New Study on Vaccinated people and Covid cases

[LeafByNiggle]

Actually I find that story can't always work. So if the vaccine IS God sending a rowboat or helicopter what about the individual who died from a not so good reaction from a vaccine like a blood clot?

The story I told does not claim that the vaccine is a gift from God. The story refutes the specific argument by Jeshu that somehow relying on the vaccine is not trusting Jesus. But if you want to make the connection to the story, keep in mind that although the row boat could have rescued the man from the flood, there are also accidents where rowboats tip over and people drown. That still does not mean the man in the story should not accept the ride in the rowboat to escape the flood. Similarly, it does not mean people today should not accept the vaccine.

You should say God gave man the capably of developing new ideas but not everything he develops works out.

While true, this observation does not make the case against vaccines.

 

[Bobber]

The story I told does not claim that the vaccine is a gift from God.

Sure it does. You claimed the vaccine is the equivalent of God sending help and if one doesn't take one that means they turned down the help that God provided.

But if you want to make the connection to the story, keep in mind that although the row boat could have rescued the man from the flood, there are also accidents where rowboats tip over and people drown.

Then I think you need to dial back saying God brought that rowboat that sank to them.

 

[Bobber]

Despite the mandates you mentioned, my area only 40% are fully vaccinated.

Although fully vaccinated can still have breakthroughs, it's still uncertain if a fully
vaccinated person with no symptoms can spread the virus.

No according to the CDC. Seems to me they're clear on the matter.

Vaccine Breakthrough Infections: The Possibility of Getting COVID-19 after Getting Vaccinated (cdc.gov)

 

[JimR-OCDS]

No according to the CDC. Seems to me they're clear on the matter.

Vaccine Breakthrough Infections: The Possibility of Getting COVID-19 after Getting Vaccinated (cdc.gov)

A possibility, but not a certainty.

As I posted, vaccinated with no symptoms are unlikely to spread the virus to others.
Those with symptoms, it's uncertain, but as the article says, a possibility, so lets just
assume they can.

Either way, this is no excuse not to get vaccinated as the vaccine does protect up to
95% and yes there will be breakthrough cases, they will not be hospitalized.

Those who are not vaccinated have a far greater chance of being hospitalized and dying from the virus. But don't read about it, ask the doctors and nurses working in the ER's what their seeing and what their opinion about not getting vaccinated is?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Sure it does. You claimed the vaccine is the equivalent of God sending help and if one doesn't take one that means they turned down the help that God provided.


Then I think you need to dial back saying God brought that rowboat that sank to them.

Never said that either. But what I do claim is the God has made Man with intelligence to develop things like penicillin, chemotherapy drugs, aspirin, ether, chlorpromazine, polio vaccine, and most recently, the mRNA vaccines for covid-19. This does not preclude the possibility of any one of these from being misused or leading to a bad outcome, including aspirin and penicillin. So what would you say to someone who had an infection and a high fever and was offered penicillin? Would you say, like Jeshu, "Don't you trust Jesus?" (to heal you)? Or would you advise them to utilize the best in modern pharmaceuticals to fight the infection?

 

[Toro]

Never said that either. But what I do claim is the God has made Man with intelligence to develop things like penicillin, chemotherapy drugs, aspirin, ether, chlorpromazine, polio vaccine, and most recently, the mRNA vaccines for covid-19. This does not preclude the possibility of any one of these from being misused or leading to a bad outcome, including aspirin and penicillin. So what would you say to someone who had an infection and a high fever and was offered penicillin? Would you say, like Jeshu, "Don't you trust Jesus?" (to heal you)? Or would you advise them to utilize the best in modern pharmaceuticals to fight the infection?

He also gave man the ability to create virus similar if not exactly like the one causing the pandemic.

Does that mean that man ALWAYS does what is good with the knowledge God provides and that even what LOOKS to be a good thing can NEVER be twisted and corrupted by greed, either for money, or for power or any of the other driving factors as to why Government, pharmaceutical companies and humanity as a whole MIGHT, just MIGHT have a self serving interest rather than the good of the many to obtain?

https://nypost.com/2021/10/21/nih-a...ion-in-wuhan-despite-faucis-repeated-denials/

 

[LeafByNiggle]

He also gave man the ability to create virus similar if not exactly like the one causing the pandemic.

