COVID-19 (Aka China Virus)

[HeloDude]

11 minutes ago, Negatory said:

I think we’re all talking past each other a little bit. If natural infection results in immunity comparable to or better than vaccination, why do those folks need to be vaccinated? So that they are extra super resistant to the virus?

You’re missing my question, and it’s a simple one:  If only one vaccine is approved outside of emergency use, and if it’s more effective than the others, then why not just mandate that everyone gets the best one and the one that has final/full approval?

Edited September 5, 2021 by HeloDude

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, Negatory said:

It’s seems to be more about compliance than efficacy.

Shack. You've hit precisely on why I'm so opposed to what .gov has been doing for a year and a half now. If this was really about "the science" we'd be doing things a lot differently. 

This is a battle between political ideologies. Primarily, the modern leftist movement (more collectivist than the classically liberal left of the 1900's) views this as an opportunity to prove that collective compliance will yield superior outcomes over decentralization and individualism. Thus the outage over republican states choosing different prevention strategies despite no correlation between lockdown policies and long term spread. 

 

Since they were unable to secure national uniformity on masking and lockdown policy, vaccination is the final opportunity to "pull together" and validate the merit of centralized (federal) control. If infection-based immunity is a part of the solution, then the eventual goal (herd immunity "beating" the disease) will have been obtained through means not directly guided by the government. 

 

For the political left, COVID was an opportunity to finally justify the abolishment of states' rights, a long held goal of progressives. 

[Negatory]

3 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

You’re missing my question, and it’s a simple one:  If only one vaccine is approved outside of emergency use, and if it’s more effective than the others, then why not just mandate that everyone gets the best one and the one that has final/full approval?

They did. They just allowed very common sense, agreeable exceptions for Moderna/JJ. If you seriously want to argue that that is bad policy then you are intentionally being obtuse.

I guarantee you would be more upset if they said that everyone including those that got Moderna/JJ had to get revaccinated. The science shows no reason for that. You’re making up an argument that no one is arguing.

[Lord Ratner]

13 minutes ago, Negatory said:

I think we’re all talking past each other a little bit. If natural infection results in immunity comparable to or better than vaccination, why do those folks need to be vaccinated? So that they are extra super resistant to the virus?

For the same reason the vaccinated are being told to wear masks. The leadership knows they can't easily discriminate between vaccinated and unvaccinated, so unvaccinated people will be able to get by not wearing masks. This is intolerable to the power hungry, so everyone wears masks.

 

They are, however, smart enough to realize that if the vaccinated were told the truth, that they were forced to wear masks because the unvaccinated were breaking the rules, they would never go along with it. So instead we're subjected to wild exaggerations and logical fallacies about disease transmission amongst the vaccinated.

 

It always shuffles back to the same unanswered question. If the vaccinated are largely protected from the disease, and everybody has had a chance to be vaccinated, and the unvaccinated are not asking anybody to do anything to protect them, why exactly are masks still mandatory?

 

And overloading the hospitals is no longer a relevant argument. It's been 18 months and trillions of dollars spent. If the hospitals haven't been built out to handle this disease, they never will be.

[HeloDude]

1 minute ago, Negatory said:

They did. They just allowed very common sense, agreeable exceptions for Moderna/JJ. If you seriously want to argue that that is bad policy then you are intentionally being obtuse.

I guarantee you would be more upset if they said that everyone including those that got Moderna/JJ had to get revaccinated. The science shows no reason for that. You’re making up an argument that no one is arguing.

I’m literally asking this simple question that you still haven’t answered:  If Pfizer is the only one that is currently FDA approved and is the most effective, then why now allow people to still choose?  Why not just say anyone who hasn’t had the shot must get Pfizer, since it’s fully approved and offers the best protection?

[Negatory]

Because, as I’ve said, there is no scientific evidence to suggest we need to discriminate between the two from an efficacy perspective. Everything suggests that Moderna/JJ provide about the same protection at very minimal risk. FDA approval is not some magic thing that liberal policy makers cling onto, and you shouldn’t either - although you will to be obtuse. There is no scientific evidence to suggest that FDA approval correlates to efficacy. It’s why all of these people on this forum - a lot of your peers - have been successfully vaccinated for months before FDA approval. This is condescending, but this is my 4th message and I addressed it previously. Learn to read and comprehend people’s responses:

1 hour ago, Negatory said:

I think we can all agree that the military allowing Moderna/JJ to count is in everyone’s best interest, as the research so far shows that there is no reason to believe they are significantly less effective - they just haven’t finished the FDA process yet.

I understand the next message from you will be, “I still see you simply cannot address my point. Pfizer is good, so if libtards were being good science followers, they would mandate it over everything else because we live in a black and white world. Checkmate.”

Edited September 5, 2021 by Negatory

[HeloDude]

1 minute ago, Negatory said:

Because, as I’ve said, there is no scientific evidence to suggest we need to discriminate between the two from an efficacy perspective. Everything suggests that Moderna/JJ provide the same protection at very minimal risk.

