Viruses / Vaccines 2

Halifax2TheMax · May 2023

nicknyr15 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

I wouldn’t do a fucking thing that POOTWH asked, recommended or told me to do. Not a fucking thing.

How is this any different than someone who is far right not wanting to do a fucking thing that Biden, Harris or fauci recommended or told them to? Makes no sense. Follow the science. You think trump was in the lab creating the vaccine. Silly.

Because Brandon tells 30 lies a day or told you to ingest bleach or shine a light up your ass? You do you.

Halifax2TheMax · May 2023

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

he doesn't seem to care that it saved millions of lives. all he cares about is the "lies" he believes were told.

I care but..
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/11/vaccinated-spread-the-coronavirus/620650/

I feel like you didn't actually read what you posted. This article 100% supports what everyone here has been saying. Maybe you should read it with a different lens if you think it's anti-vaccine.

If you find one antivaccine post from me i'll buy you a cheeseburger from McDonald's..after 3 years you still don't get my point..

Then summarize it. I certainly don't know what it is at this point.

I'll do it for last time..
first lie..the virus came from the market..they knew it it was man made..please don't te;ll otherwise..
second lie..vaccines are 100% safe and effective..bullshit..
people lost their jobs and scientists lost their reputations because they expressed a different opinion..others were called crazy and others conspiracy theorists..
second time I post this article..
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/

So let's pull this apart one thing at a time:

RE: "man made" vs "naturally occurring "

1. When you say "they knew it was man made", who precisely is "they" and when precisely did "they know"?
2. Let's say your statement is true (whoever "they" may be), what do you think your gov't or the US gov't should have done differently as a public health response, with that knowledge? Would they have not had mask mandates? Would the virus have killed fewer people. Tell me how the public response would have changed.

My views are probably in between you 2, but I'll answer.

I'm not convinced they (the government and those working for them) knew it was from a lab early on. But they sure weren't open to the idea for a very long time. Many would call you racist for even suggesting it. Turns out, 2 years later seems like the likely cause. So they could have, and should have been more open to it than just shoving the wet market idea down on us.

They did announce the vaccine as something like 95% effective and say you will not even get it. Within a few months that changed to it just reduces the symptoms. A lot of people seem to forget that initial promise to us. I don't know what they should have done differently, they had limited data in a short time. I'm just acknowledging their stance on how effective it was did change quite a lot.

I'm not sure your views are that different than mine, it's more about what expectations are of gov't, reasonably. Remember that gov't is filled with normal ass people just trying to do their job and go home like everyone else.

So with regards to this, remember that before most people even got their booster, the virus had mutated to the Omnicron strain. That was becoming prevalent by fall of 2021. So the very strain that the vaccine was designed to combat was the minority strain early in the roll out. So being less than 95% would not be a surprise. The flu vaccine has that very same limitation. But the flu vaccine also reduces your symptoms even if you get the other type, the one it wasn't designed to prevent.

And normal people often have their own agendas to worry about.
Didn't Fauci and others in the government dismiss the lab leak theories? That was a big blunder in my opinion. At least acknowledge its a possibility and worth exploring, don't just completely dismiss the idea. I don't know what the agenda would be, but they clearly didn't want anyone to even consider the lab leak. Possibly because it was associate with the right, so they felt they had to dismiss it? Maybe they were worried about China relations? Who knows.

They should have foreseen variations and warned the public accordingly and provided realistic expectations instead of promises of this being over if you just take it. Again, I'm not sure why they didn't and can only guess.
This whole vaccine thing is something I'm surprised more people didn't talk about, or are okay with it. Kamala was the original anti Covid vaxer. She said on TV she wouldn't take a vaccine that Trump said you should take. Added that the experts will be muzzled so they can develop this vaccine.
Biden made similar comments, stating a vaccine likely wouldn't go through all the needed tests.
So they go from that stance, to telling you it’s over 95% effective when it’s not, and then wonder why people don't trust them and blame the unvaccinated for the pandemic?

Thanks for leaving out the part where she said, “if Dr. Fauci or the ‘medical professionals’ said to take it, she’d be the first in line.”

You're welcome.
And in that same conversation, she also said this: Bash first asked Harris if she believed the scientists and medical professionals who were working on a vaccine would be the ones who had the final say on the efficacy of a vaccine. Harris said she did not:

“If past is prologue … they’ll be muzzled. They’ll be suppressed,” Harris said of health experts and scientists. “They will be sidelined because he’s looking at an election coming up in less than 60 days, and he’s grasping for whatever he can get to pretend he has been a leader on this issue when he has not.”
She discredited the same scientists that gave us the vaccine she was pushing just a couple months later.
Both Biden and Harris went on record before the election questioning the very vaccines they mandated just a couple months later. You can't deny it. Well, you can and you will, but it happened.

Care to link to that copy and paste for not only your source but the full context?

nicknyr15 · May 2023

Halifax2TheMax said:

nicknyr15 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

I wouldn’t do a fucking thing that POOTWH asked, recommended or told me to do. Not a fucking thing.

How is this any different than someone who is far right not wanting to do a fucking thing that Biden, Harris or fauci recommended or told them to? Makes no sense. Follow the science. You think trump was in the lab creating the vaccine. Silly.

Because Brandon tells 30 lies a day or told you to ingest bleach or shine a light up your ass? You do you.

Irrelevant to the vaccine.

Halifax2TheMax · May 2023

nicknyr15 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

nicknyr15 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

I wouldn’t do a fucking thing that POOTWH asked, recommended or told me to do. Not a fucking thing.

