Covid Vaccine. Your plans?

[PigFish]

It is not a direct comparison. It is an example of the intolerance of variation of thought.

The greater question is why the current generation is so eager to cast aside individualism for collectivism? Why would stripping of peoples rights be a good thing if they believe they are acting in their own best interests?

In a world now built on relativism, why when one represents an opinion outside the mob is it okay to shout them down, pull their posts (in this instance I did violate a forum rule) and penalize them?

Cheers! -R

[Ken Gargett]

15 hours ago, Lunettesman said:

We must not allow a passport to become reality

your problem is that i'm not really sure you can do much about it. if a country says no one gets in without the certificate saying you've been jabbed then you have the choice. get the jab or don't go to that country. and it is not as though you can vote in their elections to have it overturned. and is the fact that your own country (whichever it might be) is imposing this on other countries going to be an issue anyone gets fired up over? don't think so. 

but i do not see it as a big deal. very happy to get the jab when available here. protection not just for me but hopefully family and friends.

when i went travelling back in the 80s, we needed a fist full of certificates for all manner of diseases etc, for crossing into many countries. i had shots, tablets etc, for about 9 different diseases from memory. yellow fever, meningitis, typhoid, polio (i needed a day off work after that sip of pink syrup), rabies and so on and on. without all that, i simply would not have been allowed into many of the countries i wanted to visit. this is no difference and hardly any great imposition on anyone's rights. not much point in whinging. 

i suspect many countries will require it, as is their right, but that once this fades as a major issue (assuming it does), so will the requirement. 

[Bijan]

Well I don't think shouting down or persecuting unpopular opinions is new. What's new and potentially uniquely frustrating is persecuting dissent in the name of tolerance

As to striping rights and acting in one's best interests. Almost everyone has some limit.

Criminals are acting in their best interests while directly and/or indirectly harming others. Most people don't object to striping them of rights.

It's then just a political discussion as to where to draw the line. Best to err on the side of freedom, but most people have some preferred line in the sand which is often different for different issues.

And again ideally direct and indirect harm to others (not oneself) would be the basis for it, but indirect harm can be quite nebulous.

 

[Ken Gargett]

guys, the posts comparing this to guns have been hidden (rob will decide if he wants to unhide) for obvious reasons. lord spare me. i would much rather have launched into a debate which may have seen me on a different side but we would be right down the usual gun thread. and ray, you have even identified breaking the rule before there was any hiding. 

please find another example. not that difficult for a person of your intelligence, i have no doubt. 

[Habana Mike]

9 hours ago, ReturnFreeRisk said:

I won’t be first in line to roll the dice against this list


https://www.fda.gov/media/143557/download




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That sounds just about as bad as getting the virus....maybe worse!

Always question the source and intent though.

[PigFish]

1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

guys, the posts comparing this to guns have been hidden (rob will decide if he wants to unhide) for obvious reasons. lord spare me. i would much rather have launched into a debate which may have seen me on a different side but we would be right down the usual gun thread. and ray, you have even identified breaking the rule before there was any hiding. 

please find another example. not that difficult for a person of your intelligence, i have no doubt. 

Dude... leave it hidden. Not meant to fry you. A rule is a rule!

A better comparison would have been made around smoking... then denying one 'common good' healthcare.

Drinking, denying 'common good' healthcare...

Eating sugar... common good healthcare again!!!

It is not another anarchy or freedom argument either. It is respect of the rights of others. Disease is not beyond any of us we have all likely spread some form of it to another in our lifetime.

The point was made. Likely lost on many and nothing to do with the OP. I just tend to get sassy when someone says 'you don't think what I think and we (collectively or through government action should do harm to you...) That was the point.

I make the point if you are afraid of your neighbor, put bars around your own house. 

 

As I have said before, I am old, fat and have a heart condition. I don't really want this bug. I know tons of people who have had it, I travel and work with a lot of other people, eat out while I am out of town. By all rights I should have had it by now. By all rights, my heart should have killed me in '08.

To answer the OP, my neighbor owns hospices. If she gets a shot for me, I will take it, next week! Just like I get a flu shot. It has nothing to do with altruism. It is for my own protection. I don't condone arresting people, or denying them healthcare if they choose not to get their own flu shot, nor the Covid shot.

If I were 40 and in great health, I would likely pass!

Cheers! -R

[Habana Mike]

3 hours ago, Duxnutz said:

Public faith in government would have to be at an all time low, so trusting them on a vaccine at this point just seems hard given the emergency approval. Just seems rushed.

Still, if it gives people an incentive to fly again I’m all for it. I’m personally gonna wait til it’s well and truly been ironed out. 

“You never want the A model of anything”. 

Reminds me of a friend that was in the Russian effort to convert urine to drinking water. 

Alpha testers stated it was a liquid but still tasted a bit like piss....

