world

Austria orders nationwide lockdown for the unvaccinated

60 Comments
By KIRSTEN GRIESHABER

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.


60 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

It doesn't apply to children under 12

Are not everyone saying that kids are one if the highest risk to spread the virus?

Hmmm...but maybe not in Austria.

How about the people who can not take the vaccine because of health issues?

What a complete Nonsense.

The lockdown will initially last for 10 days and police will go on patrol to check people outside to make sure they are vaccinated.

Unvaccinated people can be fined up to 1,450 euros ($1,660) if they violate the lockdown.

My Goodness!

This Nonsense gets completely out of control.

3 ( +31 / -28 )

except for basic activities such as working, grocery shopping,..

Ah, and I forgot, when you go to work or grocery shopping, you can not catch or spread the virus.

Like I said, this nonsense is completely getting out of control and what Austria is doing here is one of the biggest political BS decision I have ever heard.

*
8 ( +33 / -25 )

It is a great common sense move by Austria, if people want to put themselves and others at greater risk, they should be prevented from doing so. I would like to see a" full payment for treatment" if these people do get infected with Covi-19. The unvaccinated are now the main reason we are still dealing with this problem. Time to get tough on them. Those with genuine allergies get a pass but the rest, if they don't want to be part of civil society? Fine... exclude them.

-7 ( +24 / -31 )

Sadly, this is what a government has to do when some of its citizens are too foolish and brainwashed to survive.

-7 ( +25 / -32 )

Please cite the evidence for this comment:

The unvaccinated are now the main reason we are still dealing with this problem.

9 ( +31 / -22 )

The move prohibits unvaccinated people 12 and older from leaving their homes except for basic activities such as working, grocery shopping, going for a walk — or getting vaccinated.

Wonderful, other countries should also implement similar measures. We have had enough of the unvaccinated idk who want continue to spread the virus.!!!

-9 ( +21 / -30 )

Why are the vaccinated so afraid of the unvaccinated if they are vaccinated and therefore protected?

5 ( +29 / -24 )

police will go on patrol to check people outside to make sure they are vaccinated,

Papers, please.

8 ( +23 / -15 )

Why are the vaccinated so afraid of the unvaccinated if they are vaccinated and therefore protected?

It never fails to surprisme how people that can only think about their own benefit automatically think everybody else is the same, it never crosses their minds that people in general can act to protect the weak members of society, those with valid medical exceptions, or that are incompletely protected by vaccines because of immune problems, those of old age or several comorbidities that make them still have a risk of complication and death even after vaccination. For all those people (and a few vaccinated young ones without any preexisting conditions) the risk is still there and the best way to protect them is to accelerate the reaching of herd immunity, either by vaccinating as much people as possible or by limiting the higher risk represented by people that refuse vaccines for illogical fears.

-5 ( +23 / -28 )

To be excluded is kind of bullying to be honest. I am trying to be as honest as I can, and educate with what I write here. It may end in vain, in may not; but at least respect my logical arguments as a scientist and one who truly desires a resolution that is fair to all. Is that too much too ask?

Those with genuine allergies get a pass but the rest, if they don't want to be part of civil society? Fine... exclude them.

-13 ( +12 / -25 )

Like I said, this nonsense is completely getting out of control and what Austria is doing here is one of the biggest political BS decision I have ever heard. 

So what else is out of control, doctors treating sick people, research on treating serous ailments, people studying to become doctors????

-1 ( +17 / -18 )

To be excluded is kind of bullying to be honest.

-4 ( +10 / -14 )

It will not stop the spread, cf Singapore. Just reduce the hospital burden.

12 ( +19 / -7 )

Great idea, if only vaccinated people didn’t also get and spread COVID.

6 ( +26 / -20 )

I give this a 0% chance of surviving a legal challenge. It's a political move by a government that wants to look like it's doing something.

