I don’t know enough about nor have I done enough research to comment on death statistics and the reasons for them but I do know that 33 years ago my sister died of cervical cancer and the death certificate listed cardiac arrest as the cause. No, she died because cancer depleted her organ function so maybe they finally fixed that nonsense and say what actually instigated the death in the first place. They did the same with AIDS patients…died of pneumonia listed on the certificate but it certainly started with HIV crushing their immune systems.
Death is death and if we know that 600,000 more people died last year then the year before then you tell me why that occurred if not by covid related issues.
Sometimes the pure ignorance of people is offensive.
My mother died of cancer almost three years ago and her death certificate lists her death as "natural causes."
Sorry for your loss as well….like the queen said about her recently departed husband… “grief is the price we pay for love”, so very true. She’s around and you’ll see her again…
5,522 people have died within 28 days of having a Covid-19 Vaccine in Scotland according to Public Health Scotland
According to the spreadsheet provided by Public Health Scotland; which includes the quantity of deaths by type of vaccine and the date they occurred, 1,877 deaths have been due to the Pfizer mRNA jab, 3,643 deaths have been due to the AstraZeneca viral vector jab, and 2 deaths have been due to the Moderna mRNA jab.
This equates to an average of 920 deaths occurring every month due to the Covid-19 vaccines in Scotland alone. Outnumbering the average number of people who have died of Covid-19 in Scotland by 866 per month.
Also, closer to home... The number was 6,000 last week.
Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 338 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 19, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 12,313 reports of death (0.0036%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths.
This is the classic correlation, not causation situation. From what is here, you can not declare that the cause of death within 28 days was the vaccine. People die all the time, every day. Scotland's vax rate is over 50%. So comparing deaths of vaccinated people to COVID 19 deaths (which this paper did), is the very definition of misinformation. It's misleading, unclear and leads people to draw unsubstantiated conclusions.
Were I the moderator, I would take down this post or at least mark it as misinformation. @gvn2fly1421 - this is a serious question. Do you critically think about what you post before you post it, or are you just grabbing links? How could you think this isn't misleading?
And you see no problem with how covid deaths were counted, correct? 30-60 days after a positive test if you passed away it was counted as a covid death. You see no issue with that, yet would like to label the links above as misinformation? I posted numerous links of gunshot victims, motorcycle crashes, etc. all counted as covid deaths, yet you are ok with that because it fits the narrative your party would like it to fit.
Okay so you're arguing that COVID isn't dangerous, and the path to that argument is spreading other misinformation. Do I have that right?
For me, obviously one of the vaccine hesitant, I am arguing that there is a risk for me either way, catching the virus or getting the vaccine. Now, I feel both of those risks would be small to me, considering I am a relatively healthy under 40 male. I have chosen to forgo the vaccine until we have some real, long term data showing me that the vaccine is truly "safe and effective".
Imagine with me something so "safe and effective" that we have to be told over and over again how safe and effective it is. The safety is obviously up in the air with all the side effects and possible death related to it, and the effectiveness is questionable as well seeing as how all of these people are catching the virus and still spreading it and still having their lives disrupted.
And because I have been here numerous times on this board, I know what comes next... But the vaccine will reduce the symptoms of covid. Right, the same virus that most people do not even know they have. Those symptoms. Again, I think most on this board think if you get covid you are either going to the hospital for an extended trip or going to die, both of which are so low odds of happening, let's say the same chance of having something bad happen when taking the vaccine, that I personally would rather take my chance with the virus.
I honestly do not see why my stance is so controversial to the point of being called names. And also, imagine wanting to be the keeper of what data/information gets published and what doesn't... Yikes, now that is scary...
Hello There!
Hopefully it doesn't caption all of the quotes here.. just your recent one. I have a few questions and comments about you. Before we go there, I haven't read other threads so if people are mocking you or insulting you, then that's not cool in my opinion... but at the same time I can understand where they may be coming from (I'll get to that later)
If I understand you correctly... you want to wait until there is more information or proof, then you may consider the vaccine. At the same time, you also don't believe the virus is dangerous enough and so you'll risk getting it as you are young and healthy.
Biggest question I would ask you is this: Will you continue to follow the three pillars of prevention as I call them: 1: Sanitize 2: Mask 3: Distance ?? Will you continue to do those things? That's the most important thing I want to know from you.
Next question is: What is your threshold of proof? Like at what point would you say "OK, I'm sold, vaccine works." And I would mention that from what I understand in USA in particular is that you have an abundance of people contracting the virus and some being hospitalized, all of whom are un-vaccinated. Like, does that concrete information register enough to sway you towards getting the vaccine? Perhaps you will pounce on my word "all." Ok, call it, 98%, 95%. Still very, very high.
A point I would like to mention with regards to what you said about risk. Getting COVID and getting the vaccine both do come with risks, yes. My arm was sore for a couple days. I know some people who were sick for a day or so. Friend of mine couldn't sleep because of 'chills' from the vaccine. My understanding is that getting the virus is much more risky than getting the vaccine. Girl at work was sick for a month. Family member hospitalized for a week. Family members of friends literally died. But the other thing and this goes to my first question, do you understand that the difference between the two 'risks' here is that while both affect you personally, the other could affect other people you come into contact with? Granted, the risk is low to contract.. but I mean... lots of dead people, lots of sick people, businesses done, industries in the toilet... etc. etc.
Final thought here... life amongst other people is all about trust. If you drive on the road, you're putting your life in other people's hands. You've never met them. You don't know how 'trained' they are at driving... but I bet you still drive. Ever been on a plane? Literally flying thousands of feet in the air in a tin can. Did you meet the pilot? Verify his/her credentials? Double check the schools he/she went to? You see where I'm going. There is a consensus amongst the scientific, medical, and yes political community that agrees the vaccines are safe. To suggest that we're all wrong, and that a small few are correct... it begs the question, why?
To give you an idea why your stance is controversial is because for starters is does go against the majority... which isn't necessarily to say it's absolutely correct but look at what we're talking about here. A vaccination against a deadly virus. A person voluntarily not wanting to get it is obviously going to cause controversy because it doesn't make a lot of sense to said majority.
Since you took the time to write out this post, I will take the time to respond.
To your first point, that is correct. There are so many unknowns currently around this thing I could not imagine taking it now, seeing as how I haven't already. Take the post right below yours from Kat, they are now saying if you took the J&J vaccine, a booster from Pfizer and Moderna may be needed. So let's say I was considering the J&J, is that telling me that when I get the J&J I might as well schedule my booster for one of the mRNA's as well? And, if I was considering the Pfizer or Moderna, should I go ahead and plan for three shots knowing the first two might not be that effective? Does that make sense? And yes, I do not feel that looking at the data and yes I know there are outliers, my demographic doesn't carry a great risk from the virus. But let's say the virus continues to mutate, which I have read actually weakens the severity but I digress, and years from now actually have some true data on the vaccines, then I will consider it at that time.
As someone who is vaccinated, does it worry you that you may be taking shots every 6-8 months?
As far as your pillars of prevention, I do not really do any of those things. Not sure why that is the most important piece of info you want from me, but there is your answer.
As far as what burden of proof I need to take the vaccine, I honestly have no idea.
One thing that has always gotten to me, and one of the arguments made here is how I can infect other people. As I have stated, the only immediate people of concern to me are my parents, both mid 60's and both who have passed on the vaccine as well. We all understand the risks associated with it at this point, correct? And if the vaccine is as good as you and the experts say it is, why are you worried about me? Now I know the answer that some will give, but in people like me it is going to mutate therefore making my vaccine less effective. Maybe. Maybe not. It seems the vaccinated catch, carry, and transmit the virus as it is, so can it not mutate in them as well?