[MrBirdman]

This question is ultimately a balancing act for public health; there are absolutely greater than usual risks in widespread use of a vaccine developed only 11 months ago. Yet we know for sure that the longer we wait for the approval, the more people will die. We’re losing over 2,000 a day in the states, and many survivors are experiencing serious complications. 

The gov’t calculus is that the vaccine risk is vastly outweighed by the costs of delaying approval. It’s as simple as that. While I would never victimize anyone for refusing it, unless serious side effects manifest I consider it a matter of personal responsibility to get vaccinated. And not just out of a sense of collective duty, but also because the people I’m most likely to infect are friends and family (and my dog). 

PS: Even by conspiracy theory standards, the micro-chipping nonsense is especially preposterous. No surreptitious RFID chip suitable for humans could fit through a vaccine needle 0.5mm wide. They can barely get a reading from my dog’s chip at the vet and it’s wider than those “ultrawide” needles they use for blood donation. 

[CaskStrength]

Most of the closest people to me are at high risk if they get the virus.  Even if they're vaccinated, a 5% chance of it not working is too high for me to not get it as well.  I also don't expect to be able to travel, watch live sports, or see a concert. until I take the vaccine, so it makes sense to get it over with.

[mprach024]

I’m not allowed to travel to Africa without several shots today.  Don’t see the difference, I don’t see any protests over that.  If people don’t want it, don’t get it, there just could be consequences to that choice. 

This is where the construct of a society lives, and unfortunately society is never smart enough to make the right decisions on their own, which is why we have laws.  You can be arrested for robbery, assaulting another, are you being stripped of your rights by not being allowed to do that?  Of course not.  While in this case jail time is not what you’ll face, Society may determine you forfeit some of your privileges should you choose to not get it.  Remains to be seen, but if it happens honestly I won’t be surprised.  

People often times mistake “privileges” for “rights” in this country and many others.  You always have your rights in the USA (see first 10 amendments of the constitution for that list) and if anyone or any institution takes them from you then you are entitled to due process.  On the hand, you only have your privileges (examples:  owning a drivers license, ability to fly on a plane, enter a commercial place of business) as long as you play ball with society’s rules.  No shoes, no shirt, no service!!!  In 6 months time we’ll see how it plays out.    

[CaptainQuintero]

  I think with issues like this, you defer to people who know more than you. Unless you have a degree level understanding of immunology/biotechnology etc then find someone who is. The media/government/Facebook isn't qualified to give you any credible advice.

  There are plenty of qualified people freely available who can produce credible information eg

https://twitter.com/andrew_croxford?s=09

 Is just one of countless others trying desperately to stem and counter the tide of misinformation spreading. There isn't any claim going around about the vaccine/testing that hasn't been thoroughly explained, evaluated and debunked by him and many other like him.

  Brilliant minds are spreading their knowledge, for free, at the click of a button.

[potpest]

I would say that comparing a drug that has been in the wild since 1969 to hastily conceived 'vaccine' is a false equivalence, at best.
Anyone claiming that vaccines are perfectly fine and safe are either entirely ignorant or outright lying.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/victims-of-swine-flu-jab-to-get-pound60m-payout-02ptvlnlzqk
https://www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment
These firms have never been trustworthy at any stage.
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/pfizer-fined-23-billion-illegal-marketing-off-label/story?id=8477617
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements
Educate yourselves, there are clearly massive conflicts of interest throughout this entire 'pandemic' response.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/
Was all that was ever needed ^^
Follow the money.
 
 

I was wondering when the Hydroxychloroquine misinformation crap would appear.

Sent from my SM-G770F using Tapatalk

[MrBirdman]

11 hours ago, Peekay said:

I would say that comparing a drug that has been in the wild since 1969 to hastily conceived 'vaccine' is a false equivalence, at best.

In a key sense, this is absolutely true: prevention and treatment are fundamentally different approaches to managing an epidemic. Invariably both are used whenever possible (e.g. STD's). A vaccine is essentially a prevention tool - what makes them so powerful is that they last months to years, and (unlike the dreaded mask) are a passive prevention measure (i.e. you don't have to wear, consume, apply, activate, or insert anything into/onto anything once you get it). And vaccines usually have no long term side effects; when they do it's usually in a very small number of cases. But there is always risk, especially with a new treatment, and nobody wants to be a member of that 1%***

(As for hydroxychloroquine, it's not viable for two reasons: 1) it has its own side-effects, and there's conflicting evidence about it having any benefits; and 2) more importantly, it's been superseded by treatments that are clearly more effective and even safer, like dexamethasone. The hydroxy debate is now entirely political, not medical). 

11 hours ago, Peekay said:

Anyone claiming that vaccines are perfectly fine and safe are either entirely ignorant or outright lying.

Again, that's true. I just haven't heard anyone actually say that - at least not anyone worth listening to when it comes to public health (which doesn't include the moronic pundits on any cable news channel).