Does that mean that man ALWAYS does what is good with the knowledge God provides and that even what LOOKS to be a good thing can NEVER be twisted and corrupted by greed, either for money, or for power or any of the other driving factors as to why Government, pharmaceutical companies and humanity as a whole MIGHT, just MIGHT have a self serving interest rather than the good of the many to obtain?

Just because knowledge can be misused does not mean it was misused in the creation of vaccines. All evidence points to these vaccines being a very good thing.

 

[Toro]

Just because knowledge can be misused does not mean it was misused in the creation of vaccines. All evidence points to these vaccines being a very good thing.

Didnt say it WAS a bad thing or that this one was misused knowledge. I simply pointed out that knowledge given to man by God CAN be used just as much for good as for evil and man CAN be corrupt and self serving.

That being the case, I do not believe those that question the shot should be talked down to as if they are crazy for asking questions or wanting MORE information such as longer term trials as to what they are allowing to be injected into their body.

You believe it good, great. Another may want more information before they take it. While another may have a conviction from the Lord to avoid it..for whatever reason...to them taking it is disobedience and bad.

God gave man free will, to do what is right AND what is wrong. Taking away free will is NOT the answer nor is it loving.

There is only one spirit I know of that wants to take away what God has given to man, especially when it comes to free will.. and it isnt the Holy Spirit.

I personally would have WILLINGLY taken the shot by this time IF it weren't for the bribery, then force and threats coming along with it as a sales pitch.

I am not anti vaccine. I am anti removal of free will. IF God does not stomp on free will even when its "for our own good" I will NEVER support a government that does. Even IF the vaccine were 100% effective.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Didnt say it WAS a bad thing or that this one was misused knowledge. I simply pointed out that knowledge given to man by God CAN be used just as much for good as for evil and man CAN be corrupt and self serving.

That being the case, I do not believe those that question the shot should be talked down to as if they are crazy for asking questions or wanting MORE information such as longer term trials as to what they are allowing to be injected into their body.

That is not quite the reason those people are criticized. There is nothing wrong with wanting more information. But when that information is not available, there is something wrong with the kind of judgements made in the absence of that information. Specifically, people are dying of covid right now. They have been dying for 20 months now. There is a point when the information we do have is enough, according to sound probabilistic judgement. Nothing in medicine is ever 100% certain. But we have to act in a timely fashion if we are to gain any benefit from medicine. We could still be running tests on the smallpox vaccine right now and holding off on launching the smallpox vaccine, instead of launching it nation-wide, as we did before 1940. If we had held off back then, we would still have smallpox in the US, instead of it being totally eradicated in the wild. Anyone who thinks we do not have enough data on the covid vaccines is not following the science. You mentioned longer term trials. How long would you prefer? Keep in mind every week of delay means half a million more infections, 10,000 more deaths, and many more long term effects of covid itself. If it weren't for the immediate need then I would say sure, let's wait and do some more testing for long term effects of the vaccine. But the immediate need is there. How do you balance the need for relief from the disease with the desire for more certainty on the safety of the vaccine? Every professional medical organization in the world has considered that balance and they all agree that the testing for safety is enough, given the immediate need.

You believe it good, great. Another may want more information before they take it.

This way of looking at the question would work if the effects of everyone's decision only affected that person. But it doesn't. It affects society at large. So the decision needs to be made, at least to some extent, for the society as a whole.

While another may have a conviction from the Lord to avoid it..for whatever reason...to them taking it is disobedience and bad.

There were people on 9/11 who believed their lord was commanding them to destroy two office towers in New York City. Obviously we cannot indulge everyone's interpretation of what God commands of them. But we do try to make allowances as much as possible, by providing for alternate means for keeping society safe from their decisions, such as frequency testing, or isolation.

God gave man free will, to do what is right AND what is wrong. Taking away free will is NOT the answer nor is it loving.

Obviously society has always placed restrictions on what some people's free will prompts them to do. This case is no different. But once again, as much accommodation as practical is made for free will in the US at least. There is a long precedent for placing reasonable limits on that free will. A very relevant example is that for many decades certain vaccines are required for all children attending public schools. Again, this is not new.

I personally would have WILLINGLY taken the shot by this time IF it weren't for the bribery, then force and threats coming along with it as a sales pitch.

