cont'd ...

I have no sympathy for the Serbian tennis player.

He should be sent packing back to his own country.
Keep him out of ours.

Paul had to isolate having caught the dreaded Oh-my-God-icron. Why? Because, having caught the virus, he was contagious and therefore a danger to the community. (At least that's the claim).

So fully vaccinated but still potentially contagious.

Yet Foxy asserts that people need to be vaccinated so that they aren't "a danger to those around me".

But the vaccinated, as represented by Paul, remain a danger to those around him. Vaccinated or unvaccinated makes no difference. Why is that logic so hard for the sheeple to follow? Just do as you're told even if it makes no sense and then claim the virtue of 'following the science'. How about following the logic.

The protected need to be protected from the unprotected by forcing the unprotected to use the protection that didn’t protect the protected in the first place.

There's every likelihood that being vaccinated is protective for the vaccinated against the the WuFlu. That is, it is good for the person vaccinated and makes no difference to everyone else. Therefore it ought to be a personal choice.

I suspect the 'follow the science' crowd won't understand that. That's because they aren't following the medical advice , they're following the propaganda.

"the assertion that Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are effective COVID treatments is persistently false "

There are any number of studies around the non-vaccine treatments for the dreaded WuFlu. Its not hard to find studies that find these treatments are ineffective or not conclusively effective.

On the other hand there are plenty of studies that find that Ivermecton and/or HCQ are effective. eg Mahmud et al... http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/results/NCT04523831?view=results).
And a meta-analysis of all such studies show more studies favouring Ivermectin than not.

So the best that can be said is that jury is out. But given that we know that both Ivermectin and HCQ are basically safe for human use and have been used for many years without significant adverse effects, why would the authorities actively try to ban and denigrate these options? They can be safely used and MIGHT be useful. Two reasons - there's more money in the vaccines for BigPharma and Trump advocated for them.

I note that the bizarre nonsense and carry on over some arrogant twerp who should be back in Serbia by now has brought the asylum seeker activists out from under their rocks, because the twerp has been detained among other illegal entrants. And of course, there is an uproar from the Serbian 'community', demonstrating that they will always be Serbian, never Australian, and who should bugger off back to Serbia with the twerp if they don't like our immigration rules. The Covid squawking is just an aside.

mhaze's comments should not be tossed lightly aside.
They should be hurled with great force.

The following link is worth a read:

http://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/26/bmjebm-2021-111678