Will you get vaccinated?

[QUOTE=JustTheDad;1644864853]Good post, and if you don't have any lasting side effects after a few weeks, you're good to go. We've never had a long term side effect show up months or years later even with the traditional vaccines like J&J's, and it's essentially impossible with the mRNA ones since they can't get into the cell nucleus.
I have wondered about people now refusing the vaccine because they are trying to be consistent with what they have said or done in the past. Kinda sad if that's really what's happening.[/QUOTE]

The reason they’re refusing is the trust factor.

Can’t fully trust media cuz they have fuked up in the past. Same with other institutions. The vaccine was rushed.

And then all the so called expert opinions on ********, Reddit and plumbers and electricians and friends.

Combine all that and you got a cocktail of negating info - that was my issue before I got vaxxed. So I decided to wait for a bit and after over 100mil had gotten it I went and got the fauci ouchie.

Another thing they don’t talk much about is that mRNA vaccine has been in the works for a very long time and due to the pandemic and chit loads of funds, resources and volunteers available, they rolled out the vaccine much faster. They should really talk about this in the media instead of trying to pay people and force them in other ways to get the vaccine

[QUOTE=Jtbny;1644856683]I never used the term anti-vax? I don't conflate those who don't get the c19 shot to that group of asshats. I understood the logic behind it when they first rolled out but now...I'm thinking many are just doubling down to double down.

I'm all for you or anyone making the choice you think is right for you. Me, I got the vax because I'm anti covid and was willing to take the chance. If that's not you - great. I'll live with my consequences if the vax fuks me up down the road while those who choose not to get it need to live with their choices.[/QUOTE]I couldn't agree more. I'm not anti shots (this is not a 'vaccine.') I am anti being blocked from information. I am anti being rushed. I am anti being coerced by government regarding getting the shots and exercising decisions about my own health.

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZxlMJUazIk&t=46s[/url]

I just had a friend send this to me. There is a part two. This Canadian doctor is discussing information that I had read about a couple weeks ago. Normally, shots like this take years to go through the process of FDA approval. But, Trump rushed this stuff out through Operation Warp Speed in an effort to get things opened up again. I understand his reasoning, I just would like more information.

If this additional information amuses a few amongst us, that's great.

[QUOTE=TryingBB;1644865403]The reason they’re refusing is the trust factor. [/QUOTE]

This. I'm not anti vaccines either, quite the contrary. My mom almost died of diphtheria as a child and one of her church friends had been disabled by polio so I grew up knowing these diseases were real and dangerous. I get my tetanus booster regularly because I do a lot of yard work and tetanus is deadly. These are all vaccines that have been around for longer than I've been alive, based on a well known principle so I feel confident with them. So calling me anti vaxxer simply makes me think that person is a complete moron, and as a rule I tend to not do what morons tell me to do.

One doesn't have to be a rabid political extremist to have figured out the media can't be trusted, the government can't be trusted and now we know the CDC can't be trusted. So how are you supposed to make an informed decision if you don't know if you are in fact informed?

And don't they realize that the more they try to force the vaccine on people, the less those people will trust them? I mean whoever got told "Do as I say or I'm gonna phuk you up real bad" and went "Oh finally someone I can trust. Please tell me more!"

[QUOTE=TryingBB;1644865403]Another thing they don’t talk much about is that mRNA vaccine has been in the works for a very long time and due to the pandemic and chit loads of funds, resources and volunteers available, they rolled out the vaccine much faster. [/QUOTE]

Oh, it's been talked about. It's never gotten past animal trials. It was bypassed this time around. That was part of the "warp speed".

Finally a number 20% reduction.....

[url]www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.16.21258817v1[/url]

"the median reduction in R associated with the wearing level observed in each region was 20.4% [2.0%, 23.3%]1.
We do not find evidence that mandating mask-wearing reduces transmission.
Our results suggest that mask-wearing is strongly affected by factors other than mandates."

[QUOTE=x-trainer ben;1644872183]Finally a number 20% reduction.....

[url]www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.16.21258817v1[/url]

"the median reduction in R associated with the wearing level observed in each region was 20.4% [2.0%, 23.3%]1.
We do not find evidence that mandating mask-wearing reduces transmission.
Our results suggest that mask-wearing is strongly affected by factors other than mandates."[/QUOTE]


Right on, thanks for posting ben

[QUOTE=sy2502;1644869623]This. I'm not anti vaccines either, quite the contrary. My mom almost died of diphtheria as a child and one of her church friends had been disabled by polio so I grew up knowing these diseases were real and dangerous. I get my tetanus booster regularly because I do a lot of yard work and tetanus is deadly. These are all vaccines that have been around for longer than I've been alive, based on a well known principle so I feel confident with them. So calling me anti vaxxer simply makes me think that person is a complete moron, and as a rule I tend to not do what morons tell me to do.

