[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by Boomer

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

There a lot more people in Missouri that lives far away from any free clinics or hospitals. Especially south central Missouri.

[Swoop]

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

So, should we take this to mean that you recommend never taking any medication unless 100% of all people in the field agree it is safe and effective and there are no unknown risks? In other words, you don't take any medications?



Interesting, and here is a quote from Penn Medicine (Assuming you meant University of Pennsylvania) last year by the two experts that actually did the research there:

"“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.



Cool, so the30% of Americans that do not have health insurance and can not afford to go traveling around the world interviewing potential doctors - what should they do?

You did exactly what I would hope everyoine could do.



I was referred to the team by my PCP. I also researched and found that I was lucky enough to have one of the highest rated teams in the world. But, even if they were only 2nd or 3rd, I probably would have gone with them, since they had a working relationship with my PCP which helps with follow up care.



Again a backhanded insult, saying you think anyone that disagrees with you doesn't question things and accepts things "BLINDLY". So, YOU are the one true source and anyone that disagrees with you is WRONG. You understand that is what your statement just said.

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.

You decided to get the vaccine. You’ve mentioned that you were seeing a cardiologist. Maybe you are in the at-risk category. If so, I applaud your decision to get vaccinated. I am not in the at-risk category. The statistical chances of me dying from Covid are 4/100’s of 1%. I like my odds. Especially since no one knows if there will be long term side effects from the vaccines. I respect your decision to get vaccinated, you did what you thought was right for you. After researching, I came to the conclusion that I prefer my chances with what I know, rather than taking the leap of faith that the vaccines won’t have long term issues. For the 50% of the population that has been vaccinated, I certainly hope that there are no issues.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by Bucco

Sorry, it all happened in the same time period...ie., refusing to take part in a congressional investigation into the attack on our capital, followed by the welcome to Brittany to come and be heard,

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.

I rest my case, you do know Congress has see several investigations going on and not just what you here on propaganda channels.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

I rest my case, you do know Congress has see several investigations going on and not just what you here on propaganda channels.

I was simply pointing out, for one example, the preposterous stance of not wanting an investigation into a violent, very costly attack on our nations capitol and an invite to Brittany Spears to “testify”

Trust me, I am vividly aware of the congressional investigations that have happened and are being scheduled (they were part of my job description) many years ago.

Unfortunetly, so many do not watch them or read about them until the subject is of personal interest. Being aware of these congressional panels and actually watching them is a great tool to learn about who is getting voted into office.

And for the record, I do not watch any channels to be informed. I read...lots of boring things like Congressional Record, but to be informed is the complete opposite of watching television.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by Swoop

You decided to get the vaccine. You’ve mentioned that you were seeing a cardiologist. Maybe you are in the at-risk category. If so, I applaud your decision to get vaccinated. I am not in the at-risk category. The statistical chances of me dying from Covid are 4/100’s of 1%. I like my odds. Especially since no one knows if there will be long term side effects from the vaccines. I respect your decision to get vaccinated, you did what you thought was right for you. After researching, I came to the conclusion that I prefer my chances with what I know, rather than taking the leap of faith that the vaccines won’t have long term issues. For the 50% of the population that has been vaccinated, I certainly hope that there are no issues.

Thank you for the civil reply, I appreciate it. Too often this type of exchange devolves into nonsense. And I appreciate you clearly articulate your position and decision. I respect that. I can respect your decision and disagree with it at the same time.

I AM in the at-risk group, but, I did leave the decision to get vaccinated to my PCP, after a long discussion about the decision and my particular case.

My decision to get vaccinated was also motivated by my concern that I did not want to be the cause of anyone else getting the virus and dying, even if I got it and survived. Which was part of the discussion with my PCP.

As (I think) Reagan said, "It takes a village". Individual actions matter - pollution, pandemics, voting, etc etc in many matters, what I do affects your life and what you do affects my life. The obvious example is the worker in a fast-food restaurant that has Hep C and doesn't wash his hands, spreading Hep C, which is another virus that can have no symptoms when it is contagious and spread. If the worker had simply washed his hand's people would not have died. The ODDs of people dying because he didn't wash his hands are very low, but not zero. But, a lot of people could live with "long haul" side effects. I didn't want to be "that person". So, I weighed the risks and felt the benefits outweighed the known risks.

I don't believe in guarantees. Sadly, I believe that almost anyone that guarantees anything is probably lying or misinformed. So, my opinion is we try to do what is generally accepted as the best thing for everyone and then deal with the consequences if it goes sideways.

[Swoop]

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

Thank you for the civil reply, I appreciate it. Too often this type of exchange devolves into nonsense. And I appreciate you clearly articulate your position and decision. I respect that. I can respect your decision and disagree with it at the same time.

I AM in the at-risk group, but, I did leave the decision to get vaccinated to my PCP, after a long discussion about the decision and my particular case.

My decision to get vaccinated was also motivated by my concern that I did not want to be the cause of anyone else getting the virus and dying, even if I got it and survived. Which was part of the discussion with my PCP.

