Prozac Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 53 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said: Well that certainly seems to be the attitude of many commenters here. “Vaccines are less effective than hoped - don’t put that poison in your body.” ”Masks are only 40% effective. No point in wearing them.” “Social distancing is marginally effective. I’ll take that as my cue to party like it’s 1999.” The truth is that there is no silver bullet, not vaccines, not masks, not monoclonals, that will get us out of this mess. All of those things have flaws that make it easy to poke holes in them on an individual basis. But taken in aggregate, they represent a layered strategy that is perfectly reasonable. Is it appropriate to talk about how far we are willing to go with these measures and what that means for economics, American ideals, mental health, and our very social fabric? Of course it is! I WANT to have that conversation. There is a lot of messaging on BOTH sides, however, that is making that conversation almost impossible to have. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashiChuni Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 Masks are WAY less effective than 40% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ratner Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 5 hours ago, Prozac said: Well that certainly seems to be the attitude of many commenters here. “Vaccines are less effective than hoped - don’t put that poison in your body.” ”Masks are only 40% effective. No point in wearing them.” “Social distancing is marginally effective. I’ll take that as my cue to party like it’s 1999.” The truth is that there is no silver bullet, not vaccines, not masks, not monoclonals, that will get us out of this mess. All of those things have flaws that make it easy to poke holes in them on an individual basis. But taken in aggregate, they represent a layered strategy that is perfectly reasonable. Is it appropriate to talk about how far we are willing to go with these measures and what that means for economics, American ideals, mental health, and our very social fabric? Of course it is! I WANT to have that conversation. There is a lot of messaging on BOTH sides, however, that is making that conversation almost impossible to have. Suddenly you have new arguments. Maybe just quote the actual argument next time, because “not 100% effective" and "only 40% effective" are not the same. Not even close. Perfectly reasonable? Based on what? It's been two years, dude. The layered strategy failed, even as there goalposts kept moving. And amazingly, what we know about COVID isn't dramatically different from May of 2020. You want to have the conversation, then have it. I posted a ton of unanswered questions regarding the duration and triggers for mandates, but instead of engaging you continue to reply with the supposed-absurd claims of others. So it seems like the only conversation you want to have is the same one everyone is obsessed with: your side is crazier than my side. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 ADMIN NOTE: I am getting tired of removing offending posts in this thread. If your post is missing, it either violated the rules or quoted a post that did (sorry about that!). A few more spirited individuals will also find their posting abilities restricted for blatant violations, which everyone was warned about. A couple also got friendly warnings to KIO as they were pushing it. The next step is outright bans, I hope it doesn't get to that but if the personal attacks don't stop, we won't have any choice. 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashiChuni Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 9 hours ago, BashiChuni said: Masks are WAY less effective than 40% Even mask zealots are admitting their failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disgruntledemployee Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 15 hours ago, Pooter said: words.. "If everyone got the VAX and wore their masks Covid 19 would cease to exist. Change my mind." Alternatively, reference the 28 weeks later flamethrower post from @disgruntledemployee The mask alarmism in this thread is very real and very dramatic. I used humor to suggest that masks and vaxs won't eradicate covid. And mask policies are like reflective belt rules. Wearing one is not a force field. Tell you what. You do you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VMFA187 Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 CEO Bourla says Pfizer vaccines offer limited protection 'if any' and even less against infection (opindia.com) Pfizer CEO once said their shots were "100% effective." Now he just said that two shots "offer very limited, if any protection against Covid-19." This is what happens when a vaccine isn't properly vetted. "Trust the science." Laughable. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FUSEPLUG Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 ...but don't forget to get your booster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VMFA187 Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 I'm curious if 1) The media will try to hide/censure that interview (it's already been removed from a few places), and 2) If vaccine proponents will continue to blindly follow whatever big pharma and the media propose for "protection" or if that single admission of failure is enough to have some of them start questioning their blind allegiance. I'm fearful it might not be enough because espousing their vaccine status and masking has become an identity for so many... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer6 Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 2 hours ago, VMFA187 said: CEO Bourla says Pfizer vaccines offer limited protection 'if any' and even less against infection (opindia.com) Pfizer CEO once said their shots were "100% effective." Now he just said that two shots "offer very limited, if any protection against Covid-19." This is what happens when a vaccine isn't properly vetted. "Trust the science." Laughable. The interview is a little hard to follow based on Bourla’s accent, so I pulled up the transcript. I can’t find the “very limited protection” quote you posted. He remarks that the current three dose vaccine provides “reasonable” protection against “severe disease” and “hospitalization” specifically against the Omicron variant. The transcript is posted below. Is there something missing from the transcript where he says the quote you’re referring to? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/01/10/first-on-cnbc-cnbc-transcript-pfizer-chairman-and-ceo-albert-bourla-speaks-with-cnbcs-squawk-box-today.html 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 “Two-doses of Pfizer’s or Moderna’s vaccines are only about 10% effective at preventing infection from omicron 20 weeks after the second dose, according to the U.K. data.” So when does the DoD mandate that members get the booster? And then the 4th booster? I mean, if they’re all about protecting the force, then not mandating it now means they want us less protected than we could be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsplayr Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 (edited) The facts on the ground change and the enemy (ie the virus) gets a vote. Omicron is significantly mutated compared to the original virus…are y’all’s TTPs just as effective against a maneuvering, innovating enemy on day 69 of the war compared to a beat-up static target that’s been sitting in the same spot on the range since the Cold War? ”Follow the science” and just common fu*king sense means there are almost never one-shot silver bullet solutions to thorny problems. You have to maintain some acceptable level of defensive effort, keeping in mind negative trade-offs, especially against nature or nature will get ya. Have you ever tried to keep squirrels from eating all the god damned birdseed out of the bird feeders? (Ask me how I know) Death eventually has a Pk of 1, I just hope she finds me old and happy and ready to see what, if anything, the next journey entails. 2 hours ago, HeloDude said: So when does the DoD mandate that members get the booster? And then the 4th booster? Probably sooner rather than later on first boosters if I had to guess. I’ve seen private employers mandate it already (large university hospital in my area). And of course you’re already free to go out and get a booster to re-up protection if you’d like to, which personally I did, having been originally vaccinated very early in 2021. I mean we get mandated flu shots every year, this will be the same, ideally rolled up into one combined vaccine for flu and COVID so there’s less beans someone needs to count. IMHO that’s the best case scenario and we’ve known that for a while; you likely can’t eradicate a virus this transmissible, but you can (hopefully) get it down to manageable endemic levels where it’s a known risk but not a world-shaking event. Anyone who thought the outcome would be otherwise or predicted something much rosier than that was either overly optimistic, misled or misleading. Edited January 12, 2022 by nsplayr 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 Just now, nsplayr said: Anyone who thought the outcome would be otherwise or predicted something much rosier than that was either overly optimistic, misled or misleading. Biden? 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsplayr Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 (edited) 4 minutes ago, HeloDude said: Biden? Yea he was too optimistic on being able to “beat the virus” for both obvious political reasons and because pre-Omicron it was legit more likely we could collectively push the virus back to very very low levels. That time has passed and I think he knows that. The problem is global vaccine inequity and if there’s a large reservoir of immunologically naïve humans (to this virus) anywhere on the planet that’s connected to the rest of the world, new and interesting mutations will continue to emerge given the sheer number of at-bats we’re giving the virus with every new infection. Edited January 12, 2022 by nsplayr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewGazmo Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 We've been down this road before: Strong-arm tactics by the DOD, coupled with inadequate oversight and politically driven behavior by CDC and FDA, have resulted in the following problems. The final four points identify needed reforms. 1. The safety and efficacy of the currently used anthrax vaccine have never been established, either for cutaneous or inhalation exposure in humans. 2. FDA standards for use of an IND (experimental) product, which apply equally to civilian and military vaccines, were bypassed because of pressure from the DOD. 3. Anthrax vaccination appears to be one of the causes of Gulf War illnesses. 4. Vaccine manufacture has been substandard. For years, the vaccine manufacturer failed to meet current Good Manufacturing Practices requirements but was allowed to continue production. Over 6 million vaccine doses have been quarantined by the FDA, have failed the army's supplemental testing, or both. 5. Service members have been subjected to a CDC-sanctioned double standard of medical practice in which risk–benefit analysis does not apply. 6. The ability of military physicians to exercise their medical judgment has been suppressed. 7. Ill, recently vaccinated service members, who rely on military medical care and who are barred from filing suit against the government, find themselves reliving the plight of ill Gulf War veterans. 8. Medical professionals, who expect information from the CDC to meet the highest standards, have instead received misrepresentations concerning anthrax vaccine. 9. The CDC is supervising the conduct of safety and efficacy trials of the current vaccine, but its ability to be objective is in question. Furthermore, because the safety issues are unresolved, conducting a large trial of this vaccine in previously unvaccinated individuals is unethical. Retrospective surveillance to assess safety should be performed first on the recent vaccinees, as recommended by the Committee on Government Reform.20 10. Medical defense measures for biological warfare, including the Joint Vaccine Acquisition Program, need independent civilian oversight, so that balanced medical decision making can occur, free of the influence of the chain of command. 