COVID-19 (Aka China Virus)

[busdriver]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html

Pretty good visualizations and whatnot on there.

[Guest LumberjackAxe]

I’m a cheap bastard and can’t get past that paywall. 

[busdriver]

26 minutes ago, LumberjackAxe said:

I’m a cheap bastard and can’t get past that paywall. 

Weird.  I don't have a subscription to the times.  Maybe just try googling "new york times covid"

[Danger41]

What I would love to see from the Government is using this pandemic as a catalyst to address the obesity and general health in this country. Show how the comorbidities make this so much worse and push healthy lifestyle. Vaccines are fine but that shouldn’t be the only thing. 
 

I will get nuked by the libertarians here but I would gladly pay more in taxes for healthier school lunches/all food in schools, subsidized organic food production and distribution to drive down cost, and some kind of fitness voucher or something like that. To me, this has shown that much of this country would literally rather die than being told to lose weight.

[uhhello]

2 hours ago, LumberjackAxe said:

I’m a cheap bastard and can’t get past that paywall. 

Icognito window on google chrome

[Lord Ratner]

10 hours ago, pawnman said:

Take it up with SECDEF.

They've already kicked one person for refusing the vaccine and mask.  I'm pretty sure there's about to be a bunch more.

I'll be cheering each and every one.

I'm not sure this sounds the same in your head as it does to the rest of us. I'm vaccinated and you sound like a twat.

[Negatory]

I’ve definitely been a pro-vax advocate on this forum, but I’ve been digging into some of the natural immunity studies that have been linked. Another one was just released in preprint that shows that natural immunity is 7-13 times more effective than 2 dose Pfizer:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1 

[gearhog]

3 hours ago, Negatory said:

I’ve definitely been a pro-vax advocate on this forum, but I’ve been digging into some of the natural immunity studies that have been linked. Another one was just released in preprint that shows that natural immunity is 7-13 times more effective than 2 dose Pfizer:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1 

Keep pulling that thread, brother. See where it takes you.

Edited September 5, 2021 by torqued

[Lord Ratner]

3 hours ago, Negatory said:

I’ve definitely been a pro-vax advocate on this forum, but I’ve been digging into some of the natural immunity studies that have been linked. Another one was just released in preprint that shows that natural immunity is 7-13 times more effective than 2 dose Pfizer:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1 

Which in no way takes away from the success of the vaccine.

But it sure does remove legitimacy from the very aggressive push for mandatory vaccination in a wide range of career fields (like airline pilot and military).

And now we are already talking about booster shots, after less than a year. I suspect many will want those to be mandatory as well.

I'm a big science advocate, but I've never heard of a single medical research subject being mastered to the point of directing legally compelled participation in less than a year. There's no such thing as experts on new diseases, and COVID 19 is still very new. It's not a coincidence that overwhelmingly the "pro-vax" people are democrats and the "anti-vax" people are republican. Like everything else in the modern world of social media and 24-hour news, it's about what team you're on, not facts.

Edited September 5, 2021 by Lord Ratner

[HeloDude]

Here’s an honest question for the pro-big government types on here:

Now that military members are being forced to take a covid shot (or risk the negative consequences if no approved waiver), why then isn’t the military mandating members take the Pfizer vaccine vs taking the Moderna or JJ?  According to big-government, Pfizer is more effective than JJ, so why give someone the option of taking a less effective shot that isn’t even the one fully approved by the FDA?  If the entire reason for the mandated vaccine is that it protects us, why wouldn’t the DoD want us to take the best one?

[pawnman]

1 hour ago, HeloDude said:

Here’s an honest question for the pro-big government types on here:

Now that military members are being forced to take a covid shot (or risk the negative consequences if no approved waiver), why then isn’t the military mandating members take the Pfizer vaccine vs taking the Moderna or JJ?  According to big-government, Pfizer is more effective than JJ, so why give someone the option of taking a less effective shot that isn’t even the one fully approved by the FDA?  If the entire reason for the mandated vaccine is that it protects us, why wouldn’t the DoD want us to take the best one?

Pfizer is the only one you ARE mandated to take.  The others are still under an EUA (remember when no one was going to take an unapproved vaccine?).  

[TheNewGazmo]

Pfizer is the only one you ARE mandated to take.  The others are still under an EUA (remember when no one was going to take an unapproved vaccine?).  

However, all of them count. If you have gotten the Moderna or J&J, all you need to do is show your clinic your vaccine card and they will add it to your military shot record.

