Kim Iversen: Denmark Proclaims Pandemic OVER. ALL Restrictions End, "The Life We Knew Before" Begins

Many times I have heard people say that growing oppression by state government is one reason to resist vaccines, masking, etc. Given the reduction in public health measures following reduction of epidemic level illness, do you feel more safe and confident that this was a temporary blip, not a sustained power grab?

Tom 1 said:

Are you saying that you don’t understand why that is the case?

Click to expand...

No, I understand exactly why there is a 2-week buffer after your second dose before you are considered "fully vaccinated". Later today, time permitting, I'll show you exactly how deceitful that definition is.

expos4ever said:

You would not be intentionally hiding the fact that, in NSW, the vaccination rate (2 shots) of those over 16 is, yes, 94%.

I strongly suspect that you are counting on readers not being numerically literate. I will spare the readers the equations, but what your numbers are "hiding" is that the death rate of the unvaxxed in your data is 4 times that of the vaxxed.

Click to expand...

Have you noticed your number for how much higher the death rate is in unvaccinated is quite fluid and keeps dropping with each passing day?

The point is, even with 94% vaccination, it isn't stopping deaths nor hospitalizations, which is what you've argued mandates would do.

HI all,

Actually, it seems that the government of Denmark is taking the 'let's just step back and let it play out as it will' philosophy. They apparently still have high hospitalizations and death numbers, but they've made the decision that those who die will die, and those who live will live.

Now, that's not to say that such an attitude is wrong, but it will likely lead to a lot of deaths that could have been prevented. We must each one decide how much we want the work of government and healthcare practices to work to protect our lives.

God bless,
Ted

probinson said:

The point is, even with 94% vaccination, it isn't stopping deaths nor hospitalizations, which is what you've argued mandates would do.

Click to expand...

Doctor A: Look! This treatment reduces risk of death by a factor of 4!
Doctor B: Yes, but does it entirely eliminate the risk of death?
Doctor A: Well, no, of course not, but it saves a lot of lives!
Doctor B: Even so, if it does not entirely solve the problem, we will not use it.

Come on, man. At least make it believable.

expos4ever said:

Doctor A: Look! This treatment reduces risk of death by a factor of 4!
Doctor B: Yes, but does it entirely eliminate the risk of death?
Doctor A: Well, no, of course not, but it saves a lot of lives!
Doctor B: Even so, if it does not entirely solve the problem, we will not use it.

Come on, man. At least make it believable.

Click to expand...

You seem confused about what you're arguing about.

You've argued that mandates will stop surges in hospitals. But as we see here in the case of NSW, even with a 94% vaccine uptake, that's not true.

Also, are you willing to acknowledge that there are risks associated with vaccines, as there are with ANY medical intervention? And would you agree that the benefit/risk calculus is quite different dependent upon a myriad of factors that makes indiscriminately mandating 2 doses of vaccine for every living, breathing human being a foolish endeavor?

probinson said:

You seem confused about what you're arguing about.

You've argued that mandates will stop surges in hospitals. But as we see here in the case of NSW, even with a 94% vaccine uptake, that's not true.

Click to expand...

You know full well that not all hospitals are overwhelmed - you are cherry-picking your data. Here in Quebec, 50% of hospital beds are filled with unvaccinated people even though they only make up about 10% of the population. It is not hard to see that getting the unvaxxed to come to heel will greatly reduce the overcrowding problem.

probinson said:

Also, are you willing to acknowledge that there are risks associated with vaccines, as there are with ANY medical intervention? And would you agree that the benefit/risk calculus is quite different dependent upon a myriad of factors that makes indiscriminately mandating 2 doses of vaccine for every living, breathing human being a foolish endeavor?

Click to expand...

This sounds reasonable but, again, you know full well that the overwhelming consensus of experts is that the benefit outweighs the risk for almost everyone.

expos4ever said:

This sounds reasonable but, again, you know full well that the overwhelming consensus of experts is that the benefit outweighs the risk for almost everyone.

Click to expand...

Not true. You really should get out of your echo chamber. There are plenty of doctors advising a more individualized approach to vaccination.