I would think the only logical way to make that decision is to base it on the risk of covid vs. risk of the vaccine. The fact that it comes with threats of force should not play any role in that decision. Consider the threats and force that were used by the English during the German blitz of 1940-1941. It was absolutely mandated that when a blackout was called for, every citizen of London was required to turn off their lights to prevent the German planes from using them to navigate. Would you consider it reasonable of the citizen of London were to say "I personally would WILLINGLY turn off my lights when a raid was announced if it were not for the force and threats and sales pitch coming from Churchill."

I am not anti vaccine. I am anti removal of free will. IF God does not stomp on free will even when its "for our own good" I will NEVER support a government that does. Even IF the vaccine were 100% effective.

You should consider addressing the valid and reasonable limitations placed on free will by any civilized society, unless you think that the only good government is anarchy.

 

[Toro]

That is not quite the reason those people are criticized. There is nothing wrong with wanting more information. But when that information is not available, there is something wrong with the kind of judgements made in the absence of that information. Specifically, people are dying of covid right now. They have been dying for 20 months now. There is a point when the information we do have is enough, according to sound probabilistic judgement. Nothing in medicine is ever 100% certain. But we have to act in a timely fashion if we are to gain any benefit from medicine. We could still be running tests on the smallpox vaccine right now and holding off on launching the smallpox vaccine, instead of launching it nation-wide, as we did before 1940. If we had held off back then, we would still have smallpox in the US, instead of it being totally eradicated in the wild. Anyone who thinks we do not have enough data on the covid vaccines is not following the science. You mentioned longer term trials. How long would you prefer? Keep in mind every week of delay means half a million more infections, 10,000 more deaths, and many more long term effects of covid itself. If it weren't for the immediate need then I would say sure, let's wait and do some more testing for long term effects of the vaccine. But the immediate need is there. How do you balance the need for relief from the disease with the desire for more certainty on the safety of the vaccine? Every professional medical organization in the world has considered that balance and they all agree that the testing for safety is enough, given the immediate need.


This way of looking at the question would work if the effects of everyone's decision only affected that person. But it doesn't. It affects society at large. So the decision needs to be made, at least to some extent, for the society as a whole.


There were people on 9/11 who believed their lord was commanding them to destroy two office towers in New York City. Obviously we cannot indulge everyone's interpretation of what God commands of them. But we do try to make allowances as much as possible, by providing for alternate means for keeping society safe from their decisions, such as frequency testing, or isolation.


Obviously society has always placed restrictions on what some people's free will prompts them to do. This case is no different. But once again, as much accommodation as practical is made for free will in the US at least. There is a long precedent for placing reasonable limits on that free will. A very relevant example is that for many decades certain vaccines are required for all children attending public schools. Again, this is not new.


I would think the only logical way to make that decision is to base it on the risk of covid vs. risk of the vaccine. The fact that it comes with threats of force should not play any role in that decision. Consider the threats and force that were used by the English during the German blitz of 1940-1941. It was absolutely mandated that when a blackout was called for, every citizen of London was required to turn off their lights to prevent the German planes from using them to navigate. Would you consider it reasonable of the citizen of London were to say "I personally would WILLINGLY turn off my lights when a raid was announced if it were not for the force and threats and sales pitch coming from Churchill."


You should consider addressing the valid and reasonable limitations placed on free will by any civilized society, unless you think that the only good government is anarchy.

Again, man is corrupt and when simply questioning gets people "canceled" . how is that NOT alarming?

When it is even PAUSIBLE that the very people that funded gain of function, the very process that could potentially create a virus such as this are the VERY same people demanding vaccinations. Why is that not reason for pause?

IF someone is ill-informed, give them evidence. IF I start insulting or mocking you... how willing are you to listen to me at all. Mocking does NOTHING but cause division.

IF the unvaccinated are TRULY the danger to humanity that so many outlets claim.... what is the purpose of the vacvine if those that have taken it to reduce their risk of catching/spreading/serious effects need to be "protected" shouldnt they already have a greater level of protection IF it IS the blessing its touted as?

If your comcern is about the effect it has not being on just "one person" and its effect on society that can be applied to a great many things.

Alcohol kills a great many of people per year both in regards to health (and putting weight on a healthcare system) and also by drunk driving.

Car accidents kill a great many people by everything from wreckless driving to vehicle neglect.

Abortion kills millions and has an effect on society in the VERY least by causing intense division, there are other potential effects on society by this one alone, but yet the very political side that demands I take tge needle, is generally the same side using "My body my choice" to justify their right to do so.