11. The same regulatory requirements imposed on civilian vaccine and drug manufacturers must be met for military products. 12. Anthrax vaccine should be used only in the most dire circumstances. When employed for prophylaxis or treatment of inhalation anthrax, it should be under the conditions required for “off-label” use, including active surveillance for adverse reactions and obtaining free informed consent. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 42 minutes ago, nsplayr said: Yea he was too optimistic on being able to “beat the virus” for both obvious political reasons and because pre-Omicron it was legit more likely we could collectively push the virus back to very very low levels. That time has passed and I think he knows that. I think you mean he was straight up wrong…or he knew better and was lying. Either way, people still believe this nonsense that we can “beat” the virus, and whenever that doesn’t happen, it’s the fault of other people (often blamed on conservatives/Trump supporters) who are stupid, selfish, etc and who aren’t doing their part. Well, politics is a dirty game, and Biden is taking a big political hit with covid, which is funny I suppose since he used the issue to get elected. 2 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 Again, my suspicion is COVID will go the way of the Spanish Flu. The question is when... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dream big Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 43 minutes ago, M2 said: Again, my suspicion is COVID will go the way of the Spanish Flu. The question is when... 2024 at the earliest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VMFA187 Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 14 hours ago, Boomer6 said: The interview is a little hard to follow based on Bourla’s accent, so I pulled up the transcript. I can’t find the “very limited protection” quote you posted. He remarks that the current three dose vaccine provides “reasonable” protection against “severe disease” and “hospitalization” specifically against the Omicron variant. The transcript is posted below. Is there something missing from the transcript where he says the quote you’re referring to? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/01/10/first-on-cnbc-cnbc-transcript-pfizer-chairman-and-ceo-albert-bourla-speaks-with-cnbcs-squawk-box-today.html I listened to him say those words in the video interview that I watched yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waingro Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 11 hours ago, M2 said: Again, my suspicion is COVID will go the way of the Spanish Flu. The question is when... Hasn't your suspicion been the overwhelming global consensus for at least a year now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Negatory Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 I agree with you, but I do find it funny. You know the Spanish flu barely killed anyone in the beginning, then killed the vast majority after a major mutation? The truth is, we don’t know how this will go. For all we know, this could go the way of the bubonic plague and be endemic for decades and have a similar mortality rate throughout. Hope not, though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pooter Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 5 hours ago, Negatory said: I agree with you, but I do find it funny. You know the Spanish flu barely killed anyone in the beginning, then killed the vast majority after a major mutation? The truth is, we don’t know how this will go. For all we know, this could go the way of the bubonic plague and be endemic for decades and have a similar mortality rate throughout. Hope not, though. Exactly. We have only been at this for two years and in the grand scheme of things know very little about this virus still. Each variant has caught the country with our collective pants down, and spiked the cases, hospitalizations, and deaths each time. And right before each spike, far right pundits have been busy declaring the pandemic over. Meanwhile the left is busy turning everyone off to common sense prevention measures because they're in full retard panic mode determined to mandate absolutely everything. I'm afraid we might be stuck in this stupid cycle for a long time. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brickhistory Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 Wll, that's convenient since this Administration has admitted it can't "stop the virus." Just stop reporting on it. Sure is nice to have allies... https://apnews.com/article/omicron-changing-news-outlets-covid-data-da9272f7c4c8a109c3bfb56bed9e9c76 NEW YORK (AP) — For two years, coronavirus case counts and hospitalizations have been widely used barometers of the pandemic’s march across the world. But the omicron wave is making a mess of the usual statistics, forcing news organizations to rethink the way they report such figures. For that reason, The Associated Press has recently told its editors and reporters to avoid emphasizing case counts in stories about the disease. That means, for example, no more stories focused solely on a particular country or state setting a one-day record for number of cases, because that claim has become unreliable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skybert Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sua Sponte Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 (edited) The SCOTUS just blocked federal vaccine mandate for large businesses. https://apnews.com/article/eb5899ae1fe5b62b6f4d51f54a3cd375 SCOTUS Opinion https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf Edited January 13, 2022 by Sua Sponte 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now