Popular National Acquisition - Covid

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

No i am saying that personel that tested NEGATIVE but did not take the shot were not allowed to work but your point again plays down satff versus beds.....the big thing was not enough staff at least equal to beds....you can create a lot of makeshift beds if have staff...but it wasnt urgent enough of an issue to let all staff in...staff was fired if they did not take the shot or basically forced to leave.......criticizing staff for working if asymptomatic also ia problem to your argument, again if sooo bad, why be against staff from working...even during the height of the 2nd and other later waves..ventilators as not a factor correct me if i am wrong..

I am not for firing medical personnel for not getting the shot. But I can certainly understand a hospital's viewpoint. You want your medical professionals to trust science so that they can make sound judgements and follow scientific protocol. If you don't believe in the shot, then perhaps you are not fit to be a medical professional?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

One thing I've found a bit surprising during this thread is just how unrealistically demanding people are of the medical community.

People are looking at things in hindsight and acting like they were foregone conclusions.

We hadn't had a pandemic in 100 years. The spanish flu killed approximately 1 in 5 that it infected, which amounted to around 675,000 Americans, which was about .65% of the entire population at the time.

For many, the lesson learned was that more could and should have been done to stem the loss of life.

And yet, it seems many on this thread think we should have done next to nothing and let the chips fall as they may. Their reasoning seems to be that only a fraction of the nation's population has died from covid. Of course, at the beginning of the pandemic, there was no way to know how deadly the virus would be.

So the reaction, which to some was an overreaction, was really just a cautious approach. Remember, we didn't have a shot that could reduce the severity of the illness for many months. Remember, we had hospitals overflowing. Remember, we didn't (and still don't) know the side effects for those that survived Covid.

It is absolutely ridiculous to expect anyone (Fauci/the CDC) to know exactly what to do without changing guidance as the reality of the pandemic evolved. And evolved it has. We now have relatively few hospitalizations/deaths relative to the beginning of the pandemic (which has a lot to do with the shot). Yet people are complaining that the CDC has changed guidance? Doesn't make any sense.

The overall disrespect of the medical community on this thread has been strange. There may come a day when you need to rely on the medical community, and they will likely treat you without a second thought, even though you have disparaged them.

I think you are disregarding people that disagreed with many of their policies and were blamed themselves for 'not following the science' and their viewpoints banned....now that they are right, you cant just go back and say, we didnt know....you should give credit to the people that gave unpopular views and were right...afterall if they were wrong, people would say they were killers and want their head.... it seems they did not need the benefit of hindsight..

also i agree, if corona killed 20% of everyone that got it..that a big difference, it would of been terrible...but you also forget the united states did have the benefit of seeing death rates and how things were handled in other countries before it got here..so we werent has blind as getting it first.....when some medications were offered,whether right or wrong many just said they wont work, even though they didnt have the benefit of hindsight either

i think what many people are not happy about is the process of all this all came down....to just say we didnt have the benefit of hindsight doesnt seem to imply there would be any fixes....the CDC saying they were wrong when their one job was to handle this exact type of matter can not be discounted

Also there are medical professionals out there that are angry how their viewpoints were not followed and they were right.... usually when there is an argument of benefit of hindsight thats when 100% or close to it went one way...not when there was a sizeable argument against those people that turned out to be right, who didnt need the benefit of hindsight...yes right and wrong can be argued...but if arguing benefit of hindsight i would assume you mean a wrong decison was made..


there were many that said we need more testing kits and we didnt have them when additional waves of covid, did the powers that be need the benefit of hindsight....


Just having good intent (save everybody from death) doesnt make you right no matter what you decide to do....

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I think you are disregarding people that disagreed with many of their policies and were blamed themselves for 'not following the science' and their viewpoints banned....now that they are right, you cant just go back and say, we didnt know....you should give credit to the people that gave unpopular views and were right...afterall if they were wrong, people would say they were killers and want their head.... it seems they did not need the benefit of hindsight..

also i agree, if corona killed 20% of everyone that got it..that a big difference, it would of been terrible...but you also forget the united states did have the benefit of seeing death rates and how things were handled in other countries before it got here..so we werent has blind as getting it first.....when some medications were offered,whether right or wrong many just said they wont work, even though they didnt have the benefit of hindsight either

i think what many people are not happy about is the process of all this all came down....to just say we didnt have the benefit of hindsight doesnt seem to imply there would be any fixes....the CDC saying they were wrong when their one job was to handle this exact type of matter can not be discounted

Also there are medical professionals out there that are angry how their viewpoints were not followed and they were right.... usually when there is an argument of benefit of hindsight thats when 100% or close to it went one way...not when there was a sizeable argument against those people that turned out to be right, who didnt need the benefit of hindsight...yes right and wrong can be argued...but if arguing benefit of hindsight i would assume you mean a wrong decison was made..


there were many that said we need more testing kits and we didnt have them when additional waves of covid, did the powers that be need the benefit of hindsight....


Just having good intent (save everybody from death) doesnt make you right no matter what you decide to do....

I don't believe that people with your laissez-faire stance on human life (except perhaps with regards to abortion) were right.

The actual circumstances of the virus have completely changed. That doesn't mean your viewpoint was right at the beginning of the pandemic.

As for looking at other countries to determine death rates, I don't know how accurate that would have been. Remember, the death rates were higher in the beginning as the elderly and other vulnerable people died in large numbers.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

One thing I've found a bit surprising during this thread is just how unrealistically demanding people are of the medical community.

People are looking at things in hindsight and acting like they were foregone conclusions.

We hadn't had a pandemic in 100 years. The spanish flu killed approximately 1 in 5 that it infected, which amounted to around 675,000 Americans, which was about .65% of the entire population at the time.

For many, the lesson learned was that more could and should have been done to stem the loss of life.

And yet, it seems many on this thread think we should have done next to nothing and let the chips fall as they may. Their reasoning seems to be that only a fraction of the nation's population has died from covid. Of course, at the beginning of the pandemic, there was no way to know how deadly the virus would be.

So the reaction, which to some was an overreaction, was really just a cautious approach. Remember, we didn't have a shot that could reduce the severity of the illness for many months. Remember, we had hospitals overflowing. Remember, we didn't (and still don't) know the side effects for those that survived Covid.

It is absolutely ridiculous to expect anyone (Fauci/the CDC) to know exactly what to do without changing guidance as the reality of the pandemic evolved. And evolved it has. We now have relatively few hospitalizations/deaths relative to the beginning of the pandemic (which has a lot to do with the shot). Yet people are complaining that the CDC has changed guidance? Doesn't make any sense.

