A Coronavirus Vaccine Won’t Work if People Don’t Take It

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
17,508
Reaction score
2,305
Points
113
You're trying to show facts and common sense to people who voted for, and support, Donald Trump.

You might as well be talking to a box of rocks. If fact, the box of rocks would have a higher IQ and reasoning power.

Spoof, for example, argued for months, at the top of his lungs, despite glaring, incontrovertible evidence, that right wingnuts weren't more likely to be anti-mask.

Do you really expect him to acknowledge the fact age will OF COURSE be a factor in vaccination rate? How could it not? They used age as an eligibility factor for months, for Pete's sake. These are the same people who scream about nursing homes, tell us kids don't need to worry, and on and on.

Sheeesh.

Kids don’t need to worry.
 

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
22,647
Reaction score
2,680
Points
113
I understand it completely. Biden and team are trying to manipulate the public. Same reason the science said not to wear masks, then to wear a mask, and then to wear multiple masks.
Since you are obsessed with masks, melvy, you probably recall that protective supplies were in short supply in the beginning of the pandemic and scientists, the CDC (swamp) and the WHO (commies) weren't certain how effective masks would be for the general public. Since much much less was known then than now about the virus, decisions were made to allocate the short supply of masks to medical personnel. (The accumulation of knowledge and information isn't stunted for non donalds. It grows over time. Pretty amazing.For example, cigarette smokinng was once thought to be healthy.) Once more was learned about the virus and supplies opened up, recommendations changed.

What you call manipulation because of your whiny paranoia is just learning something and then communicating the info to the public.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
20,507
Reaction score
3,127
Points
113
I tend to agree with this as true but technically we don’t probably know what type or proportion of adverse effects or reactions are caused by exposure to the vaccine. To my knowledge the VAERS data collating and analysis methodology is not published so we can’t know condition ABC is higher in population XYZ (age, gender, race, comorbidities) over time frame T1-T2 (weeks or months) versus a normal year/population. I just don’t know how deeply they’re drilling into this, or focusing more on key neurological or cardiovascular keywords, deaths, hospitalizations. The VITT or HIT-like thrombosis/thrombocytopenia syndrome is so unusual it probably was flagged immediately particularly after the similar and more frequent issues with the AZ product.

J&J is now up to 28 confirmed VITT in 8.8M doses. Factor in mostly female, mostly younger and it’s still a very rare (but real) ~1\100k to 1/150k risk for child-bearing age women.

I’ve heard rumors of rare to very rare heart inflammation, facial paralysis in younger folks but that hasn’t really been fleshed out yet. It will be interesting to see if these analyses are real, and released to the public. Public Health is probably torn on honesty versus causing irrational fears. It’s a no brainer for the vast majority of adults to take the vaccine despite these tiny risks.
Though GII doesn’t want to assume that everything that is reported through VAERS is a side effect of the vaccine, AND I AGREE, he seems to assume that ALL vaccine side effects are reported to VAERS and all are captured. I would argue that any data collected outside of a medical study is incomplete and that no assumptions should be drawn about them, whether it’s VAERS or any database of drug side effect reports.

Analysis of side effects should either be large data comparisons to a medicine or vaccine to placebo OR investigation into the reports of a data collection system, like VAERS.

Tucker Carlson’s report was arguing that there was something nefarious about these vaccine side effects that have gone uninvestigated. I don’t think it’s nefarious, but as political as the entire Covid situation has been, it is suspicious that no investigations appear to have been conducted as a result of the data collected.

My wife told me yesterday that the person that prepares our taxes had been in the hospital with a significant adverse event that resembled serious Covid symptoms shortly after taking the vaccine. I seriously doubt that his adverse event/side effect was reported to VAERS. Not b/c someone was trying to cover it up, but b/c it isn’t necessarily what anyone is concerned about when treating someone. If it were reported to VAERS, some investigation and report on these type of reactions would be logical IF you were interested in understanding the connection to the vaccination that he received.
 


Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
49,236
Reaction score
3,719
Points
113
Since you are obsessed with masks, melvy, you probably recall that protective supplies were in short supply in the beginning of the pandemic and scientists, the CDC (swamp) and the WHO (commies) weren't certain how effective masks would be for the general public. Since much much less was known then than now about the virus, decisions were made to allocate the short supply of masks to medical personnel. (The accumulation of knowledge and information isn't stunted for non donalds. It grows over time. Pretty amazing.For example, cigarette smokinng was once thought to be healthy.) Once more was learned about the virus and supplies opened up, recommendations changed.

What you call manipulation because of your whiny paranoia is just learning something and then communicating the info to the public.
The decision was made to lie to the public, to manipulate them into not seeking masks.
 


Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
49,236
Reaction score
3,719
Points
113
If Rebekah can’t make it as a data scientist there’s a job in politicized journalism.

Perhaps a spot on the UF Board of Regents.
FYI. She isn’t even a data scientist. She ran a webpage. She didn’t even have access to the numbers in order to manipulate them.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
20,507
Reaction score
3,127
Points
113
The data is from mid-March collected from congressional members reporting to CNN.

