It's nearing the end of 2023, how many vaccines are you up to? Are you planning on getting more?
How Many COVID Vaccines Did You Get?
deme on 01/10/2023 - 12:00
Last edited 01/10/2023 - 12:00
Last edited 01/10/2023 - 12:00
Poll Options
- 222Zero
- 221
- 3782
- 7263
- 2974
- 2105
- 306
- 67
- 78
- 789+
Comments
The 0 category consists of the immunocomprised and those allergic to other vaccines so they can not despite wanting to.
Well, judging by the comments on this thread, this seems unlikely.
Perhaps some time spent honing observational skills, discernment, & drawing conclusions, may help you better understand.
Well, judging by the comments on this thread, this seems unlikely
You have replied to people in these comments that have said they are immunocomprised. Again, comments do not represent the opinions of the whole poll population.
Perhaps some time spent honing observational skills, discernment, & drawing conclusions, may help you better understand.
Something you lack in your comments that a childhood vaccine caused someones immunity problems, that someones stillbirth was from any vaccine if they got one, touting disproven homeopathy, using social media sources, etc etc.
Here's the final conclusion though you are only on this site to reinforce your bias opinion is the correct one. As you have:
* Voted on zero deals as the one you posted is automatically voted.
* You have 3/7 posts about covid.
* You have 439 comments currently. Half if not more are in coivd posts, and 149 are here.You have replied to people in these comments that have said they are immunocomprised.
There have been more posters in this thread commenting about how they were coerced into the shots than those who took the jabs because they were immunocompromised. And there are more posters who now regret the decision to get the jabs.
Something you lack in your comments that a childhood vaccine caused someones immunity problems, that someones stillbirth was from any vaccine if they got one
They absolutely may well of been. What's wrong with asking questions? It might trigger some connections in these people, who never thought to question or connect the jabs to their health issues.
only on this site to reinforce your bias opinion is the correct one
That can apply to anyone though can't it? How is it different to you posting links to studies & claiming they back your point of view?
There have been more posters in this thread commenting about how they were coerced into the shots than those who took the jabs because they were immunocompromised. And there are more posters who now regret the decision to get the jabs.
Okay how many?
That can apply to anyone though can't it? How is it different to you posting links to studies & claiming they back your point of view?
Because the majority of my interaction with this site is not covid related, unlike yours. Clearly your use of this site is to spread and reinforce your opinion against vaccines and covid, and not for deals.
Because the majority of my interaction with this site is not covid related, unlike yours. Clearly your use of this site is to spread your opinion against vaccines and covid, and not for deals.
Maybe it's because these are topics (health in general) I consider important & have wider ramifications & implications that if people understood or at least were willing to discuss, may lead to a change in worldview, for the better?
I use this site not much for deals, that is correct, for a variety of reasons (I'm particular with my tastes, quality generally over cheapness), but I certainly do keep an eye out for what I consider to be bargains, & glean useful information on a variety of topics (tips & hacks) from a variety of users.
Maybe it's because these are topics (health in general) I consider important & have wider ramifications & implications that if people understood or at least were willing to discuss, may lead to a change in worldview, for the better?
That's great in theory. However, any poor health posted in this thread, even unrelated to covid, you have suggested the cause to be vaccines. That is not asking questions or a discussion into better health outcomes. Its presenting your skewed worldview that vaccines and those behind them are the cause for all ill-health with no consideration for an alternative.
you have suggested the cause to be vaccines. That is not asking questions or a discussion into better health outcomes.
Yes, vaccines could be a cause. You disagree? Not having a jab, may have not resulted in the health outcome people reported.
Curious, do you believe vaccines only cause local, mild, short lived reactions, & never serious illnesses, or death?
I can categorically say they cause both, & the latter are highly under reported.
What's your view?
@mrdean: Ofcourse there is all levels of reactions.
I can categorically say they cause both, & the latter are highly under reported.
And the evidence?
And the evidence?
Before we start posting "evidence", how about we start on an even playing field. I've told you my views, can you please share yours on what I asked you so we "both" have a good idea about each others position.
touting disproven homeopathy,
Do you have an open enough mind to carefully read this:
https://www.townsendletter.com/article/439-40-homeopathy-liv…
?