Everything has risks, yes. Catching covid carries a risk. Getting the vaccine carries a risk. Not sure where we are going there.
Honestly, I am here because I feel like this board thinks everyone who is unvaccinated walks around daily with MAGA hats on flags waving on the back of their truck. I am not that. Yes, I voted for DJT is 2020, not in 2016. That should not affect any of the arguments I make. I tend to think I am moderate in my political leanings. I would guess there are a lot more like me here, they are just smart enough not to come in here and engage.
Hope I answered everything and thanks for the post!
Thank you for your response. I'll answer your question first... does it worry me that I might have to take 6-8 more shots? No, not even a little bit. And if I may elaborate on that a bit.... If all I have to do is go to a facility to get a shot in my arm 6-8 times to prevent death, prevent illness, prevent hardships on the health care system, hardships on the economy, then yes, that's a pretty easy duty.
That question alone is indicative of the complete ideological differences between us. That, and your vote for Trump. Which... to me affects any and all arguments you make contrary to what you think. You're likely over there saying "Why is that?" And my answer is: "Because it proves your judgement."
In these two posts you've shown me a couple things that obviously you don't agree with. But ultimately you're an ignorant, selfish person. Stands to reason why you would vote for another ignorant, and selfish person.
You won't get vaccinated. You won't wear a mask. You won't maintain social distance. Like correct me I'm wrong here... you are saying, openly, that you won't take any of the recommended precautions during a global deadly pandemic. And you voted for Trump.
I take back what I said about people insulting you. And that it's not cool what they're doing. What you're doing is exponentially worse. And for that, you're 10-ply, bud.
I thoroughly enjoyed your response and completely agree…good job
I don’t know enough about nor have I done enough research to comment on death statistics and the reasons for them but I do know that 33 years ago my sister died of cervical cancer and the death certificate listed cardiac arrest as the cause. No, she died because cancer depleted her organ function so maybe they finally fixed that nonsense and say what actually instigated the death in the first place. They did the same with AIDS patients…died of pneumonia listed on the certificate but it certainly started with HIV crushing their immune systems.
Death is death and if we know that 600,000 more people died last year then the year before then you tell me why that occurred if not by covid related issues.
Sometimes the pure ignorance of people is offensive.
My mother died of cancer almost three years ago and her death certificate lists her death as "natural causes."
Sorry for your loss as well….like the queen said about her recently departed husband… “grief is the price we pay for love”, so very true. She’s around and you’ll see her again…
He hasn't gotten the vaccine. His parents, in their 60s, haven't gotten the vaccine Seems none of them are going to get it. Makes sense if you don't care about your older family members. Or anyone else around you
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,617
Must care about us, or at least our freedoms, to continue posting tweets aimed at changing hearts and minds.
5,522 people have died within 28 days of having a Covid-19 Vaccine in Scotland according to Public Health Scotland
According to the spreadsheet provided by Public Health Scotland; which includes the quantity of deaths by type of vaccine and the date they occurred, 1,877 deaths have been due to the Pfizer mRNA jab, 3,643 deaths have been due to the AstraZeneca viral vector jab, and 2 deaths have been due to the Moderna mRNA jab.
This equates to an average of 920 deaths occurring every month due to the Covid-19 vaccines in Scotland alone. Outnumbering the average number of people who have died of Covid-19 in Scotland by 866 per month.
Also, closer to home... The number was 6,000 last week.
Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 338 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 19, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 12,313 reports of death (0.0036%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths.
This is the classic correlation, not causation situation. From what is here, you can not declare that the cause of death within 28 days was the vaccine. People die all the time, every day. Scotland's vax rate is over 50%. So comparing deaths of vaccinated people to COVID 19 deaths (which this paper did), is the very definition of misinformation. It's misleading, unclear and leads people to draw unsubstantiated conclusions.
Were I the moderator, I would take down this post or at least mark it as misinformation. @gvn2fly1421 - this is a serious question. Do you critically think about what you post before you post it, or are you just grabbing links? How could you think this isn't misleading?
And you see no problem with how covid deaths were counted, correct? 30-60 days after a positive test if you passed away it was counted as a covid death. You see no issue with that, yet would like to label the links above as misinformation? I posted numerous links of gunshot victims, motorcycle crashes, etc. all counted as covid deaths, yet you are ok with that because it fits the narrative your party would like it to fit.
Okay so you're arguing that COVID isn't dangerous, and the path to that argument is spreading other misinformation. Do I have that right?
For me, obviously one of the vaccine hesitant, I am arguing that there is a risk for me either way, catching the virus or getting the vaccine. Now, I feel both of those risks would be small to me, considering I am a relatively healthy under 40 male. I have chosen to forgo the vaccine until we have some real, long term data showing me that the vaccine is truly "safe and effective".
Imagine with me something so "safe and effective" that we have to be told over and over again how safe and effective it is. The safety is obviously up in the air with all the side effects and possible death related to it, and the effectiveness is questionable as well seeing as how all of these people are catching the virus and still spreading it and still having their lives disrupted.
And because I have been here numerous times on this board, I know what comes next... But the vaccine will reduce the symptoms of covid. Right, the same virus that most people do not even know they have. Those symptoms. Again, I think most on this board think if you get covid you are either going to the hospital for an extended trip or going to die, both of which are so low odds of happening, let's say the same chance of having something bad happen when taking the vaccine, that I personally would rather take my chance with the virus.
I honestly do not see why my stance is so controversial to the point of being called names. And also, imagine wanting to be the keeper of what data/information gets published and what doesn't... Yikes, now that is scary...
Hello There!
Hopefully it doesn't caption all of the quotes here.. just your recent one. I have a few questions and comments about you. Before we go there, I haven't read other threads so if people are mocking you or insulting you, then that's not cool in my opinion... but at the same time I can understand where they may be coming from (I'll get to that later)
If I understand you correctly... you want to wait until there is more information or proof, then you may consider the vaccine. At the same time, you also don't believe the virus is dangerous enough and so you'll risk getting it as you are young and healthy.
Biggest question I would ask you is this: Will you continue to follow the three pillars of prevention as I call them: 1: Sanitize 2: Mask 3: Distance ?? Will you continue to do those things? That's the most important thing I want to know from you.
Next question is: What is your threshold of proof? Like at what point would you say "OK, I'm sold, vaccine works." And I would mention that from what I understand in USA in particular is that you have an abundance of people contracting the virus and some being hospitalized, all of whom are un-vaccinated. Like, does that concrete information register enough to sway you towards getting the vaccine? Perhaps you will pounce on my word "all." Ok, call it, 98%, 95%. Still very, very high.
A point I would like to mention with regards to what you said about risk. Getting COVID and getting the vaccine both do come with risks, yes. My arm was sore for a couple days. I know some people who were sick for a day or so. Friend of mine couldn't sleep because of 'chills' from the vaccine. My understanding is that getting the virus is much more risky than getting the vaccine. Girl at work was sick for a month. Family member hospitalized for a week. Family members of friends literally died. But the other thing and this goes to my first question, do you understand that the difference between the two 'risks' here is that while both affect you personally, the other could affect other people you come into contact with? Granted, the risk is low to contract.. but I mean... lots of dead people, lots of sick people, businesses done, industries in the toilet... etc. etc.