Very scientific. I’m sure not skewed. 🙄

Also, Sen Ron Johnson said that he hasn’t been vaccinated b/c he had Covid and had the antibodies, like those who have been vaccinated.

Why should someone who has the antibodies get vaccinated until it’s determined that they won’t last as long as the vaccine?

Isn’t that rather logical?

JTF is hitting rock bottom.
 





justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
14,115
Reaction score
4,608
Points
113
The data is from mid-March collected from congressional members reporting to CNN.

Very scientific. I’m sure not skewed. 🙄

Also, Sen Ron Johnson said that he hasn’t been vaccinated b/c he had Covid and had the antibodies, like those who have been vaccinated.

Why should someone who has the antibodies get vaccinated until it’s determined that they won’t last as long as the vaccine?

Isn’t that rather logical?

JTF is hitting rock bottom.
CreEJLK.png


I'm not sure you can get more scientific than surveying the entire population of people in question.

I love how your post is "This is a lie and the number of Republicans who are vaccinated is higher. Oh and also it doesn't make sense for Republicans to get vaccinated!"
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
20,810
Reaction score
5,125
Points
113
CreEJLK.png


I'm not sure you can get more scientific than surveying the entire population of people in question.

I love how your post is "This is a lie and the number of Republicans who are vaccinated is higher. Oh and also it doesn't make sense for Republicans to get vaccinated!"
Since you are going for full disclosure...
Among the Republican conference, 95 of the 212 members -- 44.8% -- have said they are vaccinated........ One hundred and twelve Republican offices did not respond to multiple CNN inquires.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
14,115
Reaction score
4,608
Points
113
Since you are going for full disclosure...
Among the Republican conference, 95 of the 212 members -- 44.8% -- have said they are vaccinated........ One hundred and twelve Republican offices did not respond to multiple CNN inquires.

Why do you think they might choose not to respond?
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
20,507
Reaction score
3,127
Points
113
Why do you think they might choose not to respond?
B/c it’s CNN and it’s none of their f’n business.

I could just hear the howling from lefties here if this were Fox News and Democrats not responding.

The difference is that Fox News wouldn’t do something this stupid.
 



jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
22,647
Reaction score
2,680
Points
113
B/c it’s CNN and it’s none of their f’n business.

I could just hear the howling from lefties here if this were Fox News and Democrats not responding.

The difference is that Fox News wouldn’t do something this stupid.
Given that the star at fox is the country's lead anti vaxxer, why would fox want to know who has been vaccinated? Fox has staked out its position.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
20,810
Reaction score
5,125
Points
113
Why do you think they might choose not to respond?
I can think of a number of reasons. Do I think all (112) who haven't responded got vaccinated? No. I'm also not dumb enough to think all that didn't respond haven't been vaccinated. The story seems to assume that and maybe that is also why you chose cut off your screen shot so that tidbit wasn't included?
 


Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
49,236
Reaction score
3,719
Points
113
They're deeply ashamed that they took the juice and don't want to anger their cult.
Just like there are probably democrats who didn’t get the vaccine but said they did because they didn’t want to anger their cult.
 


GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
27,833
Reaction score
3,533
Points
113
Though GII doesn’t want to assume that everything that is reported through VAERS is a side effect of the vaccine, AND I AGREE, he seems to assume that ALL vaccine side effects are reported to VAERS and all are captured. I would argue that any data collected outside of a medical study is incomplete and that no assumptions should be drawn about them, whether it’s VAERS or any database of drug side effect reports.

Analysis of side effects should either be large data comparisons to a medicine or vaccine to placebo OR investigation into the reports of a data collection system, like VAERS.

Tucker Carlson’s report was arguing that there was something nefarious about these vaccine side effects that have gone uninvestigated. I don’t think it’s nefarious, but as political as the entire Covid situation has been, it is suspicious that no investigations appear to have been conducted as a result of the data collected.

My wife told me yesterday that the person that prepares our taxes had been in the hospital with a significant adverse event that resembled serious Covid symptoms shortly after taking the vaccine. I seriously doubt that his adverse event/side effect was reported to VAERS. Not b/c someone was trying to cover it up, but b/c it isn’t necessarily what anyone is concerned about when treating someone. If it were reported to VAERS, some investigation and report on these type of reactions would be logical IF you were interested in understanding the connection to the vaccination that he received.
I’ve never said everything is reported to VAERS. I know it’s not.

My question again is what specifically makes you (and Carlson) think that side effects aren’t investigated? How did you come to that conclusion?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
49,236
Reaction score
3,719
Points
113
I gotta say, it’s breathtaking how fast progressives have politicized the vaccine. But I guess it’s all they know.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
20,507
Reaction score
3,127
Points
113
Just like there are probably democrats who didn’t get the vaccine but said they did because they didn’t want to anger their cult.
I wonder how many Democrats would’ve gotten the vaccine if Trump had won the 2020 election?