The overall disrespect of the medical community on this thread has been strange. There may come a day when you need to rely on the medical community, and they will likely treat you without a second thought, even though you have disparaged them.

Agree.

Separate note: Kyle, sorry to hear about your father in law. Jim

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

One thing I've found a bit surprising during this thread is just how unrealistically demanding people are of the medical community.

People are looking at things in hindsight and acting like they were foregone conclusions.

We hadn't had a pandemic in 100 years. The spanish flu killed approximately 1 in 5 that it infected, which amounted to around 675,000 Americans, which was about .65% of the entire population at the time.

For many, the lesson learned was that more could and should have been done to stem the loss of life.

And yet, it seems many on this thread think we should have done next to nothing and let the chips fall as they may. Their reasoning seems to be that only a fraction of the nation's population has died from covid. Of course, at the beginning of the pandemic, there was no way to know how deadly the virus would be.

So the reaction, which to some was an overreaction, was really just a cautious approach. Remember, we didn't have a shot that could reduce the severity of the illness for many months. Remember, we had hospitals overflowing. Remember, we didn't (and still don't) know the side effects for those that survived Covid.

It is absolutely ridiculous to expect anyone (Fauci/the CDC) to know exactly what to do without changing guidance as the reality of the pandemic evolved. And evolved it has. We now have relatively few hospitalizations/deaths relative to the beginning of the pandemic (which has a lot to do with the shot). Yet people are complaining that the CDC has changed guidance? Doesn't make any sense.

The overall disrespect of the medical community on this thread has been strange. There may come a day when you need to rely on the medical community, and they will likely treat you without a second thought, even though you have disparaged them.

Responding to talking points in your post...

1. The shield which politicians have hidden behind is the Medical Community. When you have influence on the public, that needs to be utilized cautiously, and it wasn't. 2.5 years later, we have a little over 1 million deaths, yet millions and millions of other lives were affected negatively based on the reaction from the medical community/politicians. Where's the accountability?

2. I don't believe blindly trusting the medical community is a good thing. The medical community pushes Big Pharma "medicine" which has ruined the lives of millions. They're not automatically "heroes". Combine this with the negative effects of my first point, and how much more damage did the medical community do to society vs COVID?

3. The medical community has given a mixed bag of answers. "Trust the science" isn't so simple. Many medical professionals I've spoken with and have read statements from have said to avoid the "vaxx", that COVID isn't a deadly virus unless you have pre-existing comorbities, the hospital occupancy issues are overblown, etc. These medical professionals are disregarded, yet we're told to trust the medical professionals.

4. None of the data supports the decisions by the CDC/politicians, or the arguments defending them. There are 1.04M "COVID deaths" in the US since the start of the pandemic. That's ~400k per year, which matches the death totals per year. This, despite the vaccine coming out at the end of the first year (over 50% of the country being vaxxed by 1.5 years), and now ~80-90% of adults being vaxxed. The death totals aren't dropping. That doesn't support the "vaxx is the end all be all" argument. N95 masks are proven to be the only masks that work, yet the requirement was never N95s. That doesn't support the pro-mask argument. Again, think about the number of lives negatively affected (mentally, financially, developmentally, etc.) to defend against a virus with a 99%+ survival rate.

5. The "vaxx" doesn't prevent acquisition of COVID, transmission, or severity. So, either the "vaxx" wasn't properly tested and was instead used as an experimental drug on society, or the CDC/medical professionals/politicians lied from the get go. Pat McAfee had a 104+ degree fever despite being vaxxed. Hospitalizations and deaths are not down, especially significantly, despite the "vaxx" being in the bodies of 80-90% of adults. Yet the CDC guidelines are now do not differentiate between the vaxxed and the unvaxxed.

6. Fauci completely botched the AIDS epidemic, and all the contradictions in the handling of COVID-19 are another botched attempt, yet I'm supposed to trust and respect him? All the while collecting the highest tax-payer-funded paycheck in government.


I'm sorry I don't have a medical professional shrine in my closet.

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Agree.

Separate note: Kyle, sorry to hear about your father in law. Jim

Thank you Jim. 6+ years of fighting after being given 6 months to live in the beginning. Trooper.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

Thank you Jim. 6+ years of fighting after being given 6 months to live in the beginning. Trooper.

That’s incredible. What a fight. F**k cancer.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

I don't believe that people with your laissez-faire stance on human life (except perhaps with regards to abortion) were right.

The actual circumstances of the virus have completely changed. That doesn't mean your viewpoint was right at the beginning of the pandemic.

As for looking at other countries to determine death rates, I don't know how accurate that would have been. Remember, the death rates were higher in the beginning as the elderly and other vulnerable people died in large numbers.

not laissez-faire, you always hear 'if can just save one life' thats not how the real world works. There many school buses without seat belts.....

we can make cars much more safer than they are now. Afterall you see auto racing accidents had 100+ mph and people walk away..why not make people sit in a similar seat belt harness? that would save tens of thousands of lives..is that laissez-faire attitude on that?

So our covid death rates are right but everyone elses is wrong. there is an argument that are death rates were factually less than we claim them to be as there was economic incentive to claim covid.

[Peter_Spaeth]

This is the thread that never ends.
It just goes on and on my friend.
Some people started posting here not knowing what it was
And they'll continue posting here forever just because...

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

not laissez-faire, you always hear 'if can just save one life' thats not how the real world works. There many school buses without seat belts.....

we can make cars much more safer than they are now. Afterall you see auto racing accidents had 100+ mph and people walk away..why not make people sit in a similar seat belt harness? that would save tens of thousands of lives..is that laissez-faire attitude on that?

So our covid death rates are right but everyone elses is wrong. there is an argument that are death rates were factually less than we claim them to be as there was economic incentive to claim covid.

We know that Covid deaths are not overestimated because of excess mortality figures cited earlier in this thread.

Worldwide, excess deaths from covid have exceeded estimates by millions.

"By January 2022, there had been 5.5 million official COVID-19 deaths worldwide in the pandemic. But models estimate that there have been between two and four times that number of excess deaths -- that is, mortality above what was expected -- since the start of 2020."

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00104-8

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34014945/

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This is the thread that never ends.
It just goes on and on my friend.
Some people started posting here not knowing what it was
And they'll continue posting here forever just because...

Ha, you're a poet,
and I didn't ever know it!

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

We know that the Covid estimates are not far off because of excess mortality figures cited earlier in this thread.

Worldwide, excess deaths from covid have exceeded estimates by millions.

"By January 2022, there had been 5.5 million official COVID-19 deaths worldwide in the pandemic. But models estimate that there have been between two and four times that number of excess deaths -- that is, mortality above what was expected -- since the start of 2020."

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00104-8

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34014945/

Was it by 7 million?