[Guest LumberjackAxe]

I view vaccine mandates the same as drug use and testing. A company is completely within their rights as a private company to randomly test employees for liver enzymes to detect excessive alcohol consumption, and fire you if you drink too much. There’s nothing illegal about drinking a lot, and there’s nothing illegal about them firing you for drinking a lot. If you think that’s bullshit, then you choose to work somewhere else.
 

Same thing with vaccine mandate. There’s nothing illegal about staying unvaccinated, and there’s nothing illegal about companies firing you for choosing to be unvaccinated. If you think that’s bullshit, then you choose to work somewhere else. 
 

what about the military where we don’t have a choice? Well, I’m kind of split on this one, I can totally see both sides but I think I’m more on the side of being okay with mandatory vaccinations for reasons relating to the aforementioned example of a COVID outbreak on a nuclear sub hindering the mission, but I could be persuaded. 

[Negatory]

3 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Which in no way takes away from the success of the vaccine.

But it sure does remove legitimacy from the very aggressive push for mandatory vaccination in a wide range of career fields (like airline pilot and military).

And now we are already talking about booster shots, after less than a year. I suspect many will want those to be mandatory as well.

I'm a big science advocate, but I've never heard of a single medical research subject being mastered to the point of directing legally compelled participation in less than a year. There's no such thing as experts on new diseases, and COVID 19 is still very new. It's not a coincidence that overwhelmingly the "pro-vax" people are democrats and the "anti-vax" people are republican. Like everything else in the modern world of social media and 24-hour news, it's about what team you're on, not facts.

I really only see it affecting my views on policy implementation. I think I am still in support of immunity for everyone. I’m fine with mandatory vaccines for folks that haven’t had COVID. But it doesn’t really pass the common sense test to force folks that have had COVID to get vaccinated if they already have pretty great immunity.

Yes, I saw the study that shows that folks that previously had COVID that got vaccinated did better than folks that had COVID that weren’t vaccinated. But at what point is someone safe enough? If they already have better immunity than just the shot, do they need super double plus immunity just so everyone has had the vaccine?

It’s seems to be more about compliance than efficacy.

[Negatory]

2 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Here’s an honest question for the pro-big government types on here:

Now that military members are being forced to take a covid shot (or risk the negative consequences if no approved waiver), why then isn’t the military mandating members take the Pfizer vaccine vs taking the Moderna or JJ?  According to big-government, Pfizer is more effective than JJ, so why give someone the option of taking a less effective shot that isn’t even the one fully approved by the FDA?  If the entire reason for the mandated vaccine is that it protects us, why wouldn’t the DoD want us to take the best one?

As @pawnman said, they did exactly what you were complaining about here. Pfizer is the only one mandated - check the memo.

This sort of arguing with half truths is why a lot of these discussions go nowhere. You asking the question the way you did is easily construed as misinformation. You didn’t ask “is Pfizer mandated?” You asked why “isn’t the military mandating members to take the Pfizer vaccine” as if you looked it up, found out they weren’t, and then brought new information to this forum. But 10 seconds of your own research would have shown that is exactly what happened.

If you’re trying to say that we should be arguing that if you got Moderna it shouldn’t count and you should be forced to get Pfizer, you’re creating a nothing burger argument that no one is going to bite off on. I think we can all agree that the military allowing Moderna/JJ to count is in everyone’s best interest, as the research so far shows that there is no reason to believe they are significantly less effective - they just haven’t finished the FDA process yet.

On a completely different note, this pandemic has highlighted that much of these efforts overwhelmingly support the obese and those who choose to be unhealthy. Just as I think that unvaccinated folks that get very ill with Covid chose their fate, to the extent that they could have been protected and weren’t, I believe the same for those that are extremely out of shape. I hope that at some point we have an honest look at improving that elephant in the room.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/78-of-covid-19-patients-hospitalized-in-the-us-overweight-or-obese-cdc-finds.html

Edited September 5, 2021 by Negatory

[FLEA]

28 minutes ago, Negatory said:

I really only see it affecting my views on policy implementation. I think I am still in support of immunity for everyone. I’m fine with mandatory vaccines for folks that haven’t had COVID. But it doesn’t really pass the common sense test to force folks that have had COVID to get vaccinated if they already have pretty great immunity.

Yes, I saw the study that shows that folks that previously had COVID that got vaccinated did better than folks that had COVID that weren’t vaccinated. But at what point is someone safe enough? If they already have better immunity than just the shot, do they need super double plus immunity just so everyone has had the vaccine?

It’s seems to be more about compliance than efficacy.

