Jump to content

COVID-19 (Aka China Virus)


Orbit

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Pooter said:

We've heard an awful lot of anecdotal and hypothetical concerns with precisely zero evidence to back any of it up. You guys keep saying you've poured over the data and made highly personal risk/reward calculations which led you not to get the vaccine. Except not a single one of you can cite data on these risks you keep talking about. 

You're forgetting about the whole other side of the equation where there's an extremely low risk mitigation measure (the vaccine) which can reduce whatever covid risk you do have by 90+ percent.

If I get COVID, I have a 99.9% chance of living (source: CDC, my age group). It’s actually higher than that since that includes all the comorbidity deaths, but close enough for discussions sake. VAERS is reporting 0.27% rate of adverse events amongst my age group. So from a statistical standpoint, I incur more risk of an adverse event from the vaccine than I gain in decreased risk of death. Now, we’re splitting RCHs like you read about (well, before the 2013 purge anyways), so maybe that’s the point…there’s so little to be gained (statistically) for a healthy individual when it comes down to an unemotional risk vs. reward standpoint. Now before you stop reading, know this is a baseline assessment - throw in factors like high risk family members at home, you’re not a healthy individual (whether your fault or not), etc. can logically out prioritize the above. 

Now throw in more subjective factors:

- knowing people who have died, or are currently suffering long term negative effects, from the vaccine (anecdotal, but you can’t discount that factor in someone’s thought process)

- suppression of information/voices that cast negative light on, or question the vaccine

- The very authoritarian way the govt has pursued vaccination with a shocking rate of goal post moving, “experts” being completely wrong an inconceivable amount of times (but you should still completely follow what we say without question), etc.

- No longterm data on this vaccine…that’s a fact, but subjective on the definition of “long term”

So, it’s not hard to see how people make a very rational decision to not get the vaccine in the near term. Just the same as people make a rational decision to get the vaccine for various reasons. But, to make a statistical-based argument for healthy people to get the vaccine (without knowing their personal situation) is just pissing into the wind. Even worse is refusing to acknowledge this and attacking those who chose opposite of you. I believe people can choose either way while doing so logically and rationally, depending on their specific life circumstances. 

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, brabus said:

VAERS is reporting 0.27% rate of adverse events amongst my age group. So from a statistical standpoint, I incur more risk of an adverse event from the vaccine than I gain in decreased risk of death. Now, we’re splitting RCHs like you read about (well, before the 2013 purge anyways), so maybe that’s the point…there’s so little to be gained (statistically) for a healthy individual when it comes down to an unemotional risk vs. reward standpoint.

There’s little point in having a rational discussion here fellas. As the anti-vax crowd on this forum has pointed out (weird to be called that, huh), they need literally no justification other than spite. Which is about all the justification they have. Any sort of appeal to emotion or point about helping mankind will be lost. This issue has been politicized to where they think of themselves as William Wallace fighting the British Vaccination squad, when in reality it’s nothing more than folks that are, ironically, doing what they’re told by misinformation and false news.

To the “objective” “statistical” data that was presented above, it’s all hogwash. VAERS actually presents a significantly higher chance of adverse reactions if you want to actually look at data (contained below for all COVID shots). It’s actually closer to 100% than 0% that you’ll have an adverse reaction if you want to read these statistics. For the record, VAERS records things like “headaches,” “myalgia,” “pyrexia,” or “chills” as an adverse reaction. Mind you, this is with literally everyone knowing that if you get the shot, you get sick for 1-2 days - I.e. have an adverse reaction. The 0.27% number, I wouldn’t be surprised at this point, if it was entirely made up. Or they are misrepresenting a category of reactions titled “vaccination complication,” the 215th most prevalent adverse reaction.

https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=D93E73A304E0219C83B64E8FE404?stage=results&action=sort&direction=MEASURE_DESCEND&measure=D8.M2

The actual truth, when you stop distorting the facts, is that the vast majority of people with COVID suffer complications as well. And there are mounds of data that show that getting COVID when vaccinated is significantly less severe than the alternative. But that’s not part of the calculus because of “spite” disguised as “liberty.” I’m glad we got to that in the last couple of days, because that’s the root cause. It’s not any sort of scientific or measurable reason. It’s to “own the metaphorical libs,” and that’s it.

