Jump to content

Covid Injection Tyranny - Share and Discuss


Recommended Posts

On 9/9/2021 at 10:30 AM, Sua Sponte said:

Buddy of mine at Macdill had his neck surgery cancelled twice due to lack of available ICU’s in Florida due to COVID patients.

Maybe if their physicians prescribed those patients with ivermectin, vitamins, hydroxycloroquine (zelenko protocol) at the primary care level then they would have not ended up in the ICU to begin with. It's almost as if we should treat a virus with anti-virals.

  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, brabus said:

@NegatorySo in spirit of attempting to have rational/unemotional conversation, here’s why I think much of this discussion is just stuck in a luftberry - we (and others on here) actually agree there are a lot of people in this country who should get the vaccine, and that by not getting it they are hurting others…filling up ICU beds, etc. There’s actually no argument there from me or a lot of other so-called-“anti-vaxxers”…what the discussion really should focus on so we’re not talking past each other is two-fold. The vaccination necessity for low risk people (<50, no underlying medical conditions, have natural immunity), especially with consideration to what the vaccine actually accomplished for that group, and the more difficult/subjective discussion of liberty, federal overreach, etc…where’s the line for “you do you.” When people just scream about “but muh ICU is full and it’s every unvax’d person’s fault!” or “the fuck I will get the jab…now back to my 15th slurpee and Big Mac for the week” there is no real conversation, because while there may shreds of truth/honest sentiment in statements, they are just pieces, not the entire picture, and it becomes a discussion based on omission of facts and not the whole enchilada. 

If your point is that there would be benefit in being more nuanced in saying who should be vaccinated, you are right.  In an idealistic world, you’d be able to do that. Just like how in an ideal world, I shouldn’t have to run my PFA if I ran a half marathon the week prior. But realistic employment of idealistic policy runs into several issues, and that’s why there is no way I can tell the PT monitor to accept my 1:27 half as a passing score. I still have to run the 6 laps.

1) How does the government assess if you’re not at risk to say that you probably don’t need the vaccine? You don’t even tell the flight doc the actual amount of whiskey you drink each week; how will big government know if a random 40 year old is actually an unhealthy risk factor that’s going to clog up a hospital? First, the government would have to get everyone’s health records, which would be seen as a gigantic breach of privacy, I am sure. There is no government mandated health screening. There is no government oversight of your medical records.

Lets go down this path further. The gov mandates that all people over the age of 50 get the vaccine, because they can tell age with the SSA. I’m sure there’s still be bitching and moaning, but let’s pretend that this was popularly accepted. Okay, that solves this pandemic for a giant group that is at risk.

Now they have to cover everyone under 50 that is high risk. They try to figure out how to mandate high risk under 50s to get the vaccine. They realize that 42% of Americans are Obese. 75% of Americans are overweight. And they can’t tell anything else about these humans individually based on privacy. Almost impossible to assess cardiovascular health by looking at someone. You can’t ask everyone to send in their BMI. People won’t tel you if they are smokers or drinkers. They also realize humans are notoriously bad at self reporting their health, especially if it’s about something they don’t want. The only way to capture a sufficient amount of the at risk population is to have everyone be vaccinated. Which it turns out makes sense anyways because the vast majority of Americans actually have risk factors because we are an extremely unhealthy nation.

2) This virus spreads quickly and in a shitty way that is not easy to control. It has an R0 value of 5-9. Yes, I wanted to say 6-9, but I feel that would have been nit picked. That means that if you send your healthy, not at risk, kids to school sick, they’re gonna end up getting a looooot of other people sick through secondary infections.

You ever played the six degrees of Kevin Bacon? Where it almost always proves that we are way more interconnected as a society than you would ever assume? Well apply that to this scenario. Your kids - who won’t interact with any old people or at risk folks directly (other than tons of teachers, but we’ll ignore that) - will get kids of at risk people infected. They will get kids of caregivers infected. They will get people who work in critical industry infected. And it only takes 2-4 jumps to hit a huge percentage of a specific subset of society.

It doesn’t have to just be kids. It can be young fighter pilots. They spreads it to an enlisted maintainer, who spreads it to the entire MXG. One of you is going to hit the commissary or the gym, which will open up the whole base. And everyone’s spouse and their place of work is now at risk. It quickly becomes unmanageable, exposing tons of high risk folks to the illness even though the first person was not “at risk.”

