Coronavirus

mb
Good point. Not that it will get answered.

Why has not one Dem including on here talked about the illegals who have COVID being not just allowed in but bused and flown all over our country?
Until they do their rant about un vaccinated people just reveals their idiocy and bias.
 
Can’t wait to see the science tomorrow from the CDC on masking up again. On talk radio today they were saying it was based on a study in India on a vaccine not used here. It was local conservative talk radio so take it with a grain of salt.
 
Some Americans are getting vaccinated secretly because they fear backlash

I have an uncle in NE that secretly got vaccinated. He's been caring for his sister who is recovering from cancer. Whereas another uncle is your typical West Mall anti-vaxxer. The second uncle carries a lot of weight as the owner of several small businesses across town. He's a hard working businessman but also a Trump fan and government conspiracy enthusiast that carried right into the belief that many espouse here. How sad that someone, fearing for the life of another loved one, has to hide the fact that they got vaccinated to protect that loved one.
 
I get vaccinated against things that can really affect me, not some China made virus. Not interested in having polio, smallpox, and the like. Covid, eh, whatever. For a virus that has been around not since the moment we were all born, it sure doesn't do much overall destruction, in spite of the over hype.

I just don't get it, and I don't get why that would make me an "anti-vaxxer".
 
OUBubba said:
That’s a little like saying “who are the horn fans here?”
Click to expand...
You proved my point about liberals. You do whatever the government and CNN tells you. The propaganda works on you.

I waited on getting vaccinated, but I’m not anti vaccine. Others like Deez have said the same thing. It’s a risk-reward analysis by those who can actually think for themselves. The CDC and Biden have totally F’d up the vaccines Trump accelerated to market. Your President and Vice President recommended not taking it before they were elected. Even for a sooner, you ain’t too bright.

Oh and call them out by name.
 
nashhorn said:
??? Is the National vaccination rate dropping? Back when the goal was 70% I thought I saw where we were in the high 60’s. Is it now lower because we’re including a greater age span?
Click to expand...
You may be confusing %population vs %adults vs %eligible. Right now US is approx 70% adults and 68% eligible vaccinated. Virtue signaling liberals like to use %population to make other Americans look stupid. 24% of population is 18 and under. No reason for these folks to vaccinate except to be guinea pigs for the benefit for everyone over 40.
 
Last edited:
mb227 said:
I'll put that in the category of made-up statistics. Just the other day, we were being told it was 99% of patients with the rona (never mind that they were not discussing whether the admission had even been FOR the sniffles.

It's fear porn to enable the fear mongering.

And now you have the Surgeon General claiming EVERYONE is eventually going to get Delta if unvaccinated. Not a single study to back the claim but, hey, let's run with fear porn. Add in Fauci claiming that it is not even known whether increased viral load actually is provable as increased transmissibility, but, again...let's require everyone to mask up regardless of status.

Meanwhile, we still have no asymptomatic spread AND we have a sieve at the southern border. If there were REALLY a problem, then the Border should be closed and biohazard kits given to every citizen into which to place the used masks. Instead, someone who cannot fly from Paris to NYC can just get to Mexico and come in with a welcome mat. Oh, and if they are positive, they will STILL just be waved in with no tracking whatsoever...
Click to expand...
Probably a good *assumption* that everyone will get covid in next 3 years.
 
UTChE96 said:
Biden wants to pay people $100 to get the vaccine. Good grief.
Click to expand...
Actually not a bad idea if you consider the following :
- young adults who are vaccinating take all the risk of the shot and little of the benefit. The benefit goes to older Americans (>40).
- young adults should be paid to take the shot to balance the risk and benefit balance. It should be $1000 for 12-17, $500 for 18-29, and $250 for 30-39. Older folks don’t get paid because the benefits of the shot is payment enough.
 
mb227 said:
Its crazy that we are wasting money on kabuki theatre while we have a sieve at the southern border and STILL no discussion about why a mask worn to prevent a DEADLY virus is just casually thrown away instead of being treated as the biohazard that it would seem to be...

MOST people are MORE at risk FROM the vaccine than by NOT having it.
Click to expand...
I agree the government is upside down on this. If you are vaccinated and healthy, you shouldn’t wear a mask because you WANT to get exposed. It provides additional immunity. The government can’t figure out that their messaging needs to be tiered. Instead, it’s one size fits all.
 
Last edited:
theiioftx said:
You proved my point about liberals. You do whatever the government and CNN tells you. The propaganda works on you.

I waited on getting vaccinated, but I’m not anti vaccine. Others like Deez have said the same thing. It’s a risk-reward analysis by those who can actually think for themselves. The CDC and Biden have totally F’d up the vaccines Trump accelerated to market. Your President and Vice President recommended not taking it before they were elected. Even for a sooner, you ain’t too bright.

Oh and call them out by name.
Click to expand...
Dum-dum liberals don’t understand individual risk assessments. They believe in the collective. Don’t be surprised if they support soylent green to feed voters.
 
mchammer said:
Actually not a bad idea if you consider the following :
- young adults who are vaccinating take all the risk of the shot and little of the benefit. The benefit goes to older Americans (>40).
- young adults should be paid to take the shot to balance the risk and benefit balance. It should be $1000 for 12-17, $500 for 18-29, and $250 for 30-39. Older folks don’t get paid because the benefits of the shot is payment enough.
Click to expand...
Let’s teach people to hold out on getting vaccinated for more money. 60 days from now they can get $1000. Liberals are dunces.
 
horninchicago said:
I get vaccinated against things that can really affect me, not some China made virus. Not interested in having polio, smallpox, and the like. Covid, eh, whatever. For a virus that has been around not since the moment we were all born, it sure doesn't do much overall destruction, in spite of the over hype.

