The new Corona virus, should we worry?




kg21

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
3,965
Reaction score
2,050
Points
113
Yeah, I doubt they said that it was now safe, but that is the impression it gives, IMO. It amazes me that after 2-years the Government still thinks we can mandate ourselves out of or around this Virus. The Virus is gonna Virus.
I remember if you just got vaccinated, you could anywhere, and never have a worry again.

Life changes quickly.
 





Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
13,762
Reaction score
6,080
Points
113
Is that what changed... Data? Care to show us the "data" that originally said if vaccinated you wouldn't have to worry again?

Initial data from the vaccine trial was quite good, wasn't it?
90-95% protection from infection, no?

Time and the variants changed that, didn't it?

Do you have selective memory?
 






Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
24,176
Reaction score
7,743
Points
113
Initial data from the vaccine trial was quite good, wasn't it?
90-95% protection from infection, no?

Time and the variants changed that, didn't it?

Do you have selective memory?
Yeah, fair enough. However, if you declare the Gophers winners when they are up at the end of the 1Q and they lose were you wrong or did "data change"?
 





Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
13,762
Reaction score
6,080
Points
113
Yeah, fair enough. However, if you declare the Gophers winners when they are up at the end of the 1Q and they lose were you wrong or did "data change"?


A better comparison would be looking at the betting odds over the course of the game as there is no definite answer just a host of probabilities that decisions are based off of.

Are the odds wrong as the score changes? No they aren't wrong but they also aren't definitive.
 


Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
51,260
Reaction score
4,993
Points
113
Who the hell is saying it's then safe? I've never heard that. Communication has been about reducing unnecessary gatherings, trips, etc. But if you do go, these things can help reduce your risk. Never heard anyone say the risk is eliminated.
But they knew they didn’t reduce risk. Cloth Masks don’t work. Plexiglass definitely does nothing. If nobody was wearing masks, would at risk folks go to the grocery store during an outbreak?
for the millionth time, the best strategy has always been for people to live their lives and during outbreaks to protect the vulnerable. No political power in that. It’s as simple as that.
 



GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
29,555
Reaction score
6,824
Points
113
But they knew they didn’t reduce risk. Cloth Masks don’t work. Plexiglass definitely does nothing. If nobody was wearing masks, would at risk folks go to the grocery store during an outbreak?
for the millionth time, the best strategy has always been for people to live their lives and during outbreaks to protect the vulnerable. No political power in that. It’s as simple as that.
Can you provide examples of places that were able to “live their lives” (whatever that means) while being able to protect the vulnerable during outbreaks? If it’s simple, you should be able to provide lots of examples.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
29,555
Reaction score
6,824
Points
113
Yeah, I doubt they said that it was now safe, but that is the impression it gives, IMO. It amazes me that after 2-years the Government still thinks we can mandate ourselves out of or around this Virus. The Virus is gonna Virus.
Part of the reason I think they’re doing this is some of the worker shortages in industries like restaurants is because some feel like no one cares about protecting them. Probably an attempt to help that. But honestly, all it does is make things miserable for the employees that have to try to enforce it. And then less people are going out to places that enforce it so that hurts the business which could mean they have less employees. I get the idea but don’t think it works.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
29,555
Reaction score
6,824
Points
113
Now add suicides. Then add 2 years of failure in the classroom. Add the issues from VAERS and the unknown long term effects of the vax on immune systems. The mask, vax and lockdown advocates did MASSIVE damage to our kids and to our long term future. Shameful. The fix was far worse than the disease for this age group. People that deny it are lying to themselves to absolve guilt.
 




golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
3,721
Reaction score
2,228
Points
113
Good. Now do failing kids in our schools.

Rochester schools have recently added four no school days to the calendar this year. I was talking to a teacher and he said the reason for this is the the kids are so out of control, especially at the elem and middle level, that teachers are not doing well mentally.

I shared in another post how teachers have asked the school board to come to 2 of the 3 middle schools here to see how crazy things have become.

In a post bulletin article, the superintendent blames this on remote learning. Says kids have to be retrained how to behave now that they r back in school.

The damage to kids' education progress is incalculable. Truth is, more under 19s died from drowning than china virus, and virtually all of these cv deaths had comorbidities.

Lockdowns all about politics. Height of selfishness.
 
Last edited:

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
3,721
Reaction score
2,228
Points
113

balds

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
586
Points
113
I think he's saying that public health officials (and politicians, media, etc.) have been dishonest about Covid from the beginning, starting with the suppression of the Stanford/Santa Clara County study in April 2020, and continuing to this day.
 






Top Bottom