Additionally, it spreads both asymptomatically and before symptoms emerge. So there is no real way you can stop this effect, no matter how well intentioned you are to keep your sick kids - or your sick self - at home.

You cannot insulate the effects of spread via good intentions.

3) Human beings, whether you like it or not, are not as well intentioned as we wish. There is a natural range of support for individualism vs the collective across Americans, leaning more heavily on individualism than almost any other country.

Here’s an anecdote. My parents, who are old, are at high risk for COVID. They aren’t healthy, they don’t take precautions, and they meet many other risk factors. Due to the politicization of this virus, instead of getting vaccinated, they have paid for fake vaccine cards. They may die for their insistence on listening to idiots on talk radio, and I think about that a lot, but the point is that folks don’t want to tell the government anything. They will go as far as intentionally obscuring truthful data if they think that it will give them a shred of liberty. Some people will do it just to give the democrats/republicans a middle finger. Doesn’t help public policy.

How many people would lie about if they were actually at risk if we tried to implement a nuanced policy?

The gods honest truth is that this disease is not easy to detect. It’s not easy to find symptoms. It has lasting health effects that are significantly worse than the vaccine. It randomly hits some demographics that we could not predict. And we don’t know everything about it.

The worst part about this whole thing is that the vaccine didn’t end up providing nearly the protection from spread we were hoping it would.

The only reasonable public policy decision is to include everyone, or the vast majority of society, because we have no realistic way for the government to comb through your records to say that you aren’t at risk based on limitations of privacy and manpower. Not to mention the exponential increase in work for almost no population benefit.

Idealism is no reason to nitpick public policy that, by and large, does good for the public. Just like how I shouldn’t waste everyone’s time signing a waiver for my PFA to get my half marathon to count - I should just run it.

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

5 hours ago, torqued said:

Clinicaltrials.gov.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04460703?term=COVID-19+messaging&draw=2&rank=12

Persuasive Messages for COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake: a Randomized Controlled Trial, Part 1

Guilt, Embarassment, Anger, Trust, Cowardice.

Screen Shot 2021-09-10 at 7.23.38 AM.png

I remember sharing this with mates a year or so ago and them not believing it. Come this week and not less than 3 have apologized 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, torqued said:

Clinicaltrials.gov.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04460703?term=COVID-19+messaging&draw=2&rank=12

Persuasive Messages for COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake: a Randomized Controlled Trial, Part 1

Guilt, Embarassment, Anger, Trust, Cowardice.

Screen Shot 2021-09-10 at 7.23.38 AM.png

Do you guys have any argument as to why this is actually something that is bad? We have agreed as a nation we need to be vaccinated to take control of this disease. Turns out humans are emotional creatures. They make emotional, uninformed decisions. Case in point: @dogfish78 was clearly emotionally preyed on by people closer to Q than any other group. They used the “distrust in government,” “make fun of redditors,” “don’t be a sheep,” and “own the libs” messaging they knew would touch him right where he likes.

Trying to get maximum opinion shifted for a public health decision in no way proves that the public health decision is not the correct decision. I promise that disinformation groups are going through the exact same studies to figure out how to hit your emotions.

If the public health decision is a good decision, there’s nothing to this story. Prove that the public health decision to push vaccines is harmful - that’s the actual undistracted argument you have to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, dogfish78 said:

Maybe if their physicians prescribed those patients with ivermectin, vitamins, hydroxycloroquine (zelenko protocol) at the primary care level then they would have not ended up in the ICU to begin with. It's almost as if we should treat a virus with anti-virals.

Ivermectin is the only one of those things that has shown antiviral effects, and never in vivo. HCQ and vitamins are not antivirals, you nit.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7539925/

Edited by Negatory
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you guys haven’t seen Contagion (2011), it was very predictive of a lot of how this went down. Even down to the guy pushing alternative treatments against big government.

The one thing they got wrong, though, is that everyone would be lining up at the door or fighting each other to get vaccinated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Negatory said:

Prove it.

Nah. The onus is on you to prove the following:

1. That the injection drugs will not cause short/medium/long-term injury, disability, or death.

1a. That the injection drugs will have zero affect on reproductive systems and offspring.

2. That the manufacturers of the injection drugs are criminally and civilly liable to the injured parties in court.

3. Why Constitutions, both federal and of the respective States, should be shredded in order to allow our tyrannical federal government to use coercion and force (at a minimum) to conduct medical procedures on United States citizens.

