Jump to content

COVID-19 (Aka China Virus)


Orbit

Recommended Posts

Here’s an honest question for the pro-big government types on here:

Now that military members are being forced to take a covid shot (or risk the negative consequences if no approved waiver), why then isn’t the military mandating members take the Pfizer vaccine vs taking the Moderna or JJ?  According to big-government, Pfizer is more effective than JJ, so why give someone the option of taking a less effective shot that isn’t even the one fully approved by the FDA?  If the entire reason for the mandated vaccine is that it protects us, why wouldn’t the DoD want us to take the best one?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HeloDude said:

Here’s an honest question for the pro-big government types on here:

Now that military members are being forced to take a covid shot (or risk the negative consequences if no approved waiver), why then isn’t the military mandating members take the Pfizer vaccine vs taking the Moderna or JJ?  According to big-government, Pfizer is more effective than JJ, so why give someone the option of taking a less effective shot that isn’t even the one fully approved by the FDA?  If the entire reason for the mandated vaccine is that it protects us, why wouldn’t the DoD want us to take the best one?

Pfizer is the only one you ARE mandated to take.  The others are still under an EUA (remember when no one was going to take an unapproved vaccine?).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pfizer is the only one you ARE mandated to take.  The others are still under an EUA (remember when no one was going to take an unapproved vaccine?).  
However, all of them count. If you have gotten the Moderna or J&J, all you need to do is show your clinic your vaccine card and they will add it to your military shot record.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. There’s nothing illegal about drinking a lot, and there’s nothing illegal about them firing you for drinking a lot. If you think that’s bullshit, then you choose to work somewhere else.
 

Same thing with vaccine mandate. There’s nothing illegal about staying unvaccinated, and there’s nothing illegal about companies firing you for choosing to be unvaccinated. If you think that’s bullshit, then you choose to work somewhere else. 
 

what about the military where we don’t have a choice? Well, I’m kind of split on this one, I can totally see both sides but I think I’m more on the side of being okay with mandatory vaccinations for reasons relating to the aforementioned example of a COVID outbreak on a nuclear sub hindering the mission, but I could be persuaded. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Which in no way takes away from the success of the vaccine.

But it sure does remove legitimacy from the very aggressive push for mandatory vaccination in a wide range of career fields (like airline pilot and military).

And now we are already talking about booster shots, after less than a year. I suspect many will want those to be mandatory as well.

I'm a big science advocate, but I've never heard of a single medical research subject being mastered to the point of directing legally compelled participation in less than a year. There's no such thing as experts on new diseases, and COVID 19 is still very new. It's not a coincidence that overwhelmingly the "pro-vax" people are democrats and the "anti-vax" people are republican. Like everything else in the modern world of social media and 24-hour news, it's about what team you're on, not facts.

I really only see it affecting my views on policy implementation. I think I am still in support of immunity for everyone. I’m fine with mandatory vaccines for folks that haven’t had COVID. But it doesn’t really pass the common sense test to force folks that have had COVID to get vaccinated if they already have pretty great immunity.

Yes, I saw the study that shows that folks that previously had COVID that got vaccinated did better than folks that had COVID that weren’t vaccinated. But at what point is someone safe enough? If they already have better immunity than just the shot, do they need super double plus immunity just so everyone has had the vaccine?

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Here’s an honest question for the pro-big government types on here:

Now that military members are being forced to take a covid shot (or risk the negative consequences if no approved waiver), why then isn’t the military mandating members take the Pfizer vaccine vs taking the Moderna or JJ?  According to big-government, Pfizer is more effective than JJ, so why give someone the option of taking a less effective shot that isn’t even the one fully approved by the FDA?  If the entire reason for the mandated vaccine is that it protects us, why wouldn’t the DoD want us to take the best one?

As @pawnman said, they did exactly what you were complaining about here. Pfizer is the only one mandated - check the memo.

This sort of arguing with half truths is why a lot of these discussions go nowhere. You asking the question the way you did is easily construed as misinformation. You didn’t ask “is Pfizer mandated?” You asked why “isn’t the military mandating members to take the Pfizer vaccine” as if you looked it up, found out they weren’t, and then brought new information to this forum. But 10 seconds of your own research would have shown that is exactly what happened.

If you’re trying to say that we should be arguing that if you got Moderna it shouldn’t count and you should be forced to get Pfizer, you’re creating a nothing burger argument that no one is going to bite off on. 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.

On a completely different note, this pandemic has highlighted that much of these efforts overwhelmingly support the obese and those who choose to be unhealthy. Just as I think that unvaccinated folks that get very ill with Covid chose their fate, to the extent that they could have been protected and weren’t, I believe the same for those that are extremely out of shape. I hope that at some point we have an honest look at improving that elephant in the room.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/78-of-covid-19-patients-hospitalized-in-the-us-overweight-or-obese-cdc-finds.html

Edited by Negatory
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Negatory said:

I really only see it affecting my views on policy implementation. I think I am still in support of immunity for everyone. I’m fine with mandatory vaccines for folks that haven’t had COVID. But it doesn’t really pass the common sense test to force folks that have had COVID to get vaccinated if they already have pretty great immunity.

Yes, I saw the study that shows that folks that previously had COVID that got vaccinated did better than folks that had COVID that weren’t vaccinated. But at what point is someone safe enough? If they already have better immunity than just the shot, do they need super double plus immunity just so everyone has had the vaccine?

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

Furthermore they are directing a medical procedure without being able to demonstrate medical neccesity. This is potentially in violation of most health ethics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Furthermore they are directing a medical procedure without being able to demonstrate medical neccesity. This is potentially in violation of most health ethics. 

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mandatory vaccines for military is a readiness thing, not to protect us. When all of your crew chiefs go on a two COVID vacation, it screws up training.

All of our vaccines are about keeping the force viable to fight.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by HeloDude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by Negatory
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


 
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.


  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites




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.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...