Simple math 7 billion folks on earth x .1% is 7 million. .1% that's all I'm saying.

You can tout "millions" and die on that hill, but it amounts to a rounding error

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

We know that Covid deaths are not overestimated because of excess mortality figures cited earlier in this thread.

Worldwide, excess deaths from covid have exceeded estimates by millions.

"By January 2022, there had been 5.5 million official COVID-19 deaths worldwide in the pandemic. But models estimate that there have been between two and four times that number of excess deaths -- that is, mortality above what was expected -- since the start of 2020."

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00104-8

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34014945/

I was speaking about United States numbers....such as car accident victims who happened to have corona..


its my understanding this year more will die in the US from the Flu than corona or its very close...correct me im wrong..

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I was speaking about United States numbers....such as car accident victims who happened to have corona..


its my understanding this year more will die in the US from the Flu than corona or its very close...correct me im wrong..

So it’s good that the vaxx helped and the virus watered itself down thankfully, or are those bad things?

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I was speaking about United States numbers....such as car accident victims who happened to have corona..


its my understanding this year more will die in the US from the Flu than corona or its very close...correct me im wrong..

The conclusion to the study in the 2nd link I provided was "Conclusions: In this study, we found that direct COVID-19 death counts in the US in 2020 substantially underestimated total excess mortality attributable to COVID-19."

There was a graph showing the same.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34014945/

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

The conclusion to the study in the 2nd link I provided was "Conclusions: In this study, we found that direct COVID-19 death counts in the US in 2020 substantially underestimated total excess mortality attributable to COVID-19."

There was a graph showing the same.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34014945/

Ok i will agree there were more deaths than counted but still not enough to change the argunents about not allowed to sue for bad outcomes with forced vacine healthcare workers who didnt have shot were sent home versus treating patients etc.. considering such a low mortality rate for under 50 etc..

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by Carter08

So it’s good that the vaxx helped and the virus watered itself down thankfully, or are those bad things?

Prove this is related directly to the vaxx.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

I am not for firing medical personnel for not getting the shot. But I can certainly understand a hospital's viewpoint. You want your medical professionals to trust science so that they can make sound judgements and follow scientific protocol. If you don't believe in the shot, then perhaps you are not fit to be a medical professional?

wow i cant believe you would go against what a medical professional decides to do.....especially now that CDC has said they were wrong on many things

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

wow i cant believe you would go against what a medical professional decides to do.....especially now that CDC has said they were wrong on many things

Remember, for every Valedictorian, there is someone last in the class. My guess is that the Valedictorian is pro-vax

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Deertick

Remember, for every Valedictorian, there is someone last in the class. My guess is that the Valedictorian is pro-vax

Haha.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Deertick

Remember, for every Valedictorian, there is someone last in the class. My guess is that the Valedictorian is pro-vax

right and the person that finishes last in medical school is called doctor..and the the person that finishes last in law school is called your honor.

i dont know about you but i rate professionals how they do in the real world versus what they did in college grade wise

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

right and the person that finishes last in medical school is called doctor..and the the person that finishes last in law school is called your honor.

i dont know about you but i rate professionals how they do in the real world versus what they did in college grade wise

I think we all do. Go out there and interview 3 doctors randomly selected. If you come across two that think the vaxx was a bad idea you should play the lotto because the odds are pretty crazy.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I think we all do. Go out there and interview 3 doctors randomly selected. If you come across two that think the vaxx was a bad idea you should play the lotto because the odds are pretty crazy.

You keep hanging your hat on that like you think all doctor's, nurses and other medical professionals are pro vax when nothing could be further from the truth.

How many doctor's, nurses and other medical professionals had to sign non disclosure agreements not to speak out against the vaccines, the lockdowns, etc??? I know it happened up here as I know a woman whose daughter, who works in a major Toronto hospital, had to sign one.

How many doctor's wanted to risk their careers, their livelihoods, pensions and everything they worked so hard for knowing that is exactly what would happen if they did?
Just Google doctor's against the vaccines and see how many have been accused of spreading misinformation, charged and fired.

What Proportion of Doctors Are Vaccine Hesitant?
— Researchers conducting a new survey said the answer was far higher than expected
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special...clusives/98196

Ontario regulator says anti-COVID-19 vaccine doctor can no longer practice medicine
https://www.cp24.com/news/ontario-re...yes%2F7.479328
https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2417

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I think we all do. Go out there and interview 3 doctors randomly selected. If you come across two that think the vaxx was a bad idea you should play the lotto because the odds are pretty crazy.

you keep moving the goalposts. To ask do you think its a bad idea? Define bad. I think it was a bad idea for police to lose their job and pension because they did not get a shot.

Do you think it was a bad idea for a 4 year olds not to get a shot. Was it a good idea to keep kids at home who did not have real access to log in online so that effectively did not go to school and are now years behind versus just let them in school?

I know the CDC just said a lot of their guidance was a bad idea

Google right now still does not allow unvaccinated employees go to work in the office now and they are losing pay (and of course end up losing job always part of equation when losing pay) because of refusing to take the shot

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/26/goog...outbreaks.html

is that a bad idea? As far as i know the emergency rooms are not overflooded right now yet still the mandate, so that takes away any past arguments about the flooded emergency rooms as they are still doing it now... Do we have enough ventilators right now?


Its a pretty low bar to say was it better than a bad idea with no real defined issues given...thats not exactly a ringing endorsement...

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

you keep moving the goalposts. To ask do you think its a bad idea? Define bad. I think it was a bad idea for police to lose their job and pension because they did not get a shot.

Do you think it was a bad idea for a 4 year olds not to get a shot. Was it a good idea to keep kids at home who did not have real access to log in online so that effectively did not go to school and are now years behind versus just let them in school?

I know the CDC just said a lot of their guidance was a bad idea

Google right now still does not allow unvaccinated employees go to work in the office now and they are losing pay (and of course end up losing job always part of equation when losing pay) because of refusing to take the shot

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/26/goog...outbreaks.html

is that a bad idea? As far as i know the emergency rooms are not overflooded right now yet still the mandate, so that takes away any past arguments about the flooded emergency rooms as they are still doing it now... Do we have enough ventilators right now?


Its a pretty low bar to say was it better than a bad idea with no real defined issues given...thats not exactly a ringing endorsement...

Here are the parameters. Ask actual practicing doctors and nurses if they think it was a smart or a dumb idea for a relatively healthy person to have refused the vaccine in the heart of the pandemic. My wife gave birth after the vaccine had been out and I asked around twenty if they were getting it (it was a boring time and it’s all anyone could talk about). 19 said it would be basically insane if I wasn’t going to get the vaccine. 1 nurse who looked like she may have been going through some issues was adamant that we were Guinea pigs and she would not be getting it. I think you’d wind up with similar percentages if you did your own poll.