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

31 minutes ago, Negatory said:

There’s little point in having a rational discussion here fellas.

Shack.  At the end of the day this thread is nothing but a bunch of strangers throwing web links at each other and calling each other idiots.  I don't take medical advice from strangers I meet on the sidewalk.  Nothing here is going to change my mind.

On the other hand I have been entertained by all the deranged socialists foaming at the mouth at every post that doesn't fall in line with the Ministry of Truth.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Negatory said:

 

There’s little point in having a rational discussion here fellas. As the anti-vax crowd on this forum has pointed out (weird to be called that, huh), they need literally no justification other than spite. Which is about all the justification they have. Any sort of appeal to emotion or point about helping mankind will be lost. This issue has been politicized to where they think of themselves as William Wallace fighting the British Vaccination squad, when in reality it’s nothing more than folks that are, ironically, doing what they’re told by misinformation and false news.

To the “objective” “statistical” data that was presented above, it’s all hogwash. VAERS actually presents a significantly higher chance of adverse reactions if you want to actually look at data (contained below for all COVID shots). It’s actually closer to 100% than 0% that you’ll have an adverse reaction if you want to read these statistics. For the record, VAERS records things like “headaches,” “myalgia,” “pyrexia,” or “chills” as an adverse reaction. Mind you, this is with literally everyone knowing that if you get the shot, you get sick for 1-2 days - I.e. have an adverse reaction. The 0.27% number, I wouldn’t be surprised at this point, if it was entirely made up. Or they are misrepresenting a category of reactions titled “vaccination complication,” the 215th most prevalent adverse reaction.

https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=D93E73A304E0219C83B64E8FE404?stage=results&action=sort&direction=MEASURE_DESCEND&measure=D8.M2

The actual truth, when you stop distorting the facts, is that the vast majority of people with COVID suffer complications as well. And there are mounds of data that show that getting COVID when vaccinated is significantly less severe than the alternative. But that’s not part of the calculus because of “spite” disguised as “liberty.” I’m glad we got to that in the last couple of days, because that’s the root cause. It’s not any sort of scientific or measurable reason. It’s to “own the metaphorical libs,” and that’s it.

Thats not true.  The vast majority of people with covid either dont know they ever had it or have mild symptoms.  Some people get flu like symptoms that kick their ass for a few days, but the # of people hospitalized vs + cases does not support your statement.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Negatory said:

 

There’s little point in having a rational discussion here fellas. As the anti-vax crowd on this forum has pointed out (weird to be called that, huh), they need literally no justification other than spite. Which is about all the justification they have. Any sort of appeal to emotion or point about helping mankind will be lost. This issue has been politicized to where they think of themselves as William Wallace fighting the British Vaccination squad, when in reality it’s nothing more than folks that are, ironically, doing what they’re told by misinformation and false news.

To the “objective” “statistical” data that was presented above, it’s all hogwash. VAERS actually presents a significantly higher chance of adverse reactions if you want to actually look at data (contained below for all COVID shots). It’s actually closer to 100% than 0% that you’ll have an adverse reaction if you want to read these statistics. For the record, VAERS records things like “headaches,” “myalgia,” “pyrexia,” or “chills” as an adverse reaction. Mind you, this is with literally everyone knowing that if you get the shot, you get sick for 1-2 days - I.e. have an adverse reaction. The 0.27% number, I wouldn’t be surprised at this point, if it was entirely made up. Or they are misrepresenting a category of reactions titled “vaccination complication,” the 215th most prevalent adverse reaction.

https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=D93E73A304E0219C83B64E8FE404?stage=results&action=sort&direction=MEASURE_DESCEND&measure=D8.M2

The actual truth, when you stop distorting the facts, is that the vast majority of people with COVID suffer complications as well. And there are mounds of data that show that getting COVID when vaccinated is significantly less severe than the alternative. But that’s not part of the calculus because of “spite” disguised as “liberty.” I’m glad we got to that in the last couple of days, because that’s the root cause. It’s not any sort of scientific or measurable reason. It’s to “own the metaphorical libs,” and that’s it.

