-
I gave you plenty of examples, if you'd bothered to read. Like I told you, broaden your horizons a little. If you do, you'll see lots of contrasting data coming from countries throughout Europe, India, Israel, and all around the world that don't fit the nice little vaccine narrative.
Why does everything have to revolve around Trump for you guys? You guys keep immortalizing him, and just can't let him go, can you? I guess you really miss him that badly. Be careful what you wish for.
I couldn't help but notice you never disputed any of my facts. I hope you feel some responsibility for the reported deaths from the COVID vaccines which in 7 months have eclipsed those of all other vaccines for the last 30 years combined, according to the VAERS data reported by the CDC.
[QUOTE=Bullett64;5496850]Other countries. Which other countries? Ones with similar geopolitical makeup to us or isolated Scandinavian countries with population densities that minimize virus density just by their remoteness? Or Myanmar, which has had no infections at all. Because they said so.
Don't draw your conclusions after comparing apples and pickup trucks?
Any list of liars that doesn't begin with Donald Trump shows your true colors. I sincerely hope that you come through this pandemic in good health. I also hope that you feel some responsibility to those who will not after they read the dangerous "facts" you so loosely toss out.[/QUOTE]
-
[QUOTE=Niteluvr;5497025]I can't imagine any Ph. D that I know who would be opposed to the vaccine, especially any in a health care field. [/QUOTE]And I can't imagine why you would say that, unless you've not done any in-depth study on the subject, and have just taken the sound bites at face value. But that's not what PhD's do, they do their own research.
[QUOTE=Niteluvr;5497025]"Most" of them are intelligent people, from what I've experienced. Did the article mention why the doctorate crowd is allegedly so hesitant? I understand the reasons for the Black and Hispanic crowd, but the former group makes no sense.[/QUOTE]Now you sound just like Biden. Did you bother to look at the study I cited?
-
[QUOTE=Bullett64;5497188]Which is the per-existing condition, my new knee or my old knee? [/QUOTE]Neither. Your advanced age, prostate cancer and series of strokes.
[QUOTE=Bullett64;4612293]The short answer is that I am 74, having survived prostate cancer and a series of strokes.[/QUOTE]
-
[QUOTE=ILuvEmall;5497793]And I can't imagine why you would say that, unless you've not done any in-depth study on the subject, and have just taken the sound bites at face value. But that's not what PhD's do, they do their own research.
Now you sound just like Biden. Did you bother to look at the study I cited?[/QUOTE]I prefer real-world experiences to find truths, not articles.
-
[QUOTE=AaronHamlet;5497838]Neither. Your advanced age, prostate cancer and series of strokes.[/QUOTE]Wow, thank you for taking such an interest in my health. Like my new knee, neither of the two conditions you mentioned continue to exist, so can hardly be classified as "pre-existing. " My prostate cancer was discovered early, thanks to modern medicine (you know, stuff PSA tests and vaccines) and was removed. Ergo no prostate, no prostate cancer, no condition. Similarly, there is a blood vessel that runs up the back of your neck and branches into three parts. I was born with an abnormality in mine (a kink in layman's terms) which caused a blood clot to form. Eventually it got big enough to tear apart. Bits of the clot entered the three branched blood vessels, blocking them, and causing the three small strokes. As there are nor more vessels remaining in that artery, there is no possible chance of it causing any further damage. Once again, no condition remains to pre-exist. Now realizing that you have a vested interest in my health, I must notify you that I have fully recovered from all the effects of the strokes, although I admit I read a bit slower than I used to.
As you are so very interested in me, do you have any idea why I am pulling the ball to the left as often as I am?
-
[QUOTE=ILuvEmall;5497775]. I hope you feel some responsibility for the reported deaths from the COVID vaccines which in 7 months have eclipsed those of all other vaccines for the last 30 years combined, according to the VAERS data reported by the CDC.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaers-rival-idUSL2N2O01XU[/URL]
A apologize if Reuters is not as professional in your eyes as Tucker Carlson.
Let me put it another way. If I choose to get vaccinated and wear a mask in public and I am wrong, who have I hurt? No-one. If I am right, I have helped to end the disease and have helped in avoiding its spread to the unvaccinated.
If you are right and continue on your present course, no-one is hurt. If you are not, you are placing your own life in jeopardy as well as the lives of others and continuing to enable the spread of the current form of the disease as well as enabling to mutate into even more virulent forms.
So the cost of being correct is zero. The cost of being wrong is the difference between zero all the way up to possible death. It doesn't take much of a risk / benefit analysis to figure out which is the more prudent plan.
Of course the over 600,000 people who have already died of the disease don't get to weigh in here. If they did, how many of them do you suppose would be anti-vax'ers?
-
[QUOTE=SgtLurker;5497738]Polio, Mumps, Rubella, and like have vaccines. You get the vaccine then the odds of getting the disease is infinitesimal. The flu shot is not a vaccine because their are still great odds of getting the flu. This Covid is a shot and not a vaccine because as we all see, people can and do still get the disease. It is all part of Big Pharma and Government propaganda. Not saying whether people should or should not get it, just pointing out the blatant hypocrisy of what many are being fed and happily are swallowing.[/QUOTE]Because the CDC calls it a vaccine. And I'm certain they know more than your dumb fucking ass. I suppose the fact that the shot is 99.93% effective so far means that it's not a "vaccine" to you? So dumb. I'll bet you sit in the yard and eat rocks.