And once you have 95% of actual living healthcare professionals you’re talking to calling it a dumb decision, question why the internet and the tv has led you to a different conclusion.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Here are the parameters. Ask actual practicing doctors and nurses if they think it was a smart or a dumb idea for a relatively healthy person to have refused the vaccine in the heart of the pandemic. My wife gave birth after the vaccine had been out and I asked around twenty if they were getting it (it was a boring time and it’s all anyone could talk about). 19 said it would be basically insane if I wasn’t going to get the vaccine. 1 nurse who looked like she may have been going through some issues was adamant that we were Guinea pigs and she would not be getting it. I think you’d wind up with similar percentages if you did your own poll.

And once you have 95% of actual living healthcare professionals you’re talking to calling it a dumb decision, question why the internet and the tv has led you to a different conclusion.

Still too broad, what age, 5 year olds? If no shot was available then did they think it was a smart idea for those same kids to go to the grocery store or should they stay home for 6 months. Can also ask them is it a smart idea to take a shot when you have no real legal recourse for you or your family if you get sick from the shot. Also can ask them would it be a smart idea knowing that the CDC will reverse guidance on it in a year?

Not saying wrong or right but just because a lot of people agree on something. doesnt make it right....i thought most people thought the earth was flat or center of the solar system...

It actually much much worse to be wrong in that situation because its very hard to prove them wrong because there is an immense hill to climb to prove, when you are in the minority position even if wrong its not such a big deal because everyone else was right....

thats why when the majority is wrong potentially its much much more dangerous...


right now we dont let the number 1 or 2 tennis star come to New York because no shot but we let illegal immigrants into New York and give them a place to stay with no shot...smart idea? The fact that this happens means covid cant be so dangerous that people are still losing their jobs and/or positions in company because of not taking shots....


https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sp...en-2022-08-25/


this is an outdoor event, and theres a lot of social distancing between tennis players in a match.....we got buses packed with non vaccinated immigrants over the border......to me when inconsistent in one area, you dont get benefit of doubt in all others..are emergency rooms full, we out of ventilators? What science are we exactly following right now..

[irv]

The vaccine isn't even called a vaccine anymore but yet some people still think it is and still think by calling those who refuse or are hesitant to get it, anti-vaxxers.

The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is urging Americans to "get your COVID-19 booster to increase your protection from COVID-19."

The word "protection" has replaced the word "immunity" on the CDC definitions page, as it becomes clear that even fully vaccinated Americans are not "immune" to COVID variants, most recently, omicron.

As CNSNews.com reported on May 4, 2021, the CDC at that time defined vaccination as "The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease."

But that definition has changed over time. The CDC website now defines vaccination as "the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease."

The CDC's definition of "vaccine" also has changed: Last spring, CDC defined a vaccine as "a product" that stimulates a person's immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease."

The definition of "vaccine" now reads: "A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases."
https://cnsnews.com/article/national...on-vs-immunity

Lots and lots of finger pointing and back peddling currently going on but yet, still, some refuse to acknowledge that fact.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

you keep moving the goalposts. To ask do you think its a bad idea? Define bad. I think it was a bad idea for police to lose their job and pension because they did not get a shot.

Do you think it was a bad idea for a 4 year olds not to get a shot. Was it a good idea to keep kids at home who did not have real access to log in online so that effectively did not go to school and are now years behind versus just let them in school?

I know the CDC just said a lot of their guidance was a bad idea

Google right now still does not allow unvaccinated employees go to work in the office now and they are losing pay (and of course end up losing job always part of equation when losing pay) because of refusing to take the shot

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/26/goog...outbreaks.html

is that a bad idea? As far as i know the emergency rooms are not overflooded right now yet still the mandate, so that takes away any past arguments about the flooded emergency rooms as they are still doing it now... Do we have enough ventilators right now?


Its a pretty low bar to say was it better than a bad idea with no real defined issues given...thats not exactly a ringing endorsement...

You throw out a lot of claims without providing links to back them up. We have already shown that one of your accusations, that covid numbers were overestimated, was the opposite of the truth, and that covid numbers have actually been drastically underestimated.

Do you have any evidence to support the idea that police have "lost their job and pension because they did not get a shot". I know Chicago was considering this, but I don't know if it ever actually happened.
I know that in the City I work for, that no one, including police were fired for not getting the shot. They did, however, have to frequently get tested.

How about all of the claims that the "CDC just said a lot of their guidance was a bad idea". Could you please be more specific? Perhaps even provide a link?

I am not saying all of your claims are false, but they are sometimes hard to believe without anything to back them up.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

You throw out a lot of claims without providing links to back them up. We have already shown that one of your accusations, that covid numbers were overestimated, was the opposite of the truth, and that covid numbers have actually been drastically underestimated.

Do you have any evidence to support the idea that police have "lost their job and pension because they did not get a shot". I know Chicago was considering this, but I don't know if it ever actually happened.
I know that in the City I work for, that no one, including police were fired for not getting the shot. They did, however, have to frequently get tested.

How about all of the claims that the "CDC just said a lot of their guidance was a bad idea". Could you please be more specific? Perhaps even provide a link?

I am not saying all of your claims are false, but they are sometimes hard to believe without anything to back them up.

https://www.statnews.com/2022/08/17/...ovid-missteps/
as far as overcounting and undercounting, i believe I stated i wasnt sure and correct me if wrong as far as the US numbers...

I dont think I have to provide anything about he CDC, it was a large national news story about how badly they handled the pandemic and this was shared on the most liberal networks.., I dont think anyone at the CDC is going to be winning awards anytime soon....if there was a Senate panel hearing going into the way they handled it, we would know a lot more as well, perhaps next year we will....

as to vaccine mandates its common knowledge that many are unable to work if do not take the shot...kyrie irvin for example was unable to play basketball in home games.... and right now with the tennis player i mentioned...


https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireSt...ffect-80608735

also just the fact about having to consider firing officers is just as bad....how could that even be considered? What science were they following...where was the science against that consideration..


the argument i was making about being sent home or fired when have covid is how bad could staffing to take care of covid (flooded hospitals argument) be if it was OK to send home medical staff (even if had covid and recovered) from vaccine or police to be at home even with a great need for police ....

also is the issue is that if you had covid and recovered...i didnt see anyone from CDC or any of the major news networks say that serves as a good defense of covid ... where was the science saying that if you recovered from covid you should not be in the unvaccinated group as far as future risk....