One doesn't have to be a rabid political extremist to have figured out the media can't be trusted, the government can't be trusted and now we know the CDC can't be trusted. So how are you supposed to make an informed decision if you don't know if you are in fact informed?

And don't they realize that the more they try to force the vaccine on people, the less those people will trust them? I mean whoever got told "Do as I say or I'm gonna phuk you up real bad" and went "Oh finally someone I can trust. Please tell me more!"[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Agreed with everything you've said. Not to mention the lack of food regulation of the FDA has allowed obesity, diabetes, cancer, and heart disease run amuck.

Coercion doesn't work. Great read -> [url]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7843207/[/url]

[QUOTE=sy2502;1644869623]This. I'm not anti vaccines either, quite the contrary. My mom almost died of diphtheria as a child and one of her church friends had been disabled by polio so I grew up knowing these diseases were real and dangerous. I get my tetanus booster regularly because I do a lot of yard work and tetanus is deadly. These are all vaccines that have been around for longer than I've been alive, based on a well known principle so I feel confident with them. So calling me anti vaxxer simply makes me think that person is a complete moron, and as a rule I tend to not do what morons tell me to do.

One doesn't have to be a rabid political extremist to have figured out the media can't be trusted, the government can't be trusted and now we know the CDC can't be trusted. So how are you supposed to make an informed decision if you don't know if you are in fact informed?

And don't they realize that the more they try to force the vaccine on people, the less those people will trust them? I mean whoever got told "Do as I say or I'm gonna phuk you up real bad" and went "Oh finally someone I can trust. Please tell me more!"[/QUOTE]

How do we know the CDC can't be trusted?

[QUOTE=TolerantLactose;1644871193]Oh, it's been talked about. It's never gotten past animal trials. It was bypassed this time around. That was part of the "warp speed".[/QUOTE]

Well, no. Not even close.

Pfizer and Moderna didn't skip animal trials.
What was done to speed things up, and it could be considered scary, is they ran the animal and human trials in parallel.
The lipid capsules had already been tested in animals, so the regulatory authorities all decided it was worth a small risk to run the animal studies with high doses at the same time as we tested the regular doses in humans, in order to get the vaccine vetted faster. Turned out they made the right call since there weren't any issues shown by the animal testing.

I'm curious though. Even Fox News coverage showed that the animal testing was done. In fact, Fox had a story about how the FDA required so many tests in such a short time that now we're having to invest in breeding more of the required monkeys.

When Fox, CNN, the WSJ, and the Associated Press all say it was done, it's hard to understand how you got convinced otherwise. Are you quoting us information provided by those plumbers and electricians you mentioned on Reddid? ;)

[img]https://i.imgur.com/hHC1b6y.jpg[/img]

State of Oregon calling in the National Guard, as Covid hospitalizations went up 10% in one day:

[b][url]https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/08/grim-news-of-soaring-covid-19-hospitalizations-prompts-governor-to-send-in-oregon-national-guard.html[/url][/b]

[QUOTE=IronCharles;1644900093]State of Oregon calling in the National Guard, as Covid hospitalizations went up 10% in one day:

[b][url]https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/08/grim-news-of-soaring-covid-19-hospitalizations-prompts-governor-to-send-in-oregon-national-guard.html[/url][/b][/QUOTE]

That helps pulling active guard members in needed fields of medicine from not busy hospitals to busy hospitals. There’s going to be a lot of rural areas needing this strategy.

[QUOTE=mgftp;1644879093]How do we know the CDC can't be trusted?[/QUOTE]

Well, if you haven’t noticed, they have made some insane predictions, and given asinine advice for protective measures. They say it’s safe at 6’ some places 3’ other places. It’s an airborne virus, I think we should not give distances and time limits for transmission. It requires being around active virus particles, there’s a lot of ways it can get to you. Didn’t the CDC (maybe it was a LHD) just retract a statement telling people parents should wear masks at home if they are not vaccinated?

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1644906163]Well, if you haven’t noticed, they have made some insane predictions, and given asinine advice for protective measures. They say it’s safe at 6’ some places 3’ other places. It’s an airborne virus, I think we should not give distances and time limits for transmission. It requires being around active virus particles, there’s a lot of ways it can get to you. Didn’t the CDC (maybe it was a LHD) just retract a statement telling people parents should wear masks at home if they are not vaccinated?[/QUOTE]

I haven't been paying close attention, that's why I asked. But even the things you are describing just seems like doing the best they can with the information they have which is constantly changing. Recommendations are recommendations and data is data. Have they been found be be sharing inaccurate data? I think to say they can't be trusted as if they are intentionally lying is a very far stretch unless I am missing something.

