestly, trying to compare the 2 is a huge false equivalency.

Not remotely. Both are classified as irritants. Avoiding one purely because it's classified as an irritant while not avoiding the other is just plain inconsistent. Anything else you're using to distinguish the two isn't your basis for avoiding SDS, rendering it irrelevant (unless, of course, you've found more basis for avoiding SDS than that, since it has been rather a while since you put forth that particular bit of questionable logic).

SunWuKung420 posted...

SLS has no benefits.

It has the same benefits as any other detergent, specifically the ability to emulsify non-polar dirt so it'll be dissolved by water. It's also largely responsible for the sudsing action of most products that include it, which helps to increase the surface area exposed to other components of the product (particularly relevant in cleaning hair), as well as making it easier to spread around and providing a clear visual and tactile indicator that one is scrubbing vigorously enough to clean themselves.

SunWuKung420 posted...

Eating hot sauce or a pepper is not the same as using a brush to rub SLS into your gums. Ffs

This is true. Proportional to their respective irritant capacities, the dosage is substantially higher when eating sauce or pepper, hence one experiences vastly more irritation when doing so than when brushing one's teeth. Not sure why you'd bring up that difference, though, given that it's kind of contrary to the point you're trying to make.

---

We should declare war on that country

---

SaltyAndSweet posted...

We should declare war on that country

I don't recommend it. The geese aren't very nice.

---

adjl posted...

I don't recommend it. The geese aren't very nice.

Hmm

I suppose we do have a lot in common

---

Adlj, capsaicin is something healthy, people can choose to consume. SLS is something unhealthy, people have to choose to avoid. Thankfully there are manufacturers that have the same mindset as me. It's in hand soap, dish soap, shampoos, conditioners, lotions, toothpastes, etc. You literally have to make a conscious effort to avoid something that's overused and bad for the skin, the mouth, the nose, the eyes and every other soft tissue of the body. But go ahead, keep being the pro-"do what the government tells you, they are always right and only care about your well being" schill you are.

---

Trolling the night away

---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Adlj, capsaicin is something healthy, people can choose to consume. SLS is something unhealthy, people have to choose to avoid.

So you keep saying, but your only reasoning for "SLS is bad" is "it's an irritant," which is equally true of capsaicin. Repeating yourself doesn't make your claim any more convincing. That requires you to provide actual data, detailed explanations, information on safe dosage and how typical consumption compares to that... You know, an actual basis, and not something that's completely dismantled by pointing out that your sole provided reason for hating SDS is equally true for another substance you have no problems with.

Of course, regardless of what I convince you of here, your reaction has demonstrated the point I was trying to make: That you have a long history of picking up limited information through your experiences and drawing conclusions from that information without actually taking the time to understand what it means or how it can actually be applied. You worked in biotech for 20 years and believe this means you are knowledgeable on related matters, but you have no more than a rudimentary understanding of most such things that falls apart under the most basic of scrutiny. Your grasp of immunology is no exception.

---

Of course, adjl still acting like there's equivalency between a healthy substance people choose to consume and an unhealthy substance people have to work hard to avoid. He clearly knows little regarding how the safe limits of the dosage of SLS are reached in a single product but the combined value of its abundance in multiple products used multiple times daily pushes that value into the toxic range.

Also, an adaptive immune response producing antibodies without illness will always be better than a man-made, rushed to market, novel-type vaccine, whose efficacy is still to be determined.

---

When I read this it didnt make sense at first because we have a lot of smart people here too.

Yet another brand new reason to not trust the government came out of Kamloops recently, but people are still on the trust the government train.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-calls-for-action-follows-discovery-of-childrens-remains-at-kamloops/

SunWuKung420 posted...

Of course, adjl still acting like there's equivalency between a healthy substance people choose to consume and an unhealthy substance people have to work hard to avoid. He clearly knows little regarding how the safe limits of the dosage of SLS are reached in a single product but the combined value of its abundance in multiple products used multiple times daily pushes that value into the toxic range.

Also, an adaptive immune response producing antibodies without illness will always be better than a man-made, rushed to market, novel-type vaccine, whose efficacy is still to be determined.

Wow you havent axed that guy yet? I had to get rid of him the last time the mods did nothing about his name-calling when his pretentious, holier-than-thou attitude had no affect on me.

zebatov posted...

Yet another brand new reason to not trust the government came out of Kamloops recently, but people are still on the trust the government train.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-calls-for-action-follows-discovery-of-childrens-remains-at-kamloops/

Using a government of the day scenario, to argue against current active participation; a democracy remains so long as those who participate can keep it.


---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Of course, adjl still acting like there's equivalency between a healthy substance people choose to consume and an unhealthy substance people have to work hard to avoid.

adjl posted...

So you keep saying, but your only reasoning for "SLS is bad" is "it's an irritant," which is equally true of capsaicin. Repeating yourself doesn't make your claim any more convincing.

Argue smarter, not harder.

SunWuKung420 posted...

He clearly knows little regarding how the safe limits of the dosage of SLS are reached in a single product but the combined value of its abundance in multiple products used multiple times daily pushes that value into the toxic range.

See, this is the start of a rational argument. To follow through, you need to cite those safe dosage limits as well as statistics on how people's typical exposure exceeds those limits and reports demonstrating actual effects from that excess.

Don't judge people for not knowing your argument for you. That just indicates that you suck at arguing, not that they've failed. If you truly believe you have the better-substantiated position, fight for it.

SunWuKung420 posted...

Also, an adaptive immune response producing antibodies without illness will always be better than a man-made, rushed to market, novel-type vaccine

Not only is this completely baseless and a flagrant application of the naturalistic fallacy (which is utterly devoid of any logical merit), it's also demonstrably false. Numerous diseases have been all but eradicated only because vaccines have been developed against them after natural immunity failed to control them for years. For Covid itself, it has been fairly consistently found that antibody production following infection (symptomatic or otherwise) hasn't been lasting as long as it has following vaccinations (which makes sense, given that vaccines contain adjuvants to promote a stronger, longer-lasting response, as well as most of them incorporating a second booster shot to keep it going).

Regardless of those facts, your initial point was that people who have developed immunity through asymptomatic infection don't need vaccines. As I said a while ago, they might be okay, but from a public health management perspective, that's not practical to rely on. It's vastly simpler to just vaccinate people regardless of their immunity status than to go through the hassle of testing their antibody production, especially where the vaccine will act as a booster shot to extend and strengthen the immunity. The only risk there is that they'll have two rounds of flu-like symptoms instead of one (since they'll already have an immune response for both shots, instead of just the second), which is hardly a major problem.

SunWuKung420 posted...

whose efficacy is still to be determined.

Their efficacies were determined before they made it to market. As I say to everyone who parrots this "untested" nonsense: the data's out there. If you don't trust the FDA's (or HC's, or any other country's health regulatory agency) assessment at face value, you can assess the data for yourself. Use that as the basis for your opinion, instead of pretending your uninformed gut reaction is worth sharing.

---