The question is not whether the unvaccinated are dangerous typhoid Marys clogging up the healthcare system (let's assume that they are), it's whether the Austrian government has acted proportionately and exhausted every available option before imposing such draconian restrictions on basic human rights. A carefully tailored lockdown of an urban area where the virus is spreading might be reasonable, but it becomes disproportionate when extend nationwide to include small rural communities with no active cases.

8 ( +17 / -9 )

I am not even going to go into the newer data coming out showing the cost benefit of this vaccine is really bad

The real reason is that there is no such data, which makes it impossible to produce it.

Mass media has nothing to do with the available primary sources that clearly demonstrate vaccination have a huge impact reducing hospitalizations, complications and death, even against new variants it was never designed to protect against. Thinking mass media has any role on making available this kind of information is something that nobody with even a small amount of experience in biological science would even use as an argument. but then again so is ignoring what an in-house test kid for COVID is.

Great idea, if only vaccinated people didn’t also get and spread COVID.

Vaccination reduces importantly the spreading of the infection, it also is correlated with people that actually listen to science based recommendations and that give any importance to reducing the risk for others.

-6 ( +17 / -23 )

Makes little sense other than to bully everyone to get the vax.

It doesn't apply to children under 12

Are not everyone saying that kids are one if the highest risk to spread the virus?

Only those who represent pharma say that, to sell more vaxes.

police will go on patrol to check people outside to make sure they are vaccinated,

Papers, please.

Good old Austria!

8 ( +21 / -13 )

I would like to ask if the pro-vaxxers really have any interest in knowing about the adverse effects of these vaccines? And if not, why not? I wonder if everyone here is so bent on being a liberal vs a conservative and their mind doesn't really care anymore about humanity and what is good or bad for it.

It is a valid question as I do not identify myself with either the left or the right. I just look at an issue and think about it. What seems to be the truth? As I have a pretty good scientific background in this field I give you my thoughts. I am only a recent contributor, but I feel no pro-vaxxer on this forum (and others) has any ground to stand on anymore. They use emotional and obtuse arguments, and false logic to try and win their arguments. I would find it embarrassing to be on their side.

5 ( +20 / -15 )

Good common sense. Nobody being excluded - The unvaccinated are free to work and shop. What more do they want? We knew this was going to happen somewhere.

-10 ( +10 / -20 )

would like to ask if the pro-vaxxers really have any interest in knowing about the adverse effects of these vaccines? 

How about the adverse effects of Covid?

Considering 5 million are already dead, isn’t that more important?

-9 ( +12 / -21 )

The fact that the definition of a vaccine changed from “grants immunity” to provides “protection” should have been a hint.

9 ( +21 / -12 )

The article does not say anything about those who recovered from covid. They have greater immunity than the vaxxed and should therefore not need to lockdown, assuming this measure is truly about people's health.

13 ( +20 / -7 )

I would like to ask if the pro-vaxxers really have any interest in knowing about the adverse effects of these vaccines? And if not, why not? I wonder if everyone here is so bent on being a liberal vs a conservative and their mind doesn't really care anymore about humanity and what is good or bad for it.

People interested in public health definetely do, so lots of research and vigilance is done for that, fortunately this completely contradicts the antivaxxer propaganda that presents false and misleading information to try to deceive people into unnecessary anxiety about vaccines. That or pull out arguments from imaginary data they can never produce but that supposedly proves what they say.

Asking people just to trust imaginary credentials and ignore the readily available scientific evidence is not a logical request, if you repeat that the experts and scientists say you can just refer to their very real authority on the matter and the data they use to make their recommendations, but if you are contradicting every single medical and scientific institution of the world you need much more than say you know better and that you have data without presenting it.

-5 ( +13 / -18 )

The vaccine is not the answer.

Not long ago, Indonesia was overrun with Covid-19, and they chose Ivermectin to treat it, as well as India. They wiped out the problem with its use. I posted the link before, it was overlooked, and taken down.

The virus can be killed in the beginning, at the most crucial time. Waiting is the enemy, that’s when the virus grows and goes on to do more damage.