Drugs, have a negative effect on society and cause plenty of deaths, but SOME states have utilized their state right to decide for themselves IF they want certain ones legalized.

However with a vaccine, IF a Governor decides to use his same powers he comes against Federal scrutiny. IF a governor is NOT up holding the people they are set to represent, people will remove them by their vote.

Actually they were NOT doing what the Lord told them to do as in general they want nothing to do with Jesus. But even IF this were a valid comparison, there is a difference of intent between flying a large aircraft into a building and the potential for airbourne illness with a high survivability rate.

By that logic, anyone that gave someone the flu, a cold that led to pneumonia or any similar illness that resulted in death should AT THE VERY LEAST be tried for manslaughter.

As for limits. I have worked steady since the beginning. No less than 40 hours a week. I have worn 2 masks since BEFORE Fauci said we should even be wearing one. (I still wear my original masks along with the surgical one required by my job for a total of 3 masks) I recieved looks like I was crazy because I decided what was right for me and my wife.

I go to work, I go home. Yet some how I am the wreckless danger to society and must be forced into submission? Odd how workers that were once braving the unknown of this virus are now the villians because they simply disagree.

To pretend like someone that stayed home doing nothing for an entire year then took a vaccine is safer to society when they are STILL able to catch and spread covid while they run all over town is naive at best when it is NOT the vaccination status, but lifestyle that likely plays a higher role in increased numbers.


The thing with "risk assessment" is that with the vaccine given you can still catch covid.. you must caculate in your risk of adverse effects from the vaccine AND the virus because the risk is guaranteed with the shot, but even an unvaccinated person isnt guaranteed to catch covid... so you're assigning that risk to the unvaccinated as a guaranteed number out of "what ifs" without looking at their lifestyle, odds of exposure to the virus THEN allowing the person to use risk assessment for themselves and deciding for themselves what is best for them. You would rather force risk upon them that is not 100% necessity and claim them a danger based solely on if they had a shot.

That was governed by British law not American law, but if we were comparing apples to apples for the turning off the lights , that is war time and difference between what is VERY probable to happen and what is possible to happen. One is almost absolute certain to happen while possible the only reason to enact an absolute mandate over all with a high survivability rate is fear. IF fear were a good emotion for solid decision making, we wouldnt be instructed by the bible "fear not" time and time again.

There ARE set standards to which a society MUST adheer to, agreed. One of those that it must adhere to is solid leadership. To which I say IF the vaccines are so imperative to the survival of the human race. Why is it that the very leaders mandating it and their assistants.... are exempt from the very laws they write?

Society maintains with limits of "Don't steal, murder... etc." Not under the idea that if everyone just falls in line, death doesnt happen.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Again, man is corrupt and when simply questioning gets people "canceled" . how is that NOT alarming?

I disagree with your premise.

When it is even PAUSIBLE that the very people that funded gain of function...

They CDC did not fund gain of function.

IF someone is ill-informed, give them evidence.

I didn't say they were ill-informed. I said their reasoning was faulty.

IF I start insulting or mocking you...

No one is insulting you or mocking you. I am only disagreeing with you.

IF the unvaccinated are TRULY the danger to humanity that so many outlets claim.... what is the purpose of the vacvine if those that have taken it to reduce their risk of catching/spreading/serious effects need to be "protected" shouldnt they already have a greater level of protection IF it IS the blessing its touted as?

The protection is not absolute. There are breakthrough infections. And there are people who are immuno-compromised for whom vaccines do not work very well.

If your comcern is about the effect it has not being on just "one person" and its effect on society that can be applied to a great many things.

And it is.

Alcohol kills a great many of people per year....

There are many significant limitations on the use of alcohol for that very reason.

Car accidents kill a great many people by everything from wreckless driving to vehicle neglect.

Similarly we have many safety mandates with respect to cars and drivers.

Abortion kills millions...

I'm just going to snip all these defections right here. They have nothing to do with covid.

As for limits. I have worked steady since the beginning. No less than 40 hours a week. I have worn 2 masks since BEFORE Fauci said we should even be wearing one. (I still wear my original masks along with the surgical one required by my job for a total of 3 masks) I recieved looks like I was crazy because I decided what was right for me and my wife.

You should come to Minnesota. I have been wearing masks when hardly anyone else was and I never got so much as a dirty look. That's called "Minnesota nice."