@mrdean: I'm still waiting for you to post evidence that covid vaccine deaths are highly under reported. You apparently have time to go back 10 or so comments and reply to something else.
So you must have no evidence to support you, and now you want me to trust your article that has advertisements for three different products within it and stories that author refers to anecdotes because the results cant be replicated?
I'm still waiting for you to post evidence
Your reply to my reply asking for YOUR views, before we start showing "evidence" was:
@mrdean: Read.
I didn't bother to respond to that, because to me it was meaningless. What on earth did you mean by "Read."?
So, now stating you are waiting for me, is absurd.
I'm happy to start with the evidence, once you reply to what I asked. Are you acting in good faith or not?
author refers to anecdotes because the results cant be replicated?
I see you have zero interest in reading that article, which is one of the most thoughtful, balanced & considered pieces I've ever read on homeopathy & the so called "scientific method". From a genuine MD & Homeopath no less. There are quite a few doctors who actually hold qualifications in both fields.
What on earth did you mean by "Read."?
So, now stating you are waiting for me, is absurd.The act of reading. It clearly says in my reply.
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/14391297/redirI see you have zero interest in reading that article,
You quoted me talking about something that happens in the mid point of the article.
I don’t think that implies what you think it implies at all. You wouldn't expect vaccinated individuals to necessarily continue getting any more than 3 when the medical advice has been for a long time that they don’t actually need any more than that.
It’s quite unlikely any more than a small minority actually regret being vaccinated. They just have the sense that it is …over and done now. And they don’t need 5, 6, 7 onwards.
You wouldn't expect vaccinated individuals to necessarily continue getting any more than 3 when the medical advice has been for a long time that they don’t actually need any more than that.
The recommendations, using complex reasoning & wording, include a 2023 "booster" dose for most age groups.
See here: https://www.health.gov.au/news/atagi-update-on-the-covid-19-…
And on a side, this is what "our" government has written on one of its pages regarding the "mandates". It is a direct insult to whose who were coerced into the jabs in order to keep their jobs:
"The Australian Government has not made vaccination mandatory and you can choose not to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Some state and territory public health orders can mandate vaccination in certain circumstances. For example, for some types of employment and for some community activities."
https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccines/covid-1…
The Australian Government has not made
Wouldn't the difference between federal and state governments make their statement correct?
While the federal gov did fail massively (understatement) in doing some of the things they should have been responsible for, like border control and quarantine, they didn't implement/enforce the state based health mandates or recommendations
Wouldn't the difference between federal and state governments make their statement correct?
The federal, state & territory governments, on this subject at least, have been working together to achieve their aim of getting as many people as possible jabbed.
The recommendations, using complex reasoning & wording, include a 2023 "booster" dose for most age groups.
That is simply not true at all. The recommendation is for older people. Your very supporting link says that.
I’ll admit, their advice is terrible and I don’t hold ATAGI in high esteem.
But they’ve chosen to move to the language “recommend” for older people and “consider” for younger people.
Most people have not been recommended to get another booster.
That is simply not true at all. The recommendation is for older people. Your very supporting link says that.
Does "consider" lean more towards "recommended" or "not recommended"? I know which one it points towards. ATAGI says "consider" in relation to their Feb 2023 "guidance" should be discussed by individuals with their health care providers. Given the pressure doctors are under, & their training, do you really believe they wouldn't recommend it? I would hope they wouldn't, but I doubt most are at that stage yet.
In essence, they are recommending in their Feb 2023 guidance, for the no risk group every single person over the age of 18 to get jabbed again. It also amusing how they stratified the age groups, 18-64 being by far the biggest group.
@mrdean: That couldn’t be further from the truth.
ATAGI has been highly reluctant to advise any more than a single booster, and the messaging has always emphasised it was only recommended for older people.
Back when they called it an “Winter Dose” they actually explicitly stated that it was “not recommended.” They walked that back but their language is very deliberate and doesn’t “lean” any way. You simply have an agenda to push, and are intentionally flavouring their very deliberately neutral language. Consider means consider. It does not imply, and is not intended to imply, a recommendation.
Medical consensus that most people don’t really need any more than one booster.
Once again, I don’t hold ATAGI in any sort of esteem. But let’s not just totally misrepresent them.