[QUOTE=mgftp;1644919063]I haven't been paying close attention, that's why I asked. But even the things you are describing just seems like doing the best they can with the information they have which is constantly changing. Recommendations are recommendations and data is data. Have they been found be be sharing inaccurate data? I think to say they can't be trusted as if they are intentionally lying is a very far stretch unless I am missing something.[/QUOTE]

The information they give changes more than it should, because they say too much stupid $hit, I seriously laugh at some of the recommendations. Response to an airborne virus is not new, and is something they and many other agencies conduct tabletop drills for. It’s been more about incompetence than nefarious actions, and to think the higher up appointments leading the agency, which are appointed political jobs, are not swayed by lobbyists and external forces is naive. I don’t think they are intentionally sharing inaccurate data, but they are not very forthcoming with all of the data they could share. Data is data, if good methods were used to establish it. I’ve been in various sector specific calls with the folks from the CDC, many have been helpful, but I’ve been embarrassed for them a bit too. It was especially interesting that they decided homeless people and prisoners should get vaccinated before critical infrastructure people who keep utilities like water, gas and electricity functioning, that doesn’t seem very logical for “the greater good”…

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1644922193]The information they give changes more than it should, because they say too much stupid $hit, I seriously laugh at some of the recommendations. Response to an airborne virus is not new, and is something they and many other agencies conduct tabletop drills for. It’s been more about incompetence than nefarious actions, and to think the higher up appointments leading the agency, which are appointed political jobs, are not swayed by lobbyists and external forces is naive. I don’t think they are intentionally sharing inaccurate data, but they are not very forthcoming with all of the data they could share. Data is data, if good methods were used to establish it. I’ve been in various sector specific calls with the folks from the CDC, many have been helpful, but I’ve been embarrassed for them a bit too. It was especially interesting that they decided homeless people and prisoners should get vaccinated before critical infrastructure people who keep utilities like water, gas and electricity functioning, that doesn’t seem very logical for “the greater good”…[/QUOTE]Well said

When you listen to the CDC spokesman they constantly repeat that in the face of new information we have modified or changed our recommendation. To me that sounds more than reasonable, but I would like to know if they are making chit up.

You can't tell people to change habits daily as the numbers come in but every 2 weeks seems reasonable to me.

[QUOTE=x-trainer ben;1644926493]When you listen to the CDC spokesman they constantly repeat that in the face of new information we have modified or changed our recommendation. To me that sounds more than reasonable, but I would like to know if they are making chit up.

You can't tell people to change habits daily as the numbers come in but every 2 weeks seems reasonable to me.[/QUOTE]

Just two weeks to flatten the curve, hang in there. We’re all in this together!

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1644935473]Just two weeks to flatten the curve, hang in there. We’re all in this together![/QUOTE]

Do you really see fault in that based upon the info they had and urgency to stop how rapid things were progressing?

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1644935473]Just two weeks to flatten the curve, hang in there. We’re all in this together![/QUOTE]

I know it is a big joke on here" 2 more weeks" but in all honestly too much info creates overload makes this stuff really confusing.
If you are not in the medical field, the average person gets confused.

6 ft or 12 ft
masks all the time or just around others
inside masks only or outside around others
which shot is best
hand sanitizer all the time or just special circumstances

it just goes on and on.

[QUOTE=mgftp;1644940593]Do you really see fault in that based upon the info they had and urgency to stop how rapid things were progressing?[/QUOTE]Do you see fault in them originally says masks won't help, then wear a mask, and finally, wear 2 masks? (That one fell flat on its face from the start, but hey, they tried...)

How do you "follow" the science when it changes every 3 days AND any science they disagree with is censored?

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1644935473]Just two weeks to flatten the curve, hang in there. We’re all in this together![/QUOTE]

From the beginning it made no sense. When the pandemic started the common sense said it wasn't going anywhere but then you read that and you believe it.

[QUOTE=mgftp;1644940593]Do you really see fault in that based upon the info they had and urgency to stop how rapid things were progressing?[/QUOTE]

Not at all, initially. However, it didn’t take long to determine who was most at risk, at the point the priorities should have been based on that knowledge.

[QUOTE=Cass40;1644942033]From the beginning it made no sense. When the pandemic started the common sense said it wasn't going anywhere but then you read that and you believe it.[/QUOTE]

I was concerned initially when it first got here, because I didn’t and trust China’s data. It made sense to try to see how things were going to progress, and try to keep from what happened in Italy happening here (plus it takes time to maximize space, get supplies etc.). We’ve been at the point for a loooong time that mitigation decisions should be made at the local level, which is how our entire public health system is designed.

