|
Quote:
If she is considered to be more important than finding out exactly who was responsible for the worst insurrection and attack in history (not to mention the 30 million dollars in damage), I just thought maybe she was the “go to” for virus answers. And, as you imply daily, you are much smarter and well read than I, so you will excuse me.....I still work with factual things....you know logic. |
Quote:
““Think about the mechanisms they would have to build to be able to actually execute that massive of a thing,” Cawthorn continued. “And then think about what those mechanisms could be used for. They could then go door to door and take your guns. They could go door to door and take your Bibles.” I was in awe, and since the thread was discussing why some don’t get the shot, and knowing the sideshow from Chinese Hoax, and using Hydroxychloroquine, etc., etc, I felt it was well inside the narrative. Amazing how many FACTS you wish to exclude from discussion. |
Quote:
Quote:
Please don't take it personally, Topspinmo. It's not like my home state of Ohio is taking any prizes. Mayo Clinic has a site that tracks percentages of vaccinations by state and age group. Older people have the highest percentages of being vaccinated -- and although political bent possibly applies somewhat to those who are younger, I don't think it does for most older people. I certainly understand that there are those who won't get the vaccine due to health issues that make risk possibly outweigh benefit if they take the shot. In fact, I know one such person. She is being very careful. She has to be. But what I am so tired of is hearing the litany of excuses that have been programmed into the anti-vaxxers -- who have been convinced that they are oh so much smarter than the rest of us, so in the know. Then we have the completely over-the-edge types who think we will be magnetized if we get the vaccine. In spite of the mock-ability factor of those paranoid theories, it is actually, truly awful to realize that there are those who really believe that kind of thing. I have now reached the point where I think of the denial types as being freeloaders -- plain and simple -- riding on the responsibility taken by the rest of us -- freeloading. Boomer |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Because it does make sense to medical experts in that field all over the world. |
Quote:
What percentage of people who were vaccinated have any idea how the mRNA delivery system works? How many know that although scientists have experimented with mRNA for 10 years, it was never approved as a delivery system for human vaccines? How many know that there have been no studies about the long term effects of mRNA vaccines on the immune systems? And how many just blindly accepted the vaccine? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The US population includes 23% under 18 years old. Would you like to show any evidence that 50% of 18 years old and younger are uncertain of the outcome of the vaccine? Because if we start breaking out all the demographics your 50% that fall into the category of not wanting to take the vaccine because of a lack of testing sort of fall apart. Quote:
Do you know how cruise control works on your car? Do you use it? Do you know and understand the testing to have it certified? My point is, your point is meaningless. Almost everything in medicine is "unknown" to the majority of Americans. Yet, most Americans "blindly" follow their doctor's advice and take the medicine their doctors prescribe. Guess what that doesn't always turn out well, but on the other hand, it does turn out well more often than it does not. Quote:
The Influenza vaccine was researched (experimented with) for 15 years before being authorized. And then its authorization was pushed ahead of when doctors wanted it to be released because of high infection rates affecting the military's readiness. Pfizer vaccine (mRNA)was authorized for use on people 12 years old and older on December 11, 2020. That would be under President Trump's administration which took credit for the historic achievement on numerous occasions. President Trump created a pathway that reduced testing and red tape to encourage/allow/permit companies to get vaccines to the market faster and with less testing than would normally have been done. I think that was a good thing - I believe the scientist when they say the potential dangers of the vaccine are outweighed by the known good it does. Quote:
Quote:
I know a lot about Computers, I know almost nothing about the development of virus vaccines. I can't know everything about everything. So, I listen to my PCP and do what she says. I listen to my Cardiovascular surgeon and do what he says. Do I ask him if he is certified for a particular sticking technique I prefer? Uh, nope. I do not question his knowledge or expertise. I do my job and he counts on his computer working. He does his job and my aorta artery keeps working. Both take what the other does on "BLIND FAITH". |
Quote:
The whole point of this thread is a much more infectious varient is spreading an area of the country with low vaccination rates. This varient is a different animal. and now has hospitalizations exceeding the level for that area back in Feb. The nurses and doctors are not falsifying what they are experiencing and hospitalizations. More than 3 billion people vaccinated globally. Real world experience shows benefits far outweigh the risk. It's not just about you. Vaccinations significantly reduce the risk for those around you from getting sick, hospitalized or dying. |