Did the same & could not agree more.
It's really sad that you can tell how many boosters deep some of these people are, just by how much more unhinged they've become.
The way I see the whole mandatory vaccine debate it is all about the economy and the greater good (in their mind at least). Basically governments had the choice of the following
Follow the science and force the vaccine on everyone to reduce the impact the virus will have on the economy. They can't just force it on the at risk category of the population because people will lie. Side effects for the small percentage of the population be damned.
Allow their citizens the freedom to choose and see the rapid decline of their economy and the well-being of their population.
It's easy to see why governments chose the former because the latter is basically political suicide.
Sweden didnt have any vaccine mandates and they did not experience any rapid decline in their economy or the well being of their population. In fact there is no dispute that Sweden had one of the best Covid19 outcomes in the world with zero lockdowns, zero border closures, zero school closures, zero mask mandates and zero vaccine mandates.
The hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars Australia pissed up against the wall on Covid was a demonstration of the very worst economic management imaginable.
Sweden in fact was possibly the only country in the world who followed the actual science of pandemic management, as opposed to the 2020 newly made up illogical authoritarian anti-science followed by most countries with Australia being one of the worst offenders.
Any continuing claims that the hysterical overreaction we suffered through here was "following the science" are made only by people who are either brainwashed or braindead at this point. History will not be kind.
Ultimately, this led to Sweden having worse COVID-19 outcomes than its neighboring Nordic countries.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/scathing-evaluation-swedens-co…
Mate American MSM you may as well publish a press release from Pfizer ot Moderna on the efficacy of mRNA vaccines, it would be equally objective.
The whole world was out to get Sweden from the outset, you cant lie about the effectiveness of your bullshit policies when you have a control group.
My admiration to Sweden for not folding to the propaganda and the peer pressure is immense.
@jmc787: i googled "covid deaths country". sorted by "per million", chose europe.
Weirdly, Sweden is above it's neighbours Norway, Finland, and Denmark
@Davo1111: These a lot more to life than just Covid Davo, there always was.Maybe some day people like you clutching at straws will put down your magnifying glass and look at the bigger picture.
@Gehirn: Ohhh one of the so called "science" journals lol ! History wont be kind to them either. Bought and paid for the whole lot of them. Totally discredited.
@jmc787: Omg your right, it must be a conspiracy.
"Funding by The Karolinska Institute"
"The Karolinska Institute (KI; Swedish: Karolinska Institutet;[2] sometimes known as the (Royal) Caroline Institute in English[3][4]) is a research-led medical university in Solna within the Stockholm urban area of Sweden. The Karolinska Institute is consistently ranked amongst the world's best medical schools, ranking 6th worldwide for medicine in 2021 and 7th in 2023. The Nobel Assembly at the Karolinska Institute awards the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine."
Omg your right, it must be a conspiracy.
"Funding by The Karolinska Institute"
$2.3m committed grant Sep 2020 BMGF.
https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants/2020/…The lead author of the study you linked: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01097-5
Nele Brusselaers is also at Ghent University & Antwerp Universities, in various divisions.
Both of those universities have received over 10 million dollars in research funding from the BMGF, going back a number of years.
https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants?q=ghe…
https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants?q=ant…I'm not saying this particular research project you linked to is directly funded by BMGF, but I am showing you the money flowing from the Foundation into these centres of supposed unbiased "research".
The Grand Impact of the Gates Foundation (2008 article):
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2373372/
- Sweden has less than half the population of Australia and more covid deaths.
- A death rate multiple times higher than their neighbouring countries that locked down.
- Sweden's death toll for over 60's was over 20,000 compared to Australia's around 11,000.
You're still falling for the original mistake of reducing your entire economy and population to a single microscopic goal of minimising deaths "with" Covid in an agegroup that will naturally die from something else instead. If you rationalise locking down 25 million people for 2 years and spending hundreds of billions of dollars causing massive economic social and education damage to the entire population so that 9,000 80+ year olds got to die naturally from something else then you are utterly demented.
@jmc787: Okay but you said Sweden had no decline in the well being of its population.
So what's the number of people dying where you do act?
@jmc787: The old "fark ém, they're going to die anyway" rationalisation.
I can hardly wait till you get old. Who knows, you may even grow up along the way.