Final thought here... life amongst other people is all about trust. If you drive on the road, you're putting your life in other people's hands. You've never met them. You don't know how 'trained' they are at driving... but I bet you still drive. Ever been on a plane? Literally flying thousands of feet in the air in a tin can. Did you meet the pilot? Verify his/her credentials? Double check the schools he/she went to? You see where I'm going. There is a consensus amongst the scientific, medical, and yes political community that agrees the vaccines are safe. To suggest that we're all wrong, and that a small few are correct... it begs the question, why?
To give you an idea why your stance is controversial is because for starters is does go against the majority... which isn't necessarily to say it's absolutely correct but look at what we're talking about here. A vaccination against a deadly virus. A person voluntarily not wanting to get it is obviously going to cause controversy because it doesn't make a lot of sense to said majority.
Since you took the time to write out this post, I will take the time to respond.
To your first point, that is correct. There are so many unknowns currently around this thing I could not imagine taking it now, seeing as how I haven't already. Take the post right below yours from Kat, they are now saying if you took the J&J vaccine, a booster from Pfizer and Moderna may be needed. So let's say I was considering the J&J, is that telling me that when I get the J&J I might as well schedule my booster for one of the mRNA's as well? And, if I was considering the Pfizer or Moderna, should I go ahead and plan for three shots knowing the first two might not be that effective? Does that make sense? And yes, I do not feel that looking at the data and yes I know there are outliers, my demographic doesn't carry a great risk from the virus. But let's say the virus continues to mutate, which I have read actually weakens the severity but I digress, and years from now actually have some true data on the vaccines, then I will consider it at that time.
As someone who is vaccinated, does it worry you that you may be taking shots every 6-8 months?
As far as your pillars of prevention, I do not really do any of those things. Not sure why that is the most important piece of info you want from me, but there is your answer.
As far as what burden of proof I need to take the vaccine, I honestly have no idea.
One thing that has always gotten to me, and one of the arguments made here is how I can infect other people. As I have stated, the only immediate people of concern to me are my parents, both mid 60's and both who have passed on the vaccine as well. We all understand the risks associated with it at this point, correct? And if the vaccine is as good as you and the experts say it is, why are you worried about me? Now I know the answer that some will give, but in people like me it is going to mutate therefore making my vaccine less effective. Maybe. Maybe not. It seems the vaccinated catch, carry, and transmit the virus as it is, so can it not mutate in them as well?
Everything has risks, yes. Catching covid carries a risk. Getting the vaccine carries a risk. Not sure where we are going there.
Honestly, I am here because I feel like this board thinks everyone who is unvaccinated walks around daily with MAGA hats on flags waving on the back of their truck. I am not that. Yes, I voted for DJT is 2020, not in 2016. That should not affect any of the arguments I make. I tend to think I am moderate in my political leanings. I would guess there are a lot more like me here, they are just smart enough not to come in here and engage.
Hope I answered everything and thanks for the post!
Thank you for your response. I'll answer your question first... does it worry me that I might have to take 6-8 more shots? No, not even a little bit. And if I may elaborate on that a bit.... If all I have to do is go to a facility to get a shot in my arm 6-8 times to prevent death, prevent illness, prevent hardships on the health care system, hardships on the economy, then yes, that's a pretty easy duty.
That question alone is indicative of the complete ideological differences between us. That, and your vote for Trump. Which... to me affects any and all arguments you make contrary to what you think. You're likely over there saying "Why is that?" And my answer is: "Because it proves your judgement."
In these two posts you've shown me a couple things that obviously you don't agree with. But ultimately you're an ignorant, selfish person. Stands to reason why you would vote for another ignorant, and selfish person.
You won't get vaccinated. You won't wear a mask. You won't maintain social distance. Like correct me I'm wrong here... you are saying, openly, that you won't take any of the recommended precautions during a global deadly pandemic. And you voted for Trump.
I take back what I said about people insulting you. And that it's not cool what they're doing. What you're doing is exponentially worse. And for that, you're 10-ply, bud.
Can y'all imagine how the pandemic would look if we were not testing healthy people all along? Casedemic anyone?
"if we didn't do any testing, we would have very few cases" -tRUmp
...eyeroll...
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
0
Options
curmudgeoness
Brigadoon, foodie capital Posts: 3,231
5,522 people have died within 28 days of having a Covid-19 Vaccine in Scotland according to Public Health Scotland
According to the spreadsheet provided by Public Health Scotland; which includes the quantity of deaths by type of vaccine and the date they occurred, 1,877 deaths have been due to the Pfizer mRNA jab, 3,643 deaths have been due to the AstraZeneca viral vector jab, and 2 deaths have been due to the Moderna mRNA jab.
This equates to an average of 920 deaths occurring every month due to the Covid-19 vaccines in Scotland alone. Outnumbering the average number of people who have died of Covid-19 in Scotland by 866 per month.
Also, closer to home... The number was 6,000 last week.
Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 338 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 19, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 12,313 reports of death (0.0036%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths.
This is the classic correlation, not causation situation. From what is here, you can not declare that the cause of death within 28 days was the vaccine. People die all the time, every day. Scotland's vax rate is over 50%. So comparing deaths of vaccinated people to COVID 19 deaths (which this paper did), is the very definition of misinformation. It's misleading, unclear and leads people to draw unsubstantiated conclusions.
Were I the moderator, I would take down this post or at least mark it as misinformation. @gvn2fly1421 - this is a serious question. Do you critically think about what you post before you post it, or are you just grabbing links? How could you think this isn't misleading?
And you see no problem with how covid deaths were counted, correct? 30-60 days after a positive test if you passed away it was counted as a covid death. You see no issue with that, yet would like to label the links above as misinformation? I posted numerous links of gunshot victims, motorcycle crashes, etc. all counted as covid deaths, yet you are ok with that because it fits the narrative your party would like it to fit.
Okay so you're arguing that COVID isn't dangerous, and the path to that argument is spreading other misinformation. Do I have that right?
For me, obviously one of the vaccine hesitant, I am arguing that there is a risk for me either way, catching the virus or getting the vaccine. Now, I feel both of those risks would be small to me, considering I am a relatively healthy under 40 male. I have chosen to forgo the vaccine until we have some real, long term data showing me that the vaccine is truly "safe and effective".
Imagine with me something so "safe and effective" that we have to be told over and over again how safe and effective it is. The safety is obviously up in the air with all the side effects and possible death related to it, and the effectiveness is questionable as well seeing as how all of these people are catching the virus and still spreading it and still having their lives disrupted.
And because I have been here numerous times on this board, I know what comes next... But the vaccine will reduce the symptoms of covid. Right, the same virus that most people do not even know they have. Those symptoms. Again, I think most on this board think if you get covid you are either going to the hospital for an extended trip or going to die, both of which are so low odds of happening, let's say the same chance of having something bad happen when taking the vaccine, that I personally would rather take my chance with the virus.
I honestly do not see why my stance is so controversial to the point of being called names. And also, imagine wanting to be the keeper of what data/information gets published and what doesn't... Yikes, now that is scary...
1) The risk of catching COVID if unvaccinated is astronomically, exponentially higher than the risk of suffering an adverse side-effect from the vaccine. Clinical trials are designed to make sure that side-effects and risks are nowhere near as severe/ pronounced as the disease itself.
2) The risk of having severe COVID if unvaccinated also is exponentially higher than the risk of adverse reactions to the vaccines.
2a) Delta variant is hitting harder than the original (wild) virus, so just because you are under 65 and/or in good health means very little.
3) The mRNA technology is not some newfangled thing that scientists pulled out of their asses last summer; the technology was developed about a decade ago as part of the search for an HIV vaccine. It has succeeded beyond researchers' wildest dreams.