Dude, the government literally has said that Pfizer offers more protection than JJ.  So no, it’s not “the same”.  Once again, you’re struggling with your counter arguments.
 

 

[FLEA]

59 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Do you feel the same about all the other vaccines you got?

I mean...when was the last time an American died of polio...does that mean we shouldn't be mandating polio vaccines for kids to go to school?

Nope. I want protected from polio. Polio sucks and if I got it, it would probably kill me. It's necessary for my survival to inoculate against it, especially since it's still widespread in many countries the US operates in. 

If I am a recovered COVID patient, you can't make the same argument for necessity. I am likely already possessing immunity equal to one greater than what the vaccine alone can provide. The vaccine isn't necessary to save my life or protect me in anyway. 

[Guest LumberjackAxe]

Is there a good way to tell if you’ve had COVID and thus have a greater immunity? Aren’t the antibody tests notoriously unreliable, or am I thinking of the regular COVID test?

[glockenspiel]

3 minutes ago, LumberjackAxe said:

Is there a good way to tell if you’ve had COVID and thus have a greater immunity? Aren’t the antibody tests notoriously unreliable, or am I thinking of the regular COVID test?

@lumberjacka look at the T-detect test to detect Tcell immunity. 

17 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Nope. I want protected from polio. Polio sucks and if I got it, it would probably kill me. It's necessary for my survival to inoculate against it, especially since it's still widespread in many countries the US operates in. 

If I am a recovered COVID patient, you can't make the same argument for necessity. I am likely already possessing immunity equal to one greater than what the vaccine alone can provide. The vaccine isn't necessary to save my life or protect me in anyway. 

@FLEA just pipe down and hop on the mandate train. Covid vaccines are just as black and white as polio vaccines and seat belts!!

[Scooter14]

[mention=78553]FLEA[/mention] just pipe down and hop on the mandate train. Covid vaccines are just as black and white as polio vaccines and seat belts!!

I thought you said this thread wasn’t about seatbelts…

[pawnman]

2 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

For the same reason the vaccinated are being told to wear masks. The leadership knows they can't easily discriminate between vaccinated and unvaccinated, so unvaccinated people will be able to get by not wearing masks. This is intolerable to the power hungry, so everyone wears masks.

 

They are, however, smart enough to realize that if the vaccinated were told the truth, that they were forced to wear masks because the unvaccinated were breaking the rules, they would never go along with it. So instead we're subjected to wild exaggerations and logical fallacies about disease transmission amongst the vaccinated.

 

It always shuffles back to the same unanswered question. If the vaccinated are largely protected from the disease, and everybody has had a chance to be vaccinated, and the unvaccinated are not asking anybody to do anything to protect them, why exactly are masks still mandatory?

 

And overloading the hospitals is no longer a relevant argument. It's been 18 months and trillions of dollars spent. If the hospitals haven't been built out to handle this disease, they never will be.

Well, in the military, it's because even if you want to be a dumbass and don't care about your own health, the military still needs you healthy enough to be ready to fight.  

Same reason they make you get the flu shot every year even though relatively few people die of the flu - because if you're sick in bed at home for a week with the flu, that's a week you aren't getting in the cockpit.

[Scooter14]

 
And overloading the hospitals is no longer a relevant argument. It's been 18 months and trillions of dollars spent. If the hospitals haven't been built out to handle this disease, they never will be.

Man I’ll tell ya, the medical and scientific communities really should have thought of a solution that could be widely dispersed to keep people out of hospitals and to keep people from getting severely ill with COVID.

It’s too bad they couldn’t figure it out.

[jazzdude]

And overloading the hospitals is no longer a relevant argument. It's been 18 months and trillions of dollars spent. If the hospitals haven't been built out to handle this disease, they never will be.

Physical hospital space and available beds is one problem, and that's an easier problem to solve because you can throw money at it to fix it. Staying and patient loads are a bigger problem.

I mean, it's not like it doesn't take years to create doctors and nurses to staff those hospitals (as well as everything else medical related such as clinics and nursing homes), and the pipeline (particularly for doctors) is already maxed out.

It's like the AF pilot retention problem, except doctors don't have an ADSC and there's no real way to increase the production of doctors in a year like the AF can with pilots.

[ecugringo]

I'm not pro or anti  VAX but I have questions on the VAX.  This vax was available for testing within like 4 months of the pandemic.  After like 6 months it was the silver bullet vs Covid.  But now there are ppl that have the vax and being hospitalized.  Jesse Jackson and his wife, Oscar De la Hoya just to name a few celebs.  There are many other break through cases.  We really dont know what the make up of hospitalizations is because there is a good chance they will never admit how many breakthrough hospitalizations there are because then they lost all credibility.  (not like we haven't been lied to before, Vietnam, Iraq, AFG, etc....)My 38 yr old healthy cousin is vaxed but still got pretty sick, not hospitalized.  Most likely same symptoms vaxed or not.  Now they are calling for boosters cuz the vax wears off.  The US is in the 2nd highest case peak and climbing last i checked.  Maybe, just maybe this vaccine sucks and they didn't have adequate time to really test it?  Bring these questions up to a hard left pro vaxer and you basically get labeled as a racist deplorable trump supporter.  There is literally no conversation.  Just look at this thread.  