But if it’s killed early, natural immunity will reside, which is better than any vaccine, with its side effects and yet unknown dangers.

Dr Zelenko’s “Z-pack”: Zinc, with Quercetin or HCQ, (the hcq or quercetin open the cells to allow the zinc in) with high dosage vit C, D-3, can kill the virus. Some even take now as protection, and increase dosage if illness occurs.

There is no need to use vaccines, especially in children. Many brilliant doctors, including Dr Robert Malone, who is the most knowledgeable on mRNA vaccines, have issued many warnings about the repercussions of mass vaccinating. It’s time people start listening more to these doctors, and less to knee-jerk authoritarians, whose agenda is not the health of the world.

5 ( +17 / -12 )

The article does not say anything about those who recovered from covid. They have greater immunity than the vaxxed and should therefore not need to lockdown, assuming this measure is truly about people's health.

Reports indicate the contrary, vaccinated people can have stronger immunity (specially if the previous infection is not heavily symptomatic) and even people previously infected benefit from the vaccine. Since no infection is the same people that want to prove they have "greater immunity" would need to prove it with repeated determinations that are much more expensive (and have bigger risks) than the vaccine.

The fact that the definition of a vaccine changed from “grants immunity” to provides “protection” should have been a hint.

Why is that? antivaxxer groups were abusing this to pretend immunity had a different meaning that wat is real in the medical field, this way this is no longer possible and the definition is still completely correct, in medicine immunity do not mean absolute protection.

-7 ( +13 / -20 )

Not long ago, Indonesia was overrun with Covid-19, and they chose Ivermectin to treat it, as well as India. They wiped out the problem with its use. I posted the link before, it was overlooked, and taken down.

There is no evidence at all that ivermectin had any role in controlling COVID in any place, and some evidence that points out it helped in nothing. Vaccines on the other hand clearly show huge decrease of risks, much more than any study on ivermectin have ever reported.

Precisely because of the immunity brought by vaccines inactivates the virus from the very beginning is why it is so useful, the vaccines are useful in reducing the risk on any population where they are indicated, including children, saying that there is no need in preventing unnecesssary deaths is deeply disturbing.

Can you present any institution of science or medicine that supports your views? big universities, hospitals, research institutes? because if not you are the one not listening to what the professionals are saying,

0 ( +14 / -14 )

Other articles I read say the exemption is for vaccinated people and those who have “recovered”.

but I didn’t find any further details on this natural immunity exemption. At least they have one, unlike other countries. As it is proven that one is “protected” by both the vaccine and by having had COVID.

Available evidence shows that fully vaccinated individuals and those previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 each have a low risk of subsequent infection for at least 6 months.

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

Readers, we'll try something new today. In order to prevent the usual bickering, and to keep the thread open, if you have already posted on this topic today, we ask that you please do not post again here for at least two hours.

Reports indicate the contrary, vaccinated people can have stronger immunity (specially if the previous infection is not heavily symptomatic) and even people previously infected benefit from the vaccine.

If it is better, it's for a few weeks at best before dropping to zero within 6 months.

The Science™ on the other hand calculates:

For SARS-CoV [immunity after infection], the 5–95% quantiles were 4 months to 6 years

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00219-6/fulltext

Natural immunity is demonstrably superior to the rip-offs being foisted onto the people of the world

5 ( +13 / -8 )

Why do they call it a lockdown ?

You can go walking or shopping

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

If it is better, it's for a few weeks at best before dropping to zero within 6 months.

the science indicates that after 6 months the immunity is literally less than zero. They are more susceptible to the virus than if they had never gotten vaxxed.

-2 ( +10 / -12 )

I don't understand why they won't make special districts that unvaccinated would live then it would be much easier to contain the virus.

-19 ( +3 / -22 )

A number of countries, with a low vax rate, solved COVID. You'd think Austria would be a LITTLE curious.

But nothing to see there folks, now move along and get your shots...

0 ( +11 / -11 )

Irrelevant. In Europe, as per the EMA, there is no vaccine approved for children under 12. That's why they are excempt.