4) The adenovirus vaccine (J&J) is very similar to the flu shots many of us get every year.
5) You are being told repeatedly that the vaccines are safe and effective because you continue to refuse to believe that they are safe and effective, so the government is trying to find a resource/ authority whom you WILL believe.
6) If you are vaccinated, you are much less likely to spread the virus to others. The most recent research I've read says that asymptomatic vaccinated carriers carry a lower viral load and thus are far less likely to spread the disease even if they don't know that they are sick.
7) It's not just about you. You might get sick and feel just fine. But you might give it to someone at the grocery store who is undergoing chemo, and now they're screwed. That's not okay, just like it's not okay to fire your gun into the air on New Year's Eve even though you aren't aiming at anyone.
8) The longer the virus spreads unchecked, the more likely that a mutation will arise that gives us a variant that is resistant to the vaccines. Viruses mutate -- rapidly. It's what they do. So by refusing to get vaccinated, you are potentially endangering everyone. If we reach herd immunity, the virus cannot find new hosts, which stops the spread. Each time it finds a new host, there is the opportunity to mutate. When you choose to refuse the vaccine, ***your choice affects everyone else.*** That's not okay. If you choose to drive the wrong way on the freeway because traffic's heavy on the right side, and you're in a hurry, your choice is endangering others. Choosing to drive drunk endangers others. Refusing a vaccine for a deadly disease also endangers others; the effect might be less obvious and less immediate than getting wasted and driving home via whatever freeway lane is most convenient, but the risk is very real nonetheless.
Daily cases have tripled in the last two weeks. If you dig into the numbers, the virus is raging in unvaccinated populations with the same intensity as at the beginning of the year. Overall numbers have been brought down by vaccinations, period.
As for "XXXX people have died since getting the vaccine!" -- well, as someone pointed out the other day, thousands of people have died since Tampa Bay won the Super Bowl, but we can't really blame Tom Brady for that. The vaccine won't cure cancer or heart disease, it won't prevent strokes or car accidents or stop your damn cat from tripping you on the stairs.
The usual disclaimers: I'm not a doctor. My husband has been directly engaged in past pandemic responses and vaccination campaigns, and we have an immunocompromised family member, so we stay on top of this stuff. We take science seriously. And had my husband had the slightest doubts about these vaccines, we would have waited for better data and more information. As it is, we got vaccinated at the first opportunity.
Since I'm sure the "emergency use authorization" will come up at some point: There is NO WAY -- no. way. -- that the FDA would unleash treatments for mass use if there were any concerns about their safety and efficacy. Getting full clearance takes time. "Emergency use authorization" is a way to fast-track something because it is urgently needed -- it does NOT mean "well, we're not done checking it to see if it's safe."
It has been a long 18 months, and I'm tired of arguing these topics. The reality is, this is not "The X-Files," we are not being microchipped and our DNA is not being altered. These vaccines were developed, manufactured, and distributed by regular people who have been working very hard to get the pandemic under control. Not everything is political. Viruses don't care who you voted for, what color you are, how much money you have, or whether or not you "believe in science." Viruses are all about spreading and evolving to evade elimination. Period.
All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it.
Can y'all imagine how the pandemic would look if we were not testing healthy people all along? Casedemic anyone?
From the article you took this snap and headline from. Sounds like vaccinations are the way to go
Italy and Israel are just two of the countries where a surge of infections over recent months did not cause a surge in the death rate. The case of Israel is especially instructive, because people opposed to vaccination have seized on the uptick in infections there to argue that the vaccines don’t work. But as The Washington Post’s Aaron Blake has pointed out, in Israel, where 85 percent of adults are vaccinated, cases remain at less than one-tenth of their January peak, while intensive-care admissions are at one-20th of the peak. The country has witnessed a clear decoupling between “cases” and “severe illness.”
While the United States is not experiencing decoupling of cases and severe illnesses to that degree, we are seeing a disproportionately lower number of severe illnesses per case than we did in the past. One reason instances of severe illness have not dropped even further is that the United States is far more polarized than Israel on vaccination. In communities where vaccine-skepticism is strong, there is a public health risk similar to 2020. So a full-speed-ahead vaccine push remains essential: Full FDA approval of coronavirus vaccines, which is long overdue, should help increase vaccination rates in some of these communities. So should mobile vaccinations, giving people time off work to get vaccinated and providing child care and transportation to make it easier for them to do so.
Food for thought here because part of this thread is about viruses.
It's my understanding that there are punishable crimes for knowingly having HIV and then unprotected sex with someone without informing them correct?
I get it... apples and oranges. But hear me out. A fellow gets HIV and laments about it. Maybe he was careful, maybe he wasn't but ultimately he doesn't think it was his fault.. I mean, he got it from someone else who obviously wasn't careful perhaps.
Even though he didn't purposely get HIV, he has it now, and the law states that he needs to be under some form of control to protect others and prevent spread. It's literally no longer about him as an individual but it is about his decisions and how they affect others.
Would the same people who spout off about "freedom" back up the HIV fellow and his 'right as a free citizen' to live a completely normal life and not have to inform a sexual partner? Like... "Well.. freedom dictates he can sleep with whoever he wants and not have to provide that information." Or would you tend to side with the female or male who was put in harm's way against his/her will?
Freedom is so often associated with the ability to DO something, it's not often associated with a freedom FROM something.
There are a handful of differences here in particular the fellow knowingly being so callous but when you think of it... how do you weigh personal freedoms against public safety?
It's disheartening when I see posts like that Gvn2Fly fellow who basically thinks 'I'm gonna do what I want, how I want .. when I want...because I'm free.' How many more would have died if every person had that mentality? It's extremely foolish and dangerous thinking... IMO.
Post edited by Parksy on
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
Food for thought here because part of this thread is about viruses.
It's my understanding that there are punishable crimes for knowingly having HIV and then unprotected sex with someone without informing them correct?
I get it... apples and oranges. But hear me out. A fellow gets HIV and laments about it. Maybe he was careful, maybe he wasn't but ultimately he doesn't think it was his fault.. I mean, he got it from someone else who obviously wasn't careful perhaps.
Even though he didn't purposely get HIV, he has it now, and the law states that he needs to be under some form of control to protect others and prevent spread. It's literally no longer about him as an individual but it is about his decisions and how they affect others.
Would the same people who spout off about "freedom" back up the HIV fellow and his 'right as a free citizen' to live a completely normal life and not have to inform a sexual partner? Like... "Well.. freedom dictates he can sleep with whoever he wants and not have to provide that information." Or would you tend to side with the female or male who was put in harm's way against his/her will?
Freedom is so often associated with the ability to DO something, it's not often associated with a freedom FROM something.
There are a handful of differences here in particular the fellow knowingly being so callous but when you think of it... how do you weigh personal freedoms against public safety?
It's disheartening when I see posts like that Gvn2Fly fellow who basically thinks 'I'm gonna do what I want, how I want .. when I want...because I'm free.' How many more would have died if every person had that mentality? It's extremely foolish and dangerous thinking... IMO.
Freedom is so often associated with the ability to DO something, it's not often associated with a freedom FROM something.
There are a handful of differences here in particular the fellow knowingly being so callous but when you think of it... how do you weigh personal freedoms against public safety?
It's disheartening when I see posts like that Gvn2Fly fellow who basically thinks 'I'm gonna do what I want, how I want .. when I want...because I'm free.' How many more would have died if every person had that mentality? It's extremely foolish and dangerous thinking... IMO.