I also did show you the link with the tennis star not being able to play in New York right now....because not vaccinated (even if had covid and recovered) but ok for packed busses of immigrants to go to new york and new york pay for place to stay.......where is the science on that?

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

but ok for packed busses of immigrants to go to new york and new york pay for place to stay.......where is the science on that?

You mean the science on using human beings as pawns in a cheap political stunt? I'd be curious about that, too....

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

You mean the science on using human beings as pawns in a cheap political stunt? I'd be curious about that, too....

Cheap? "Workers lost $3.7 trillion in the pandemic Billionaires around the world: gained $3.9 trillion in the pandemic It's the biggest one-year wealth transfer in history"


Buy some of my cards if that's cheap!

Not saying it was a PLAN-demic but it certainly if "trillions had been paid out in wages instead of being funneled into corporate profits and the offshore accounts of the super-rich. Imagine how much richer and more resilient the American people would be. Imagine how many more lives would have been saved had our people been more resilient. (Time.magazine sept 2020)

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

https://www.statnews.com/2022/08/17/...ovid-missteps/
as far as overcounting and undercounting, i believe I stated i wasnt sure and correct me if wrong as far as the US numbers...

I dont think I have to provide anything about he CDC, it was a large national news story about how badly they handled the pandemic and this was shared on the most liberal networks.., I dont think anyone at the CDC is going to be winning awards anytime soon....if there was a Senate panel hearing going into the way they handled it, we would know a lot more as well, perhaps next year we will....

as to vaccine mandates its common knowledge that many are unable to work if do not take the shot...kyrie irvin for example was unable to play basketball in home games.... and right now with the tennis player i mentioned...


https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireSt...ffect-80608735

also just the fact about having to consider firing officers is just as bad....how could that even be considered? What science were they following...where was the science against that consideration..


the argument i was making about being sent home or fired when have covid is how bad could staffing to take care of covid (flooded hospitals argument) be if it was OK to send home medical staff (even if had covid and recovered) from vaccine or police to be at home even with a great need for police ....

also is the issue is that if you had covid and recovered...i didnt see anyone from CDC or any of the major news networks say that serves as a good defense of covid ... where was the science saying that if you recovered from covid you should not be in the unvaccinated group as far as future risk....

I also did show you the link with the tennis star not being able to play in New York right now....because not vaccinated (even if had covid and recovered) but ok for packed busses of immigrants to go to new york and new york pay for place to stay.......where is the science on that?

Okay, so you have no evidence that police officers lost their pensions for not being vaccinated.

Do you understand what is going on with busses of immigrants going to NY?
The Texas Governor is sending them there. So I am not really sure what your point is....

If you had covid and then recovered, it could be difficult to prove you had had it. I think you would get a lot of people pretending they had recovered from it, so as to bypass having to get vaccinated/immunized.

[irv]

12 state police members fired for not getting COVID vaccine
https://www.wbur.org/news/2022/04/11...-covid-vaccine
Joe Biden says police should be fired for not getting the vaccine
The president also mocked those who refuse the vaccine mandate and accused them of turning it into a political issue
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1943285.html
Toronto cops who refuse to get vaccinated placed on “indefinite” unpaid leave
https://nowtoronto.com/news/toronto-...e-unpaid-leave
Toronto police put 205 employees on unpaid leave as part of COVID-19 vaccination policy
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...lice-1.6268435

One can be tested to see if they acquired immunity or already have antibodies. Tests like this have been around forever but they magically disappeared during this scam-demic. It was get vaccinated and be able to show proof of that or you were fired/suspended.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Cheap? "Workers lost $3.7 trillion in the pandemic Billionaires around the world: gained $3.9 trillion in the pandemic It's the biggest one-year wealth transfer in history"


Buy some of my cards if that's cheap!

Not saying it was a PLAN-demic but it certainly if "trillions had been paid out in wages instead of being funneled into corporate profits and the offshore accounts of the super-rich. Imagine how much richer and more resilient the American people would be. Imagine how many more lives would have been saved had our people been more resilient. (Time.magazine sept 2020)

Surely you are in favor of changing our laws so that billionaires no longer pay an effective lower federal tax rate than the working poor, yes? And also improving the IRS's ability to go after the biggest and wealthiest tax avoiders?

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Surely you are in favor of changing our laws so that billionaires no longer pay an effective lower federal tax rate than the working poor, yes? And also improving the IRS's ability to go after the biggest and wealthiest tax avoiders?

If you cant dispute facts, just throw more fuel on the fire!

Helicopter money got us hyper inflation, and the added money thrown out the window in the Inflation Reduction Act is going to
Tame it! ....right.

Government won't go after the top wealthiest. Their lobbyists are too strong. Americans claim they want to drain the swamp and 4 years later elect swamp thing. 47 years of bribes and kickbacks.


If you cant agree at least the voices being heard are limited, I cant help you.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

If you cant dispute facts, just throw more fuel on the fire!

Which facts are you suggesting that I am unable to dispute?

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Government won't go after the top wealthiest. Their lobbyists are too strong.

^Something we agree on!

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Americans claim they want to drain the swamp and 4 years later elect swamp thing. 47 years of bribes and kickbacks.

In an election that perhaps best represents, in all of US history, the "lesser of two evils" conundrum that the two-party system imposes on voters.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Cheap? "Workers lost $3.7 trillion in the pandemic Billionaires around the world: gained $3.9 trillion in the pandemic It's the biggest one-year wealth transfer in history"

Coincidentally, $3.9 trillion has been paid out so far for Covid issues. I'm not positive, but I think that includes loans as well. Only $931 billion went out as direct payments to citizens.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Okay, so you have no evidence that police officers lost their pensions for not being vaccinated.

Do you understand what is going on with busses of immigrants going to NY?
The Texas Governor is sending them there. So I am not really sure what your point is....

If you had covid and then recovered, it could be difficult to prove you had had it. I think you would get a lot of people pretending they had recovered from it, so as to bypass having to get vaccinated/immunized.