4. Why, in spite of the aforementioned concerns, our tyrannical federal government should be acting unconstitutionally to combat a virus that 99.9% of people recover from with no complications?

 

 

See:  https://ivmmeta.com

Edited by dogfish78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Negatory said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bostonherald.com/2021/09/07/majority-of-americans-support-vaccination-requirements-in-gallup-poll/amp/

The great thing about a democracy or a republic is that you don’t have to wait to get everyone on board to have consensus.

>thinking we trust (((polls)))

Did you learn nothing of 2016? lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dogfish78 said:

Nah. The onus is on you to prove the following:

1. That the injection drugs will not cause short/medium/long-term injury, disability, or death.

1a. That the injection drugs will have zero affect on reproductive systems and offspring.

2. That the manufacturers of the injection drugs are criminally and civilly liable to the injured parties in court.

3. Why Constitutions, both federal and of the respective States, should be shredded in order to allow our tyrannical federal government to use coercion and force (at a minimum) to conduct medical procedures on United States citizens.

4. Why, in spite of the aforementioned concerns, our tyrannical federal government should be acting unconstitutionally to combat a virus that 99.9% of people recover from with no complications?

 

 

See:  https://ivmmeta.com

1) Biggest clinical study ever on a vaccine shows that the risks are minimal. Not enough though. What will be enough? Making it 50 times bigger? Also, virtually all vaccine side effects for all previous vaccines show up in some form within the first few months. Prove that vaccine side effects can show up at 5-10 years. Prove it, don't just use anecdotal evidence.

2) They aren't. Get over it. Your choice - an extremely effective vaccine that appears to have no significant side effects or years of lockdowns and death rates greater than 2%. 

3) They aren't shredded. There is precedent for vaccination for private business, schools, and federal jobs, sorry that hurts your feelings. They haven't mandated anyone outside of those groups.

4) 99.9% of people do not recover from with no complications. 10% of people with MILD infections have long term moderate to severe symptoms that impact their daily lives. Moderate to Severe infections are significantly worse.

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

The onus is on you to stop arguing like a child and use data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/9/2021 at 8:30 AM, Sua Sponte said:

Buddy of mine at Macdill had his neck surgery cancelled twice due to lack of available ICU’s in Florida due to COVID patients.

Is your buddy having surgery in the ICU?  That's weird.

 

It's definitely a staffing shortage.  Maybe they shouldn't be firing/laying off people during a staffing shortage...priorities.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rancormac said:

Is your buddy having surgery in the ICU?  That's weird.

 

It's definitely a staffing shortage.  Maybe they shouldn't be firing/laying off people during a staffing shortage...priorities.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/treatment-tests-and-therapies/recovering-from-surgery--intensive-care

Quote

Sometimes a patient is transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU) for further, close monitoring. Intensive care is most often needed for patients on mechanical ventilation, for patients recovering from heart attacks or major surgery, for patients in shock, and for patients with acute renal failure. In intensive care, clinical staff closely watch the patient minute-by-minute.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites




It's definitely a staffing shortage.  Maybe they shouldn't be firing/laying off people during a staffing shortage...priorities.


Remember, in America healthcare is a business. If it isn't profitable, it's not getting done. It's not a bug in the system, it's a feature

Plus, there's been a shortage for a while in healthcare, where demand has outstripped supply. Even doing things like adding nurse practitioners to cover for a lack of doctors had been a band aid fix at best
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Negatory said:

2) This virus spreads quickly and in a shitty way that is not easy to control. It has an R0 value of 5-9. Yes, I wanted to say 6-9, but I feel that would have been nit picked. That means that if you send your healthy, not at risk, kids to school sick, they’re gonna end up getting a looooot of other people sick through secondary infections.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html
 

where you getting your nearly 6-9 R0? I seeing 2-4 from the site above, but that might be old info. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, glockenspiel said:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html
 

where you getting your nearly 6-9 R0? I seeing 2-4 from the site above, but that might be old info. 
 

