Vaccine or not?

#12,101
#12,101
Bend the knee to them once and they’ll make you live on your knees from now on out.

Willfully ignoring natural immunity among those refusing the shots shows this is all about power not medicine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and hog88
#12,102
#12,102
LouderVol said:
What percentage of the VAERs reports are bs? According to the existing Covid logic, if 1.6% of deaths, and or 5.8% of hospitalizations on VAERs are true we should treat it very seriously.
Click to expand...

I'm not following you. What is covid logic?

VAERS is a passive reporting system, meaning it relies on individuals to send in reports of their experiences. Anyone can submit a report to VAERS, including parents and patients.
 
#12,103
#12,103
Septic said:
I'm not following you. What is covid logic?

VAERS is a passive reporting system, meaning it relies on individuals to send in reports of their experiences. Anyone can submit a report to VAERS, including parents and patients.
Click to expand...
I thought the process required follow up on reports to have them entered into the database? It’s a question not a statement.
 
#12,104
#12,104
BowlBrother85 said:
Not necessarily. An unvaccinated person probably doesn't take the threat of COVID seriously. Why would they worry about the threat to other people, if they have no fear of contraction for themselves?
Click to expand...
And the vaxxed has a false sense of security. Many believe they cant catch or pass it on, thanks to all the miss information out there. Pushed by many, up to the President.

If a person is protected by the vaccine, why should I be worried about my risk to them? Especially in the typical just passing each other circumstance. Everyone is ultimately responsible for their own safety. Any engagement with other humans has always brought some degree of risk. If you think the risk is too high, you do what you need to.

I will always respect private individuals making their own decisions regarding their own property, but if you are out in the world, you have accepted risk.
 
#12,105
#12,105
LouderVol said:
I will always respect private individuals making their own decisions regarding their own property, but if you are out in the world, you have accepted risk.
Click to expand...

This would have incredible implications if normalized. I'm really hoping the courts make a ruling like this actually because I want to test the electronic limiter for my car on the way down the interstate each morning.
 
#12,107
#12,107
BowlBrother85 said:
Yes, I did. There is no reason for an unvaccinated person to get tested consistently, if they have no fear of contracting the virus.
Click to expand...
Having fear of it, and respecting health concerns of other private individuals are different things, and not exclusive of each other.

I will be getting tested this weekend because I am about to go visit a family friend who has requested I get tested.

All we generally want is to be left alone to make our own health decisions. Testing, imo, isnt a health decision, and is a reasonable request of those who do fear it. The reasonableness has some limits, just due to testing taking time to get results back. Imo if you are worried about Covid you should want testing for everyone, regardless of vaccine status.
 
#12,108
#12,108
Wafflestomper said:
This would have incredible implications if normalized. I'm really hoping the courts make a ruling like this actually because I want to test the electronic limiter for my car on the way down the interstate each morning.
Click to expand...
You accept the risk there may be idiots on the road using Louder’s example. Using your example you choose to be an idiot in the road? 🤷‍♂️
 
#12,111
#12,111
LouderVol said:
All we generally want is to be left alone to make our own health decisions.
Click to expand...
When that decision can impact the health of others, it's not merely your own health decision. I will harken back to Jacobson v. Massachusetts, once again. A president can't issue such a mandate, but governors definitely can and have.
 
#12,112
#12,112
Septic said:
I'm not following you. What is covid logic?

VAERS is a passive reporting system, meaning it relies on individuals to send in reports of their experiences. Anyone can submit a report to VAERS, including parents and patients.
Click to expand...
Covid logic: The 1.6% CFR from Covid is unacceptable, so the government must lock us down and set requirements for participation in society.

So if that reasoning is applied to VAERs, ie reported vaccine caused deaths, if 1.6% of the reports are true regarding deaths it would be worth while to shut down the vaccines.

Because the government and health care industry refuse to give us hard metrics, surely we can use the metrics they have already applied.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ButchPlz
#12,113
#12,113
NorthDallas40 said:
You accept the risk there may be idiots on the road using Louder’s example. Using your example you choose to be an idiot in the road? 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...

I go to work really early and have never had an accident in my life so I've assessed the risk to myself and determined it to be acceptable. If others feel safer traveling 65 mph then they're welcome to do that.
 
#12,114
#12,114
Wafflestomper said:
This would have incredible implications if normalized. I'm really hoping the courts make a ruling like this actually because I want to test the electronic limiter for my car on the way down the interstate each morning.
Click to expand...
Test the limiter on a private drive. Problem solved.

I have supported the punishment, via civil suits, job loss, criminal charges, of people knowingly trying to spread Covid, or really any germs to other individuals. It's absolutely disgusting and probably criminal. Examples like the texas teacher getting in her masked students face.

Someone hanging out drinking a beer at their own table is not knowingly spreading anything to anyone not directly engaging with them, hence no harm or foul.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#12,115
#12,115
Wafflestomper said:
I go to work really early and have never had an accident in my life so I've assessed the risk to myself and determined it to be acceptable. If others feel safer traveling 65 mph then they're welcome to do that.
Click to expand...
Well ok then. Thanks for confirming my analysis of the two examples?
 
#12,116
#12,116
BowlBrother85 said:
When that decision can impact the health of others, it's not merely your own health decision. I will harken back to Jacobson v. Massachusetts, once again. A president can't issue such a mandate, but governors definitely can and have.
Click to expand...
Having the power to take such action doesn’t outweigh the common sense to know better not to.
 
#12,117
#12,117
I'm still waiting on BowlBrother here to pick out the highly vaccinated states from my datasets with 100% accuracy.
 
#12,118
#12,118
LouderVol said:
Test the limiter on a private drive. Problem solved.

I have supported the punishment, via civil suits, job loss, criminal charges, of people knowingly trying to spread Covid, or really any germs to other individuals. It's absolutely disgusting and probably criminal. Examples like the texas teacher getting in her masked students face.

Someone hanging out drinking a beer at their own table is not knowingly spreading anything to anyone not directly engaging with them, hence no harm or foul.
Click to expand...

Driving at high speeds isn't knowingly trying to injure anyone either, so this isn't a refutation to that analogy if that's what you were intending it to be.
 
#12,121
#12,121
Wafflestomper said:
So, if we're to reverse it then, people not taking precautions during covid (e.g., large gatherings and no distancing or whatever) would be idiots?
Click to expand...
Nope. Your analogy is ridiculously horrible. I don’t have a right to speed. I do have a right to say what goes into my body. My body my choice right?
 
#12,122
#12,122
NorthDallas40 said:
Nope. Your analogy is ridiculously horrible. I don’t have a right to speed. I do have a right to say what goes into my body. My body my choice right?
Click to expand...

I didn't disagree with that. What's wrong with the analogy, other than its implications are inconvenient?

Edit: to clarify, there would be no illegal speeding if we normalize the my body/my property, my choice philosophy.
 
Last edited:
#12,123
#12,123
  • Like
Reactions: DynaLo and kiddiedoc
#12,124
#12,124
Wafflestomper said:
I didn't disagree with that. What's wrong with the analogy, other than its implications are inconvenient?
Click to expand...
I thought I explained that. Louder is saying the world isn’t a safe place and you accept that when you walk out the door. You’re desperately trying to hedge that acceptance by giving the state powers they shouldn’t have for some illusion they can make things safer. They can’t
 
#12,125
#12,125
McDad said:
Your link from NebraskaMed is a promotional piece for vaccination.
Click to expand...
It also contrasts many other actual medical studies that show that natural immunity is better than vaccinated immunity. It's basically just more lies and propaganda.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top