I assume people who quit their jobs for fear of many things or were fired lost their pensions, you would have to show otherwise that they got their pensions when the number of years did not vest......i dont see any proof on your end that they did get pensions.. In addition, not sure how you want to keep a job with unpaid leave.....how is unpaid leave acceptable.... i also dont think it matters if it wasnt police officers,, if was anybody, where is the science....did medical professionals have to leave their job for not taking the shot or do i need a link...its the same point....that supports my position.

also if you jhave covid and recovered, you would have covid antibodies (since didnt take vaccine, it would be very easy to prove, or what i need a link to prove that too?) So if you agree that proof can be made, than you 'difficult to prove' is wrong and now what would your defense to that issue be?

as to new york buses, do you know whats going on in the border of Texas? New York is a sanctuary city...how is texas wrong for only accepting and caring for 90+% of the illegal immigrants? Why cant new york do their fair share, afterall the immigrants wanted to go to new york and had a choice where they wanted to go.....easy to argue with texas, why not solve the problem on the border then, was it happening in the last administration like this? If its so bad whats happening to new york why not change the border policy or provide federal funds to texas, correct me if im wrong but i believe texas has been stating they havent been given adequate funding to take care of the immigrants.....new york seems to say the same thing with a micro fraction percent of the immigrants texas is dealing with

The point is why isnt new york refusing to take unvaccinated non citizens when they wont take the tennnis player


another point that shatters your difficult to prove you recovered from covid is , what if you tested postive for corona before and took a test at a medical establishment, the same places that give you proof of vaccination perhaps, so 3 months later at your job you have to go on unpaid leave because you didnt get the shot even though you have zero symptom? Would the fact that you tested postive 3 months earlier show that you have since recovered. Its not rocket science to prove you recovered from covid. So is that following the science when someone had covid and recovers without the shot is subject to all the issues that non vaccine people have?

Whats the point of herd immunity when non vax people got covid and recovered are still even today facing many issues

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I assume people who quit their jobs for fear of many things or were fired lost their pensions, you would have to show otherwise that they got their pensions when the number of years did not vest......i dont see any proof on your end that they did get pensions.. In addition, not sure how you want to keep a job with unpaid leave.....how is unpaid leave acceptable.... i also dont think it matters if it wasnt police officers,, if was anybody, where is the science....did medical professionals have to leave their job for not taking the shot or do i need a link...its the same point....that supports my position.

also if you jhave covid and recovered, you would have covid antibodies (since didnt take vaccine, it would be very easy to prove, or what i need a link to prove that too?) So if you agree that proof can be made, than you 'difficult to prove' is wrong and now what would your defense to that issue be?

as to new york buses, do you know whats going on in the border of Texas? New York is a sanctuary city...how is texas wrong for only accepting and caring for 90+% of the illegal immigrants? Why cant new york do their fair share, afterall the immigrants wanted to go to new york and had a choice where they wanted to go.....easy to argue with texas, why not solve the problem on the border then, was it happening in the last administration like this? If its so bad whats happening to new york why not change the border policy or provide federal funds to texas, correct me if im wrong but i believe texas has been stating they havent been given adequate funding to take care of the immigrants.....new york seems to say the same thing with a micro fraction percent of the immigrants texas is dealing with

The point is why isnt new york refusing to take unvaccinated non citizens when they wont take the tennnis player

So you're point is that if someone retires early/is fired early because they didn't want to get the shot, they should get a pension they didn't yet earn? If you could get a pension for retiring/getting fired before you are vested, everyone would do it. I thought you were claiming that even if you had been vested, you would lose your pension if fired for not getting the shot.

As for your idea that people could prove they had the antibodies and therefore avoid the need for the shot, I am not against this other than I think it would be very difficult to administer. Not sure insurance would cover that. It incentivizes people to not get the shot and encourages risky behavior.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

So you're point is that if someone retires early/is fired early because they didn't want to get the shot, they should get a pension they didn't yet earn? If you could get a pension for retiring/getting fired before you are vested, everyone would do it. I thought you were claiming that even if you had been vested, you would lose your pension if fired for not getting the shot.

As for your idea that people could prove they had the antibodies and therefore avoid the need for the shot, I am not against this other than I think it would be very difficult to administer. Not sure insurance would cover that. It incentivizes people to not get the shot and encourages risky behavior.

Please see my rest of my post, easy to prove had covid and recovered if you can show a prior positive test. What is the risky behavior, everyone and their mother already got covid, both past presidents who had rigorous screening to prevent covid got covid. Covid and insurance? Dont need insurance to pay for covid througout the pandemic, the govt paid for it all ... and can also tax profits from the vaccine companies like they proposed to tax oil companies for making too much profit..

I agree, as to employees they shouldnt get pension if retire by their choice but if forced to take a shot that you cant sue on if you get sick seems pretty odd....and no i did not say that if you vested your pension you would lose it..my example was if you had 1 year left and you left your job, the other side cant say 'well even though you were forced out of your job, no harm done because you could find another job' my point was it wasnt an apples to apples situation because you would lose your pension rights on that job and now have to start all over...


one thing that you could say well if you get covid but didnt take the shot and you end up in the hospital and unable to work at your job after 2 weeks or so, we have a right to fire you but if you took the shot , we keep your job for you no matter how long you are in hospital and/or we have insurance to cover that. I would imagine people that had covid before would be ok with that since they have a type of immunity to covid..

[Republicaninmass]

"Those who cant sacrifice human life have no right talking about a common good"

Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged


Oh the Irony!

[irv]

"The "HOPE" is that these particular boosters will protect us against further COVID surges and additional variants," she says.

Imagine injecting an unproven experimental drug into your body, (that one side affect can cause death) that's based on "HOPE" only.


Here's When to Expect a 4th COVID-19 Booster Vaccine

a3b36c87496fc8bdbce605dbf1f9562a

Here's When to Expect a 4th COVID-19 Booster Vaccine
Zee Krstic
Sun, August 28, 2022 at 7:00 AM


A fourth COVID-19 booster vaccine will be made available to a majority of Americans in early September, according to current projections from federal health officials.

This booster vaccine has been specifically designed to address the prevalent Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5, as well as to build further immunity on original SARS-CoV-2 strains (which is why it is called "bivalent").

Pfizer's booster may be available immediately following federal approval, which is slated for early September. Moderna's booster shot, however, may be rolled out at a later date.

Below, you'll learn: When these new bivalent booster vaccines will be available; who can get their 4th vaccine this fall; and if the new bivalent booster vaccines will provide more protection against COVID-19.

Federal health officials have signaled that Americans who have yet to receive a fourth COVID-19 vaccine will be able to do so shortly after Labor Day, according to multiple reports. Updated booster vaccines manufactured by teams at Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna aim to reduce the risk of further Omicron-fueled SARS-CoV-2 subvariant spread this fall. More people will be able to get this shot than previous boosters: eligibility will be wider, and will encompass more than only older and immunocompromised individuals.

Referred to as "bivalent" vaccines by healthcare officials, these targeted shots specifically target two viral Omicron subvariant strains, BA.4 and BA.5, which have been fueling the majority of new breakthrough cases recorded this summer. Current figures shared by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that the BA.5, is responsible for more than 90% of COVID-19 cases here in the U.S. right now.

These new booster vaccines will also aim to rebuild immunity to the original coronavirus strain that people gained earlier on in the pandemic, explains Bernadette Boden-Albala, MPH, DrPH, the director of the University of California, Irvine's program in public health.