 

The position I am currently in is that my odds are low of dying of Covid.  The VAX may or may not reduce my chance of hospitalization but even that my odds are still low of requiring a bed.  I am not confident what the long term effects of hte vaccine are at this point.  I am aware I will most likely need the vaccine to continue my job in hte civilian sector.

 

Side note:  We have an office in Calgary.  Im pretty close with a guy there and I asked a while ago why Canada is so crazy over shut downs.  Apparently they only have 250 ICU beds in Alberta which is like 4.5mm ppl.  Compare that to my state of CO where we have like 2k....makes you glad you dont have govt run health care and makes sense if that is the case in Australia why they are freakign out over 5 cases.  They simply pissed away tax payer money vs building the health care infrastructure.

[CaptainMorgan]

I view vaccine mandates the same as drug use and testing. A company is completely within their rights as a private company to randomly test employees for liver enzymes to detect excessive alcohol consumption, and fire you if you drink too much.

What company has done this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pawnman]

5 hours ago, FLEA said:

Nope. I want protected from polio. Polio sucks and if I got it, it would probably kill me. It's necessary for my survival to inoculate against it, especially since it's still widespread in many countries the US operates in. 

If I am a recovered COVID patient, you can't make the same argument for necessity. I am likely already possessing immunity equal to one greater than what the vaccine alone can provide. The vaccine isn't necessary to save my life or protect me in anyway. 

But if you have the shot, why does it matter if school kids get it?  You're protected, right?  Why the mandates for public school children to get vaccinated for polio, measles, mumps, rubella...I mean, those kill fewer people than Covid has every year, why the mandates?

[TheNewGazmo]

Physical hospital space and available beds is one problem, and that's an easier problem to solve because you can throw money at it to fix it. Staying and patient loads are a bigger problem.

I mean, it's not like it doesn't take years to create doctors and nurses to staff those hospitals (as well as everything else medical related such as clinics and nursing homes), and the pipeline (particularly for doctors) is already maxed out.

It's like the AF pilot retention problem, except doctors don't have an ADSC and there's no real way to increase the production of doctors in a year like the AF can with pilots.

The other issue is that COVID is driving a lot of hospitals into bankruptcy. They don't make as much money treating COVID patients as they do performing elective surgeries (many of which they've had to postpone because of COVID). The government gives them $40k every time they put someone on a ventilator, but it still doesn't compare to the triple bypasses they could be doing.

[Guest LumberjackAxe]

2 hours ago, CaptainMorgan said:

What company has done this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Busch Gardens Director level positions, at a minimum, but that was as of 2008. Many tech companies in the Bay Area also test for “excessive alcohol use,” but again that’s for higher level positions that risk more embarrassment than entry level workers. Do I know of anyone being fired for that? No.

Edited September 6, 2021 by LumberjackAxe

[CaptainMorgan]

Busch Gardens Director level positions, at a minimum, but that was as of 2008. Many tech companies in the Bay Area also test for “excessive alcohol use,” but again that’s for higher level positions that risk more embarrassment than entry level workers. Do I know of anyone being fired for that? No.

That makes zero sense and seems like it could result in some serious liability should an employee/potential employee decide to sue. A liver enzyme test can determine whether someone drinks or doesn’t. It’s accuracy on gauging how much some one drinks is zero. There are way too many factors to discern that through such a test. Also, who the hell wants to work for Busch gardens, and what sort of hypocrisy are we in that Busch gardens wants to make sure their employees are sober?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FLEA]

6 hours ago, pawnman said:

But if you have the shot, why does it matter if school kids get it?  You're protected, right?  Why the mandates for public school children to get vaccinated for polio, measles, mumps, rubella...I mean, those kill fewer people than Covid has every year, why the mandates?

Wtf are you talking about dude? Do you even know anymore? 

[pawnman]

4 hours ago, FLEA said:

Wtf are you talking about dude? Do you even know anymore? 

Oh, the argument only works for Covid, not polio?

Where is your cutoff for vaccines that should be required vs ones that shouldn't be?

[mp5g]

16 hours ago, pawnman said:

Same reason they make you get the flu shot every year even though relatively few people die of the flu - because if you're sick in bed at home for a week with the flu, that's a week you aren't getting in the cockpit.

Ahh, but there in lies the problem. You are assuming that maintenance is producing enough jets for us to get into the cockpit on a weekly basis. 😆 

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

Oh, the argument only works for Covid, not polio?

Where is your cutoff for vaccines that should be required vs ones that shouldn't be?

Dude we are talking about the medical neccesity of vaccinating people who have already recovered from COVID. This has nothing to do with polio or children. Your arguments make no sense. 

[pawnman]

4 hours ago, FLEA said:

Dude we are talking about the medical neccesity of vaccinating people who have already recovered from COVID. This has nothing to do with polio or children. Your arguments make no sense. 

Yes, yes, we know that you oppose vaccinations in spite of a wealth of data.

Any argument in favor of vaccines won't make sense to you.