I have strong libertarian tendencies myself, and I tend to take to heart phrases like "my rights end at the tip of your nose."
But in this case, if one chooses not to get vaccinated, that decision literally is going up someone else's nose, to extend the imagery. So while a case of sorts could be made for choosing not to wear a seatbelt (I don't recommend this; have you seen what happens when someone goes through a windshield?!?) -- in the case of a contagious disease this argument falls flat. You don't have a right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater, you do not have the right to do all kinds of things that endanger others. This cannot and should not be framed as a matter of individual liberties.
All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it.
No one has yet come banging on our door with swabs in hand to jam up the family's nostrils. (I guess it's the same no one who has yet to come banging on our door to take our family Bible and whatever old firearms we might have locked up in a box somewhere.)
*Other than (mostly unvaccinated) folks who wish to remain employed in certain occupations, travel, etc.*, the idea of our overlords compelling us to test, test, test is just more propaganda that persists.
I bet that you cannot find one person in these discussions (*excluding the group mentioned above* and hypochondriacs) who gets tested just because. I've never once been tested, and I even had a few pre-vaccine overnights in a couple of different Massachusetts hospitals during the pandemic's different peaks. Everyone else in my family has been tested at least once, but that was because they had two or more Covid-19 symptoms.
With regards to the headline above, someone at WaPo needs to have a sit down with the copy editor who wrote it because its pushes harmful rhetoric. I mean, who the fuck are this "We?" Certainly not me or anyone I know of. How about you?
I mean, my "evidence" is anecdotal, for sure, but for me, it's still more robust than a bad headline or something I read on social media.
Food for thought here because part of this thread is about viruses.
It's my understanding that there are punishable crimes for knowingly having HIV and then unprotected sex with someone without informing them correct?
I get it... apples and oranges. But hear me out. A fellow gets HIV and laments about it. Maybe he was careful, maybe he wasn't but ultimately he doesn't think it was his fault.. I mean, he got it from someone else who obviously wasn't careful perhaps.
Even though he didn't purposely get HIV, he has it now, and the law states that he needs to be under some form of control to protect others and prevent spread. It's literally no longer about him as an individual but it is about his decisions and how they affect others.
Would the same people who spout off about "freedom" back up the HIV fellow and his 'right as a free citizen' to live a completely normal life and not have to inform a sexual partner? Like... "Well.. freedom dictates he can sleep with whoever he wants and not have to provide that information." Or would you tend to side with the female or male who was put in harm's way against his/her will?
Freedom is so often associated with the ability to DO something, it's not often associated with a freedom FROM something.
There are a handful of differences here in particular the fellow knowingly being so callous but when you think of it... how do you weigh personal freedoms against public safety?
It's disheartening when I see posts like that Gvn2Fly fellow who basically thinks 'I'm gonna do what I want, how I want .. when I want...because I'm free.' How many more would have died if every person had that mentality? It's extremely foolish and dangerous thinking... IMO.
You've done a good job in your last several posts of summarizing the exact same thoughts I have been pondering in response to the never ending stream of anti-vaccine propaganda and whataboutisms being shared here the last few days. Thank you for taking the time and expressing it so clearly.
Food for thought here because part of this thread is about viruses.
It's my understanding that there are punishable crimes for knowingly having HIV and then unprotected sex with someone without informing them correct?
I get it... apples and oranges. But hear me out. A fellow gets HIV and laments about it. Maybe he was careful, maybe he wasn't but ultimately he doesn't think it was his fault.. I mean, he got it from someone else who obviously wasn't careful perhaps.
Even though he didn't purposely get HIV, he has it now, and the law states that he needs to be under some form of control to protect others and prevent spread. It's literally no longer about him as an individual but it is about his decisions and how they affect others.
Would the same people who spout off about "freedom" back up the HIV fellow and his 'right as a free citizen' to live a completely normal life and not have to inform a sexual partner? Like... "Well.. freedom dictates he can sleep with whoever he wants and not have to provide that information." Or would you tend to side with the female or male who was put in harm's way against his/her will?
Freedom is so often associated with the ability to DO something, it's not often associated with a freedom FROM something.
There are a handful of differences here in particular the fellow knowingly being so callous but when you think of it... how do you weigh personal freedoms against public safety?
It's disheartening when I see posts like that Gvn2Fly fellow who basically thinks 'I'm gonna do what I want, how I want .. when I want...because I'm free.' How many more would have died if every person had that mentality? It's extremely foolish and dangerous thinking... IMO.
You've done a good job in your last several posts of summarizing the exact same thoughts I have been pondering in response to the never ending stream of anti-vaccine propaganda and whataboutisms being shared here the last few days. Thank you for taking the time and expressing it so clearly.
No one has yet come banging on our door with swabs in hand to jam up the family's nostrils. (I guess it's the same no one who has yet to come banging on our door to take our family Bible and whatever old firearms we might have locked up in a box somewhere.)
*Other than (mostly unvaccinated) folks who wish to remain employed in certain occupations, travel, etc.*, the idea of our overlords compelling us to test, test, test is just more propaganda that persists.
I bet that you cannot find one person in these discussions (*excluding the group mentioned above* and hypochondriacs) who gets tested just because. I've never once been tested, and I even had a few pre-vaccine overnights in a couple of different Massachusetts hospitals during the pandemic's different peaks. Everyone else in my family has been tested at least once, but that was because they had two or more Covid-19 symptoms.
With regards to the headline above, someone at WaPo needs to have a sit down with the copy editor who wrote it because its pushes harmful rhetoric. I mean, who the fuck are this "We?" Certainly not me or anyone I know of. How about you?
I mean, my "evidence" is anecdotal, for sure, but for me, it's still more robust than a bad headline or something I read on social media.
I like this comment on that perspective article in WaPo:
How many asymptomatic people are getting tested and contributing to this so called distortion in our perception of the risk of covid-19? I’d guess a drop in the bucket. Dr. Ghandi needs to back her theory with real world data.
I get her intent with the piece she wrote, but it's most likely only going to provide fuel to the anti-vax crowd because they only read headlines and share screen caps. And yes, WaPo should have used a different headline. It did its job though, got an anti-vaxxer to push just a caption out to the masses. I'd assume they were trying to bait anti-vaxxers in to reading it to back up their POV, but if they read it through, it hammers on them for continuing the pandemic.
Post edited by tbergs on
It's a hopeless situation...
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,703
The thing with the information I post though, is that is how I form my opinion. I am getting blasted over this Scotland data, which is literally linked to the Public Health site and data in the article. The way I understand the issue you have mrussell is how that data is being interpreted, in that they are counting vaccine deaths as any death within 28 days of the vaccine being administered. I am trying to say that is how covid deaths have been counted this whole time so why not count the vaccine deaths the same?
I don't believe that any death occurring within 60 days of a positive test is counted as COVID. Where are you sourcing that information? If COVID were not actually connected to the death, we would not have seen a 15.9% age adjusted increase in mortality in 2020 compared to 2019. If your hypothesis is correct, the mortality rate would not have increased at all.
In Oregon a death is reported as a COVID death if:
The death is of a confirmed or probable COVID-19 case within 60 days of the earliest available date among exposure to a confirmed case, onset of symptoms, or date of specimen collection for the first positive test; or
The death results from any cause in a hospitalized person during admission or in the 60 days following discharge AND a COVID-19-positive laboratory diagnostic test at any time since14 days prior to hospitalization; or
The death is of someone with a COVID-19-specific ICD-10 code listed as a primary or contributing cause of death on a death certificate, regardless of the dates of diagnosis or death.