[QUOTE=Bullett64;5498029][URL]https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaers-rival-idUSL2N2O01XU[/URL]
A apologize if Reuters is not as professional in your eyes as Tucker Carlson.
Let me put it another way. If I choose to get vaccinated and wear a mask in public and I am wrong, who have I hurt? No-one. If I am right, I have helped to end the disease and have helped in avoiding its spread to the unvaccinated.
If you are right and continue on your present course, no-one is hurt. If you are not, you are placing your own life in jeopardy as well as the lives of others and continuing to enable the spread of the current form of the disease as well as enabling to mutate into even more virulent forms.
So the cost of being correct is zero. The cost of being wrong is the difference between zero all the way up to possible death. It doesn't take much of a risk / benefit analysis to figure out which is the more prudent plan.
Of course the over 600,000 people who have already died of the disease don't get to weigh in here. If they did, how many of them do you suppose would be anti-vax'ers?[/QUOTE]While noble, I wouldn't bother trying to explain anything to this group of conspiracy cock swallowing idiots. I'm good with the Darwin shit that's happening.
-
[QUOTE=RogerOver;5498542]I suppose the fact that the shot is 99.93% effective
While noble, I wouldn't bother trying to explain anything to this group of conspiracy cock swallowing idiots. I'm good with the Darwin shit that's happening.[/QUOTE]"alot of people are hostile to these analytical tools and availing themselves the right to borrow logic and analysis for the purpose of manipulation".
Followed by:
[URL]https://youtu.be/K7oLLbg3s7k?t=394[/URL]
and:
"they believe we are in a battle that has a coherent endpoint ... but that battle doesn't even exist. There is no coherent endpoint."
-
[QUOTE=RogerOver;5498542]And I'm certain they know more than your dumb fucking ass. I suppose the fact that the shot is 99.93% effective.[/QUOTE]'both mRNA COVID-19 vaccines' effectiveness dropped in the month of July. The researchers found that Moderna's vaccine effectiveness was 76 percent, as compared with Pfizer's 42 percent. '.
[URL]https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.06.21261707v1.full.pdf[/URL]
"alot of people are hostile to these analytical tools and availing themselves the right to borrow logic and analysis for the purpose of manipulation. ".
[URL]https://youtu.be/K7oLLbg3s7k?t=404[/URL]
-
[QUOTE=Niteluvr;5497877]I prefer real-world experiences to find truths, not articles.[/QUOTE]So far, here's my real-world experience with the Delta variant. I know 2 people personally in the US that have had Covid since the Delta variant. One works for me and was on vacation at the time with his family of 4, all of which were vaccinated, and all of which got COVID. He ended up having to have oxygen, while the rest of his family had more mild symptoms. He was out for 2 weeks.
One of my neighbors also got Covid after returning from Florida on vacation with his family of 4, all of which were unvaccinated. The rest of them tested negative. He never went to the hospital or got any treatment, but did have a rough go of it, and is still recovering. He was back to work after 1 week, but does still struggle doing any heavier physical labor.
Even though that's my real-world experience, I realize it's very limited, and it's probably not representative of what I should expect in general. For that, I look to broader-based studies, and from what I see, the vaccines do appear to offer symptomatic relief. Did I believe they offered the 98% that was claimed (and since qualified with the "oops, oh yeah, that was outdated data that included 4 months worth of time where no one was vaccinated" Of course not, because this wasn't close to matching the data from other countries like the UK and Israel, and it just didn't pass the smell test.
Our plant in Israel got hit with Covid, and 16 of 18 people on our engineering floor ended being out with it, all of which were vaccinated. This did fit with much of the data I was seeing from both Israel and the UK, showing the vaccines were not effective against the Delta variant, so in this case I did believe my real-world data was reflective of the studies. We also saw a very high % get hit in the Cape Cod cluster outbreak here, forcing dumbass Biden to eat crow on his ill-timed "pandemic of the unvaccinated" line, doing his best to foster divisions and push his forced vaccine agenda.
I stopped after my MS degree so can't claim a PhD, but I've worked in research for decades, and have PhDs that work for me, and I can assure you they are not stupid, and they are not accepting this at face value either.
-
[QUOTE=Bullett64;5498029][URL]https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaers-rival-idUSL2N2O01XU[/URL]
A apologize if Reuters is not as professional in your eyes as Tucker Carlson.
[/QUOTE]I think it's obvious that you are slow to read, because it's twice now that you've obviously misread my posts. What does your link have to do with my post? Please show me where my post made that claim?
[QUOTE=Bullett64;5498029]
Let me put it another way. If I choose to get vaccinated and wear a mask in public and I am wrong, who have I hurt? No-one. If I am right, I have helped to end the disease and have helped in avoiding its spread to the unvaccinated.