Clearly you did not actually read most of the posts from the "anti-vax crowd." Most of them had absolutely nothing to do with spite. And most of them had nothing to do with politics or "owning the libs." Such a position would be a bit strange, considering Trump was the main reason the vaccines were rolled out so quickly in the first place...

Agree, this thread has become a complete waste of time, particularly because of people like you who are gaslighting the hell out of everyone and saying things like people who have some rational hesitancies towards the vaccines think of themselves as "William Wallace fighting the British Vaccination squad."

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, brabus said:

If I get COVID, I have a 99.9% chance of living (source: CDC, my age group). It’s actually higher than that since that includes all the comorbidity deaths, but close enough for discussions sake. VAERS is reporting 0.27% rate of adverse events amongst my age group. So from a statistical standpoint, I incur more risk of an adverse event from the vaccine than I gain in decreased risk of death. Now, we’re splitting RCHs like you read about (well, before the 2013 purge anyways), so maybe that’s the point…there’s so little to be gained (statistically) for a healthy individual when it comes down to an unemotional risk vs. reward standpoint. Now before you stop reading, know this is a baseline assessment - throw in factors like high risk family members at home, you’re not a healthy individual (whether your fault or not), etc. can logically out prioritize the above. 

Now throw in more subjective factors:

- knowing people who have died, or are currently suffering long term negative effects, from the vaccine (anecdotal, but you can’t discount that factor in someone’s thought process)

- suppression of information/voices that cast negative light on, or question the vaccine

- The very authoritarian way the govt has pursued vaccination with a shocking rate of goal post moving, “experts” being completely wrong an inconceivable amount of times (but you should still completely follow what we say without question), etc.

- No longterm data on this vaccine…that’s a fact, but subjective on the definition of “long term”

So, it’s not hard to see how people make a very rational decision to not get the vaccine in the near term. Just the same as people make a rational decision to get the vaccine for various reasons. But, to make a statistical-based argument for healthy people to get the vaccine (without knowing their personal situation) is just pissing into the wind. Even worse is refusing to acknowledge this and attacking those who chose opposite of you. I believe people can choose either way while doing so logically and rationally, depending on their specific life circumstances. 

Okay! This is at least a data point.  I appreciate you.  
 

Here's my counter argument. VAERS adverse reaction rates vs covid death rates isn't an apples to apples comparison. Those stats are measuring two entirely different things. It would make more sense to compare adverse vaccine reactions to adverse covid reactions. And in that department I think you will find adverse covid reactions to be way way higher because an "adverse event" for covid would basically be any symptomatic case.

The other problem with this data point is that vaers reporting adverse vaccine reactions is simply a mechanism to report any significant health issues people get after they've had vaccine. Doctors, healthcare workers, and individuals can all submit reports so it is important to understand that vaers is a gigantic, low fidelity data dump that they use to guide further medical research. A condition being listed on vaers does not mean it was caused by the covid shot.  The CDC site explains this: 

  • If a health problem is reported to VAERS, that doesn’t mean that the vaccine caused the problem. It warns vaccine safety experts of potential problems that may need investigation and alerts them to take further action, as needed.
  • Millions of people in the United States have received COVID-19 vaccines. Other than rare reports of severe allergic reactions, analysis of VAERS reports has not detected any patterns that would indicate a safety problem with COVID-19 vaccines.