Old Covid in 2020 studies was typically 2-4, I believe. Delta estimates are higher, usually 5-9. Although I have seem some studies that estimate 6-7. And a Yale one that estimates 3.5-4. The numbers come from an internal CDC document, page 15:

https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/54f57708-a529-4a33-9a44-b66d719070d9/note/7335c3ab-06ee-4121-aaff-a11904e68462.#page=1

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/delta-variant.html

EDIT: and the source article for that document is here

https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/cdc-breakthrough-infections/94390e3a-5e45-44a5-ac40-2744e4e25f2e/?_=1

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

Estimates of R0 for the delta strain have wide variation, depending on where the study is conducted.

https://academic.oup.com/jtm/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jtm/taab124/6346388

The estimates for England are 5-8 per the above link, and the lower end of that spectrum (5.2) with a secondary attack rate of 4.3%.  There are CDC studies that show a much higher secondary attack rate in some cases, but not others:    (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7028e2.htm) so there's still quite a bit of "who knows?"

Probably safe to say it's still bad, so more contagious is more badder.

 

I am curious where they got their efficacy of masking percentages and how they broke that out from social distancing efforts and the various lockdown strategies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Negatory said:

1) Biggest clinical study ever on a vaccine shows that the risks are minimal. Not enough though. What will be enough? Making it 50 times bigger? Also, virtually all vaccine side effects for all previous vaccines show up in some form within the first few months. Prove that vaccine side effects can show up at 5-10 years. Prove it, don't just use anecdotal evidence.

2) They aren't. Get over it. Your choice - an extremely effective vaccine that appears to have no significant side effects or years of lockdowns and death rates greater than 2%. 

3) They aren't shredded. There is precedent for vaccination for private business, schools, and federal jobs, sorry that hurts your feelings. They haven't mandated anyone outside of those groups.

4) 99.9% of people do not recover from with no complications. 10% of people with MILD infections have long term moderate to severe symptoms that impact their daily lives. Moderate to Severe infections are significantly worse.

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

The onus is on you to stop arguing like a child and use data.

Clinical trials don't end until 2023. Two senior FDA scientist resigned over how the CDC has unethically infiltrated the FDA's approval committee to get the injections "approved".

Extremely effective? Not according to the data in the modern nation-state of Israel.

There was also precedent to commit infanticide (Roe v. Wade) and look at what the U.S. SCOTUS just said about that. Legal precedent changes. Jacobson v. Massachusetts (the precedent you're probably referencing considering "vaccination") was and still is misread; the State was never allowed to force injections on people. In Buck v. Bell the court errored in how they read Jacobson v. Massachusettsto which Roe v. Wade later relied on Buck v. Bell. Now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, the reliance upon such further precedent from the erroneously applied Jacobson v. Massachusetts is null and void.

Let's consider your data is correct. All it tells me is that people who were sick still feel somewhat sick after they get through the bulk of their sickness. Sounds like every sickness people have had throughout time. The people dying from covid are killed due to comorbidities and/or the protocols the hospitals are using such as using ventilators and denying other treatments.

The onus is on the state to prove one's guilt, not of the defendant to prove their innocence. You wanting the state to force people to have a medical procedure done logically follows that same principle. The state would have to prove why this "pandemic" outweighs the federal and state constitutions, civil rights, human rights, and individual liberty and freedoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, dogfish78 said:

Clinical trials don't end until 2023. Two senior FDA scientist resigned over how the CDC has unethically infiltrated the FDA's approval committee to get the injections "approved".

Extremely effective? Not according to the data in the modern nation-state of Israel.

There was also precedent to commit infanticide (Roe v. Wade) and look at what the U.S. SCOTUS just said about that. Legal precedent changes. Jacobson v. Massachusetts (the precedent you're probably referencing considering "vaccination") was and still is misread; the State was never allowed to force injections on people. In Buck v. Bell the court errored in how they read Jacobson v. Massachusettsto which Roe v. Wade later relied on Buck v. Bell. Now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, the reliance upon such further precedent from the erroneously applied Jacobson v. Massachusetts is null and void.

Israel’s rate of hospitalization and ICU admittance has shown that vaccinations 100% work, resulting in a huge improvement for the vaccinated population. Your statement = base rate fallacy. I would love for you to read and internalize this example of numerous similar analyses that I am going to include below. This one is actually pretty easy to follow. After that, you’ll be able to better understand how statistics have been presented to you incorrectly, and, therefore, you can then recognize where you have regurgitated some misleading statements. But let me guess. Nah?

https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated

I know you personally want to enforce your personal will on women and men everywhere and dream of creating a handmaid state, but Roe v Wade is not a relevant comparison to this discussion about public health. I would say make another thread, but please for the love of god do not.