The thing with "risk assessment" is that with the vaccine given you can still catch covid..

At a much lower rate. If the virus reproduction rate drops below 1.0, the virus simple fades away. The R value is currently about 1.3 or so.

you must caculate in your risk of adverse effects from the vaccine AND the virus because the risk is guaranteed with the shot, but even an unvaccinated person isnt guaranteed to catch covid...

You have that backwards. The risk of covid is much worse than the risk of the vaccine. That is obvious from the fact that out of 45 million covid cases, 700,000+ have died, while we have over 200 million people vaccinated and less than 5 have died from the vaccine.

 

[loveofourlord]

Again, man is corrupt and when simply questioning gets people "canceled" . how is that NOT alarming?

When it is even PAUSIBLE that the very people that funded gain of function, the very process that could potentially create a virus such as this are the VERY same people demanding vaccinations. Why is that not reason for pause?

IF someone is ill-informed, give them evidence. IF I start insulting or mocking you... how willing are you to listen to me at all. Mocking does NOTHING but cause division.

IF the unvaccinated are TRULY the danger to humanity that so many outlets claim.... what is the purpose of the vacvine if those that have taken it to reduce their risk of catching/spreading/serious effects need to be "protected" shouldnt they already have a greater level of protection IF it IS the blessing its touted as?

If your comcern is about the effect it has not being on just "one person" and its effect on society that can be applied to a great many things.

Alcohol kills a great many of people per year both in regards to health (and putting weight on a healthcare system) and also by drunk driving.

Car accidents kill a great many people by everything from wreckless driving to vehicle neglect.

Abortion kills millions and has an effect on society in the VERY least by causing intense division, there are other potential effects on society by this one alone, but yet the very political side that demands I take tge needle, is generally the same side using "My body my choice" to justify their right to do so.

Drugs, have a negative effect on society and cause plenty of deaths, but SOME states have utilized their state right to decide for themselves IF they want certain ones legalized.

However with a vaccine, IF a Governor decides to use his same powers he comes against Federal scrutiny. IF a governor is NOT up holding the people they are set to represent, people will remove them by their vote.

Actually they were NOT doing what the Lord told them to do as in general they want nothing to do with Jesus. But even IF this were a valid comparison, there is a difference of intent between flying a large aircraft into a building and the potential for airbourne illness with a high survivability rate.

By that logic, anyone that gave someone the flu, a cold that led to pneumonia or any similar illness that resulted in death should AT THE VERY LEAST be tried for manslaughter.

As for limits. I have worked steady since the beginning. No less than 40 hours a week. I have worn 2 masks since BEFORE Fauci said we should even be wearing one. (I still wear my original masks along with the surgical one required by my job for a total of 3 masks) I recieved looks like I was crazy because I decided what was right for me and my wife.

I go to work, I go home. Yet some how I am the wreckless danger to society and must be forced into submission? Odd how workers that were once braving the unknown of this virus are now the villians because they simply disagree.

To pretend like someone that stayed home doing nothing for an entire year then took a vaccine is safer to society when they are STILL able to catch and spread covid while they run all over town is naive at best when it is NOT the vaccination status, but lifestyle that likely plays a higher role in increased numbers.


The thing with "risk assessment" is that with the vaccine given you can still catch covid.. you must caculate in your risk of adverse effects from the vaccine AND the virus because the risk is guaranteed with the shot, but even an unvaccinated person isnt guaranteed to catch covid... so you're assigning that risk to the unvaccinated as a guaranteed number out of "what ifs" without looking at their lifestyle, odds of exposure to the virus THEN allowing the person to use risk assessment for themselves and deciding for themselves what is best for them. You would rather force risk upon them that is not 100% necessity and claim them a danger based solely on if they had a shot.

That was governed by British law not American law, but if we were comparing apples to apples for the turning off the lights , that is war time and difference between what is VERY probable to happen and what is possible to happen. One is almost absolute certain to happen while possible the only reason to enact an absolute mandate over all with a high survivability rate is fear. IF fear were a good emotion for solid decision making, we wouldnt be instructed by the bible "fear not" time and time again.

There ARE set standards to which a society MUST adheer to, agreed. One of those that it must adhere to is solid leadership. To which I say IF the vaccines are so imperative to the survival of the human race. Why is it that the very leaders mandating it and their assistants.... are exempt from the very laws they write?

