Vaccine or not?

#18,302
#18,302
C-south said:
To what end? Masks don’t work. The vaccine doesn’t work. I guess it’s all about optics and feelings with people like you and luther.
Click to expand...

Wtf does this have to do with feelings? And I've been straightforward on this board that I don't mask unless required or requested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#18,304
#18,304
AshG said:
But being minorly inconvenienced is completely anti-American! Your sovereign self has been completely infringed upon!
Click to expand...
Would you say the health care providers who have lost or are about to lose their jobs or privileges are being more than "minorly inconvenienced?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: ButchPlz
#18,305
#18,305
kiddiedoc said:
Would you say the health care providers who have lost or are about to lose their jobs or privileges are being more than "minorly inconvenienced?"
Click to expand...

I was replying sarcastically to Luther.

As I've been reminded here several times, business is business whoever is in charge is right even if they're wrong. I didn't get a memo that the rules had changed.
 
#18,306
#18,306
BigOrangeTrain said:
Then why are the people you put so much trust in, the CDC, Fauci and others keep pushing the fear narrative of being unvaccinated?
Click to expand...
Because they understand that the more who are vaccinated, the better off we become.

It was all very much an unknown, and still is to a degree.
I view it like this.

If a cat 5 hurricane is predicted for your area, you should board up your windows and head elsewhere. That in no way means that if you board up your windows your house will not be damaged or even destroyed. It in no way means that if you don't board up your windows that your house will be damaged or destroyed. It doesn't mean that if you choose not to evacuate you will be killed. It in no ways guarantees that if you do evacuate you will not be killed in a car accident that you otherwise would have avoided.
I view boarding up your windows sort of like wearing a mask.
I view evacuations sort of like vaccinations.
When it's a cat 2, evacuations will be recommended.
When it's a cat 3, evacuations will be strongly encouraged.
When it's a cat 5, evacuations will be mandatory. If you choose to stay, it's at your own risk and you should not expect assistance when you find yourself in need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohhbother
#18,307
#18,307
My apologies for stepping out of line. I will better measure the consequences of stepping outside of conservative groupthink before responding to Luther again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HammondB3Vol
#18,308
#18,308
kiddiedoc said:
Would you say the health care providers who have lost or are about to lose their jobs or privileges are being more than "minorly inconvenienced?"
Click to expand...
I would say they should get the vaccination.
Some employers require background checks. What if you think that is an invasion of your privacy and therefor will not comply? Are you being minorly inconvenienced? Majorly inconvenienced? Principled? Stupid?
My employer requires several things I find unnecessary, irritating, intrusive, etc...I get to decide if it rises to the level of me choosing to find employment elsewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohhbother
#18,309
#18,309
AshG said:
I was replying sarcastically to Luther.

As I've been reminded here several times, business is business whoever is in charge is right even if they're wrong. I didn't get a memo that the rules had changed.
Click to expand...

You literally never actually respond when called out on your bullsh** posts, just deflect deflect deflect. Grow some nuts 👍
 
#18,310
#18,310
AshG said:
My apologies for stepping out of line. I will better measure the consequences of stepping outside of conservative groupthink before responding to Luther again.
Click to expand...

So dramatic…if there were ever a thread in this forum that lacks group think, it’s this one. A wide variety of positions and opinions.
 
#18,311
#18,311
615vols said:
You literally never actually respond when called out on your bullsh** posts, just deflect deflect deflect. Grow some nuts 👍
Click to expand...

Ok, ok... You're right.

Inconvenience is relative. What is a minor inconvenience to one person is a major inconvenience to another. As a physically disabled, mobility limited, neurodivergent individual, I see things through a different lens of experience than others. I spend a significant portion of time either making sure that my issues don't become a hindrance to others or dealing with a world that was not set up to work in concert with my exceptionalities.

So, yeah. I see many things that people whine about as being far less of an issue because my minor inconveniences require more energy and ingenuity to overcome than what they consider major inconveniences. My perspective, such that it is.
 