The old "fark ém, they're going to die anyway" rationalisation.
Ever wonder if this was a truly deadly pandemic that was a major threat to the human race, then why didn't our leaders do everything to protect those in the prime of their lives or the very young, first? After all, they are the ones shouldered with carrying on the human race, not the elderly in retirement homes, nursing homes or aged care facilities.
Those were deaths WITH Covid, not deaths FROM Covid.
Why do you insist on spreading misinformation like that, still ?
@infinite: 15% of the deaths were identified as directly caused FROM the virus in this study from 2021.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14034948211047137
You must be a masochist since you keep wanting to be proven wrong from your lies.
@Gehirn: So now your fact checking yourself and saying you were only 15% telling the truth ?
That's an interesting way to admit you lied.
@infinite: So now you admit there were deaths FROM covid?
That's an interesting way to admit you lied.
@Gehirn: Still refusing to explain yourself and why you continue to spread medical misinformation here, huh ?
@infinite: Oh you needed it explained to you? Sorry. A journal article is where scientists, doctors, and other professionals post their findings as replicated in experiments or researched from other sources. They are found in academic journals, these journals are peer-reviewed meaning their peers review their article to make sure it is credible. This one is posted in The Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. Scandinavia is the region Sweden is located, the topic of conversation. The authors of the article present medical records of a region of Sweden saying there are deaths directly caused by covid and not other causes. This is important because you said people only died with covid. However as stated these people died from covid.
@Gehirn: Why didn't you read it, then ?
The study clearly states in it's conclusion that the only reason why Sweden had a bump in the death rate in 2020 compared to Norway, was because Sweden had an unusually lower than normal mortality rate for the +70 age bracket in 2018/19 period. The slight 3% increase in 2020 simply smoothed the curve from the year prior back to it's normal mortality rate.
There was no link or causality in relation to Covid at all. Every other age group for 2020 had lower mortality rates per capita compared to Norway.
So again, why are you in here spraying medical misinformation & deliberately lying about medical studies ?
@infinite: I have made no comment of the trends in the singular year of 2020, or any comments about the study than the following.
15% of the deaths were identified as directly caused by the virus
You said there are only deaths with covid and it says there are medical records of deaths from covid. The rest of the article is irrelevant to the topic of conversation.
If you accept their finding of a 3% increase though, you are accepting deaths from covid.
Thankyou.
The way I see the whole mandatory vaccine debate it is all about the economy
Holyshit, I got 5 vaccines but this is just insane.
Wow 😯! Are you up to date yet?!
I dunno what up to date means the messaging has been so crap.
I've taken into consideration the risks for me and my family and done what I think is a good idea.
Does that mean you should do the same? Dunno, ymmv
Of course governments wanted to reduce the number of deaths and hospitalizations as well which is what I meant by the greater good.
You said economy.
@deme: You replied to my comment so I'm typing it again because I can't edit it now.
Of course governments wanted to reduce the number of deaths and hospitalizations as well which is what I meant by the greater good. But what I am saying is that came second compared to the economy for their decision making.
Rather than give us a choice which is what I feel far more people would have accepted, they wanted it over with as quickly as possible because it was doing major damage to the economy. If they gave us a choice with the vaccine, the covid hysteria would have lasted even longer because even without lockdowns, people would still self isolate. Also a lot of people like me weren't even anti-vax but was still on the fence about taking a rushed vaccine and they couldn't wait for people like us who were still making up our minds or waiting for a better vaccine and are self isolating in the mean time.
In essence they wanted us to take the vaccine to feel safe again so that we could start going out and waste money on stupid things again.
In essence they wanted us to take the vaccine to feel safe again so that we could start going out and waste money on stupid things again
You can do that from the relative safety of your home w/o needing to go out . Just stay glued to OzB deals for some dumb dumb things to buy
In essence they wanted us to take the vaccine to feel safe again so that we could start going out and waste money on stupid things again.
Agreed
Holy Shit 70 people on here have had 9 doses plus 😳😳😳😳🤷♂️
Just unimaginably cooked now.
I saw a post yesterday about a quadruple vaccinated lady from QLD that claimed to be on her tenth covid infection. She’s hoping more doses will save her 🤯😱. No dots have connected whatsoever.