Society maintains with limits of "Don't steal, murder... etc." Not under the idea that if everyone just falls in line, death doesnt happen.

SIMPLY QUESTIONING???? They aren't just questioning they are killing people and spreading lies, and other things. I'm sorry that when people are dying we can't cuddle you and tell you it's okay if you lie about vaccines and make up stuff.

 

[Toro]

I disagree with your premise.


They CDC did not fund gain of function.


I didn't say they were ill-informed. I said their reasoning was faulty.


No one is insulting you or mocking you. I am only disagreeing with you.


The protection is not absolute. There are breakthrough infections. And there are people who are immuno-compromised for whom vaccines do not work very well.


And it is.


There are many significant limitations on the use of alcohol for that very reason.


Similarly we have many safety mandates with respect to cars and drivers.


I'm just going to snip all these defections right here. They have nothing to do with covid.


You should come to Minnesota. I have been wearing masks when hardly anyone else was and I never got so much as a dirty look. That's called "Minnesota nice."


At a much lower rate. If the virus reproduction rate drops below 1.0, the virus simple fades away. The R value is currently about 1.3 or so.


You have that backwards. The risk of covid is much worse than the risk of the vaccine. That is obvious from the fact that out of 45 million covid cases, 700,000+ have died, while we have over 200 million people vaccinated and less than 5 have died from the vaccine.

You have the right to disagree, I disagree with blindly trusting a system that is controlled by corruptable man when that same sysyem ALTHOUGH NOT ALL PARTS of that system potentially caused the problem to begin with.

No, the CDC didn't, but the US tax payers funded it and as such the US government approved it. The same federal government mandating the shot.

I didnt say you did call people ill-informed, it was a general statement towards how those that want to push the vaccine so hard as to mandate it... rather than mock, educate.

Those examples DO have restrictions BUT none of them have a mandate to do away with them entirely (like vaccine mandates want to sweepingly do away with the unvaccinayed.

IF they said "You must be vaccinated if you want to fly" "go to a bar." Etc. Fine. But if someone is already at a low risk lifestyle...they should not be forced to bend the knee just to make everyone feel better or lose their job.

Even IF you get the entirety of humanity vaccinated today, Covid doesnt "fade away" it is here to stay.

Nah, thanks but no thanks I have no desire to go to Minnesota,.

I wasnt declaring the risk of the vaccine is worse than the virus.

I was saying that IF you can still catch covid after recieving the shot to prevent catching/severity/spread but it does not prevent infection nor spread entirely you are risking the known side effects while the long term effects are unknown to ultimately prevent the possibility of severity. But spread and infection are still possible (and as I said I believe lifestyle should be a far more concerning factor in society than vaccination status. A man like me that is PERFECTLY happy getting curbside groceries, going to work wearing many layers only to go home to my wife and cat... is NOT a huge threat to society IF my choice to wait until I roll up my sleeve to take the shot is by will, not because there is a figurative knee on my throat to make me comply.

If the end all be all is simply vaccination status we are in trouble because in risk assessment ALL factors must be considered, not just one.

 

[Bobber]

I personally would have WILLINGLY taken the shot by this time IF it weren't for the bribery, then force and threats coming along with it as a sales pitch.

I am not anti vaccine. I am anti removal of free will. IF God does not stomp on free will even when its "for our own good" I will NEVER support a government that does. Even IF the vaccine were 100% effective.

But Toro consider in the bigger picture of things this wouldn't make sense.

Let's just consider if you're willing to consider the vax is helpful, as it seems that's what you're open to acknowledge for you say you would have willingly have taken the shot by now so that would mean you have a faith in the lab people who developed a good vaccine but because OTHERS....the marketing team which is outside of them government etc, didn't market it in a gracious manner that means you won't take the thing which is good?

Toro there would be nothing wrong with you saying I can't stand the way government rolled out the pressure to take it and ALSO saying regardless I'm still going to take it. I'd encourage you to consider that doesn't mean you gave up good solid principles it would just mean you're not willing to throw out the baby with the bath water. If you seriously believe the vaccination might be beneficial then how about let that be the ONLY thing you base your decision on. Why give up something that might be good because of other people's foolishness?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

No, the CDC didn't [fund gain of function research], but the US tax payers funded it and as such the US government approved it. The same federal government mandating the shot.