Also, while Texas has been successful in legalizing a religious citizen police cyber snitch state (congrats), almost all legal analysts believe that if a case was ever actually brought to trial it would be ruled unconstitutional. Also want to remind you that 2/3s of Americans do not support that law or restrictions on abortion. 

Citing nit picked Lawfare that clearly hasn’t finished as an example of how everything else can be overturned is not a good argument. You could make even more outrageous claims. Go ahead and say that since slavery was overturned, legal precedence doesn’t matter anywhere. Anything can be overturned, so therefore I can argue anything is unconstitutional! In fact, you disagreeing with me on here and spreading misinformation intentionally is illegal! It’s unconstitutional! It hasn’t been up to the Supreme Court yet, but it will be, you just wait!

1 hour ago, dogfish78 said:

Let's consider your data is correct. All it tells me is that people who were sick still feel somewhat sick after they get through the bulk of their sickness. Sounds like every sickness people have had throughout time. The people dying from covid are killed due to comorbidities and/or the protocols the hospitals are using such as using ventilators and denying other treatments.

The data is correct. Thanks for recognizing. Your “99.9%” data is bullshit misinformation that makes you feel good - go ahead and admit that and we can get back to the adults table. Tell me what other minor transmissible illnesses result in 10-30% of the sick population having medium and long term effects. The onus is on you now to prove my actual scientific statistics don’t matter. But, let me guess? Nah? Instead, you’d rather deflect and argue that everyone who died was unhealthy, instead of also realizing that a ton of fat, old, unhealthy people have been protected by the vaccine.

Most states have already declared a state of emergency. The nation is there. That actually empowers most governments more than you would like. Hospital ICUs are entirely full. And now the majority of people support a common sense vaccination and restrictions. Gotta love a republic/democracy. But let me guess. Nah?

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, rancormac said:

Is your buddy having surgery in the ICU?  That's weird.

 

It's definitely a staffing shortage.  Maybe they shouldn't be firing/laying off people during a staffing shortage...priorities.

yeah don't get me started on our healthcare system (red button topic in my household). To wit, the inability to retain capacity surplus in this Country due to that abhorrent just-in-time supply model applied to for-profit healthcare delivery, is one of our epic national embarrassments (military adventurism is the other one, but I digress on that).

My RN wife has healthcare friends all over the region and out of state, and the anecdotes on the group chat are appalling. Even in our current location, the transfers gridlock kerfuffle is absolutely in your face, and it really underscores the second tier effects to non-covid admittances. 

But it comes down to the profit motivations. We can't scale surplus capacity to save our lives. Automotive supply chain economics applied to healthcare is not a bug, it's a feature as you point out. That's how you end up with layoffs in the non-covid floors, and an Afghan Defense Force amateur level of inability to address a shortage in staffing/ICU/ECMO capacity. 

May the odds be forever in our favor. And as to those who believe in the canard that we're NOT having people die in America in triage, wake the f up. We've been doing that for a while. And people still talk about govt death panels like it's some sort of libertarian p@wn? LOL yeak ok, 6 of mine, your half a dozen.....

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Negatory

LMAO sure... the "vaccines" work... that's exactly why the "vaccinated" are still getting sick and now BOOSTERS are required. Our own CDC Director (((Walensky))) here has admitted this too. You're behaving like a 🤡

Don't try to talk law to me, you're bad at it; plus you don't have a J.D. (Hint: I do).

Encouraging citizens to tell the state if someone is attempting to kill an unborn child does not equal Handmaid's Tale. That is called having a moral society; the antithesis of modern "progressive" ideology. Using the government to force non-consenting citizens to have a medical procedure done IS Handmaid's Tale-tier.

TBH it's kinda gay and suspicious that you made your pro-infanticide statement about me wanting to enforce my will on women (as if acting to prevent infanticide is that). Dude...... stop simping for women.

Doesn't matter if 2/3rds of Americans support infanticide (they don't), 2/3rds of Americans are not the people of Texas. It's sad you have never actually read the U.S. Constitution (see: Amendment 10).

Why do you insist on trusting the CDC's numbers? They've been caught lying again, and again throughout this whole thing. Including the NIH and overlord Fauci. The ones dying from covid, and I mean REAL covid (not influenza) are either fatasses or have other comorbidities. End the "pandemic" and let's build this nation so we can ALL succeed together.

  • Downvote 1
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...