Furthermore they are directing a medical procedure without being able to demonstrate medical neccesity. This is potentially in violation of most health ethics. 

[pawnman]

12 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Furthermore they are directing a medical procedure without being able to demonstrate medical neccesity. This is potentially in violation of most health ethics. 

Do you feel the same about all the other vaccines you got?

I mean...when was the last time an American died of polio...does that mean we shouldn't be mandating polio vaccines for kids to go to school?

[busdriver]

Mandatory vaccines for military is a readiness thing, not to protect us. When all of your crew chiefs go on a two COVID vacation, it screws up training.

All of our vaccines are about keeping the force viable to fight.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Negatory]

I think we’re all talking past each other a little bit. If natural infection results in immunity comparable to or better than vaccination, why do those folks need to be vaccinated? So that they are extra super resistant to the virus?

[Guardian]

Maybe we should start a 3rd chat stream on the topic to clear it up.

[HeloDude]

11 minutes ago, Negatory said:

I think we’re all talking past each other a little bit. If natural infection results in immunity comparable to or better than vaccination, why do those folks need to be vaccinated? So that they are extra super resistant to the virus?

You’re missing my question, and it’s a simple one:  If only one vaccine is approved outside of emergency use, and if it’s more effective than the others, then why not just mandate that everyone gets the best one and the one that has final/full approval?

Edited September 5, 2021 by HeloDude

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, Negatory said:

It’s seems to be more about compliance than efficacy.

Shack. You've hit precisely on why I'm so opposed to what .gov has been doing for a year and a half now. If this was really about "the science" we'd be doing things a lot differently. 

This is a battle between political ideologies. Primarily, the modern leftist movement (more collectivist than the classically liberal left of the 1900's) views this as an opportunity to prove that collective compliance will yield superior outcomes over decentralization and individualism. Thus the outage over republican states choosing different prevention strategies despite no correlation between lockdown policies and long term spread. 

 

Since they were unable to secure national uniformity on masking and lockdown policy, vaccination is the final opportunity to "pull together" and validate the merit of centralized (federal) control. If infection-based immunity is a part of the solution, then the eventual goal (herd immunity "beating" the disease) will have been obtained through means not directly guided by the government. 

 

For the political left, COVID was an opportunity to finally justify the abolishment of states' rights, a long held goal of progressives. 

[Negatory]

3 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

You’re missing my question, and it’s a simple one:  If only one vaccine is approved outside of emergency use, and if it’s more effective than the others, then why not just mandate that everyone gets the best one and the one that has final/full approval?

They did. They just allowed very common sense, agreeable exceptions for Moderna/JJ. If you seriously want to argue that that is bad policy then you are intentionally being obtuse.

I guarantee you would be more upset if they said that everyone including those that got Moderna/JJ had to get revaccinated. The science shows no reason for that. You’re making up an argument that no one is arguing.

[Lord Ratner]

13 minutes ago, Negatory said:

I think we’re all talking past each other a little bit. If natural infection results in immunity comparable to or better than vaccination, why do those folks need to be vaccinated? So that they are extra super resistant to the virus?

For the same reason the vaccinated are being told to wear masks. The leadership knows they can't easily discriminate between vaccinated and unvaccinated, so unvaccinated people will be able to get by not wearing masks. This is intolerable to the power hungry, so everyone wears masks.

 

They are, however, smart enough to realize that if the vaccinated were told the truth, that they were forced to wear masks because the unvaccinated were breaking the rules, they would never go along with it. So instead we're subjected to wild exaggerations and logical fallacies about disease transmission amongst the vaccinated.

 

It always shuffles back to the same unanswered question. If the vaccinated are largely protected from the disease, and everybody has had a chance to be vaccinated, and the unvaccinated are not asking anybody to do anything to protect them, why exactly are masks still mandatory?

 

And overloading the hospitals is no longer a relevant argument. It's been 18 months and trillions of dollars spent. If the hospitals haven't been built out to handle this disease, they never will be.

[HeloDude]

1 minute ago, Negatory said:

They did. They just allowed very common sense, agreeable exceptions for Moderna/JJ. If you seriously want to argue that that is bad policy then you are intentionally being obtuse.

I guarantee you would be more upset if they said that everyone including those that got Moderna/JJ had to get revaccinated. The science shows no reason for that. You’re making up an argument that no one is arguing.

I’m literally asking this simple question that you still haven’t answered:  If Pfizer is the only one that is currently FDA approved and is the most effective, then why now allow people to still choose?  Why not just say anyone who hasn’t had the shot must get Pfizer, since it’s fully approved and offers the best protection?