Whether this is true or not has no bearing on the question of the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine as determined by the CDC and many others.

I didnt say you did call people ill-informed, it was a general statement towards how those that want to push the vaccine so hard as to mandate it... rather than mock, educate.

This too is a deflection. There may be bad actors out there that do what you said, but that does not have any bearing on the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

Those examples DO have restrictions BUT none of them have a mandate to do away with them entirely (like vaccine mandates want to sweepingly do away with the unvaccinayed.

There are no such mandates. The only mandates in effect right now are for people whose chosen profession or chosen activity puts them in close contact with other members of society. If you want to stay isolated in your home, or get a job in outdoor landscaping or any number of jobs that do not involve social contact, no one will force you to get a vaccine. But if you want to get up close and personal with strangers as part of your job, you might be required to be vaccinated. The mandates are not absolute, and if only 5% of the population remained unvaccinated, that would be great and everyone would be satisfied.

IF they said "You must be vaccinated if you want to fly" "go to a bar." Etc. Fine. But if someone is already at a low risk lifestyle...they should not be forced to bend the knee just to make everyone feel better or lose their job.

That is already the case, as I mentioned. Landscapers and farmers, etc. are not required to be vaccinated. It looks like you are complaining about mandates that don't exist and have no real chance of ever existing.

Even IF you get the entirety of humanity vaccinated today, Covid doesnt "fade away" it is here to stay.

That may be true. Even measles is still with us, but at a vastly reduced rate. There are occasional outbreaks of measles in communities that are reluctant to take the measles vaccine. If covid could be reduced to the level of measles, even though it is still with us, it would be great!

Nah, thanks but no thanks I have no desire to go to Minnesota,.

Actually I just heard on the news today that the town of Bemidji in the far North of Minnesota is paying folks up to $2500 to relocate there.

I wasnt declaring the risk of the vaccine is worse than the virus.

You were comparing the relative risks, saying that the risks of the vaccine are guaranteed, but they are not. The virus presents a much greater risk to the unvaccinated than the vaccine presents to the vaccinated. In short, you are better off vaccinated than not vaccinated, and so is the society around you, including those who are closest to you.

I was saying that IF you can still catch covid after receiving the shot...

It is true, you can catch covid after receiving the shot. But the chances of that happening are about 90% lower if you are vaccinated.

...you are risking the known side effects...

The known side effects are mostly a sore arm, perhaps some swelling and redness, and then the possibility of headaches, tiredness, chills, fever, and in some people, nausea. Of the people in my family that have taken the vaccine (2 doses plus a booster), the worst side effect was two days of fatigue. Now everyone in my family is fine. Even these side effects are only with some people. Many people have no side effects at all, other than a little soreness in the arm, which everyone gets for any shot whatsoever.

..while the long term effects are unknown...

I already address long term effects in a earlier post. To review, I said that the immediate need of saving lives means that we cannot wait forever to see what the very long term effects are. We already have almost 2 years of data. That is pretty long, don't you think? And there is the fact that vaccines in general have had a very good record of not producing long-term negative effects, considering that we have been vaccinating people for well over a century now.

But spread and infection are still possible (and as I said I believe lifestyle should be a far more concerning factor in society than vaccination status. A man like me that is PERFECTLY happy getting curbside groceries, going to work wearing many layers only to go home to my wife and cat... is NOT a huge threat to society IF my choice to wait until I roll up my sleeve to take the shot is by will, not because there is a figurative knee on my throat to make me comply.

Even before a vaccine was available in 2020, I was shopping for groceries inside the store after just one try with curbside pickup. It is really hard to get curbside pickup to choose just the right avocado for me.... But I went at 5:30 AM when the store was practically empty, just once a week, wearing two layers of mask, and kept my distance from anyone else in the store. Even now that I am vaccinated I do almost the same thing, except that I no longer restrict myself to 5:30 AM. But as to your worry, no, there is no chance with your lifestyle that you will be subjected to a vaccine mandate. I must compliment you on your mask wearing. Many people who reject the covid vaccine also reject wearing masks. So good for you!

If the end all be all is simply vaccination status we are in trouble because in risk assessment ALL factors must be considered, not just one.

That has in fact been done by people who have more data and resources to do just that.

 

[Job 33:6]

Sure it does. You claimed the vaccine is the equivalent of God sending help and if one doesn't take one that means they turned down the help that God provided.