How is this any different than someone who is far right not wanting to do a fucking thing that Biden, Harris or fauci recommended or told them to? Makes no sense. Follow the science. You think trump was in the lab creating the vaccine. Silly.

Because Brandon tells 30 lies a day or told you to ingest bleach or shine a light up your ass? You do you.

Irrelevant to the vaccine.

So, if I have you straight, you trust a guy who told, on average, 30 lies or misstatements a day throughout his administration and that when POOTWH spoke to or of the vaccine, you trust him? Like I said, you do you.

You know he had an uncle that attended MIT?

mrussel1 · May 2023

nicknyr15 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

I wouldn’t do a fucking thing that POOTWH asked, recommended or told me to do. Not a fucking thing.

How is this any different than someone who is far right not wanting to do a fucking thing that Biden, Harris or fauci recommended or told them to? Makes no sense. Follow the science. You think trump was in the lab creating the vaccine. Silly.

The question is about intent.

When Joe Biden makes a statement, do you generally believe he has the best interests of Americans at heart? I do. I don't think he's always right nor can he possibly make everyone happy. But I believe his perspective is shaped by what he thinks is right for our people.

By contrast, I think Trump's statements are made with what he thinks are best for HIM, only. For Trump it goes: Trump, his family, his base. In that order. If all that works out well for the people, then great. But that's not a primary concern.

HughFreakingDillon · May 2023

we had trump on one hand, that was actually pushing for the vaccine to be finished and ready for distribution prior to the 2020 election. this sowed doubt as to whether his "demands" would influence how the vaccine was developed and tested.

biden and harris said they'd endorse the vaccine when they knew the vaccine was being developed and tested in a time frame without outside political influence.

this wasn't political. any normal person, hearing trump talk about it, would have had doubts taking the vaccine had it seemed like he was pushing it out for political gain.

these two CANNOT be conflated.

mace1229 · May 2023

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

he doesn't seem to care that it saved millions of lives. all he cares about is the "lies" he believes were told.

I care but..
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/11/vaccinated-spread-the-coronavirus/620650/

I feel like you didn't actually read what you posted. This article 100% supports what everyone here has been saying. Maybe you should read it with a different lens if you think it's anti-vaccine.

If you find one antivaccine post from me i'll buy you a cheeseburger from McDonald's..after 3 years you still don't get my point..

Then summarize it. I certainly don't know what it is at this point.

I'll do it for last time..
first lie..the virus came from the market..they knew it it was man made..please don't te;ll otherwise..
second lie..vaccines are 100% safe and effective..bullshit..
people lost their jobs and scientists lost their reputations because they expressed a different opinion..others were called crazy and others conspiracy theorists..
second time I post this article..
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/

So let's pull this apart one thing at a time:

RE: "man made" vs "naturally occurring "

1. When you say "they knew it was man made", who precisely is "they" and when precisely did "they know"?
2. Let's say your statement is true (whoever "they" may be), what do you think your gov't or the US gov't should have done differently as a public health response, with that knowledge? Would they have not had mask mandates? Would the virus have killed fewer people. Tell me how the public response would have changed.

My views are probably in between you 2, but I'll answer.

I'm not convinced they (the government and those working for them) knew it was from a lab early on. But they sure weren't open to the idea for a very long time. Many would call you racist for even suggesting it. Turns out, 2 years later seems like the likely cause. So they could have, and should have been more open to it than just shoving the wet market idea down on us.

They did announce the vaccine as something like 95% effective and say you will not even get it. Within a few months that changed to it just reduces the symptoms. A lot of people seem to forget that initial promise to us. I don't know what they should have done differently, they had limited data in a short time. I'm just acknowledging their stance on how effective it was did change quite a lot.

I'm not sure your views are that different than mine, it's more about what expectations are of gov't, reasonably. Remember that gov't is filled with normal ass people just trying to do their job and go home like everyone else.

So with regards to this, remember that before most people even got their booster, the virus had mutated to the Omnicron strain. That was becoming prevalent by fall of 2021. So the very strain that the vaccine was designed to combat was the minority strain early in the roll out. So being less than 95% would not be a surprise. The flu vaccine has that very same limitation. But the flu vaccine also reduces your symptoms even if you get the other type, the one it wasn't designed to prevent.

And normal people often have their own agendas to worry about.
Didn't Fauci and others in the government dismiss the lab leak theories? That was a big blunder in my opinion. At least acknowledge its a possibility and worth exploring, don't just completely dismiss the idea. I don't know what the agenda would be, but they clearly didn't want anyone to even consider the lab leak. Possibly because it was associate with the right, so they felt they had to dismiss it? Maybe they were worried about China relations? Who knows.

They should have foreseen variations and warned the public accordingly and provided realistic expectations instead of promises of this being over if you just take it. Again, I'm not sure why they didn't and can only guess.
This whole vaccine thing is something I'm surprised more people didn't talk about, or are okay with it. Kamala was the original anti Covid vaxer. She said on TV she wouldn't take a vaccine that Trump said you should take. Added that the experts will be muzzled so they can develop this vaccine.
Biden made similar comments, stating a vaccine likely wouldn't go through all the needed tests.
So they go from that stance, to telling you it’s over 95% effective when it’s not, and then wonder why people don't trust them and blame the unvaccinated for the pandemic?

Thanks for leaving out the part where she said, “if Dr. Fauci or the ‘medical professionals’ said to take it, she’d be the first in line.”