Never thought I'd live to see the day.
First Major World Politician Apologizes To the Unvaccinated: ‘You Were Right, We Were Wrong’
Danielle Smith, the premier of Alberta, Canada, is the first major elected politician in the world to issue a heartfelt apology to the unvaccinated for crimes perpetrated against their human rights by the government during Covid lockdowns.
“I can apologize right now. I’m deeply sorry,” she said, “for anyone who was inappropriately subjected to discrimination as a result of their vaccine status, I’m deeply sorry. For any government employee that was fired from their job, because of their vaccine status, and I welcome them back if they want to come back.”
Did you not look at that politicians past statements about vaccines before just assuming it supports your point (or the point you just blindly copied from twitter/X)?
Never thought I'd live to see the day :)Nope. What did she say?
(I guess that would explain why she is the only one of the despots who has apologised (or is she?) )
Nope
Do you see why this is an issue in terms of critical thinking?
Never thought I'd live to see the day.
She actually said this October 11, 2022. You have lived many days since it happened.
https://twitter.com/TheBreakdownAB/status/166148109808449945…she once compared vaccinated to Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich.
This is clearly a major 180 degree turn around in here views and resulting apology to the unvaccinated :)Someone clearly just assumes what they read is true and spends no 'critical thinking' time actually verifying 60s article snippets on twitter
OK thanks for that. :)
Have there been any others since?
I see these open ended questions posed on Twitter all the time. They're usually posted by antivaxxers so that they can get into a debate with you about your choices. There is no point trying to convince someone that they are wrong when they've already made up their mind not to trust the scientific process. You can't use logic in arguments with people like that.
This post feels exactly like that.
How Many COVID Vaccines Did You Get? 0-n where n is bounded by the number of vaccine boosters.
Are you planning on getting more? Yes/No/UnsureHow is this open ended?
They're usually posted by antivaxxers
I've also had 5 shots.
Almost no one is anti-vaccinations in general, it's obvious why so many are (and will continue) to be anti clot-shot though.
Almost no one is anti-vaccinations in general
What's your opinion on the ones who are 100% against any Vax?
Don't know, have never met anyone in my lifetime who actually holds that belief.
@Ughhh: Feel free to link to multiple examples of individuals who have openly stated they are against any & all vaccinations.
@infinite: They've posted here many times. If you can't see it…. Well I can't make you see something you want to be ignorant of.
@infinite: Will your view change depending if I find/link one or not?
Are you afraid to express your view? Or scared of what that person will do to you?@infinite: Are you incapable of thinking of such situation and understand yourself enough to know what your opinion would be?
Did you have to experience being burnt to know the damage fire can cause? lolol
They are smart! If I had my time again I wouldn’t have had a single “vaccine”
For the monsters who continue to recommend this to children, I hope you go to jail for being negligent, ignoring science and ethics:
https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/amp…
For anyone who supported this experiment, you also support all the pain and death this has caused to 1/800 people who would end up developing a serious adverse reaction.
Other vaccines have been pulled for 1/10,000
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X2…
Shame!!
I'd encourage everyone to carefully & critically read that article & the embedded letter from the Health Minister to the family.
The so called compensation scheme has been set up to mirror the US experience back in the 1980s of an expedited no fault scheme with a special court with special judges. Originally that scheme actually provided some decent results because the bill that created it was actually pushed for by parents of jab injured children. But what happened was that over time, amendments were made to it by the pharmaceutical lobby industry that weakened it & made it an adversarial system. The list of medical conditions that warranted compensation was whittled down, it was made a lot more difficult to claim & the process was drawn out with a lot of hoops to jump through. Now, it essentially provides protection to the pharmaceutical industry, just like the regulators do. I have no doubt in time the same will apply here.
And then, the last section of the article where they talk about "benefits vs risk" is basically a public relations exercise to reassure the population that the jabs have saved more lives than they have harmed.
The study you presented:
"In the randomized trials used in this analysis, all SAEs (serious adverse events) were to be recorded, irrespective of clinical judgment regarding potential causality"
irrespective of clinical judgment regarding potential causality"
The get out of jail card. Plausible deniability.
That's all you see, in the entire study? FFS!