Then I think you need to dial back saying God brought that rowboat that sank to them.

Maybe vaccines, or in more broad sense, the ability to use our brains to develop life saving technology, is a gift from God. Whereas the virus could be viewed as God's wrath, bringing justice to a sinful world.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

pharmaceuticals

def pharmacy

from Greek pharmakeia "a healing or harmful medicine, a healing or poisonous herb; a drug, poisonous potion; magic (potion), dye,

https://www.etymonline.com/word/pharmacy

so we see that it can be good and bad by definition

Revelation 22:15
For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

Revelation 21:8
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

sorcerer
sôr′sər-ər
noun

1. One who practices sorcery; a wizard.
2. Originally, one who casts lots; one who divines or interprets by the casting of lots; hence, one who uses magic arts in divination or for other ends; a wizard; an enchanter; a conjurer.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

When it is even PAUSIBLE that the very people that funded gain of function, the very process that could potentially create a virus such as this are the VERY same people demanding vaccinations. Why is that not reason for pause?

you might be on to something
found this

Axios also found that a disclosure in a pending scientific paper revealed four NIH scientists filed a provisional patent application for a “2019-nCoV vaccine.” A statement the NIH sent to Axios said that the scientists’ contribution to the vaccine was “creat[ing] stabilized coronavirus spike proteins for the development of vaccines against coronavirus.” Fauci was not among the four scientists named in the paper: Kizzmekia S. Corbett, Nianshuang Wang, Jason S. McLellan, and Barney S. Graham. While these four NIH scientists may receive royalties from the vaccine, federal law prevents their compensation from exceeding $150,000 a year

Does Anthony Fauci Own ‘Half the Patent’ for Moderna’s COVID Vaccine?

Fauci is the head of the NIH

 

[Job 33:6]

I didnt say you did call people ill-informed, it was a general statement towards how those that want to push the vaccine so hard as to mandate it... rather than mock, educate.

Those examples DO have restrictions BUT none of them have a mandate to do away with them entirely (like vaccine mandates want to sweepingly do away with the unvaccinayed.

IF they said "You must be vaccinated if you want to fly" "go to a bar." Etc. Fine. But if someone is already at a low risk lifestyle...they should not be forced to bend the knee just to make everyone feel better or lose their job.

Even IF you get the entirety of humanity vaccinated today, Covid doesnt "fade away" it is here to stay.

Nah, thanks but no thanks I have no desire to go to Minnesota,.

I wasnt declaring the risk of the vaccine is worse than the virus.

I was saying that IF you can still catch covid after recieving the shot to prevent catching/severity/spread but it does not prevent infection nor spread entirely you are risking the known side effects while the long term effects are unknown to ultimately prevent the possibility of severity. But spread and infection are still possible (and as I said I believe lifestyle should be a far more concerning factor in society than vaccination status. A man like me that is PERFECTLY happy getting curbside groceries, going to work wearing many layers only to go home to my wife and cat... is NOT a huge threat to society IF my choice to wait until I roll up my sleeve to take the shot is by will, not because there is a figurative knee on my throat to make me comply.

If the end all be all is simply vaccination status we are in trouble because in risk assessment ALL factors must be considered, not just one.

I think part of the problem is that many people will never actually choose to get vaccinated. And because of this, hundreds of thousands more Americans will die. And so people are upset by dying family members and hospitalizations, so they ask the government to push mandates.

And people think that social distancing and curbside groceries and all that is sufficient, but the truth is that many people don't actually care about such things and just go out anyway. For example, music concerts are becoming more common again. Many unvaccinated certainly would go cram in with countless people while simultaneously refusing vaccination. And these are the people that vaccine mandates are targeting.

Mandates and laws and regulations are always implemented because of the bad apples. Never because of the good apples. And that's for any area of regulation. Cops don't mandate speed limits because of the safe drivers, they mandate speed limits for all people because of the fewer bad apple dangerous drivers that endanger everyone else. And safe drivers ask cops to enforce these speed limit mandates because safe drivers see the bad apples ruining their daily commute. And it only takes 1 bad apple to screw up the flow of traffic for everyone else. And it only takes 1 bad apple to run over your grandpa. So put back into vaccine context and you're talking about thousands of bad apples where people A. Don't get vaccinated, and B. Also don't give a rats about social distancing, masking, etc.