You're welcome.
And in that same conversation, she also said this: Bash first asked Harris if she believed the scientists and medical professionals who were working on a vaccine would be the ones who had the final say on the efficacy of a vaccine. Harris said she did not:

“If past is prologue … they’ll be muzzled. They’ll be suppressed,” Harris said of health experts and scientists. “They will be sidelined because he’s looking at an election coming up in less than 60 days, and he’s grasping for whatever he can get to pretend he has been a leader on this issue when he has not.”
She discredited the same scientists that gave us the vaccine she was pushing just a couple months later.
Both Biden and Harris went on record before the election questioning the very vaccines they mandated just a couple months later. You can't deny it. Well, you can and you will, but it happened.

What? No, she didn't discredit them. You usually have good takes, but I don't know where you got this. She's discrediting Trump and his strategy of politicizing everything. And she was right, we learned later that he "played it down" as you well know.

Consider the context. Her intent was to put doubt in our minds about trump's handling of the vaccine. No one thought trump was in the basement making the vaccine himself. We all knew about operation warp speed and the developments that were going on. For her to say she doesn't trust trump, and that the health experts will be muzzled, was to discredit the trump and the vaccines created while he was in office.

Less than 2 months before the election Biden said "If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that need to be done, and the trials that are needed to be done." and "Look at what’s happened. Enormous pressure put on the CDC not to put out the detailed guidelines. The enormous pressure being put on the FDA to say they’re going, that the following protocol will in fact reduce, it will have a giant impact on COVID. All these things turn out not to be true, and when a president continues to mislead and lie, when we finally do, God willing, get a vaccine, who’s going to take the shot? Who’s going to take the shot? You going to be the first one to say, ‘Put me — sign me up, they now say it’s OK’?"
But somehow 2 months later that's not an issue anymore? He had the same agenda. Discredit trump and the progress towards the vaccines created under his administration.

The whole purpose of making those statements was to discredit any progress towards a vaccine while trump was in office. Then mandate the exact same vaccines a few months later. Nobody on this planet thought trump was personally involved in any vaccine. If he would tell people to get the vaccine it would only be because companies like Pfizer did all the appropriate work and scientists told him it was safe. The only reason even bring him up is to discredit the work on the vaccine and give the impression if you want the pandemic to end and a proper vaccine, we need new leadership.

The funny thing is every single person I know who didn't take the vax, says exactly what I bolded above. They think it was developed too quickly and corners were cut. It was ok to say that before the election, but unAmerican to say it after. In truth we know it to be a fact as it was given emergency authorization and didn't go through the same process as every other vaccine we have available. So what changed in November 2020, other than the election, that makes that not a valid point anymore?

mace1229 · May 2023

For the record, I am pro vax. I think it was safe then and is now. Its just clear to me that the comments made by the admin had changed and they could have handled it differently from election time through the mandate process and been more clear about reasonable expectations. Its just ironic to me to have that stance pre-election, then a few months later label it a "pandemic of the unvaccinated."

cblock4life · May 2023

Why aren’t we past all this yet? Was the vaccine rushed due to mass deaths, yes. Does it mean it wasn’t effective to the majority with no severe sides affects, no. They’ve been researching MRNA vaccines since the 60’s so that’s probably why the majority responded so well. They’ve adapted these vaccines for 50 plus years. I believe these people/doctors are called to heal, discover, develop for our benefit.

It isn’t political, it’s just that I trust them. How can anyone doubt the effectiveness of these vaccines still. All FDA approved drugs have side affects. These vaccines saved millions and millions and that’s simply a fact.

mace1229 · May 2023

cblock4life said:

Why aren’t we past all this yet? Was the vaccine rushed due to mass deaths, yes. Does it mean it wasn’t effective to the majority with no severe sides affects, no. They’ve been researching MRNA vaccines since the 60’s so that’s probably why the majority responded so well. They’ve adapted these vaccines for 50 plus years. I believe these people/doctors are called to heal, discover, develop for our benefit.
It isn’t political, it’s just that I trust them. How can anyone doubt the effectiveness of these vaccines still. All FDA approved drugs have side affects. These vaccines saved millions and millions and that’s simply a fact.

I agree with this (minus it not being political). I was originally commented to 23's post how they oversold the vax as nearly 100% effective and immune.
I added they clearly flip flopped on the issue. They played politics during the election (I mean, is anyone surprised by this, I'd expect nothing less from a politician). They questioned the validity of the trials and tests just a few weeks before the election.
It was just politics, make people question what your opponent has been doing.
Here's a video of Biden saying "If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that need to be done, and the trials that are needed to be done" less than 2 months before the election.

I'm not saying the vaccine is bad. But we don't need to pretend there wasn't any politics being played right before a presidential election either. That was the goal, get people to doubt the progress and safety of the vaccine as it was being developed while trump was in office. Then they had to turn a 180 when he won.

https://grabien.com/getmedia.php?id=1002333&key=18ce8d3a2d997a54ff445badccb28a9e

mrussel1 · May 2023

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

he doesn't seem to care that it saved millions of lives. all he cares about is the "lies" he believes were told.

I care but..
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/11/vaccinated-spread-the-coronavirus/620650/

I feel like you didn't actually read what you posted. This article 100% supports what everyone here has been saying. Maybe you should read it with a different lens if you think it's anti-vaccine.

If you find one antivaccine post from me i'll buy you a cheeseburger from McDonald's..after 3 years you still don't get my point..

Then summarize it. I certainly don't know what it is at this point.