So what???

Close the schools and lock down the kids under 12 too.

Especially because Austria is doing this action, because they want to protect the people to get infected and a prevent a overrun to hospitals.

Especially because everyone said that kids are the most highest risk for spreading the virus.

Or do just the adults spread the virus?

Same restrictions for all the unvaccinated, adults or kids, right?

Or better not?

-14 ( +1 / -15 )

WOW, harsh but understandable.

-6 ( +8 / -14 )

Im not for lockdowns but at least this way they limit the lockdown and its effects.

Anyway why not take into account the suggestion of including those who have been infected already.

In other countries the vaccinated or unvaccinated who gets a negative covid test are allowed same activities.

Why not do antibody tests to include those who pass also

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

The so called "protected" are fearing the unprotected. First time in History since the world began. Can they just mind their own business?

3 ( +11 / -8 )

How can it possibly be effective ?

The unvaccinated can go shopping or walking around.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

the science indicates that after 6 months the immunity is literally less than zero. They are more susceptible to the virus than if they had never gotten vaxxed.

You're too far gone man.

Are there even antivaxers who believe this?

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

In a place where availability is no longer a barrier to being vaccinated, this seems reasonable enough to me. If you want to drive a car you need to be insured and wear a seatbelt. If you want to travel internationally you need a passport. If you want to participate in society during a pandemic you need to be vaccinated.

That said, it is only 10 days and doesn't even apply to everyone and has a lot of exceptions (such as grocery shopping). I am not actually sure how much that will benefit things, but it may be something of a test run just to see if it incentivizes people to vaccinate. If it is effective at all they may extend it, and maybe other countries will even try the same thing.

Definitely worth keeping an eye on to see how it pans out, but I feel like people who have thus far refused vaccination won't be swayed by much of anything.

-4 ( +7 / -11 )

The so called "protected" are fearing the unprotected. First time in History since the world began. Can they just mind their own business?

Not the first.

Do you have kids? They need to have a lot of other routine vaccinations to get accepted in schools in some countries.

Have been mandatory for a long time

-4 ( +9 / -13 )

But I truly believe vaccinating, when there are pharmaceuticals that work, is a mistake.

But pharmaceuticals that work are only coming in now, and access is very limited.

In any case, vaccines are for preventing diseases, they are the first option when available even if there are already meds that work, which are used when someone is already infected or sick

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

MontyToday  07:16 am JST

except for basic activities such as working, grocery shopping,..

Ah, and I forgot, when you go to work or grocery shopping, you can not catch or spread the virus.

Like I said, this nonsense is completely getting out of control and what Austria is doing here is one of the biggest political BS decision I have ever heard.

Yeah, nah, it's not nonsense at all; it's not an elimination policy, they're aiming to 'reduce' numbers.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

I think some of you didn’t read the entire article, seeing how a third of the cases are from vaccinated folks, so what if 100% was vaccainted and there would still be cases, so who do you blame then? You don’t think they would still be implementing the same policies? Naive people

what makes me laugh is that from the vaccinated 65% of the population the number of infections is a third of the total compared to the unvaccinated 35% who amount to two thirds. And there are people who still think the vaccine doesn’t work.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

What’s the problem now? Although a few people including me having written multiple times what to do and been censored or bashed every time, the whole world has in majority stated it would all be over with two vaccinations and therefore also decided that it can easily and well live together with the viruses. Now shut up and just show exactly that. No excuses, complains, tears, just prove it, while you still can.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Thus only people with 3 shots should be exempt from lockdowns.

Why not?

The focus is on getting 2 shots.

As you know there are countries like Russia where the government is not able to provide even a single shot to its citizens!!!

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

What possible problem can anti-vaxxers, Covid-deniers and anti-lockdowners have with the action being taken by Austria to protect the vulnerable (i.e. the unvaccinated) in order to preserve the capacity of the health sector to cope with the burden of looking after too many sick people?

