You are reading a single comment by @Brommers and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
Esp now when it seems they are not protecting their old and frail to any major degree, without numbers why should they risk it?
Risk what? Battling through your insistence upon txt spk I am bewildered about the 'risks' you refer to. Citation needed. And not just anecdata and 'a man talking bollocks on YouTube'. Proper data plz.
Brommers
badboybjorn
Heard a discussion about similar a few days ago. He believed that a large portion of those still not vaccinated but are elligable for vaccination were ppl who had allrdy had the virus and and not thought it worth to then also get vaccinated. Could be a pretty large group. Esp since we were first told it protected against future infections pretty well and it was almost unheard of ppl getting it twice.
If u have had it, how likely is it you will get it bad the 2nd time, i have not seen any numbers at all which i find unsatisfactory.
Lets say you are 20-50 years old. A total number of deaths in sweden for this age group amounts to 170 or similar. So u had it and suffered no long term effects, what are the dangers for you in contracting the virus again? The risk reward ratio is likely not all that good of an incentive but since i never saw any numbers on this i can only guess ofc. But if the risk is still big i would have thought that could be a good incentive to get a group of ppl onboard with the vaccination that perhaps had not yet come around to it. Esp now when it seems they are not protecting their old and frail to any major degree, without numbers why should they risk it?