[QUOTE=CommitmentRulz;1644941933]Do you see fault in them originally says masks won't help, then wear a mask, and finally, wear 2 masks? (That one fell flat on its face from the start, but hey, they tried...)

How do you "follow" the science when it changes every 3 days AND any science they disagree with is censored?[/QUOTE]

I haven’t seen the Faucster for awhile, don’t watch news etc, is he still rolling double masked or is that science no longer science?

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1644942823]I was concerned initially when it first got here, because I didn’t and trust China’s data. It made sense to try to see how things were going to progress, and try to keep from what happened in Italy happening here (plus it takes time to maximize space, get supplies etc.). We’ve been at the point for a loooong time that mitigation decisions should be made at the local level, which is how our entire public health system is designed.[/QUOTE]

Definitely local level because there's so much difference..let's say classrooms, some may be crowded and packed whereas others have more resources social distancing etc. so how can you just make a decisions for them whether they should mask or not not knowing any details about that specific situation, for instance.

[QUOTE=Cass40;1644943013]Definitely local level because there's so much difference..let's say classrooms, some may be crowded and packed whereas others have more resources social distancing etc. so how can you just make a decisions for them whether they should mask or not not knowing any details about that specific situation, for instance.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I’d say base it more on local positivity rates, hospital capacities etc rather than space for distancing, but for real that is the way public health is supposed to work. I saw a study the other day that looked legit (I think it was) that suggested masks were about 20% effective with a 95% confidence, in reducing transmission if everyone is wearing them correctly, all the time. That seems plausible.

Here’s a kicker though. We are going to a party tonight for a friend who works in the medical field. One of her coworkers who was admittedly antivax, caught covid the other day, after working in the hospital for the last 18 months, and was now urging her unvaxxed friends to get vaxxed. Evidently she’s bed ridden and miserable, but not hospitalized. That makes my brain hurt. How TF could she not have already been exposed. I’ll learn more about this tonight, it’s one of my wife’s friends.

Workers who have yet to be vaccinated against COVID-19 could soon be paying as much as $50 more per paycheck for health insurance as companies across the U.S. try to protect their employees — and themselves — from outbreaks of the disease.





[url]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccine-insurance-premiums/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=127678441[/url]

[QUOTE=mtpockets;1644944253]Workers who have yet to be vaccinated against COVID-19 could soon be paying as much as $50 more per paycheck for health insurance as companies across the U.S. try to protect their employees — and themselves — from outbreaks of the disease.

[url]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccine-insurance-premiums/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=127678441[/url][/QUOTE]

Meanwhile there is a flood of illegal immigrants infected with covid streaming across our open borders to get to a hospital ER for some good ol hospitality hospitalization.

[QUOTE=CommitmentRulz;1644941933]Do you see fault in them originally says masks won't help, then wear a mask, and finally, wear 2 masks? (That one fell flat on its face from the start, but hey, they tried...)

How do you "follow" the science when it changes every 3 days AND any science they disagree with is censored?[/QUOTE]

Sorry but this post just comes off as exaggeration fueled by anger.

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1644942433]Not at all, initially. However, it didn’t take long to determine who was most at risk, at the point the priorities should have been based on that knowledge.[/QUOTE]

And I felt they were, unless it's lost on me what you are referringing to? All I heard about was don't kill your grandma, and vaccines were only available to the most at risk early on.

Probably the biggest thing we could do in playing this differently is lock down our boarders early on when this popped up in China like some countries did. Most of those countries are in great shape, and things never got bad, some living life as normal today. It's tough at the time though, a certain group wants all the precautions and another group wants all the freedoms. And without clear necessary knowledge on what was going on I don't think we can blame Trump, the CDC, or anyone for their decisions early on. Seems like everyone is trying to create more problems where there aren't really in a situation where enough problems exist already. People chitting on the CDC and going as far as to say they can't just trusted for no credible reason I have seen just comes off as ridiculous. And listen I don't like any government body, I think almost every single one could do better, should have funding cut, etc, etc. But to act like the CDC is deceiving the public is we didn't land on the moon level stuff to me.

[QUOTE=mtpockets;1644944253]Workers who have yet to be vaccinated against COVID-19 could soon be paying as much as $50 more per paycheck for health insurance as companies across the U.S. try to protect their employees — and themselves — from outbreaks of the disease.





[url]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccine-insurance-premiums/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=127678441[/url][/QUOTE]

Good. If only we could do this type of thing for fat people, smokers, etc. as well.