#18,312
#18,312
luthervol said:
I would say they should get the vaccination.
Some employers require background checks. What if you think that is an invasion of your privacy and therefor will not comply? Are you being minorly inconvenienced? Majorly inconvenienced? Principled? Stupid?
My employer requires several things I find unnecessary, irritating, intrusive, etc...I get to decide if it rises to the level of me choosing to find employment elsewhere.
Click to expand...
You just keep digging deeper and deeper into your steaming pile of crap. What background checks pose a risk of physical harm to the individual?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#18,313
#18,313
(PDF) Innate Immune Suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes and microRNAs


A few "minor inconveniences:"
We also identify potential profound disturbances in regulatory control of protein synthesis and cancer surveillance. These disturbances are shown to have a potentially direct causal link to neurodegenerative disease, myocarditis, immune thrombocytopenia, Bell’s palsy, liver disease, impaired adaptive immunity, increased tumorigenesis, and DNA damage
Click to expand...
 
#18,314
#18,314
kiddiedoc said:
You just keep digging deeper and deeper into your steaming pile of crap. What background checks pose a risk of physical harm to the individual?
Click to expand...
What does that have to do with anything? I thought the conversation was about an employer having a requirement for employment that an employee may not agree with......for whatever reason.
 
#18,315
#18,315
luthervol said:
What does that have to do with anything? I thought the conversation was about an employer having a requirement for employment that an employee may not agree with......for whatever reason.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. It's about a government mandating that people undergo an invasive medical treatment with known risks.
 
#18,316
#18,316
kiddiedoc said:
Incorrect. It's about a government mandating that people undergo an invasive medical treatment with known risks.
Click to expand...
Aren't flu shots required by some and do they not carry risks?
Aren't certain childhood immunizations required and do they not carry risks?
Aren't there certain immunizations required in the military and do they not carry risks?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohhbother
#18,318
#18,318
luthervol said:
Aren't flu shots required by some and do they not carry risks?
Aren't certain childhood immunizations required and do they not carry risks?
Aren't there certain immunizations required in the military and do they not carry risks?
Click to expand...
A) none of the above have NEARLY the risk of adverse events, and all have a long track record of safety without risks of malignancy, alteration of the immune system, or reproductive cycle changes
B) all of the above are FDA approved and the manufacturers are liable for damages
C) forcing an experimental treatment is a bioethical violation
D) the EUA, by definition, should be immediately revoked -- as there are available treatments AND an FDA-approved vaccine available
 
#18,319
#18,319
kiddiedoc said:
(PDF) Innate Immune Suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes and microRNAs


A few "minor inconveniences:"
Click to expand...

Isn’t Peter McCullough the Fox News guy who said vaccines didn’t work at all against Delta even after it was clear that wasn’t true and also got sued by his former University for using their letterhead after he quit/got fired?

Has he revised that opinion or are these conclusions that the Covid 19 vaccines are not positive contributors to public health influenced by it?

Also, you never answered. Which of these statements is true:

A) It is false [that there would be less cases of Covid-19 if everyone were vaccinated.]
B) The risk of hospitalization and death would be reduced for only the old and those with multiple co-morbidities [as a result of complete vaccination of those eligible.]
C) Healthy, younger people don't need the jab. D) The jab put unneeded risk on healthy, younger people.
E) “The jab” serves zero purpose for healthy younger people.
F) These "vaccines" should be treated just like the flu shot and when sanity once again reigns supreme in our medical community the COVID shot will only be recommended for those that are already knocking on deaths door.
G) Only a total moron would recommend this therapeutic to a child, teen, or healthy young adult.

Thanks in advance.
 
#18,322
#18,322
RockyTop85 said:
Isn’t Peter McCullough the Fox News guy who said vaccines didn’t work at all against Delta even after it was clear that wasn’t true and also got sued by his former University for using their letterhead after he quit/got fired?

Has he revised that opinion or are these conclusions that the Covid 19 vaccines are not positive contributors to public health influenced by it?

Also, you never answered. Which of these statements is true:

A) It is false [that there would be less cases of Covid-19 if everyone were vaccinated.]
B) The risk of hospitalization and death would be reduced for only the old and those with multiple co-morbidities [as a result of complete vaccination of those eligible.]
C) Healthy, younger people don't need the jab. D) The jab put unneeded risk on healthy, younger people.
E) “The jab” serves zero purpose for healthy younger people.
F) These "vaccines" should be treated just like the flu shot and when sanity once again reigns supreme in our medical community the COVID shot will only be recommended for those that are already knocking on deaths door.
G) Only a total moron would recommend this therapeutic to a child, teen, or healthy young adult.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

I don't know of any connection between Dr. McCullough (or the other authors) and Fox News. I do know that he has been a proponent of early, affordable treatment and has serious concerns about vaccine safety.

As for the list, I would generally agree with all of those statements.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top