Quote:
In today’s world it’s hard to believe there are such remote areas, but most would never know it’s a part of everyday life for some |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
I never stated that the reason for 50% of the general population not getting vaccinated was due to the lack of testing. But I do find it interesting that half of Fauci’s staff chose not to be vaccinated. I do not put rocket engines or cruise controls into my body. And I guarantee that cruise control was tested for more than a few months before being approved and released. If my doctor suggested a med, I would absolutely research it before agreeing to take it. The mRNA early trials of other vaccines were unsuccessful, therefore there were no long term studies and there still haven’t been. Unless you count the current ongoing study of the Covid vaccines. Unfortunately it’s too early to determine the results. I think it’s great that people in the high risk group were given access to a vaccine so quickly. For them the risk was well worth it. If I was in the high risk category, I would have been vaccinated too. Here is a quote from Penn Medicine regarding mRNA: “The current evidence base on messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines is made up entirely of small early-stage trials, nearly all of which examined only short-term outcomes. They lack sufficient power for testing the statistical significance of most results, and for assessing the risk of serious but uncommon adverse events.” When I was diagnosed with cancer 16 years ago, I visited 3 of the highest rated cancer hospitals in the US. I performed countless hours of research and based on that, made the decision that was best for me. I did NOT blindly accept the first doctor’s opinion. Did you just just pull any cardiologist’s name, or did you look into him before you went to see him? Maybe that’s the difference, I what to know about the things that will effect my body, and you are willing to accept them without question or knowledge… |
Quote:
The Top Four Reasons Why Some People, Doctors; Scientists Refuse To Take The COVID Vaccine – Rights and Freedoms |
Quote:
Quote:
"“We understand there are concerns the vaccine was developed quickly, but Kati (Karikó) and I developed our enabling technology fifteen years ago, and we and other scientists have been working on how to use it to develop mRNA ever since,” Weissman said. “This isn’t brand new—scientists have been studying vaccines using this mRNA platform for at least six or seven years. Based on all of the data available to date, these mRNA vaccines have shown a good safety profile. Clinicians always consider risk-benefit scenarios whenever we recommend a new treatment or a new vaccine to patients and to the public, and with this vaccine, there’s no comparison—the benefit is huge and there’s really little to no risk.” So much for your previous 10-year comment. Quote:
You did exactly what I would hope everyoine could do. Quote:
Quote:
I think the difference is you have found reports that agree with your conclusions and you look for comments and articles that support your position. That is what about 99% (made up stat meaning a large majority) of people do. We, everyone, filter what we read and hear and what agrees with us is acceptable and what disagrees is not. |
Quote:
I can't speak for anyone else but I disagree with you and I subscribed to 6 leading medical and research journals (Nature, NEJM, Harvard, PennNews, et al) when the virus was first reported in the US. I subscribe to podcasts by leading Doctors in the field and the hospitals they work at and to podcasts by educators in the same field. I have been posting here and Nextdoor since then and have simply been reporting what the experts around the world have said. And yet, I have been characterized as a fear-monger for explaining the concept of exponential growth, a liar for saying COVID was worse than the FLU, and now you are saying I am lazy and simply do what I am told by strangers rather than questioning and researching. I disagree with you. I disagree with your conclusions, I will frequently disagree with your sources (when you provide them). But, I will never insult you, I will never call you lazy, will never call you sheep. I respect you, I can do that and still disagree with you. EDIT: I read your link, it is written by a 20ish "reporter" with no background in medicine. he starts by saying: "Reflect On: Why does the mainstream fail to have appropriate conversations about concerns that are being raised about the COVID vaccine? Why do they remain unacknowledged and unaddressed?" Which is demonstrably false. I am sure you can find some "media" that are ignoring the debate, but I could provide dozens (hundreds) of links to articles discussing and debating it - but the last time I did that I got banned. Moving on down the article, the first "expert" he references is an associate editor that works at a prestigious journal. Not a scientist in this field. The second was also NOT a specialist in this field. In fact, i found ONE specialist quoted. The article is an opinion piece. He even states in his Bio that he got into writing for this outlet because he "disagrees" with other outlets. Not what I would call a credible source, more of a biased or prejudiced source. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by
DragonByte SEO v2.0.32 (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.