While not 60 days, I love this video of the Illinois Director of Public Health being completely honest.
""If you were in hospice and had already been given a few weeks to live, and then you also were found to have COVID, that would be counted as a COVID death. It means technically even if you died of a clear alternate cause, but you had COVID at the same time, it's still listed as a COVID death. So, everyone who's listed as a COVID death doesn't mean that that was the cause of the death, but they had COVID at the time of the death." Dr. Ezike outlined."
Again, this is real causal data that shows COVID was real and has/had a meaningful negative impact on life expectancy, mortality rates, etc. If COVID is overstated and just BS, why would these numbers continue to represent the opposite?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Food for thought here because part of this thread is about viruses.
It's my understanding that there are punishable crimes for knowingly having HIV and then unprotected sex with someone without informing them correct?
I get it... apples and oranges. But hear me out. A fellow gets HIV and laments about it. Maybe he was careful, maybe he wasn't but ultimately he doesn't think it was his fault.. I mean, he got it from someone else who obviously wasn't careful perhaps.
Even though he didn't purposely get HIV, he has it now, and the law states that he needs to be under some form of control to protect others and prevent spread. It's literally no longer about him as an individual but it is about his decisions and how they affect others.
Would the same people who spout off about "freedom" back up the HIV fellow and his 'right as a free citizen' to live a completely normal life and not have to inform a sexual partner? Like... "Well.. freedom dictates he can sleep with whoever he wants and not have to provide that information." Or would you tend to side with the female or male who was put in harm's way against his/her will?
Freedom is so often associated with the ability to DO something, it's not often associated with a freedom FROM something.
There are a handful of differences here in particular the fellow knowingly being so callous but when you think of it... how do you weigh personal freedoms against public safety?
It's disheartening when I see posts like that Gvn2Fly fellow who basically thinks 'I'm gonna do what I want, how I want .. when I want...because I'm free.' How many more would have died if every person had that mentality? It's extremely foolish and dangerous thinking... IMO.
You've done a good job in your last several posts of summarizing the exact same thoughts I have been pondering in response to the never ending stream of anti-vaccine propaganda and whataboutisms being shared here the last few days. Thank you for taking the time and expressing it so clearly.
The thing with the information I post though, is that is how I form my opinion. I am getting blasted over this Scotland data, which is literally linked to the Public Health site and data in the article. The way I understand the issue you have mrussell is how that data is being interpreted, in that they are counting vaccine deaths as any death within 28 days of the vaccine being administered. I am trying to say that is how covid deaths have been counted this whole time so why not count the vaccine deaths the same?
I don't believe that any death occurring within 60 days of a positive test is counted as COVID. Where are you sourcing that information? If COVID were not actually connected to the death, we would not have seen a 15.9% age adjusted increase in mortality in 2020 compared to 2019. If your hypothesis is correct, the mortality rate would not have increased at all.
In Oregon a death is reported as a COVID death if:
The death is of a confirmed or probable COVID-19 case within 60 days of the earliest available date among exposure to a confirmed case, onset of symptoms, or date of specimen collection for the first positive test; or
The death results from any cause in a hospitalized person during admission or in the 60 days following discharge AND a COVID-19-positive laboratory diagnostic test at any time since14 days prior to hospitalization; or
The death is of someone with a COVID-19-specific ICD-10 code listed as a primary or contributing cause of death on a death certificate, regardless of the dates of diagnosis or death.
While not 60 days, I love this video of the Illinois Director of Public Health being completely honest.
""If you were in hospice and had already been given a few weeks to live, and then you also were found to have COVID, that would be counted as a COVID death. It means technically even if you died of a clear alternate cause, but you had COVID at the same time, it's still listed as a COVID death. So, everyone who's listed as a COVID death doesn't mean that that was the cause of the death, but they had COVID at the time of the death." Dr. Ezike outlined."
Again, this is real causal data that shows COVID was real and has/had a meaningful negative impact on life expectancy, mortality rates, etc. If COVID is overstated and just BS, why would these numbers continue to represent the opposite?
“Especially with the delta variant becoming a lot more aggressive and seeing another spike, it was a good time to do it,” he said in an interview. “When you talk to people who run hospitals, in New Orleans or other states, 90% of people in hospital with delta variant have not been vaccinated. That’s another signal the vaccine works.”
He's close. A good time to do it was 2-3 months ago to prevent the Delta variant from gaining a strong foothold in the US, but alas here we are. Better late than never.
Has anyone fact checked this? Kat? Mrussel? I do not want misinformation to be spread here.
Edited to add a link to comb through the data which clearly shows all the young, unvaccinated people that she has had to see. It shows 396 covid related deaths between the ages of 25-49.... since the pandemic began.... IN THE WHOLE STATE! Fact Check says, most likely rubbish!
Give her a call. Ask her yourself. Why the age qualification? Does she work on a 25-49 only floor/ward? Odd. Does everyone she treat die? Odder still. Might as well stay home if you get sick and leave the beds for the gun and motorcycle accident victims. Laughable.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
“Especially with the delta variant becoming a lot more aggressive and seeing another spike, it was a good time to do it,” he said in an interview. “When you talk to people who run hospitals, in New Orleans or other states, 90% of people in hospital with delta variant have not been vaccinated. That’s another signal the vaccine works.”
He's close. A good time to do it was 2-3 months ago to prevent the Delta variant from gaining a strong foothold in the US, but alas here we are. Better late than never.
What better late than never might look like:
Has anyone fact checked this? Kat? Mrussel? I do not want misinformation to be spread here.
Edited to add a link to comb through the data which clearly shows all the young, unvaccinated people that she has had to see. It shows 396 covid related deaths between the ages of 25-49.... since the pandemic began.... IN THE WHOLE STATE! Fact Check says, most likely rubbish!
Give her a call. Ask her yourself. Why the age qualification? Does she work on a 25-49 only floor/ward? Odd. Does everyone she treat die? Odder still. Might as well stay home if you get sick and leave the beds for the gun and motorcycle accident victims. Laughable.
That's it. What she doesn't tell you is that most of the deaths are 50-55 year-olds that tried to sneak in. She had them killed.
Post edited by OnWis97 on
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
“Especially with the delta variant becoming a lot more aggressive and seeing another spike, it was a good time to do it,” he said in an interview. “When you talk to people who run hospitals, in New Orleans or other states, 90% of people in hospital with delta variant have not been vaccinated. That’s another signal the vaccine works.”
He's close. A good time to do it was 2-3 months ago to prevent the Delta variant from gaining a strong foothold in the US, but alas here we are. Better late than never.
What better late than never might look like:
Has anyone fact checked this? Kat? Mrussel? I do not want misinformation to be spread here.
Edited to add a link to comb through the data which clearly shows all the young, unvaccinated people that she has had to see. It shows 396 covid related deaths between the ages of 25-49.... since the pandemic began.... IN THE WHOLE STATE! Fact Check says, most likely rubbish!
Give her a call. Ask her yourself. Why the age qualification? Does she work on a 25-49 only floor/ward? Odd. Does everyone she treat die? Odder still. Might as well stay home if you get sick and leave the beds for the gun and motorcycle accident victims. Laughable.
That's it. What she doesn't tell you is that most of the deaths are 50-55 year-olds that tried to sneak in. She had them killed.
“Especially with the delta variant becoming a lot more aggressive and seeing another spike, it was a good time to do it,” he said in an interview. “When you talk to people who run hospitals, in New Orleans or other states, 90% of people in hospital with delta variant have not been vaccinated. That’s another signal the vaccine works.”