I'll do it for last time..
first lie..the virus came from the market..they knew it it was man made..please don't te;ll otherwise..
second lie..vaccines are 100% safe and effective..bullshit..
people lost their jobs and scientists lost their reputations because they expressed a different opinion..others were called crazy and others conspiracy theorists..
second time I post this article..
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/

So let's pull this apart one thing at a time:

RE: "man made" vs "naturally occurring "

1. When you say "they knew it was man made", who precisely is "they" and when precisely did "they know"?
2. Let's say your statement is true (whoever "they" may be), what do you think your gov't or the US gov't should have done differently as a public health response, with that knowledge? Would they have not had mask mandates? Would the virus have killed fewer people. Tell me how the public response would have changed.

My views are probably in between you 2, but I'll answer.

I'm not convinced they (the government and those working for them) knew it was from a lab early on. But they sure weren't open to the idea for a very long time. Many would call you racist for even suggesting it. Turns out, 2 years later seems like the likely cause. So they could have, and should have been more open to it than just shoving the wet market idea down on us.

They did announce the vaccine as something like 95% effective and say you will not even get it. Within a few months that changed to it just reduces the symptoms. A lot of people seem to forget that initial promise to us. I don't know what they should have done differently, they had limited data in a short time. I'm just acknowledging their stance on how effective it was did change quite a lot.

I'm not sure your views are that different than mine, it's more about what expectations are of gov't, reasonably. Remember that gov't is filled with normal ass people just trying to do their job and go home like everyone else.

So with regards to this, remember that before most people even got their booster, the virus had mutated to the Omnicron strain. That was becoming prevalent by fall of 2021. So the very strain that the vaccine was designed to combat was the minority strain early in the roll out. So being less than 95% would not be a surprise. The flu vaccine has that very same limitation. But the flu vaccine also reduces your symptoms even if you get the other type, the one it wasn't designed to prevent.

And normal people often have their own agendas to worry about.
Didn't Fauci and others in the government dismiss the lab leak theories? That was a big blunder in my opinion. At least acknowledge its a possibility and worth exploring, don't just completely dismiss the idea. I don't know what the agenda would be, but they clearly didn't want anyone to even consider the lab leak. Possibly because it was associate with the right, so they felt they had to dismiss it? Maybe they were worried about China relations? Who knows.

They should have foreseen variations and warned the public accordingly and provided realistic expectations instead of promises of this being over if you just take it. Again, I'm not sure why they didn't and can only guess.
This whole vaccine thing is something I'm surprised more people didn't talk about, or are okay with it. Kamala was the original anti Covid vaxer. She said on TV she wouldn't take a vaccine that Trump said you should take. Added that the experts will be muzzled so they can develop this vaccine.
Biden made similar comments, stating a vaccine likely wouldn't go through all the needed tests.
So they go from that stance, to telling you it’s over 95% effective when it’s not, and then wonder why people don't trust them and blame the unvaccinated for the pandemic?

Thanks for leaving out the part where she said, “if Dr. Fauci or the ‘medical professionals’ said to take it, she’d be the first in line.”

You're welcome.
And in that same conversation, she also said this: Bash first asked Harris if she believed the scientists and medical professionals who were working on a vaccine would be the ones who had the final say on the efficacy of a vaccine. Harris said she did not:

“If past is prologue … they’ll be muzzled. They’ll be suppressed,” Harris said of health experts and scientists. “They will be sidelined because he’s looking at an election coming up in less than 60 days, and he’s grasping for whatever he can get to pretend he has been a leader on this issue when he has not.”
She discredited the same scientists that gave us the vaccine she was pushing just a couple months later.
Both Biden and Harris went on record before the election questioning the very vaccines they mandated just a couple months later. You can't deny it. Well, you can and you will, but it happened.

What? No, she didn't discredit them. You usually have good takes, but I don't know where you got this. She's discrediting Trump and his strategy of politicizing everything. And she was right, we learned later that he "played it down" as you well know.

Consider the context. Her intent was to put doubt in our minds about trump's handling of the vaccine. No one thought trump was in the basement making the vaccine himself. We all knew about operation warp speed and the developments that were going on. For her to say she doesn't trust trump, and that the health experts will be muzzled, was to discredit the trump and the vaccines created while he was in office.

Less than 2 months before the election Biden said "If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that need to be done, and the trials that are needed to be done." and "Look at what’s happened. Enormous pressure put on the CDC not to put out the detailed guidelines. The enormous pressure being put on the FDA to say they’re going, that the following protocol will in fact reduce, it will have a giant impact on COVID. All these things turn out not to be true, and when a president continues to mislead and lie, when we finally do, God willing, get a vaccine, who’s going to take the shot? Who’s going to take the shot? You going to be the first one to say, ‘Put me — sign me up, they now say it’s OK’?"
But somehow 2 months later that's not an issue anymore? He had the same agenda. Discredit trump and the progress towards the vaccines created under his administration.

The whole purpose of making those statements was to discredit any progress towards a vaccine while trump was in office. Then mandate the exact same vaccines a few months later. Nobody on this planet thought trump was personally involved in any vaccine. If he would tell people to get the vaccine it would only be because companies like Pfizer did all the appropriate work and scientists told him it was safe. The only reason even bring him up is to discredit the work on the vaccine and give the impression if you want the pandemic to end and a proper vaccine, we need new leadership.

The funny thing is every single person I know who didn't take the vax, says exactly what I bolded above. They think it was developed too quickly and corners were cut. It was ok to say that before the election, but unAmerican to say it after. In truth we know it to be a fact as it was given emergency authorization and didn't go through the same process as every other vaccine we have available. So what changed in November 2020, other than the election, that makes that not a valid point anymore?

