Can vaccinated people still spread the coronavirus?

Therefore there's no justification for giving more human rights to vaccinated people than unvaccinated people.

Nobody is taking or giving human rights, demonstrating immunity help allowing people to do some things, the same as wearing a mask or being tested, even if it is not perfect these actions reduce the possibility of spreading the disease and can be a requirement in order to reduce risks to other people.

You can refuse to do everything, that is your right, but then the other people right not to be exposed to unnecessary risks from you would mean you may not be allowed to do some things, that is also part of your decision.

 As they are now NOT absorbed (because of your vaccines they can’t dock on anymore and replicate inside for a longer time)

Wow. That is not how it works. The virus needs to take over host organism's cells to replicate. It turns the hose organisms cells into virus factories. If, however, it cannot infect the host organism due to the presence of antibodies the virus cannot replicate and dies.

I heard from an epidemiologist that only 50% herd immunity is required to end the pandemic, so I don't think they should force anyone to take it. Though if you are in an at-risk category and want to live it up, you probably should

The proportion of the population that is required to be immune to achieve herd immunity depends on how easily the disease is caught and subsequent to this how many you will interact with to infect. . The less infectious a particular disease is and the fewer day to day contacts people have the lower the threshold for herd immunity.

I heard from an epidemiologist that only 50% herd immunity is required to end the pandemic

I'm skeptical. I haven't seen any epidemiologists suggest anything less than 65%. This guy sounds like an outlier, if he exists.

You can refuse to do everything, that is your right, but then the other people right not to be exposed to unnecessary risks from you would mean you may not be allowed to do some things, that is also part of your decision.

Why not those who are afraid of the virus just avoid going out, or take the vaccine to reduce chances of contraction? That's your choice and part of your decision and reaction to the virus.

Why should those of us who are not afraid of it have our civil rights curtailed because of those who are afraid?

I think that's fair.

Why not those who are afraid of the virus just avoid going out, or take the vaccine to reduce chances of contraction? That's your choice and part of your decision and reaction to the virus.

Why should those of us who are not afraid of it have our civil rights curtailed because of those who are afraid?

I think that's fair.

Exactly, why should we risk our health/life taking a risky experimental vaccine because others are afraid to get sick?

The answer is effectively “yes”, not immediately, but “yes”. Airlines are already recognizing prior COVID diagnosis in lieu of PCR results for safe passage ... next is vaccines + some number of days. prior infection is inherently the most effective vaccine. Why is English-language news on Japan so far behind English-speaking world

Good article.

Additionally, it would be good to agree that China's conceited CCP, should be held accountable for this Global Pandemic and made to pay.

I guess that means that I have a right not to be exposed to your germs.

Please stay home and if you go outside, wear a biohazard suit so I can feel safe.

That is of course invalid, first you need to prove there is a higher risk from exposure to other people germs above from what you get from your own, without it you claim is baseless.

Second you would have to prove that one person staying home would modify that risk for you in any significant way, else your suggested solution would have no merit.

That is the huge difference between acting according to the advice of the best current scientific knowledge or your own personal opinion based on nothing but imagination. Valid, objective knowledge can be imposed as true (until disproven), while your personal opinion not.

Can vaccinated people still spread the coronavirus?

There seems to be no direct answer to this question in the interview.

In any case, the probability of that must be relatively low.

We live in a world of probability, practically everything is subject to chance-taking. It is a foregone conclusion..

Again, because scientific data proves that the more people are vaccinated the safer they are and the easier it gets to reduce other life saving measures.

Scientific data also shows that those who are afraid of catching viruses are less likely to contract them if they avoid contact with others, minimize going out etc. So those who are afraid of Covid can take those steps rather than denying the rights of those who are not afraid of it by coercing them to take a risky vaccine or punishing them by limiting their participation in civil activities.

They should also do a write up on whether the vaccine bestows immortality or not because so many people seem incredulous that people still die even after being vaccinated

Isn’t that easy to understand by simplest logic? What happens, if you breath in 1,000,000 of those viruses? As they are now NOT absorbed (because of your vaccines they can’t dock on anymore and replicate inside for a longer time) , you just breathe them all out or bring them to the toilet, minus a few that wander through other body regions and try to there some LongCovid effects or hide until you possibly have less antibodies and immunity one day sooner or later again. That means , in summary, for others or the environment you are (only in that short span of time) much higher infectious than if not vaccinated. In the long run that is not the case, because, as I wrote, no significant replication takes place as long as the vaccine works.

Isn’t that easy to understand by simplest logic?

That is incorrect, vaccinated people have been demonstrated to spread the disease in less amount than infected people, already producing lower cases of infection in places where vaccination is more common. This is because your proposed mechanism has no basis on reality. You just need to think for a moment how antibodies act. That should give you a huge hint.

Sounds like the flu vaccine.

I heard from an epidemiologist that only 50% herd immunity is required to end the pandemic, so I don't think they should force anyone to take it. Though if you are in an at-risk category and want to live it up, you probably should.

And I agree with others, China's footing the bill for all losses from the intentionally-released virus. Heck, they should be paying for the vaccines, too.

Why not those who are afraid of the virus just avoid going out, or take the vaccine to reduce chances of contraction? That's your choice and part of your decision and reaction to the virus.

Again, because scientific data proves that the more people are vaccinated the safer they are and the easier it gets to reduce other life saving measures. This is the most productive, safe and effective option so it is the one that has more merit being promoted, specially since it has the science on it side, so it can be pushed as true.

Why should those of us who are not afraid of it have our civil rights curtailed because of those who are afraid?

If you want to go against objective evidence and act irrationally just for a mistaken understanding of what are your "civil rights" you can do it, but also assume the consequences. Society can validly push for the best solution of the ones available, because is the one that will benefit the most everybody (even those that want to act irrationally), if you want to push for the least effective option you will simply have to deal with the consequences of it.

Scientific theories change with the wind.

Fundamental human rights and equality do not.

Your dream of a two-tiered apartheid type society will fail.

Scientific theories change with validly obtained and analyzed data, you don't like it? that is too bad, you will still have to accept them or find data that support what you believe so you can change the theories.

Fundamental human rights are still being protected, if everybody wants to act rationally but you don't you are still free to do as you like but you can be demonstrated as wrong, so you cannot justify infringing on the rights of others.

Exactly, why should we risk our health/life taking a risky experimental vaccine because others are afraid to get sick?

You don't have to do it, that is a strawman, you just have to deal with the consequences of choosing the least safe option because of irrational reasons, you may not be able to do some activities because you belief science is wrong and you are right, but that is part of what it means going against objective knowledge.

Let's just agree on :

a vaccine is probably a good thing for you

but doesn't necessarily mean you won't become a carrier and infect someone else who is susceptible for infection.

you should have the right to choose without penalty, whether to take the vaccination or not.