He's close. A good time to do it was 2-3 months ago to prevent the Delta variant from gaining a strong foothold in the US, but alas here we are. Better late than never.
What better late than never might look like:
Has anyone fact checked this? Kat? Mrussel? I do not want misinformation to be spread here.
Edited to add a link to comb through the data which clearly shows all the young, unvaccinated people that she has had to see. It shows 396 covid related deaths between the ages of 25-49.... since the pandemic began.... IN THE WHOLE STATE! Fact Check says, most likely rubbish!
Give her a call. Ask her yourself. Why the age qualification? Does she work on a 25-49 only floor/ward? Odd. Does everyone she treat die? Odder still. Might as well stay home if you get sick and leave the beds for the gun and motorcycle accident victims. Laughable.
That's it. What she doesn't tell you is that most of the deaths are 50-55 year-olds that tried to sneak in. She had them killed.
She voted for Hillary too.
I heard the hospital she works in has a tunnel direct to Comet Pizza and that’s where all the kids are taken after being admitted with “covid.” Seen it on Twitter.
US virus cases nearly triple in 2 weeks amid misinformation
By HEATHER HOLLINGSWORTH and JIM SALTER
13 mins ago
MISSION, Kan. (AP) — COVID-19 cases nearly tripled in the U.S. over two weeks amid an onslaught of vaccine misinformation that is straining hospitals, exhausting doctors and pushing clergy into the fray.
“Our staff, they are frustrated," said Chad Neilsen, director of infection prevention at UF Health Jacksonville, a Florida hospital that is canceling elective surgeries and procedures after the number of mostly unvaccinated COVID-19 inpatients at its two campuses jumped to 134, up from a low of 16 in mid-May.
“They are tired. They are thinking this is déjà vu all over again, and there is some anger because we know that this is a largely preventable situation, and people are not taking advantage of the vaccine.”
Across the U.S., the seven-day rolling average for daily new cases rose over the past two weeks to more than 37,000 on Tuesday, up from less than 13,700 on July 6, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. Health officials blame the delta variant and slowing vaccination rates. Just 56.2% of Americans have gotten at least one dose of the vaccine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In Louisiana, health officials reported 5,388 new COVID-19 cases Wednesday — the third-highest daily count since the beginning of the pandemic in early 2020. Hospitalizations for the disease rose to 844 statewide, up more than 600 since mid-June.
Utah reported having 295 people hospitalized due to the virus, the highest number since February. The state has averaged about 622 confirmed cases per day over the last week, about triple the infection rate at its lowest point in early June. Health data shows the surge is almost entirely connected to unvaccinated people.
“It is like seeing the car wreck before it happens,” said Dr. James Williams, a clinical associate professor of emergency medicine at Texas Tech, who has recently started treating more COVID-19 patients. “None of us want to go through this again.”
He said the patients are younger — many in their 20s, 30s and 40s — and overwhelmingly unvaccinated.
As lead pastor of one of Missouri’s largest churches, Jeremy Johnson has heard the reasons congregants don’t want the COVID-19 vaccine. He wants them to know it’s not only OK to get vaccinated, it’s what the Bible urges.
“I think there is a big influence of fear,” said Johnson, whose Springfield-based church also has a campus in Nixa and another about to open in Republic. “A fear of trusting something apart from scripture, a fear of trusting something apart from a political party they’re more comfortable following. A fear of trusting in science. We hear that: ‘I trust in God, not science.’ But the truth is science and God are not something you have to choose between.”
Now many churches in southwestern Missouri, like Johnson’s Assembly of God-affiliated North Point Church, are hosting vaccination clinics. Meanwhile, about 200 church leaders have signed onto a statement urging Christians to get vaccinated, and on Wednesday announced a follow-up public service campaign.
Opposition to vaccination is especially strong among white evangelical Protestants, who make up more than one-third of Missouri’s residents, according to a 2019 report by the Pew Research Center.
“We found that the faith community is very influential, very trusted, and to me that is one of the answers as to how you get your vaccination rates up,” said Ken McClure, mayor of Springfield.
The two hospitals in his city are teeming with patients, reaching record and near-record pandemic highs. Steve Edwards, who is the CEO of CoxHealth in Springfield, tweeted that the hospital has brought in 175 traveling nurses and has 46 more scheduled to arrive by Monday.
“Grateful for the help," wrote Edwards, who previously tweeted that anyone spreading misinformation about the vaccine should “shut up."
Jacob Burmood, a 40-year-old Kansas City, Missouri, artist, said his mother has been promoting vaccine conspiracy theories even though her husband — Burmood's stepfather — is hospitalized on a ventilator in Springfield.
“It is really, really sad, and it is really frustrating," he said.
Burmood recalled how his mother had recently fallen ill and "was trying to tell me that vaccinated people got her sick, and it wasn’t even COVID. I just shut her down. I said, ‘Mom, I can’t talk to you about conspiracy theories right now.’ ... You need to go to a hospital. You are going to die.”
His mother, who is in her 70s, has since recovered.
In New York City, workers in city-run hospitals and health clinics will be required to get vaccinated or get tested weekly as officials battle a rise in COVID-19 cases, Mayor Bill de Blasio said Wednesday.
De Blasio’s order will not apply to teachers, police officers and other city employees, but it's part of the city’s intense focus on vaccinations amid an increase in delta variant infections.
The number of vaccine doses being given out daily in the city has dropped to less than 18,000, down from a peak of more than 100,000 in early April. About 65% of all adults are fully vaccinated, compared with about 60% of public hospital system staffers, said system leader Dr. Mitchell Katz.
Meanwhile, caseloads have been rising in the city for weeks, and health officials say the variant makes up about 7 in 10 cases they sequence.
“We have got to deal with it aggressively. And in the end, there is also a thing called personal responsibility,” de Blasio said, urging inoculated people to raise the issue with unvaccinated relatives and “get up in their face."
Back in Louisiana, New Orleans officials strongly recommended that people resume wearing masks indoors. Mayor LaToya Cantrell stopped short Wednesday of requiring masks. She said the new advisory “puts the responsibility on individuals themselves, rather than having the city enforce a mandate."
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Comments
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
His parents, in their 60s, haven't gotten the vaccine
Seems none of them are going to get it.
Makes sense if you don't care about your older family members.
Or anyone else around you
/s
-tRUmp
...eyeroll...
It sucks when people who act selfish and ignorant are appropriately labeled as selfish and ignorant.
Italy and Israel are just two of the countries where a surge of infections over recent months did not cause a surge in the death rate. The case of Israel is especially instructive, because people opposed to vaccination have seized on the uptick in infections there to argue that the vaccines don’t work. But as The Washington Post’s Aaron Blake has pointed out, in Israel, where 85 percent of adults are vaccinated, cases remain at less than one-tenth of their January peak, while intensive-care admissions are at one-20th of the peak. The country has witnessed a clear decoupling between “cases” and “severe illness.”
While the United States is not experiencing decoupling of cases and severe illnesses to that degree, we are seeing a disproportionately lower number of severe illnesses per case than we did in the past. One reason instances of severe illness have not dropped even further is that the United States is far more polarized than Israel on vaccination. In communities where vaccine-skepticism is strong, there is a public health risk similar to 2020. So a full-speed-ahead vaccine push remains essential: Full FDA approval of coronavirus vaccines, which is long overdue, should help increase vaccination rates in some of these communities. So should mobile vaccinations, giving people time off work to get vaccinated and providing child care and transportation to make it easier for them to do so.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/07/21/covid-testing-vaccinated/
It's my understanding that there are punishable crimes for knowingly having HIV and then unprotected sex with someone without informing them correct?