I disagree fundamentally with this italicized/bolded statement. Of course no one thought the president was working on the vaccine. But what Harris was saying, IMO, was that if Trump said the vaccine was safe, she wouldn't necessarily believe him UNLESS the professionals at the CDC said the same. I couldn't agree more. If Trump said "it's safe" and the professionals said "um, we're not done testing. Not so fast", wouldn't that give you pause? It would be if Biden said it was safe and the CDC said it wasn't. The difference is that Biden would not say it's safe without the support of his professionals. Neither would Obama, or Bush, or Clinton, or Bush. Or any normal president.

mrussel1 · May 2023

It's also funny that you think it was developed too quickly. mRNA technology has been around for 20 years.

Again, using the polio vaccine as a comparative, it was TESTED on 1.8MM children over the course of two years. It was determined to be 90% effective (not 100% which apparently is the standard these days), and it had side effects of about 1% for children. In fact, 1000 of the children who received the vaccine later contracted the disease. So is this better or worse than the vaccine for the original strain from Moderna and Phizer?

https://sph.umich.edu/polio/#:~:text=Francis made the announcement to,his former student, Jonas Salk.

mace1229 · May 2023

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

he doesn't seem to care that it saved millions of lives. all he cares about is the "lies" he believes were told.

I care but..
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/11/vaccinated-spread-the-coronavirus/620650/

I feel like you didn't actually read what you posted. This article 100% supports what everyone here has been saying. Maybe you should read it with a different lens if you think it's anti-vaccine.

If you find one antivaccine post from me i'll buy you a cheeseburger from McDonald's..after 3 years you still don't get my point..

Then summarize it. I certainly don't know what it is at this point.

I'll do it for last time..
first lie..the virus came from the market..they knew it it was man made..please don't te;ll otherwise..
second lie..vaccines are 100% safe and effective..bullshit..
people lost their jobs and scientists lost their reputations because they expressed a different opinion..others were called crazy and others conspiracy theorists..
second time I post this article..
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/

So let's pull this apart one thing at a time:

RE: "man made" vs "naturally occurring "

1. When you say "they knew it was man made", who precisely is "they" and when precisely did "they know"?
2. Let's say your statement is true (whoever "they" may be), what do you think your gov't or the US gov't should have done differently as a public health response, with that knowledge? Would they have not had mask mandates? Would the virus have killed fewer people. Tell me how the public response would have changed.

My views are probably in between you 2, but I'll answer.

I'm not convinced they (the government and those working for them) knew it was from a lab early on. But they sure weren't open to the idea for a very long time. Many would call you racist for even suggesting it. Turns out, 2 years later seems like the likely cause. So they could have, and should have been more open to it than just shoving the wet market idea down on us.

They did announce the vaccine as something like 95% effective and say you will not even get it. Within a few months that changed to it just reduces the symptoms. A lot of people seem to forget that initial promise to us. I don't know what they should have done differently, they had limited data in a short time. I'm just acknowledging their stance on how effective it was did change quite a lot.

I'm not sure your views are that different than mine, it's more about what expectations are of gov't, reasonably. Remember that gov't is filled with normal ass people just trying to do their job and go home like everyone else.

So with regards to this, remember that before most people even got their booster, the virus had mutated to the Omnicron strain. That was becoming prevalent by fall of 2021. So the very strain that the vaccine was designed to combat was the minority strain early in the roll out. So being less than 95% would not be a surprise. The flu vaccine has that very same limitation. But the flu vaccine also reduces your symptoms even if you get the other type, the one it wasn't designed to prevent.

And normal people often have their own agendas to worry about.
Didn't Fauci and others in the government dismiss the lab leak theories? That was a big blunder in my opinion. At least acknowledge its a possibility and worth exploring, don't just completely dismiss the idea. I don't know what the agenda would be, but they clearly didn't want anyone to even consider the lab leak. Possibly because it was associate with the right, so they felt they had to dismiss it? Maybe they were worried about China relations? Who knows.

They should have foreseen variations and warned the public accordingly and provided realistic expectations instead of promises of this being over if you just take it. Again, I'm not sure why they didn't and can only guess.
This whole vaccine thing is something I'm surprised more people didn't talk about, or are okay with it. Kamala was the original anti Covid vaxer. She said on TV she wouldn't take a vaccine that Trump said you should take. Added that the experts will be muzzled so they can develop this vaccine.
Biden made similar comments, stating a vaccine likely wouldn't go through all the needed tests.
So they go from that stance, to telling you it’s over 95% effective when it’s not, and then wonder why people don't trust them and blame the unvaccinated for the pandemic?

Thanks for leaving out the part where she said, “if Dr. Fauci or the ‘medical professionals’ said to take it, she’d be the first in line.”

You're welcome.
And in that same conversation, she also said this: Bash first asked Harris if she believed the scientists and medical professionals who were working on a vaccine would be the ones who had the final say on the efficacy of a vaccine. Harris said she did not:

“If past is prologue … they’ll be muzzled. They’ll be suppressed,” Harris said of health experts and scientists. “They will be sidelined because he’s looking at an election coming up in less than 60 days, and he’s grasping for whatever he can get to pretend he has been a leader on this issue when he has not.”
She discredited the same scientists that gave us the vaccine she was pushing just a couple months later.
Both Biden and Harris went on record before the election questioning the very vaccines they mandated just a couple months later. You can't deny it. Well, you can and you will, but it happened.

What? No, she didn't discredit them. You usually have good takes, but I don't know where you got this. She's discrediting Trump and his strategy of politicizing everything. And she was right, we learned later that he "played it down" as you well know.

