Coachella scraps mandatory vaccination rule, says negative test fine

[BornAsUnic0rn 1,854]

9 minutes ago, TEANUS said:

But the vaccine isn’t full proof, you can still get and spread the virus fully vaccinated. I’m vaccinated with J&J and felt no side effects, I’d recommend it to anyone. So your misinformation, ‘woke’ attempts are fruitless. But nice try at dragging me.

 

Thanks for explaining how vaccines work.

 

[Economy 43,989]

33 minutes ago, CameltoeKween said:

This is harmful misinformation and it would be a real shame is someone read this and walked away thinking there's no point in getting vaccinated against COVID-19.

A fully vaccinated population means nearly zero hospitalizations, and a greatly reduced chance of virus mutation. The chances of catching COVID once vaccinated are so low that it's almost a non-issue, and even if you get breakthrough COVID it's nothing more than a light cold for most. Enforcing a vaccine policy for attendance is 100x more safe and effective at controlling outbreak than just negative tests.

If everyone did their part and got both shots, this would've been over a long time ago - but too many people have to give their two cents and carelessly spread misinformation that casts doubts. It's incredibly sad and frustrating.

What u going on about? I never suggested ppl shouldnt get their vaccines

 

And i did say the unvaccinated are a problem cuz they can catch it

 

Stop twisting my words

[Cameltoe Chariot 11,804]

4 minutes ago, Economy said:

What u going on about? I never suggested ppl shouldnt get their vaccines

 

And i did say the unvaccinated are a problem cuz they can catch it

 

Stop twisting my words

I didn’t reply to you… 

[SpiritBunny 2,942]

3 minutes ago, CameltoeKween said:

I didn’t reply to you… 

drag her sis

[Cameltoe Chariot 11,804]

40 minutes ago, TEANUS said:

But the vaccine isn’t full proof, you can still get and spread the virus fully vaccinated. I’m vaccinated with J&J and felt no side effects, I’d recommend it to anyone. So your misinformation, ‘woke’ attempts are fruitless. But nice try at dragging me.

 

The difference is the odds of catching it when you’re double vaxxed versus not vaxxed, as well as the severity of illness if you do catch it.

You can also be exposed to the virus after getting a test that comes back negative and still bring it into the festival grounds.

Having both a vaccine policy and requiring negative tests is the best way to prevent a super spreader event.

Understanding the science behind vaccines and viral transmission doesn’t make me “woke” but nice try with that dig.

[Economy 43,989]

4 minutes ago, CameltoeKween said:

I didn’t reply to you… 

When i pressed reaction notification the page scrolled straight to ur comment and i thought the reply was to my comment 

 

My mistake 

 

im sorry  

[Cameltoe Chariot 11,804]

1 minute ago, Economy said:

When i pressed reaction notification the page scrolled straight to ur comment and i thought the reply was to my comment 

 

My mistake 

 

im sorry  

 

It’s okay sis 

And for the record I’m not trying to drag anybody with what I said. My only concern is making sure the facts are out there and that people aren’t spreading misinformation, even if it’s well intentioned.

All I want is for people to be informed and safe! 

[salty like sodium 721]

2 hours ago, Economy said:

I mean a negative test (if very recent) is probably even better to prevent spread from u than the vaccine given vaccinated can still spread unknowingly if they are infected

 

The problem is the unvaccinated with the test catching it

 

also a test is not always reliable ...

[Economy 43,989]

4 minutes ago, salty like sodium said:

also a test is not always reliable ...

Theres nothing thats 100% reliable. But if im not mistaken, if ur viral load is high enough to spread its extremely unlikely ull get a false negative although it can technically happen

 

Of course regardless of tests having ppl vaccinated is invaluable and i didnt suggest otherwise.

 

Im merely saying tests are pretty effective in terms of stopping unvacinated from spreading it to others in general even tho it doesnt protect them so its still a pretty solid measure id say...

 

Im not saying tests are better in general if u had to pick one or the other since vaccines reduce spread on the giving and receiving end while tests only reduce on the giving end

[Jnick81 417]

1 hour ago, TEANUS said:

But the vaccine isn’t full proof, you can still get and spread the virus fully vaccinated. I’m vaccinated with J&J and felt no side effects, I’d recommend it to anyone. So your misinformation, ‘woke’ attempts are fruitless. But nice try at dragging me.

 

It’s about making sure your loved ones have access to hospital beds and ventilators if it comes to that. Nothing else. 
The vaccine doesn’t make you immune. It reduces the worst symptoms in most and that can save a community. 
❤️

[salty like sodium 721]

1 hour ago, Economy said:

Theres nothing thats 100% reliable. But if im not mistaken, if ur viral load is high enough to spread its extremely unlikely ull get a false negative although it can technically happen

 

Of course regardless of tests having ppl vaccinated is invaluable and i didnt suggest otherwise.

 

Im merely saying tests are pretty effective in terms of stopping unvacinated from spreading it to others in general even tho it doesnt protect them so its still a pretty solid measure id say...

 

Im not saying tests are better in general if u had to pick one or the other since vaccines reduce spread on the giving and receiving end while tests only reduce on the giving end

I think it's more that the incubation period is quite vague. Like what if you caught covid the night before your test, or the night after your test and before the event ? But yeah I wasn't implying that that's what you were suggesting, just that vaccines are a bit more trustworthy than tests because once you're vaccinated, you're vaccinated.

Ideally they should ask for both.

[Flawless 2,092]

the new variant is coming from US

[Economy 43,989]

18 hours ago, salty like sodium said:

I think it's more that the incubation period is quite vague. Like what if you caught covid the night before your test, or the night after your test and before the event ? But yeah I wasn't implying that that's what you were suggesting, just that vaccines are a bit more trustworthy than tests because once you're vaccinated, you're vaccinated.

Ideally they should ask for both.

Im just not sure the odds of a test failing because u get it right before or after tests is really higher than the chances ull still spread with vaccine. Cuz the probabilities ud get it right on the incubation period seem extremely extremely tiny thats why i said i thought that in terms of spreading it to others i feel like the test might actually be more effective than the vaccine

 

However thats for spreading im saying but obviously a test doesnt protect u from getting it so theres that to add to equation

 

And again to be chrystal clear i wasnt suggesting ppl not get shots cuz they should. Like no one is gonna be tested every day for starters for ur everyday life

 

But i do however feel its a reasonable safety policy for a specific event thats why im not all that against it

[salty like sodium 721]

38 minutes ago, Economy said:

Im just not sure the odds of a test failing because u get it right before or after tests is really higher than the chances ull still spread with vaccine. Cuz the probabilities ud get it right on the incubation period seem extremely extremely tiny thats why i said i thought that in terms of spreading it to others i feel like the test might actually be more effective than the vaccine

 

However thats for spreading im saying but obviously a test doesnt protect u from getting it so theres that to add to equation

 

And again to be chrystal clear i wasnt suggesting ppl not get shots cuz they should. Like no one is gonna be tested every day for starters for ur everyday life

 

But i do however feel its a reasonable safety policy for a specific event thats why im not all that against it

I think for such a large event, both should be mandatory, imo, I mean we are talking about thousands of people who will encounter many more in their personal lives before and after the event. But I get what you're saying !

[Economy 43,989]

6 minutes ago, salty like sodium said:

I think for such a large event, both should be mandatory, imo, I mean we are talking about thousands of people who will encounter many more in their personal lives before and after the event. But I get what you're saying !

I agree! Requiring both would be even better than either one or the other for sure which wouldnt be a bad idea for such a packed event