 

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

7 hours ago, brabus said:

If I get COVID, I have a 99.9% chance of living (source: CDC, my age group). It’s actually higher than that since that includes all the comorbidity deaths, but close enough for discussions sake. VAERS is reporting 0.27% rate of adverse events amongst my age group. So from a statistical standpoint, I incur more risk of an adverse event from the vaccine than I gain in decreased risk of death. Now, we’re splitting RCHs like you read about (well, before the 2013 purge anyways), so maybe that’s the point…there’s so little to be gained (statistically) for a healthy individual when it comes down to an unemotional risk vs. reward standpoint. Now before you stop reading, know this is a baseline assessment - throw in factors like high risk family members at home, you’re not a healthy individual (whether your fault or not), etc. can logically out prioritize the above. 

Now throw in more subjective factors:

- knowing people who have died, or are currently suffering long term negative effects, from the vaccine (anecdotal, but you can’t discount that factor in someone’s thought process)

- suppression of information/voices that cast negative light on, or question the vaccine

- The very authoritarian way the govt has pursued vaccination with a shocking rate of goal post moving, “experts” being completely wrong an inconceivable amount of times (but you should still completely follow what we say without question), etc.

- No longterm data on this vaccine…that’s a fact, but subjective on the definition of “long term”

So, it’s not hard to see how people make a very rational decision to not get the vaccine in the near term. Just the same as people make a rational decision to get the vaccine for various reasons. But, to make a statistical-based argument for healthy people to get the vaccine (without knowing their personal situation) is just pissing into the wind. Even worse is refusing to acknowledge this and attacking those who chose opposite of you. I believe people can choose either way while doing so logically and rationally, depending on their specific life circumstances. 

You'd be right if death were the only adverse impact from Covid.  10% of Covid patients have long-term effects, even if their initial case of Covid was mild.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/04/210407174321.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

You'd be right if death were the only adverse impact from Covid.  10% of Covid patients have long-term effects, even if their initial case of Covid was mild.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/04/210407174321.htm

Negated by the fact that COVID is not event that happens with 100% certainty. If I calculated myself as an unvaccinated individual my own probability of getting COVID is only 17% in the next 3 years. That is extremely conservative as the reality is your probability decreases  daily as more people either A.) get COVID or B.) get vaccinated, reducing their own transmissions. This was calculated using statistics provided by (https://19andme.covid19.mathematica.org/) and a simple recurring probability event formula, 1-(1-X)^L   . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Pooter said:

As much fun as this highly productive conversation is.. I'm still waiting for a single shred of reputable scientific evidence that points to the vaccine being unsafe in any way. 

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Making assumptions based on unpredicted risk is a routine part of risk calculation. There isn't a lack of scientific evidence because scientist couldn't find any. There is a lack because they haven't tried, largely inhibited by the resource (time) they need to perform such a project. You better believe that there are universities who will study control groups 10 years from now and compare to vaccinated groups to look for things like increased risk to common ailments, etc.... 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kiloalpha said:

Unknown if true. I don’t think this is exactly going to endear the President to the armed forces. But if they say I need it, I’ll get it. Just think it’s a little bullshit.

8BF1FE2A-B3DE-4B0A-AE10-8E4E42DF89AB.jpeg

Interesting. Figured they’d wait until it was off emergency authorization. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ecugringo said:

Thats not true.  The vast majority of people with covid either dont know they ever had it or have mild symptoms.  Some people get flu like symptoms that kick their ass for a few days, but the # of people hospitalized vs + cases does not support your statement.

You’re right, that was a mistype. I meant to say a large fraction, not a majority - significantly larger than any actual adverse vaccine effects, as Pawnman has already cited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BroncoEN said:

Interesting. Figured they’d wait until it was off emergency authorization politically expedient. 

FIFY.  Can't wait to see the look on the bureaucrat's face when I claim that my heart inflammation is service-related.

There is one bright spot though...  I found the constant virtue signaling from my chain-of-management utterly tiresome.  Hopefully that PSYOP will stop.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Kiloalpha said:

Unknown if true. I don’t think this is exactly going to endear the President to the armed forces. But if they say I need it, I’ll get it. Just think it’s a little bullshit.