Consider the context. Her intent was to put doubt in our minds about trump's handling of the vaccine. No one thought trump was in the basement making the vaccine himself. We all knew about operation warp speed and the developments that were going on. For her to say she doesn't trust trump, and that the health experts will be muzzled, was to discredit the trump and the vaccines created while he was in office.

Less than 2 months before the election Biden said "If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that need to be done, and the trials that are needed to be done." and "Look at what’s happened. Enormous pressure put on the CDC not to put out the detailed guidelines. The enormous pressure being put on the FDA to say they’re going, that the following protocol will in fact reduce, it will have a giant impact on COVID. All these things turn out not to be true, and when a president continues to mislead and lie, when we finally do, God willing, get a vaccine, who’s going to take the shot? Who’s going to take the shot? You going to be the first one to say, ‘Put me — sign me up, they now say it’s OK’?"
But somehow 2 months later that's not an issue anymore? He had the same agenda. Discredit trump and the progress towards the vaccines created under his administration.

The whole purpose of making those statements was to discredit any progress towards a vaccine while trump was in office. Then mandate the exact same vaccines a few months later. Nobody on this planet thought trump was personally involved in any vaccine. If he would tell people to get the vaccine it would only be because companies like Pfizer did all the appropriate work and scientists told him it was safe. The only reason even bring him up is to discredit the work on the vaccine and give the impression if you want the pandemic to end and a proper vaccine, we need new leadership.

The funny thing is every single person I know who didn't take the vax, says exactly what I bolded above. They think it was developed too quickly and corners were cut. It was ok to say that before the election, but unAmerican to say it after. In truth we know it to be a fact as it was given emergency authorization and didn't go through the same process as every other vaccine we have available. So what changed in November 2020, other than the election, that makes that not a valid point anymore?

I disagree fundamentally with this italicized/bolded statement. Of course no one thought the president was working on the vaccine. But what Harris was saying, IMO, was that if Trump said the vaccine was safe, she wouldn't necessarily believe him UNLESS the professionals at the CDC said the same. I couldn't agree more. If Trump said "it's safe" and the professionals said "um, we're not done testing. Not so fast", wouldn't that give you pause? It would be if Biden said it was safe and the CDC said it wasn't. The difference is that Biden would not say it's safe without the support of his professionals. Neither would Obama, or Bush, or Clinton, or Bush. Or any normal president.

But all that goes without saying. No one on this planet would take a vaccine just because trump said so and without the backing of medical professionals (except maybe that one guy who drank the fish tank cleaner because it sounded similar to a drug trump mentioned). Trump was working with several big Pharma companies that were already in phase II of trials at the time. I think it goes without swaying he isn't going to announce a vaccine without a lot of support. So to say you won't take a vaccine because Trump said to, to me is trying to discredit the progress.Either that or you're just mansplaining the obvious.
We can disagree, that's how it comes across to me.

cblock4life · May 2023

mace1229 said:

cblock4life said:

Why aren’t we past all this yet? Was the vaccine rushed due to mass deaths, yes. Does it mean it wasn’t effective to the majority with no severe sides affects, no. They’ve been researching MRNA vaccines since the 60’s so that’s probably why the majority responded so well. They’ve adapted these vaccines for 50 plus years. I believe these people/doctors are called to heal, discover, develop for our benefit.
It isn’t political, it’s just that I trust them. How can anyonei doubt the effectiveness of these vaccines still. All FDA approved drugs have side affects. These vaccines saved millions and millions and that’s simply a fact.

I agree with this. I was originally commented to 23's post how they oversold the vax as nearly 100% effective and immune.
I added they clearly flip flopped on the issue. They played politics during the election (I mean, is anyone surprised by this, I'd expect nothing less from a politician). They questioned the validity of the trials and tests just a few weeks before the election.
It was just politics, make people question what your opponent has been doing.
Here's a video of Biden saying "If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that need to be done, and the trials that are needed to be done" less than 2 months before the election.

I'm not saying the vaccine is bad. But we don't need to pretend there wasn't any politics being played right before a presidential election either. That was the goal, get people to doubt the progress and safety of the vaccine as it was being developed while trump was in office. Then they had to turn a 180 when he won.

https://grabien.com/getmedia.php?id=1002333&key=18ce8d3a2d997a54ff445badccb28a9e

This is where my “all politicians are the same and POS” statement gets repeated. All politicians tell you what you want to hear. Of course it was political. Had Trump handled it differently by allowing those knowledgeable to make medical/vaccine decisions he would have won hands down. He missed a huge opportunity to finally be a respectable, responsible president. Arrogance and ignorance lost him the election. The most honest statement I heard from him was when he told everyone the answer when Baron asked if the pandemic was bad and he said yes. That was the truth but it was like no one heard it.

mrussel1 · May 2023

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

he doesn't seem to care that it saved millions of lives. all he cares about is the "lies" he believes were told.

I care but..
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/11/vaccinated-spread-the-coronavirus/620650/

I feel like you didn't actually read what you posted. This article 100% supports what everyone here has been saying. Maybe you should read it with a different lens if you think it's anti-vaccine.

If you find one antivaccine post from me i'll buy you a cheeseburger from McDonald's..after 3 years you still don't get my point..

Then summarize it. I certainly don't know what it is at this point.