2020's Covid-deniers and anti-lockdowners (or anti- any other control measures) spent much of last year advocating that "vulnerable" people be locked away in order to protect them against Covid. Apparently there were "protocols" that could be put in place, everything would be hunky-dory, and the rest of society could carry on unimpeded at work and play, without having to worry about the over-50s or those with co-morbidities or those in nursing homes or indeed anyone else outside their own spheres of interest whose health problems might get in the way of what they described as "freedom".

But now that Covid-deniers and anti-lockdowners have morphed into 2021's anti-vaxxers, (often right in front of our eyes on JT), and the boot is on the other foot and anti-vaxxers are the vulnerable ones, they won't accept the measures they themselves suggested as being entirely suitable for others!

-2 ( +8 / -10 )

If it is better, it's for a few weeks at best before dropping to zero within 6 months.

No data indicates this, on the contrary reports indicate immunity after infection can decrease faster than from the vaccines.

Natural immunity is demonstrably superior to the rip-offs being foisted onto the people of the world

But you present no evidence of this, specially because natural immunity comes with precisely the full risks you are trying to avoid with immunity which would make it worse by definiton.

I think some of you didn’t read the entire article, seeing how a third of the cases are from vaccinated folks, so what if 100% was vaccainted and there would still be cases, so who do you blame then? You don’t think they would still be implementing the same policies? Naive people

Reduction is reduction, do you believe no people get hurt or killed if they wear a seat belt? or that people that do not drink never have a traffic accident? the point is taking rational measures that reduce the risk.

the science indicates that after 6 months the immunity is literally less than zero. They are more susceptible to the virus than if they had never gotten vaxxed.

There is no data that indicates this, anywhere. Pulling out imaginary "facts" only evidence that you don't have actual evidence to support these beliefs.

That argument can be used against everybody who took 2 shots but hasn't taken the 3rd.

Not at all, specially if the increase of the protection is not significant, that would be like arguing that you have to wear a paper tissue under your seatbelt because it decreases deaths in a rate of one less death per each 10 million drivers.

-4 ( +6 / -10 )

Yes, the CDC couldnt identify any transmission from 146 million people who caught COVID and recovered.

Its also strange that the same people trying to convince people that they also need a 3rd shot are the same people trying to convince the unvaccinated that the 1st shot has any value. Cause "vaccines work!" (if so, why are people even with boosters already still getting COVID?)

Meanwhile an unvaccinated NFL player caught COVID last week. Took ivermectin, recovered and played today at a high level, COVID free. While the other double vaccinated player caught COVID and didnt play at all.

1 ( +10 / -9 )

No data indicates this, on the contrary reports indicate immunity after infection can decrease faster than from the vaccines.

CDC:

*"Available evidence shows that fully vaccinated individuals and those previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 each have a low risk of subsequent infection for at least 6 months."*

They EACH have a low risk. same time frame, 6 months.

It didnt say one has a lower risk than the other or that one decreases quicker.

Each, and 6 months.

-2 ( +8 / -10 )

I am supporting this unvaccinated confinement.

Why?

Because it needs to become clear that the vaccine does not stop infection.

At least once there will only be vaccinated people mingling around and numbers still rising, this fact will become clear and unvaccinated can not be blamed anymore.

If after your 3rd shot, you still catch Covid and be sick for 2 weeks, ask yourself the right questions.

-1 ( +10 / -11 )

Absolutely the way it should be. Once vaccinated, let them mingle with other vaccinated people. No reason why spreaders should be allowed to ruin the nation for everyone, including themselves.

-7 ( +7 / -14 )

Thus only people with 3 shots should be exempt from lockdowns.

Why not?

Because 3rd shot is not necessary yet. Duh.

-6 ( +6 / -12 )

Again, I'm against lockdowns but this very discussion shows the need for it.

There are simply too many people that can't understand and won't listen to people who do understand.

If you really think that you know better than doctors then completely stop listening to them and heal thyself when you're sick.

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

Good move by Austria. I support it.

0 ( +11 / -11 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites