[CFrance]

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

So you are saying the tests are weighted to people that are not vaccinated, and that would account for the higher percentage of testing positive.

That is a very good answer. Thank you. I will have to scratch my head for a while to see if the bias adds up, but the first impression is you are right.

(Oh darn, sorry, I didn't mean to agree with you again - people are going to start taking!)

You two stop being so nice to each other.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by lkagele

Too judgmental, IMO. I chose to be vaccinated due to my age bracket. I don't really care about those choosing not to get the vaccine. Their choice and they will live with any adverse consequences. And, for younger generations, the risk of adverse consequences is minimal.

Have you ever considered that we might be the ones that turn out to be stupid. After all, the vaccines are still only experimental having only been approved for emergency use. No one yet knows if there are any long term effects. I'm hoping not but I still understand there's that risk.

Actually, no, I have my entire life put science first in my life. So, I put my trust in scientists that spend their lives learning about pandemics and doing that for that old fashion, an out-of-style thing called "helping mankind".

Sure there are some scientists that have sold their souls to big corporations and make statements like "Camel Cigarettes are GOOD for your cough". And they are part of the reason for the anti-science so prevalent today.

And then there are the charlatans that sell their snake oil to those that will buy it.

But, those down in the trenches, not looking for fame and riches, do doing the hard work and publishing in peer review journals. I trust them. I think NOT trusting them would be a bad idea.

[Byte1]

July had the lowest death rate by Covid in over a year, almost two years. In Florida, of the total deaths in July was less than 6% Covid related.
Most of those refusing the Covid vaccination are either young or minorities. That's a fact according to the demographics table on the CDC site.

[Escape Artist]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

The whole spike protein thing is overblown, and has been used as a political anti-vax conspiracy to cast blame and deflect. While I don't really understand about spike proteins, I do understand about checking out information sources. If credentialed, known, experienced, published, peer-reviewed, immunologists, virologists, research scientists who are respected *by their peers* all say "yeah that thing you heard? It's just more fox news nonsense" then I'm going to believe them, before I believe Tucker Carlson.

And by "by their peers" I am intentionally excluding people whose opinions of those scientists have no relevance. What a Tucker or Hannity or whoever is on CNN or main-stream-media or some alt-right or anarchy conspiracy website or Dr. Oz or even our President feels about a scientist is not relevant. I don't care about their feelings about science. I care about the respected opinions of respected scientists, about other respected scientists.

In other words, I believe in science, not editorials.

Who or what determines "respectability"? Everything, including science, has become extremely politicized so it's almost impossible to be objective. Therefore, the general public will naturally be skeptical of the "experts" and take their "respected" opinions with a grain of salt.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by drducat

Happy healthy children who were successfully inoculated against smallpox. Routine vaccination for smallpox ended in 1972, after smallpox was eradicated from the planet thanks to vaccinations.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Escape Artist

Who or what determines "respectability"? Everything, including science, has become extremely politicized so it's almost impossible to be objective. Therefore, the general public will naturally be skeptical of the "experts" and take their "respected" opinions with a grain of salt.

When the choice is a medical conspiracy website that sells supplements that don't do anything, or Tucker Carlson, or Sean Hannity, or the President - who is also not a scientist or doctor of any kind...

I'll pick the actual scientists who have spent their lives studying virii for a living.

[Escape Artist]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

When the choice is a medical conspiracy website that sells supplements that don't do anything, or Tucker Carlson, or Sean Hannity, or the President - who is also not a scientist or doctor of any kind...

I'll pick the actual scientists who have spent their lives studying virii for a living.

Ah, but they also are influenced by outside sources. You seem to want to deify scientists but they can be corrupt just like everyone else, haha.

My daughter was an immunologist - not a virologist, but close enough. She worked for research labs in the U.S. and Europe. She usually worked under the umbrella of a hospital or university so it depended on who was providing the funding for their research and that could skew results (especially if pharmaceutical companies were involved). Hate to burst your bubble!

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by Escape Artist

Who or what determines "respectability"? Everything, including science, has become extremely politicized so it's almost impossible to be objective. Therefore, the general public will naturally be skeptical of the "experts" and take their "respected" opinions with a grain of salt.

Actually no, science has not become politicized. The mainstream scientists are still the same, are still publishing and being peer-reviewed, and still practicing science.

There certainly has been an attempt to politicize it, but for the most part that is not the case.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by Escape Artist

Ah, but they also are influenced by outside sources. You seem to want to deify scientists but they can be corrupt just like everyone else, haha.

See this doesn't help. No one is Deifying anyone. Scientists are human. Scientists make mistakes. Scientists can be influenced.

But, a Vet giving advice on Pandemics is not science. A politician saying they are smarter than scientists is not helpful.

Why does it seem it is always necessary to exaggerate the opposition's position to make ones point.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by Escape Artist

My daughter was an immunologist - not a virologist, but close enough. She worked for research labs in the U.S. and Europe. She usually worked under the umbrella of a hospital or university so it depended on who was providing the funding for their research and that could skew results (especially if pharmaceutical companies were involved). Hate to burst your bubble!

You aren't bursting my bubble. One example to pain all scientists seems a bit unfair.

Are you saying that unless all scientists are saints, that they are are unworthy?

[Escape Artist]

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

You aren't bursting my bubble. One example to pain all scientists seems a bit unfair.

Are you saying that unless all scientists are saints, that they are are unworthy?

My reply wasn't directed at you unless you and Orange Blossom Baby are one in the same. there's too much reliance on science as if it isn't fallible, especially regarding the vaccines which are new and experimental so its effects and results are still evolving and not engraved in stone.

And to say science hasn't become politicized is untrue. I can think of two glaring examples aside from COVID but don't want to veer off topic and get the thread closed down.

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by Byte1

Sure, like that is going to convince anyone to get their vaccination.

Of course not. Because they have their fingers in their ears. LOL.

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by lkagele

Too judgmental, IMO. I chose to be vaccinated due to my age bracket. I don't really care about those choosing not to get the vaccine. Their choice and they will live with any adverse consequences. And, for younger generations, the risk of adverse consequences is minimal.

Have you ever considered that we might be the ones that turn out to be stupid. After all, the vaccines are still only experimental having only been approved for emergency use. No one yet knows if there are any long term effects. I'm hoping not but I still understand there's that risk.

What time frame are people concerned about regarding "long term effects"? Is it one year, five years, 20 years? We know NOW what effects Covid causes and that includes those pesky long haul effects right up to death. Why worry about the unknown of a vaccine when it is very possible there will be no long term effects with the vaccines at all.

Vaccination history has proven that long term effects from any vaccine ever developed and used in humanity has not caused long term effects beyond the amount of time that has already lapsed for these mRNA vaccines that have already been administered. Very good chance there will not be long term effects from these Covid vaccines.

That seems to be the most popular excuse used by anti-vaxxers and hesitant vaxxers. They need to start singing a different tune if you ask me.

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by Byte1

No one is stopping you now. Cruise ships have been leaving port in Florida.

I'm aware. I follow the Cruise Critic forums very closely. As avid cruisers, hubby and I are still waiting it out. Too many "surprises" going on with the protocols changing at the drop of a hat. This Delta variant is waaaay too contagious for us to get on a ship right now. Oh well.

[Escape Artist]

Originally Posted by coffeebean

What time frame are people concerned about regarding "long term effects"? Is it one year, five years, 20 years? We know NOW what effects Covid causes and that includes those pesky long haul effects right up to death. Why worry about the unknown of a vaccine when it is very possible there will be no long term effects with the vaccines at all.

Vaccination history has proven that long term effects from any vaccine ever developed and used in humanity has not caused long term effects beyond the amount of time that has already lapsed for these mRNA vaccines that have already been administered. Very good chance there will not be long term effects from these Covid vaccines.

That seems to be the most popular excuse used by anti-vaxxers and hesitant vaxxers. They need to start singing a different tune if you ask me.

No one seems to know how long the immunity conveyed by the vaccines lasts. they estimate 6-12 months. They did the trails for the Pfizer in July 2020 and tested the participants in January 2021 and they still had strong antibodies. Maybe it never goes away? That wouldn't be a good thing, either. With traditional vaccines, they are broken down by your cells over time, but we don't know what to expect with these mRNA ones.