As (I think) Reagan said, "It takes a village". Individual actions matter - pollution, pandemics, voting, etc etc in many matters, what I do affects your life and what you do affects my life. The obvious example is the worker in a fast-food restaurant that has Hep C and doesn't wash his hands, spreading Hep C, which is another virus that can have no symptoms when it is contagious and spread. If the worker had simply washed his hand's people would not have died. The ODDs of people dying because he didn't wash his hands are very low, but not zero. But, a lot of people could live with "long haul" side effects. I didn't want to be "that person". So, I weighed the risks and felt the benefits outweighed the known risks.

I don't believe in guarantees. Sadly, I believe that almost anyone that guarantees anything is probably lying or misinformed. So, my opinion is we try to do what is generally accepted as the best thing for everyone and then deal with the consequences if it goes sideways.

The politician who used the “It Takes a Village” quote was Hillary Clinton.
I wore my mask “for the good of others”, but I considered my own health when making my decision regarding the vaccine.
In your case, based on your health, it should have been a pretty easy decision. In fact I’m surprised that it took the “benefit of others” to sway your decision.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by Swoop

The politician who used the “It Takes a Village” quote was Hillary Clinton.
I wore my mask “for the good of others”, but I considered my own health when making my decision regarding the vaccine.
In your case, based on your health, it should have been a pretty easy decision. In fact I’m surprised that it took the “benefit of others” to sway your decision.

Thank you for the correction. And thank you for wearing a mask. I appreciate it.

And I didn't say it took "benefit others", I said, it was part of the consideration. Very few things are so simple to decide. I could have self-isolated. In fact, part of my consideration was if there were others that needed the vaccine more than me, my own PCP for instance is certainly more at risk than I would be, then I have self-isolated until more vaccinations were available. But, she felt it important for me to be moved to the top of the list because I had just had major abdominal surgery. So, I did what she said to do.

[Becca9800]

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

So, should I interpret your comment to say that ANYONE that disagrees with you simply accepted what they were told and did no research.

Your perceptions are your reality. If you choose to believe that’s what I meant… You get to own it though. The well-researched knows both sides.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

and now you are saying I am lazy and simply do what I am told by strangers rather than questioning and researching.

Is that what I said to you? You read that huh? I'm certain I did not. I never used that word anywhere, nor was I even addressing you.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

EDIT: I read your link, it is written by a 20ish "reporter" with no background in medicine.

This was clearly an article about why there is vaccine hesitancy. It is not a medical research paper. C’mon! You know the difference. So what if he's 20ish? Does that make him not credible in and of itself? I thought it was well researched, well written and hit the nail right on the head.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

Which is demonstrably false

If you believe medical doctors and scientists speaking unfavorably about the vaccine aren't being silenced, you'd be very wrong. And because they are being silenced, how can their findings and opinions be adequately discussed by any media? So whatever debates you're hearing are incomplete or one-sided.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

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 author's first source, a medical journal editor and publisher, was for a quote used re: politicization, corruption, and suppression of science. I’m not sure why you think he's not expert enough to quote.

Again, it was a piece on why there is vaccine hesitancy, not a medical research paper. The author cited his sources to demonstrate the reasons behind the hesitancy, which you reject solely because you don't find the sources expert enough. You don't address the info provided, instead you simply discount all of it.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

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.

It's meant as a look at the other side. So the author is not a credible source to write an article explaining why there is vaccine hesitancy? Ok then. This is why I try to avoid any discussion about the vaccine. No author, source, study or expert is ever acceptable. Have a good rest of your day.

[Swoop]

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

Thank you for the correction. And thank you for wearing a mask. I appreciate it.

And I didn't say it took "benefit others", I said, it was part of the consideration. Very few things are so simple to decide. I could have self-isolated. In fact, part of my consideration was if there were others that needed the vaccine more than me, my own PCP for instance is certainly more at risk than I would be, then I have self-isolated until more vaccinations were available. But, she felt it important for me to be moved to the top of the list because I had just had major abdominal surgery. So, I did what she said to do.

“My decision to get vaccinated was also motivated by my concern that I did not want to be the cause of anyone else getting the virus and dying, even if I got it and survived.”
That certainly sounds like a “to benefit others” reason. I was just surprised that your medical condition alone wasn’t enough for you to get vaccinated. Or, did you decide to get vaccinated as soon as it was available, for your health, and the “benefit of others” comment was meant as a shallow attempt to shame me for choosing not to get vaccinated….

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by Swoop

“My decision to get vaccinated was also motivated by my concern that I did not want to be the cause of anyone else getting the virus and dying, even if I got it and survived.”
That certainly sounds like a “to benefit others” reason. I was just surprised that your medical condition alone wasn’t enough for you to get vaccinated. Or, did you decide to get vaccinated as soon as it was available, for your health, and the “benefit of others” comment was meant as a shallow attempt to shame me for choosing not to get vaccinated….

My PCP said they had enough vaccines to go around and she strongly advised me to get it early. So, yes, both my wife and I got ours very early on via the VA.