I'll do it for last time..
first lie..the virus came from the market..they knew it it was man made..please don't te;ll otherwise..
second lie..vaccines are 100% safe and effective..bullshit..
people lost their jobs and scientists lost their reputations because they expressed a different opinion..others were called crazy and others conspiracy theorists..
second time I post this article..
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/

So let's pull this apart one thing at a time:

RE: "man made" vs "naturally occurring "

1. When you say "they knew it was man made", who precisely is "they" and when precisely did "they know"?
2. Let's say your statement is true (whoever "they" may be), what do you think your gov't or the US gov't should have done differently as a public health response, with that knowledge? Would they have not had mask mandates? Would the virus have killed fewer people. Tell me how the public response would have changed.

My views are probably in between you 2, but I'll answer.

I'm not convinced they (the government and those working for them) knew it was from a lab early on. But they sure weren't open to the idea for a very long time. Many would call you racist for even suggesting it. Turns out, 2 years later seems like the likely cause. So they could have, and should have been more open to it than just shoving the wet market idea down on us.

They did announce the vaccine as something like 95% effective and say you will not even get it. Within a few months that changed to it just reduces the symptoms. A lot of people seem to forget that initial promise to us. I don't know what they should have done differently, they had limited data in a short time. I'm just acknowledging their stance on how effective it was did change quite a lot.

I'm not sure your views are that different than mine, it's more about what expectations are of gov't, reasonably. Remember that gov't is filled with normal ass people just trying to do their job and go home like everyone else.

So with regards to this, remember that before most people even got their booster, the virus had mutated to the Omnicron strain. That was becoming prevalent by fall of 2021. So the very strain that the vaccine was designed to combat was the minority strain early in the roll out. So being less than 95% would not be a surprise. The flu vaccine has that very same limitation. But the flu vaccine also reduces your symptoms even if you get the other type, the one it wasn't designed to prevent.

And normal people often have their own agendas to worry about.
Didn't Fauci and others in the government dismiss the lab leak theories? That was a big blunder in my opinion. At least acknowledge its a possibility and worth exploring, don't just completely dismiss the idea. I don't know what the agenda would be, but they clearly didn't want anyone to even consider the lab leak. Possibly because it was associate with the right, so they felt they had to dismiss it? Maybe they were worried about China relations? Who knows.

They should have foreseen variations and warned the public accordingly and provided realistic expectations instead of promises of this being over if you just take it. Again, I'm not sure why they didn't and can only guess.
This whole vaccine thing is something I'm surprised more people didn't talk about, or are okay with it. Kamala was the original anti Covid vaxer. She said on TV she wouldn't take a vaccine that Trump said you should take. Added that the experts will be muzzled so they can develop this vaccine.
Biden made similar comments, stating a vaccine likely wouldn't go through all the needed tests.
So they go from that stance, to telling you it’s over 95% effective when it’s not, and then wonder why people don't trust them and blame the unvaccinated for the pandemic?

Thanks for leaving out the part where she said, “if Dr. Fauci or the ‘medical professionals’ said to take it, she’d be the first in line.”

You're welcome.
And in that same conversation, she also said this: Bash first asked Harris if she believed the scientists and medical professionals who were working on a vaccine would be the ones who had the final say on the efficacy of a vaccine. Harris said she did not:

“If past is prologue … they’ll be muzzled. They’ll be suppressed,” Harris said of health experts and scientists. “They will be sidelined because he’s looking at an election coming up in less than 60 days, and he’s grasping for whatever he can get to pretend he has been a leader on this issue when he has not.”
She discredited the same scientists that gave us the vaccine she was pushing just a couple months later.
Both Biden and Harris went on record before the election questioning the very vaccines they mandated just a couple months later. You can't deny it. Well, you can and you will, but it happened.

What? No, she didn't discredit them. You usually have good takes, but I don't know where you got this. She's discrediting Trump and his strategy of politicizing everything. And she was right, we learned later that he "played it down" as you well know.

Consider the context. Her intent was to put doubt in our minds about trump's handling of the vaccine. No one thought trump was in the basement making the vaccine himself. We all knew about operation warp speed and the developments that were going on. For her to say she doesn't trust trump, and that the health experts will be muzzled, was to discredit the trump and the vaccines created while he was in office.

Less than 2 months before the election Biden said "If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that need to be done, and the trials that are needed to be done." and "Look at what’s happened. Enormous pressure put on the CDC not to put out the detailed guidelines. The enormous pressure being put on the FDA to say they’re going, that the following protocol will in fact reduce, it will have a giant impact on COVID. All these things turn out not to be true, and when a president continues to mislead and lie, when we finally do, God willing, get a vaccine, who’s going to take the shot? Who’s going to take the shot? You going to be the first one to say, ‘Put me — sign me up, they now say it’s OK’?"
But somehow 2 months later that's not an issue anymore? He had the same agenda. Discredit trump and the progress towards the vaccines created under his administration.

The whole purpose of making those statements was to discredit any progress towards a vaccine while trump was in office. Then mandate the exact same vaccines a few months later. Nobody on this planet thought trump was personally involved in any vaccine. If he would tell people to get the vaccine it would only be because companies like Pfizer did all the appropriate work and scientists told him it was safe. The only reason even bring him up is to discredit the work on the vaccine and give the impression if you want the pandemic to end and a proper vaccine, we need new leadership.

The funny thing is every single person I know who didn't take the vax, says exactly what I bolded above. They think it was developed too quickly and corners were cut. It was ok to say that before the election, but unAmerican to say it after. In truth we know it to be a fact as it was given emergency authorization and didn't go through the same process as every other vaccine we have available. So what changed in November 2020, other than the election, that makes that not a valid point anymore?