I see:
- A peer reviewed study:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4125239- 50 references
- Cited in 116 other studies
- 7 experts who have been cited hundreds of times
For everyone else THAT WANTS TO READ WHAT A PEER REVIEWED STUDY FOUND:
"Results: Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events of special interest, with an absolute risk increase of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95% CI -0.4 to 20.6 and -3.6 to 33.8), respectively. Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an absolute risk increase of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 (95% CI 2.1 to 22.9). The excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest surpassed the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group in both Pfizer and Moderna trials (2.3 and 6.4 per 10,000 participants, respectively).
Discussion: The excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalization or death."
Eat it. Learn. Stop advocating for shit killing children. Get it through your heads.
You want SCIENCE, HERE IT IS. PEER REVIEWED!!
That's all you see, in the entire study? FFS!
No, I see it as what they posted it as a study of events that followed someone getting vaccinated. It is not a study of causation as you promote it as. "Following", "Association", their own quote I posted. Linking a different source of the journal and quoting more of the abstract doesn't change their own wording. Did you even read past the abstract? They are very forthcoming with the limitations.
Those vaccine studies were conducted by Pfizer and Moderna you know? I find it rather ironic you yourself and others who say you dont trust them and their findings on the efficacy of the vaccine now trust them when their reporting something that fits your agenda.
Eat it. Learn. Stop advocating for shit killing children. Get it through your heads.
This study does not even represent the effects of the vaccine in children. The results from the moderna trial is 18+, and pfizer is only 16+.
You want to boil it down to an emotional debate of who is in favour of killing children. How many confirmed vaccine deaths in children are there in Australia? 0. Yet there are confirmed deaths of children due to Covid.
You want SCIENCE, HERE IT IS. PEER REVIEWED!!
Yeah that article is science. Your opinion that this is conclusive evidence and twisting it is not science. Especially when they say it is only a primary investigation and in the discussion (as you quoted) that further investigation is needed, and Covid-19 may be a bigger risk to people. If it was peer reviewed with your title and conclusion that the vaccine caused the events it would have failed peer reviewal.
@Gehirn: You clearly didn't read the study at all. Why are you so desperately spreading misinformation here still?
Do you have a financial interest in these pharma companies or something?
@infinite: No, I only have a financial interest in ozbargain. I get paid by the total comments here so keep it up.
points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalization or death.
You just stopped there and thought “case closed”?
This isn’t a hypothetical point.
We HAVE done a harm-benefit analysis. And it HAS been stratified according to risk.
That’s where the recommendations come from. And that’s why the recommendations are stratified in age groups, racial groups (aboriginal), health status (immunocompromised) as well - some being recommended to booster, others not!
The fact of the matter is, the risks are far outweighed by the benefit.
@haemolysis: Get a life bot, you literally can't read anything. Just let intelligent people discuss please. ChatGPT can answer better than you can. That's not a FACT. Stop spreading MISINFORMATION BOT!!
3 but only becuz my workplace/s world of sacked me if i didnt get 3
The story for thousands. I will never forgive or forget the complete and utter overreach by the Morrison, state and territory premiers. The lies, and coercion were a whole other level! Yet our death rates have climbed significantly. Never mind there’s nothing to see here.
it was the state premiers that mandated the vax in a number of states it was optional Victoria was mandatory blame Andrews
Yes but did you know that where state/territory and federal laws clash the federal law is supposed to take affect. Morrison did nothing and is therefore to blame as well.
@AussieDolphin: The Federal Govt has no ability to over-rule the states if they enact the equivalent of a "state of emergency". He stated it specifically as the reason why he couldn't stop the Victorian Government from abusing the basic rights of Victorians or locking down their own borders.
It was the federal government that acquired the clotshots, it was the federal government that allowed states access to your vax status. The federal government was the enabler of this crime.
@mrdean: Yes lets circle back like 8 comments to this again.
I will do some mrdean speculation on the unclear 0-2 category. The 0 category consists of the immunocomprised and those allergic to other vaccines so they can not despite wanting to. The 1 category had a reaction to the covid vaccine likewise. The 2 category, the majority of Australia's population 95% which has shown support for the measures and vaccine. Also in those three categories are non-"believers at the time but have since changed their views".
Plus the very real 7,8,9 options.