"A 'bivalent' booster simply means that it will target two different antigens, meaning it will respond to the original coronavirus strain as well as the Omicron variant," Boden-Albala tells Good Housekeeping. "[Healthcare officials] are finding that the original vaccine hasn't been as responsive to newer variants as we hoped, hence we need these bivalent boosters."

Pifzer's new booster vaccine will be available to those older than the age of 12, while initial filings by Moderna suggest their boosters will remain targeted for anyone over 18.

When will new bivalent booster vaccines be available?
CDC officials will have a final say on the timing of the release of new booster vaccines to the public — and the agency plans to make this decision in early September, just before the federal Labor Day holiday. According to NBC News, teams at Pfizer and Moderna are actively seeking initial approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but final authorization will come from the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Currently, this board is set to meet on September 1 and 2, and is expected to sign off shortly after.

That timeline likely means Americans may be able to receive a COVID-19 booster vaccine starting in the second or third week of September, depending on how fast manufacturers can roll out vaccines to clinicians across the country. If there are supply chain issues, healthcare providers may choose to strategically provide first access to those who are at higher risk of serious infection, reported White House officials earlier this summer.


According to this CNBC report, healthcare insiders expect Pfizer's booster to be approved first and to reach healthcare providers earlier, given its wider range of initial availability to anyone over the age of 12. While Moderna's booster dose will eventually seek authorization for a wider array of ages, its 18+ shot is expected by some to be available in the first week of October — and both booster vaccines will be made available to pediatric patients later in the fall.

Who can get a 4th bivalent booster vaccine?
These new booster vaccines will lower the age of eligibility to 12 and up — but these booster vaccines will only be available to those who have completed a primary two-shot series earlier in 2022 or 2021. Why? It mostly has to do with healthcare providers wanting to ensure optimized immunity against the original strain of SARS-CoV-2.

"The original vaccine series provides a foundation for full coverage, but as we start seeing these other variants, the boosters specifically trigger the immune system to fight new strains," Boden-Albala adds.

But don't wait on the fall booster if you haven't gotten the boosters that are currently available — the boosters out right now provide crucial protection against death and hospitalization, Boden-Albala and other leading health experts say. CDC data suggests that more than half of those who gotten their initial COVID-19 vaccination series of two shots have not received their first booster vaccine as instructed, meaning they're not up-to-date on vaccinations. Getting a booster vaccine now won't prevent you from signing up for the upcoming bivalent vaccine booster shot later this winter.

Will these new bivalent booster vaccines be more protective?
Boden-Albala says that these bivalent booster vaccines were approved in the United Kingdom earlier this month, and submitted trial results seem promising. "The hope is that these particular boosters will protect us against further COVID surges and additional variants," she says. "Vaccines are effective, but these boosters are only [further] helping our immune systems target the variants that continue to pop up."

The upcoming booster, say officials, may be crucial in stemming widespread outbreaks as temperatures fall and a significant wave of new COVID-19 infections is projected to impact health on a global scale. "It's going to be really important that people this fall and winter get the new shot; it's designed for the virus that's out there," said Ashish Jha, M.D., the White House's COVID-19 response coordinator at a virtual event in mid-August.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by irv

"The "HOPE" is that these particular boosters will protect us against further COVID surges and additional variants," she says.

Imagine injecting an unproven experimental drug into your body, (that one side affect can cause death) that's based on "HOPE" only.


Here's When to Expect a 4th COVID-19 Booster Vaccine

a3b36c87496fc8bdbce605dbf1f9562a

Here's When to Expect a 4th COVID-19 Booster Vaccine
Zee Krstic
Sun, August 28, 2022 at 7:00 AM


A fourth COVID-19 booster vaccine will be made available to a majority of Americans in early September, according to current projections from federal health officials.
get the new shot; it's designed for the virus that's out there," said Ashish Jha, M.D., the White House's COVID-19 response coordinator at a virtual event in mid-August.

can you sue if get sick from it? Are emergency rooms full now? What about if you test positive next month due to a test in a hospital but dont take the vaccine but recover and 3 weeks later, are you still in the non vax category for jobs and access to the same things Vax people get?

What happened to the emergency rooms are full argument or we cant prove you got covid argument?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by irv

You keep hanging your hat on that like you think all doctor's, nurses and other medical professionals are pro vax when nothing could be further from the truth.

How many doctor's, nurses and other medical professionals had to sign non disclosure agreements not to speak out against the vaccines, the lockdowns, etc??? I know it happened up here as I know a woman whose daughter, who works in a major Toronto hospital, had to sign one.

How many doctor's wanted to risk their careers, their livelihoods, pensions and everything they worked so hard for knowing that is exactly what would happen if they did?
Just Google doctor's against the vaccines and see how many have been accused of spreading misinformation, charged and fired.

What Proportion of Doctors Are Vaccine Hesitant?
— Researchers conducting a new survey said the answer was far higher than expected
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special...clusives/98196

Ontario regulator says anti-COVID-19 vaccine doctor can no longer practice medicine
https://www.cp24.com/news/ontario-re...yes%2F7.479328
https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2417

I think this speaks to an important point. People say they believe, and often do truly believe, whatever is in their interest to believe. If your career signals to you to believe X and that if you think Y is actually suggested by the data then you are fired and blacklisted and unable to provide for your family, which narrative are you honestly going to go with?

To be clear, this doesn’t require an evil conspiracy. It’s simple normal human behavior that almost all of us have partaken in. Almost any job will not really allow people to question key paradigms and narratives or disagree with them on topics key to the identity of the business or profession. Experts have pronounced a consensus view on many things that have turned out wrong because of this; it’s a lot easier to say “no we are right” when that’s where the incentive is. If a doctor says “I think this shot is causing myocarditis and health issues for young people for whom the vaccine statistically offers little to no benefit, don’t take it, this is a dangerous sham” you will be fired and informally blacklisted from getting another job in a well paying profession that cost a fortune in time and money to get the med school degree in. Hell, that happens even if you shut up and just don’t take the shot 1-4+ times yourself. Belief in this vaccine (even though we’ve had to change the definition of what a vaccine even is and it quite obviously does not do what is said to do when it was being forced into us) has become a core identity for a large swath of the world, both politically and professionally. They can never, and will never, abandon this.

The state and the industry have both anchored themselves to the Covid narrative. They will change some specifics and flip 180’s every couple of weeks to keep the central themes of the narrative alive, partially because people, for the most part, cannot abandon a narrative they have doubled down on so hard. Medical professionals have held up science as an unquestionable monolith, a bastardization of the very word ‘science’, but one incredibly hard to walk back now after they have forced this shot and partaken in extreme cessions of individual rights to the state and county health departments.