I just don't get it, and I don't get why that would make me an "anti-vaxxer".
Click to expand...

As someone who has had both Pfizer shots I can say that being cautious of a drug that has not even been approved doesn't make someone an anti-vaxxer. WTF is wrong with the left in this country?
 
Garmel said:
As someone who has had both Pfizer shots I can say that being cautious of a drug that has not even been approved doesn't make someone an anti-vaxxer. WTF is wrong with the left in this country?
Click to expand...
Let me clarify. I'm not afraid of the "vaccine". The virus itself doesn't scare me, so no need to feel like I need to get the "vaccine".
 
I got both shots in March and have had no negative effects. Unless you count webbing between the toes and the new found ability to speak Mandarin.

Seriously, no negative effects....yet.
 
You are not an anti vaxxer, but according to lapdog liberals you are. You just know you are healthy and at low risk if you get Covid.
 
mchammer said:
Dum-dum liberals don’t understand individual risk assessments. They believe in the collective. Don’t be surprised if they support soylent green to feed voters.
Click to expand...
Worst. Movie. Ever. Wife has to watch it for a grad school project. She Mae me watch it to make sure she wasn’t missing something.
 
Garmel said:
As someone who has had both Pfizer shots I can say that being cautious of a drug that has not even been approved doesn't make someone an anti-vaxxer. WTF is wrong with the left in this country?
Click to expand...
You are not allowed to do your own risk assessment. They seriously don’t understand that they are asking 14 years old to risk their health for the benefit of someone they have never met who can protect themselves with the vaccine.
 
I think this piece in Slate (of all places) is illustrative of why many of us aren't just reflexively getting the vaccine. There is a credibility problem for those trying to encourage it.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I think this piece in Slate (of all places) is illustrative of why many of us aren't just reflexively getting the vaccine. There is a credibility problem for those trying to encourage it.
Click to expand...

I know Slate is sugar coating a tad here, but no doubt it's a damning piece

When experts or agencies deliver information to the public that they consider possibly or definitively false to further a larger, often well-meaning agenda, they are telling what is called a noble lie. Although the teller’s intentions may be pure—for example, a feeling of urgency that behavioral change is needed among the lay public—the consequences can undermine not only those intentions but also public trust in experts and science. During the first year of COVID-19, leaders were faced with an unknown disease amid a politically sensitive election in the era of social media, and the preconditions for noble lies became especially fertile. Not surprisingly, we witnessed several examples. More than anything, these examples illustrate the destructive potential of such lies.
 
Horn2RunAgain said:
I know Slate is sugar coating a tad here, but no doubt it's a damning piece

When experts or agencies deliver information to the public that they consider possibly or definitively false to further a larger, often well-meaning agenda, they are telling what is called a noble lie. Although the teller’s intentions may be pure—for example, a feeling of urgency that behavioral change is needed among the lay public—the consequences can undermine not only those intentions but also public trust in experts and science. During the first year of COVID-19, leaders were faced with an unknown disease amid a politically sensitive election in the era of social media, and the preconditions for noble lies became especially fertile. Not surprisingly, we witnessed several examples. More than anything, these examples illustrate the destructive potential of such lies.
Click to expand...
Look at what they said about vaccinating adolescents. CDC lied through their ducking teeth.
 
There were, however, several concerns with this model. First, it used rates of community SARS-CoV-2 spread that again were out of date. By the time of the meeting, the rates were lower, meaning the benefits of vaccination would be reduced, but the harms remain the same. Second, it did not consider the risks separately for boys and girls, who appear to have substantially different risk of myocarditis (much higher in boys). Third, it did not consider any middle ground positions, such as only receiving one dose of the vaccine, which provides much of the benefit with far lower myocarditis risk. Instead, the CDC presented zero or two doses as the only options. Fourth, the modeling did not consider natural immunity—i.e., the vaccine’s risk to kids who already recovered from COVID-19 might be the same, but the benefits far lower (as these children have some natural immunity). Finally, the model did not consider the fact that young adults with preexisting medical conditions and those who are otherwise well might have different risk benefit profiles, as the former account for a disproportionate number of COVID-19 hospitalizations.

Together, these are all information choices made by government agencies and/or officials about vaccination of young adults. Amplifying out-of-date statistics and building a model to support vaccination that has questionable assumptions work to support rapid deployment of two doses of mRNA to all healthy kids aged 12 to 17. That may be the CDC’s policy pursuit, and one we are sympathetic to. However, distorting evidence to achieve this result is a form of a noble lie. Accurately reporting current risks to adolescents, and exploring other dosing possibilities, is part of the unbiased scientific exploration of data.
 
Horn2RunAgain said:
I know Slate is sugar coating a tad here, but no doubt it's a damning piece
Click to expand...

They're solidly pro-vaccine, so they will sugar coat. They just have enough perspective to understand that if you lie to people enough times, those same people are less likely to believe you later even if your lie was plausibly well-intentioned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top