I disagree fundamentally with this italicized/bolded statement. Of course no one thought the president was working on the vaccine. But what Harris was saying, IMO, was that if Trump said the vaccine was safe, she wouldn't necessarily believe him UNLESS the professionals at the CDC said the same. I couldn't agree more. If Trump said "it's safe" and the professionals said "um, we're not done testing. Not so fast", wouldn't that give you pause? It would be if Biden said it was safe and the CDC said it wasn't. The difference is that Biden would not say it's safe without the support of his professionals. Neither would Obama, or Bush, or Clinton, or Bush. Or any normal president.

But all that goes without saying. No one on this planet would take a vaccine just because trump said so and without the backing of medical professionals (except maybe that one guy who drank the fish tank cleaner because it sounded similar to a drug trump mentioned). Trump was working with several big Pharma companies that were already in phase II of trials at the time. I think it goes without swaying he isn't going to announce a vaccine without a lot of support. So to say you won't take a vaccine because Trump said to, to me is trying to discredit the progress.Either that or you're just mansplaining the obvious.
We can disagree, that's how it comes across to me.

You can argue that the question to Harris was infused with liberal bias and wasn't a good question because it would never happen. Sure, maybe. I don't care about that because media gets to be biased. I don't have any issue. But considering Trump mused about bleach, light rays and said that he likes to downplay the virus, nothing can be considered "out of bounds" for him. His whole being is out of bounds for norms.

cblock4life · May 2023

Remember that HUGE vaccine that scared us for life? Probably in the sixties. That thing was as wide as my arm, about the size of a nickel and we waited in line for hours to get it. I can still see it but can’t remember what it was for…maybe Polio.

mrussel1 · May 2023

cblock4life said:

Remember that HUGE vaccine that scared us for life? Probably in the sixties. That thing was as wide as my arm, about the size of a nickel and we waited in line for hours to get it. I can still see it but can’t remember what it was for…maybe Polio.

Yes, I think that was polio. By the 70s it was smaller. I don't have that mark.

Halifax2TheMax · May 2023

mace1229 said:

cblock4life said:

Why aren’t we past all this yet? Was the vaccine rushed due to mass deaths, yes. Does it mean it wasn’t effective to the majority with no severe sides affects, no. They’ve been researching MRNA vaccines since the 60’s so that’s probably why the majority responded so well. They’ve adapted these vaccines for 50 plus years. I believe these people/doctors are called to heal, discover, develop for our benefit.
It isn’t political, it’s just that I trust them. How can anyone doubt the effectiveness of these vaccines still. All FDA approved drugs have side affects. These vaccines saved millions and millions and that’s simply a fact.

I agree with this (minus it not being political). I was originally commented to 23's post how they oversold the vax as nearly 100% effective and immune.
I added they clearly flip flopped on the issue. They played politics during the election (I mean, is anyone surprised by this, I'd expect nothing less from a politician). They questioned the validity of the trials and tests just a few weeks before the election.
It was just politics, make people question what your opponent has been doing.
Here's a video of Biden saying "If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that need to be done, and the trials that are needed to be done" less than 2 months before the election.

I'm not saying the vaccine is bad. But we don't need to pretend there wasn't any politics being played right before a presidential election either. That was the goal, get people to doubt the progress and safety of the vaccine as it was being developed while trump was in office. Then they had to turn a 180 when he won.

https://grabien.com/getmedia.php?id=1002333&key=18ce8d3a2d997a54ff445badccb28a9e

Re the “source” you linked to:

About

Grabien is a marketplace where users can buy and sell pre-edited news clips that services the growing demand for news video.

No thanks.

mrussel1 · May 2023

I don't recall the vaccine or its safety being anywhere on the radar regarding the election in 2020. Trump's handling of the Pandemic and his messaging was absolutely an issue. But not vaccine safety or efficacy.

mace1229 · May 2023

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

cblock4life said:

Why aren’t we past all this yet? Was the vaccine rushed due to mass deaths, yes. Does it mean it wasn’t effective to the majority with no severe sides affects, no. They’ve been researching MRNA vaccines since the 60’s so that’s probably why the majority responded so well. They’ve adapted these vaccines for 50 plus years. I believe these people/doctors are called to heal, discover, develop for our benefit.
It isn’t political, it’s just that I trust them. How can anyone doubt the effectiveness of these vaccines still. All FDA approved drugs have side affects. These vaccines saved millions and millions and that’s simply a fact.

I agree with this (minus it not being political). I was originally commented to 23's post how they oversold the vax as nearly 100% effective and immune.
I added they clearly flip flopped on the issue. They played politics during the election (I mean, is anyone surprised by this, I'd expect nothing less from a politician). They questioned the validity of the trials and tests just a few weeks before the election.
It was just politics, make people question what your opponent has been doing.
Here's a video of Biden saying "If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that need to be done, and the trials that are needed to be done" less than 2 months before the election.

I'm not saying the vaccine is bad. But we don't need to pretend there wasn't any politics being played right before a presidential election either. That was the goal, get people to doubt the progress and safety of the vaccine as it was being developed while trump was in office. Then they had to turn a 180 when he won.

https://grabien.com/getmedia.php?id=1002333&key=18ce8d3a2d997a54ff445badccb28a9e

Re the “source” you linked to:

About
Grabien is a marketplace where users can buy and sell pre-edited news clips that services the growing demand for news video.

No thanks.

Im unfamiliar with the site. I just remembered a similar comment, so when I google searched it, that's what I got.

Viruses / Vaccines 2

Comments

About

About

Categories