The constant 180’s on details, that the shot obviously does not do what it was said to do, and the statistical evidence is causing the narrative to lose followers every day. Many of those moderates who have casually followed the edicts are no longer going with the narrative. Even where I am, in the most progressive and left wing part of the nation where it can be social and career suicide to be left-wing but not left-wing enough or publicly question any of the lefts key precepts, few are actually following the government advice anymore. About a quarter seem to be masking indoors, seemingly few are keeping six feet apart. But the devoted progressives will never abandon this narrative no matter how many contradictions there are, no matter how many lies are uncovered. Almost comically, Trump’s jab has become the leading virtue signal of the left for the moment, a key identifier of ideological orthodoxy. It may quietly be allowed to fade from public discourse, but it will never be walked back at this point in the game, no matter what. People of all world views are prone to tribalism, to being strongly against any serious questioning of core beliefs, and in favor of forcing the practice of their beliefs onto everyone else, whether or not datasets agree with their claims. Many of those against the vaccine are not doing so on legal, moral, or dataset grounds but are using the same tribalism and identifiers, just in reverse and without the power of the state behind them.

In 10 years, if 10,000,000 vaccinated Americans die of heart disease given to them by the vaccine (which I do not think will happen, I do not think the vaccine is particularly harmful), the state, the medical profession and the population that will always adhere to their sides political orthodoxy on the key narratives will insist it’s fine and the better outcome.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by G1911

I think this speaks to an important point. People say they believe, and often do truly believe, whatever is in their interest to believe. If your career signals to you to believe X and that if you think Y is actually suggested by the data then you are fired and blacklisted and unable to provide for your family, which narrative are you honestly going to go with?

To be clear, this doesn’t require an evil conspiracy. It’s simple normal human behavior that almost all of us have partaken in. Almost any job will not really allow people to question key paradigms and narratives or disagree with them on topics key to the identity of the business or profession. Experts have pronounced a consensus view on many things that have turned out wrong because of this; it’s a lot easier to say “no we are right” when that’s where the incentive is. If a doctor says “I think this shot is causing myocarditis and health issues for young people for whom the vaccine statistically offers little to no benefit, don’t take it, this is a dangerous sham” you will be fired and informally blacklisted from getting another job in a well paying profession that cost a fortune in time and money to get the med school degree in. Hell, that happens even if you shut up and just don’t take the shot 1-4+ times yourself. Belief in this vaccine (even though we’ve had to change the definition of what a vaccine even is and it quite obviously does not do what is said to do when it was being forced into us) has become a core identity for a large swath of the world, both politically and professionally. They can never, and will never, abandon this.

The state and the industry have both anchored themselves to the Covid narrative. They will change some specifics and flip 180’s every couple of weeks to keep the central themes of the narrative alive, partially because people, for the most part, cannot abandon a narrative they have doubled down on so hard. Medical professionals have held up science as an unquestionable monolith, a bastardization of the very word ‘science’, but one incredibly hard to walk back now after they have forced this shot and partaken in extreme cessions of individual rights to the state and county health departments.

The constant 180’s on details, that the shot obviously does not do what it was said to do, and the statistical evidence is causing the narrative to lose followers every day. Many of those moderates who have casually followed the edicts are no longer going with the narrative. Even where I am, in the most progressive and left wing part of the nation where it can be social and career suicide to be left-wing but not left-wing enough or publicly question any of the lefts key precepts, few are actually following the government advice anymore. About a quarter seem to be masking indoors, seemingly few are keeping six feet apart. But the devoted progressives will never abandon this narrative no matter how many contradictions there are, no matter how many lies are uncovered. Almost comically, Trump’s jab has become the leading virtue signal of the left for the moment, a key identifier of ideological orthodoxy. It may quietly be allowed to fade from public discourse, but it will never be walked back at this point in the game, no matter what. People of all world views are prone to tribalism, to being strongly against any serious questioning of core beliefs, and in favor of forcing the practice of their beliefs onto everyone else, whether or not datasets agree with their claims. Many of those against the vaccine are not doing so on legal, moral, or dataset grounds but are using the same tribalism and identifiers, just in reverse and without the power of the state behind them.

In 10 years, if 10,000,000 vaccinated Americans die of heart disease given to them by the vaccine (which I do not think will happen, I do not think the vaccine is particularly harmful), the state, the medical profession and the population that will always adhere to their sides political orthodoxy on the key narratives will insist it’s fine and the better outcome.

it is starting to be funny to see some people wear masks outside now......like 4 years ago you couldnt wear a mask into a bank....

people wearing masks at some places are like the neighbors with X Mas decorations still out in February..

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

it is starting to be funny to see some people wear masks outside now......like 4 years ago you couldnt wear a mask into a bank....

people wearing masks at some places are like the neighbors with X Mas decorations still out in February..

There are many non-COVID reasons one might wear a facemask.

[SAllen2556]

Originally Posted by irv

You keep hanging your hat on that like you think all doctor's, nurses and other medical professionals are pro vax when nothing could be further from the truth.

How many doctor's, nurses and other medical professionals had to sign non disclosure agreements not to speak out against the vaccines, the lockdowns, etc??? I know it happened up here as I know a woman whose daughter, who works in a major Toronto hospital, had to sign one.

How many doctor's wanted to risk their careers, their livelihoods, pensions and everything they worked so hard for knowing that is exactly what would happen if they did?
Just Google doctor's against the vaccines and see how many have been accused of spreading misinformation, charged and fired.

Here's what I want to really know. This is the thing that keeps me up at night. The thing I can't figure out no matter how hard I try to think of an answer:
Why in the world did you put an apostrophe on "doctors" but not "nurses" or "professionals" ? All three words are written as plurals, so none of them should have an apostrophe, yet you chose to use an apostrophe on "doctors". Why?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

There are many non-COVID reasons one might wear a facemask.

And yet we all know exactly what 99% of them being worn are for.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

There are many non-COVID reasons one might wear a facemask.

Yet banks would not let you in with all of the non covid risks for years in years prior. Yeah i know exceptions like in anything but people all wearing masks 100x now versus 3 years ago so they cant all suddenly have the same exception as was present 3 years ago...so it would appear is COVID reasons for those non exceptions..unless there is something new that isnt covid you are alluding too..that was not present 3 years ago..

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

There are many non-COVID reasons one might wear a facemask.

Yes, it actually helps protect again some particles of pollution. This is why they wore them in China. It had nothing to do with germs. Now, who knows with the science!! If you spray someone with your sneeze, they are going to get sick.

That was always the case, covid didn't change that. It's why people.should stay home when they are sick