8BF1FE2A-B3DE-4B0A-AE10-8E4E42DF89AB.jpeg

While the fall out for Biden will be hilarious to watch, I am in huge support of this.  Maybe we can take off our masks for good, at least on base. Nothing is more BS than being vaccinated yet having to wear a mask again.  

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bozo said:

FIFY.  Can't wait to see the look on the bureaucrat's face when I claim that my heart inflammation is service-related.

There is one bright spot though...  I found the constant virtue signaling from my chain-of-management utterly tiresome.  Hopefully that PSYOP will stop.

The deeper you stare into clown world, the more of a clown one becomes. 🤡

 

4 minutes ago, dream big said:

While the fall out for Biden will be hilarious to watch, I am in huge support of this.  Maybe we can take off our masks for good, at least on base. Nothing is more BS than being vaccinated yet having to wear a mask again.  

Don’t question. Obey. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/4/2021 at 2:04 AM, ViperMan said:

Military: Established that you need to take vaccines. Experimental vaccines, open question.

Civilian: Doesn't matter if it's a sugar pill. Can't make anyone take it for any reason whatsoever.

New York, New York would like a chat with you. You won’t be able to exist there without government mandated digital identification as proof of inoculation. This has been the admitted plan of the New World Order for quite some time now. This is just the beginning. The military is one of the guineas. “Clap for that, you stupid bastards.” - Supreme Chancellor Xiden

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, busdriver said:

Your tinfoil is getting worn, might want to fix it.



 

It’s aluminum, not tin! People think it doesn’t exist, until you show them the ID2020 Alliance working towards the United Nations’ 2030 “Agenda for Sustainable Development”. You think it’s a joke.

https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/sdg-16/

Subtarget 9 on target 16 on that webpage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, dream big said:

While the fall out for Biden will be hilarious to watch, I am in huge support of this.  Maybe we can take off our masks for good, at least on base. Nothing is more BS than being vaccinated yet having to wear a mask again.  

What makes you think any of us will be able to take our masks off?  

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, busdriver said:

That line has nothing to do with "papers please"

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 

My point being, there is a global consortium of government and non-governmental organizations who have a stated goal of a digital identification being needed for every facet of life. The fact one of the largest cities in the world (it also being in the United States) has now governmentally mandated this will be done in September should concern you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:

What makes you think any of us will be able to take our masks off?  

Optimism… and to be fair we did take them off between 14 May** and last week for those vaccinated.

Edited by dream big
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dream big said:

While the fall out for Biden will be hilarious to watch, I am in huge support of this.  Maybe we can take off our masks for good, at least on base. Nothing is more BS than being vaccinated yet having to wear a mask again.  

More people are vaccinated than not.  And a huge majority of the vaccinated people already blame the unvaccinated people for the continuing pandemic.

Anti-vaxxers were largely Trump supporters already.

If anything, I can see this boosting Biden's popularity, especially if it gets the spikes in Covid under control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dogfish78 said:

New York, New York would like a chat with you. You won’t be able to exist there without government mandated digital identification as proof of inoculation. This has been the admitted plan of the New World Order for quite some time now. This is just the beginning. The military is one of the guineas. “Clap for that, you stupid bastards.” - Supreme Chancellor Xiden

Someone binged Alex Jones while waiting for MX to green up the aircraft...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Anti-vaxxers were largely Trump supporters already.

Just to be clear, you are calling people with three page vaccination sheets who do not want this particular experimental vaccine “anti-vaxxers?”  And you are calling the huge number of Democrat voting minorities electing not to receive the COVID vaccine “Trump supporters?”

Do you think those with natural immunity should be forced to vaccinate? Do you think it makes you sound smart to falsely label people? Or is name-calling just a sad outlet to vent frustration in lieu of cogent thought?

I am vaccinated, still got COVID, and am 100% against forcing my kids to get this injection.  There are idiosyncrasies here that should be considered rationally.  

  • Like 7
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...