If you are right and continue on your present course, no-one is hurt. If you are not, you are placing your own life in jeopardy as well as the lives of others and continuing to enable the spread of the current form of the disease as well as enabling to mutate into even more virulent forms.
So the cost of being correct is zero. The cost of being wrong is the difference between zero all the way up to possible death. It doesn't take much of a risk / benefit analysis to figure out which is the more prudent plan.
Of course the over 600,000 people who have already died of the disease don't get to weigh in here. If they did, how many of them do you suppose would be anti-vax'ers?[/QUOTE]Let me put it to you this way- you are truly ignorant and refuse to get educated, even though I have asked you to please do so. You accuse me of listening only to Fox, even though you clearly are extremely poorly read, and don't realize that these vaccines do not provide immunity, and were never intended to do so (please do your fact checking on that). That's right, the vaccinated can and do spread the virus. Now, it's funny you bring up about mutations, because there's something called ADE (look that up and read about it), and every coronavirus vaccine applied for in the past has exhibited this. Now, in the absence of long term data (which by definition can't exist) demonstrating that these vaccines are different, there is a high likelihood that these vaccines are actually creating the problem and allowing mutations to develop at a more rapid pace, and not the unvaccinated. There are many notable scientists, including one of the pioneeers of MRNA vaccines, a Nobel Prize winner, and the former Chief Scientist of Pfizer that support this theory.
So the cost of being wrong on these vaccines is far from zero, and could potentially be creating a much larger problem for the entire world to deal with. Add on top of that the unknown long-term health effects of the vaccines, and there are potentially huge costs of being wrong. On the other hand, if the vaccines are as great as you pro-vaccine proponents think they are, then you are protected, and it's only the unvaccinated who are left to deal with the risks they willingly choose to take themselves. I'm being a little facetious there, but despite what you believe, there's more than one side to consider in this, and you're not being the selfless pariah you may see yourself as, so you can come down off your high horse.
We could get into a whole debate on the interpretation of statistics, but I won't go there. Instead, I'll just ask how many people have died of the flu so far? Have we tried to mandate the flu vaccine? Please, make your own choice, I'm all for that. Just don't try to make mine for me.
-
[QUOTE=Bullett64;5497188] I realize that the pores in the mask are bigger than the actual virus, but I am intelligent enough to know that the virus does not travel by itself, but attached to (mostly) water vapor molecules which are big enough for the mask to stop. l.[/QUOTE]Water vapor molecules evaporate almost immediately once outside the body. The much smaller viral microbes attached to the water molecules don't. Your mask won't stop the viral microbes.
I'm CCP virus + and cough, sneeze or spit in your mask wearing face. You may not feel any of moisture but thousands of CCP viral microbes passed through your mask and into your mouth and nose. But a mask might protect you from tasting my spit, mucous or snot. Maybe.
-
[QUOTE=Bullett64;5497991]neither of the two conditions you mentioned continue to exist, so can hardly be classified as "pre-existing. " My prostate cancer was discovered early, thanks to modern medicine (you know, stuff PSA tests and vaccines) and was removed. Ergo no prostate, no prostate cancer, no condition. [/QUOTE]Doesn't matter if they continue to exist or not. You're 75, had cancer and a series of strokes. You're considered immunocompromised.
-
[QUOTE=AaronHamlet;5499094]Doesn't matter if they continue to exist or not. You're 75, had cancer and a series of strokes. You're considered immunocompromised.[/QUOTE]You are simply making shit up (again.) Nothing that has happened to me has compromised my immune system any more than a broken arm as a child would.
Have you broken a bone? Had dental work? Spelling deficiencies? Zits? Ooooh, you too must be immunocompromised.
-
[QUOTE=Bullett64;5499125]You are simply making shit up (again.) Nothing that has happened to me has compromised my immune system any more than a broken arm as a child would.
Have you broken a bone? Had dental work? Spelling deficiencies? Zits? Ooooh, you too must be immunocompromised.[/QUOTE]'At this time, based on available studies, having a history of cancer increases your risk.'
'Stroke or cerebrovascular disease, which affects blood flow to the brain.'
'Having cerebrovascular disease, such as having a stroke, can make you more likely to get severely ill from COVID-19.'
'Older adults are more likely to get severely ill from COVID-19. More than 80% of COVID-19 deaths occur in people over age 65.'
'Dementia or other neurological conditions.'
'Having neurological conditions, such as dementia, can make you more likely to get severely ill from COVID-19.'
[URL]https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/people-with-medical-conditions.html[/URL]
'Having a stroke damages immune cells as well as affecting the brain. Having a stroke damages immune cells as well as affecting the brain, research has found. '.
[URL]https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/04/170420113807.htm[/URL]#text=Having%20 a%20 stroke%20 damages%20 immune%20 cells%20 as%20 well%20 as%20 affecting%20 the%20 brain. &text=FULL%20 STORY-,Having%20 a%20 stroke%20 damages%20 immune%20 cells%20 as%20 well%20 as%20 affecting, pneumonia%2 C%20 after%20 having%20 a%20 stroke.
[QUOTE=Bullett64;5499125]You are simply making shit up (again.) [/QUOTE]What am I making up, old man? You say again, so what have I made up in the past?