[roscoguy]

Originally Posted by Becca9800

"O, the irony" is clear to me. Because simply doing what you're told is best for you, wo questioning, is the very definition of "reasonable", correct? The mere fact that you believe it's a "few skeptical entertainers" and call it "theories and suspicions" tells me you are unaware of the breadth and depth of skepticism surrounding the C19 vaccine. I'm going to leave this article here for you, you'll be surprised by the who & why. The reasonable person wants to know both sides of an issue, will you read the article?

The Top Four Reasons Why Some People, Doctors; Scientists Refuse To Take The COVID Vaccine – Rights and Freedoms

And who said that I, or others who decided to trust the consensus of Doctors & scientists from all over the world, did so without questions? Okay, there are some skeptical professionals as well as the professional skeptics, but that is true of almost anything you can think of.

As far as the article goes, it's basically the same old stuff: railing against the so-called and much-vilified MSM; whining that those who disagree with his opinions would label them "conspiracy theories"; all the other paranoid suspicions of government & his "state-pharma alliance". And that's what the entire article comes down to, the author's opinions, even if there is some published support for them.

Point "1. A Lack of Trust In Government & Pharmaceutical Companies." There definitely is some of that! Some is even well-founded, if only historically speaking.

Point "2. The Virus Has A High Survival Rate." Maybe, at least for now. What about the next variant, or the 13th, made possible by natural mutation & unchecked spread amongst the unvaccinated? What about the 'long-haulers' who have sometimes severe & long-lasting side effects from infection? Survival rate alone does not tell the whole story of the human costs of this virus.

Point "3. Some People Don’t Know How Safe And Effective The Vaccine Is" Nope, we don't. But many people have decided to trust the vast majority of HCP's. As has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread, nearly all of us end up trusting in authorities whose job it is to keep us safe & healthy.

Point "4. There May Be Protection From Infection" And maybe not. Your dice to roll, just bear in mind that you & other skeptics alike may well have a part in providing hosts to this and any other variants that arise.

So, I read a fair amount of your article; will you do the same? Try these, from the CDC.

Understanding mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines | CDC
Use of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine After Reports of Myocarditis Among Vaccine Recipients: Update from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices — United States, June 2021 | MMWR
Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine Overview and Safety | CDC

Note that some do contain concerns and/or warnings and yet the CDC still recommends that the majority of Americans get the vaccine. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

Depending on your definition of "long term effects" no one knows the long term effects of anything.

Helmets don't protect football players perfectly, seatbelts don't protect drivers and passengers perfectly, polio vaccinations don't protect people perfectly. While so many are waiting for perfection and proof it is perfect, people are dying that don't have to die.

There is NO guarantee. All we have are lots of people working to learn how to do something and recommending that the vaccine is safer than not taking the vaccine.

As long as there is no law requiring vaccinations, then people can make up their own minds. Personally, I would like to see vaccinations REQUIRED by law.

But, that is not going to happen, so all these arguments more or less sound like an old couple just repeating the same old arguments they have been having for the past 40 years. Round and round the argument goes, and nothing new is ever said, and neither side is willing to actually listen to the other side.

I would be fine with required vaccinations. Just like seat belts and other reasonable requirements.

[Swoop]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I would be fine with required vaccinations. Just like seat belts and other reasonable requirements.

Based on that reasoning we should definitely outlaw smoking since it kills 480,000 per year. And since overweight people have more health issues, we should outlaw fast food restaurants and also outlaw all unhealthy foods from grocery stores. Those changes would save far more lives than the vaccine and greatly reduce the burden on the medical system…

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by Swoop

Based on that reasoning we should definitely outlaw smoking since it kills 480,000 per year. And since overweight people have more health issues, we should outlaw fast food restaurants and also outlaw all unhealthy foods from grocery stores. Those changes would save far more lives than the vaccine and greatly reduce the burden on the medical system…

I agree while I expect you are being facetious, I agree, we should outlaw alcohol, smoking, fast food, and other activities that cost EVERYONE a lot of money. You and I are paying the highest healthcare costs in the world and at least part of that high cost is because of all the health issues those lifestyle choices cause - not contribute to, but actually cause. Of course, a lot of people would object to the government taking such an up close and personal interest in our lifestyle choices.

However, just because there is no way we can do EVERYTHING that should be done, that is no excuse to do nothing when we can. Also, a vaccine requirement, unlike all those other areas would NOT stop people from doing things that want to do and are already doing. And there are plenty of examples of mandatory vaccinations already that have had major positive benefits to society. So, your comparison falls a little short.

[Becca9800]

Originally Posted by roscoguy

And who said that I, or others who decided to trust the consensus of Doctors & scientists from all over the world, did so without questions?

I was actually telling you, that I, meaning me, didn't just do as I was told, I researched.

Originally Posted by roscoguy

So, I read a fair amount of your article; will you do the same? Try these, from the CDC.

Appreciate the links but I'm well aware of what the CDC says. I'm tuned in to both sides of the get/don't get argument. See Reason #1 for vaccine hesitancy.

Originally Posted by roscoguy

Note that some do contain concerns and/or warnings and yet the CDC still recommends that the majority of Americans get the vaccine. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

It seems not at all reasonable for me. We're just going to have to agree to disagree.