In late summer, Democrats didn’t seem to have a lot of confidence in when it was going to be available and whether it was going to be safe an effective. It appears they were wrong on both counts.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
20,507
Reaction score
3,127
Points
113
I’ve never said everything is reported to VAERS. I know it’s not.

My question again is what specifically makes you (and Carlson) think that side effects aren’t investigated? How did you come to that conclusion?
B/c no government official has said that they have been investigated and stated the results of those investigations. Pretty simple.

I don’t think it’s an nefarious oversight though, as Carlson implied. I do think it raises questions.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
20,507
Reaction score
3,127
Points
113
As of today, the CDC reports vaccination rates 36% fully vaccinated and 47% of ‘at least one dose’.

I don’t know why lefties are screaming about the vaccine hesitant. Those seem like a pretty good numbers to me.

Maybe another potential reason why the CDC crossed the threshold on mask wearing?
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
20,810
Reaction score
5,125
Points
113
As of today, the CDC reports vaccination rates 36% fully vaccinated and 47% of ‘at least one dose’.

I don’t know why lefties are screaming about the vaccine hesitant. Those seem like a pretty good numbers to me.

Maybe another potential reason why the CDC crossed the threshold on mask wearing?
Also, keep in mind, that 36%/47% is of the US Population - not of those eligible (0-11 still not eligivle and 12-15 have only been for a short time). The % of those eligible is much higher.

It is another oddity/inconsistency out there. People don't even tabulate this consistently. I have seen some states that define it by % of population and others that define it by % of eligible.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
20,810
Reaction score
5,125
Points
113
Also, keep in mind, that 36%/47% is of the US Population - not of those eligible (0-11 still not eligivle and 12-15 have only been for a short time). The % of those eligible is much higher.

It is another oddity/inconsistency out there. People don't even tabulate this consistently. I have seen some states that define it by % of population and others that define it by % of eligible.
For example: MDH touts over 60% vaccinated. That is of those 16+. When on the Wisconsin site it shows just over 40%. That is of the total population. MN is actually at about 40% of the total population - which puts us right on par with Wisconsin. Actually slightly behind, but who is comparing 😊
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
10,496
Reaction score
2,095
Points
113
You getting your vaccine tomorrow? It will be interesting to see if your’s and other’s theory becomes true. If still having to wear masks after being vaccinated was keeping many from getting it, we should see a big spike in those getting their shots now. I hope you’re all right.
I haven't 100% followed up on what has happened in the last 24+ hours with this but the wife said something about Nevada making national news with something in regards to masks. I did literally in the last 10 minutes get an email from my private country club about no masks required if you have been vaccinated, for the benefit of others, please continue to wear a mask if you are NOT vaccinated.

The short answer is, Yes, this most definitely changes things. It may not be today but hell yes, if it means not wearing a mask I would be 1000X more likely to get on board and will get online and investigate when and where I can get a vaccine. As I mentioned, the wife already is.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
10,496
Reaction score
2,095
Points
113
To follow up: I'm not sure this is 100% clear?

>> "Late last evening, the state of Nevada adopted and updated new Mask protocols. Note, that as of May 1st, we were directed to follow the Clark County and State of Nevada Directives. Per the link, from the Governor:

Nevada Adopts Updated CDC Mask Guidance Carson City, Nev. — On May 13, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued updated guidance that fully-vaccinated individuals do not need to wear a mask in most indoor and outdoor locations.

What this means, effective immediately, if you are fully vaccinated, you do not need to wear a mask. We ask that if you are not fully vaccinated, for the protection of our employees, please continue to wear a mask.<<<

One paragraph says no mask "in most indoor and outdoor locations'; the next paragraph says simply "you do not need to wear a mask", no qualifying or limiting statement.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
20,507
Reaction score
3,127
Points
113
Also, keep in mind, that 36%/47% is of the US Population - not of those eligible (0-11 still not eligivle and 12-15 have only been for a short time). The % of those eligible is much higher.

It is another oddity/inconsistency out there. People don't even tabulate this consistently. I have seen some states that define it by % of population and others that define it by % of eligible.
I was assuming those eligible, which if true, seems pretty good.

Between vaccines and natural immunity, I think we’re well on our way to herd immunity.

Some people are going still prefer to wear masks and some people are going to have reasons that they don’t get vaccinated.

It only seems like the lefties that want to dictate to people what they must do.
 

scools12

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
6,012
Reaction score
1,834
Points
113
I gotta say, it’s breathtaking how fast progressives have politicized the vaccine. But I guess it’s all they know.
I haven’t heard them say not getting the vaccine is racist. Or maybe they have and I just missed it.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
49,236
Reaction score
3,719
Points
113
I haven’t heard them say not getting the vaccine is racist. Or maybe they have and I just missed it.
Just how badly they want it to be “us vs them”. In everything. I really do not want it to be that way.
 




Top Bottom