I get it... apples and oranges. But hear me out. A fellow gets HIV and laments about it. Maybe he was careful, maybe he wasn't but ultimately he doesn't think it was his fault.. I mean, he got it from someone else who obviously wasn't careful perhaps.
Even though he didn't purposely get HIV, he has it now, and the law states that he needs to be under some form of control to protect others and prevent spread. It's literally no longer about him as an individual but it is about his decisions and how they affect others.
Would the same people who spout off about "freedom" back up the HIV fellow and his 'right as a free citizen' to live a completely normal life and not have to inform a sexual partner? Like... "Well.. freedom dictates he can sleep with whoever he wants and not have to provide that information." Or would you tend to side with the female or male who was put in harm's way against his/her will?
Freedom is so often associated with the ability to DO something, it's not often associated with a freedom FROM something.
There are a handful of differences here in particular the fellow knowingly being so callous but when you think of it... how do you weigh personal freedoms against public safety?
It's disheartening when I see posts like that Gvn2Fly fellow who basically thinks 'I'm gonna do what I want, how I want .. when I want...because I'm free.' How many more would have died if every person had that mentality? It's extremely foolish and dangerous thinking... IMO.
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
*Other than (mostly unvaccinated) folks who wish to remain employed in certain occupations, travel, etc.*, the idea of our overlords compelling us to test, test, test is just more propaganda that persists.
I bet that you cannot find one person in these discussions (*excluding the group mentioned above* and hypochondriacs) who gets tested just because. I've never once been tested, and I even had a few pre-vaccine overnights in a couple of different Massachusetts hospitals during the pandemic's different peaks. Everyone else in my family has been tested at least once, but that was because they had two or more Covid-19 symptoms.
With regards to the headline above, someone at WaPo needs to have a sit down with the copy editor who wrote it because its pushes harmful rhetoric. I mean, who the fuck are this "We?" Certainly not me or anyone I know of. How about you?
I mean, my "evidence" is anecdotal, for sure, but for me, it's still more robust than a bad headline or something I read on social media.
+1
I get her intent with the piece she wrote, but it's most likely only going to provide fuel to the anti-vax crowd because they only read headlines and share screen caps. And yes, WaPo should have used a different headline. It did its job though, got an anti-vaxxer to push just a caption out to the masses. I'd assume they were trying to bait anti-vaxxers in to reading it to back up their POV, but if they read it through, it hammers on them for continuing the pandemic.
do note the illinois link is dated 4-20-20......
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
WTF...
that age demographic matters cuz thats his demographic. its the only one that matters.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
MISSION, Kan. (AP) — COVID-19 cases nearly tripled in the U.S. over two weeks amid an onslaught of vaccine misinformation that is straining hospitals, exhausting doctors and pushing clergy into the fray.
“Our staff, they are frustrated," said Chad Neilsen, director of infection prevention at UF Health Jacksonville, a Florida hospital that is canceling elective surgeries and procedures after the number of mostly unvaccinated COVID-19 inpatients at its two campuses jumped to 134, up from a low of 16 in mid-May.
“They are tired. They are thinking this is déjà vu all over again, and there is some anger because we know that this is a largely preventable situation, and people are not taking advantage of the vaccine.”
Across the U.S., the seven-day rolling average for daily new cases rose over the past two weeks to more than 37,000 on Tuesday, up from less than 13,700 on July 6, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. Health officials blame the delta variant and slowing vaccination rates. Just 56.2% of Americans have gotten at least one dose of the vaccine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In Louisiana, health officials reported 5,388 new COVID-19 cases Wednesday — the third-highest daily count since the beginning of the pandemic in early 2020. Hospitalizations for the disease rose to 844 statewide, up more than 600 since mid-June.
Utah reported having 295 people hospitalized due to the virus, the highest number since February. The state has averaged about 622 confirmed cases per day over the last week, about triple the infection rate at its lowest point in early June. Health data shows the surge is almost entirely connected to unvaccinated people.
“It is like seeing the car wreck before it happens,” said Dr. James Williams, a clinical associate professor of emergency medicine at Texas Tech, who has recently started treating more COVID-19 patients. “None of us want to go through this again.”
He said the patients are younger — many in their 20s, 30s and 40s — and overwhelmingly unvaccinated.
As lead pastor of one of Missouri’s largest churches, Jeremy Johnson has heard the reasons congregants don’t want the COVID-19 vaccine. He wants them to know it’s not only OK to get vaccinated, it’s what the Bible urges.
“I think there is a big influence of fear,” said Johnson, whose Springfield-based church also has a campus in Nixa and another about to open in Republic. “A fear of trusting something apart from scripture, a fear of trusting something apart from a political party they’re more comfortable following. A fear of trusting in science. We hear that: ‘I trust in God, not science.’ But the truth is science and God are not something you have to choose between.”
Now many churches in southwestern Missouri, like Johnson’s Assembly of God-affiliated North Point Church, are hosting vaccination clinics. Meanwhile, about 200 church leaders have signed onto a statement urging Christians to get vaccinated, and on Wednesday announced a follow-up public service campaign.
Opposition to vaccination is especially strong among white evangelical Protestants, who make up more than one-third of Missouri’s residents, according to a 2019 report by the Pew Research Center.
“We found that the faith community is very influential, very trusted, and to me that is one of the answers as to how you get your vaccination rates up,” said Ken McClure, mayor of Springfield.
The two hospitals in his city are teeming with patients, reaching record and near-record pandemic highs. Steve Edwards, who is the CEO of CoxHealth in Springfield, tweeted that the hospital has brought in 175 traveling nurses and has 46 more scheduled to arrive by Monday.
“Grateful for the help," wrote Edwards, who previously tweeted that anyone spreading misinformation about the vaccine should “shut up."
Jacob Burmood, a 40-year-old Kansas City, Missouri, artist, said his mother has been promoting vaccine conspiracy theories even though her husband — Burmood's stepfather — is hospitalized on a ventilator in Springfield.
“It is really, really sad, and it is really frustrating," he said.
Burmood recalled how his mother had recently fallen ill and "was trying to tell me that vaccinated people got her sick, and it wasn’t even COVID. I just shut her down. I said, ‘Mom, I can’t talk to you about conspiracy theories right now.’ ... You need to go to a hospital. You are going to die.”
His mother, who is in her 70s, has since recovered.
In New York City, workers in city-run hospitals and health clinics will be required to get vaccinated or get tested weekly as officials battle a rise in COVID-19 cases, Mayor Bill de Blasio said Wednesday.
De Blasio’s order will not apply to teachers, police officers and other city employees, but it's part of the city’s intense focus on vaccinations amid an increase in delta variant infections.
The number of vaccine doses being given out daily in the city has dropped to less than 18,000, down from a peak of more than 100,000 in early April. About 65% of all adults are fully vaccinated, compared with about 60% of public hospital system staffers, said system leader Dr. Mitchell Katz.
Meanwhile, caseloads have been rising in the city for weeks, and health officials say the variant makes up about 7 in 10 cases they sequence.
“We have got to deal with it aggressively. And in the end, there is also a thing called personal responsibility,” de Blasio said, urging inoculated people to raise the issue with unvaccinated relatives and “get up in their face."
Back in Louisiana, New Orleans officials strongly recommended that people resume wearing masks indoors. Mayor LaToya Cantrell stopped short Wednesday of requiring masks. She said the new advisory “puts the responsibility on individuals themselves, rather than having the city enforce a mandate."
___
Salter reported from St. Louis.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14