And it's important to note: we would not be moving forward with a COVID vaccine that was only 40% effective, because the risks would outweigh the benefits of the vaccine, even though many would probably take that risk. But through Providence and modern science we have vaccines that are 95% effective. That means herd immunity - and an end to the pandemic - can be achieved if at least 3 out of every 4 people in a given area are immunized. That's huge. We know that will save tens of thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands of lives. But the crisis will persist if not enough people are willing to get vaccinated. They all have to be adults too, since the vaccine hasn't been studied in kids yet.

Many of my ancestors were called on to fight in wars, which is more dangerous than COVID itself let alone any vaccine. Fortunately, I live in a time and place where such a sacrifice is no longer demanded. All I need to do to help win this war is follow the suggestions of doctors and epidemiologists: wear a mask and, barring new information, get vaccinated. 

***DISCLAIMER: The 1% number is not a reference to actual odds related in any way to medicine or COVID. Just a little levity! Carry on and smoke well!

[Ken Gargett]

14 minutes ago, MrBirdman said:

In a key sense, this is absolutely true: prevention and treatment are fundamentally different approaches to managing an epidemic. Invariably both are used whenever possible (e.g. STD's). A vaccine is essentially a prevention tool - what makes them so powerful is that they last months to years, and (unlike the dreaded mask) are a passive prevention measure (i.e. you don't have to wear, consume, apply, activate, or insert anything into/onto anything once you get it). And vaccines usually have no long term side effects; when they do it's usually in a very small number of cases. But there is always risk, especially with a new treatment, and nobody wants to be a member of that 1%***

(As for hydroxychloroquine, it's not viable for two reasons: 1) it has its own side-effects, and there's conflicting evidence about it having any benefits; and 2) more importantly, it's been superseded by treatments that are clearly more effective and even safer, like dexamethasone. The hydroxy debate is now entirely political, not medical). 

Again, that's true. I just haven't heard anyone actually say that - at least not anyone worth listening to when it comes to public health (which doesn't include the moronic pundits on any cable news channel).

And it's important to note: we would not be moving forward with a COVID vaccine that was only 40% effective, because the risks would outweigh the benefits of the vaccine, even though many would probably take that risk. But through Providence and modern science we have vaccines that are 95% effective. That means herd immunity - and an end to the pandemic - can be achieved if at least 3 out of every 4 people in a given area are immunized. That's huge. We know that will save tens of thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands of lives. But the crisis will persist if not enough people are willing to get vaccinated. They all have to be adults too, since the vaccine hasn't been studied in kids yet.

Many of my ancestors were called on to fight in wars, which is more dangerous than COVID itself let alone any vaccine. Fortunately, I live in a time and place where such a sacrifice is no longer demanded. All I need to do to help win this war is follow the suggestions of doctors and epidemiologists: wear a mask and, barring new information, get vaccinated. 

***DISCLAIMER: The 1% number is not a reference to actual odds related in any way to medicine or COVID. Just a little levity! Carry on and smoke well!

good post. 

[Meklown]

11 hours ago, potpest said:

If enough people are vaccinated the virus can't come back from other non vaccinated countries, that's literally how vaccines work.

Sent from my SM-G770F using Tapatalk
 

Course it can, just not in pandemic levels

[mprach024]

37 minutes ago, MrBirdman said:

Many of my ancestors were called on to fight in wars, which is more dangerous than COVID itself let alone any vaccine. Fortunately, I live in a time and place where such a sacrifice is no longer demanded. All I need to do to help win this war is follow the suggestions of doctors and epidemiologists: wear a mask and, barring new information, get vaccinated. 

Very well said here.

[Nino]

10 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

when i went travelling back in the 80s, we needed a fist full of certificates for all manner of diseases etc, for crossing into many countries. i had shots, tablets etc, for about 9 different diseases from memory. yellow fever, meningitis, typhoid, polio (i needed a day off work after that sip of pink syrup), rabies and so on and on. without all that, i simply would not have been allowed into many of the countries i wanted to visit. this is no difference and hardly any great imposition on anyone's rights. not much point in whinging. 

i suspect many countries will require it, as is their right, but that once this fades as a major issue (assuming it does), so will the requirement. 

Tell me, Ken - when I started flying early 70*s it was the complete "yellow book" plus shots, vaccines, some more shots and many more vaccines plus pills like Resochin to combat Malaria prevalent then in all of Africa and most of South America - tried Resochin once for a Lagos flight, had severe stomach pain, dropped it and decided Malaria could not be worse ( and the cure for Malaria was to swallow more Resochin).
Flying to South America on a regular monthly basis I'd have had to eat Resochin all my flying days...

 

[Ken Gargett]

8 minutes ago, nino said:

Tell me, Ken - when I started flying early 70*s it was the complete "yellow book" plus shots, vaccines, some more shots and many more vaccines plus pills like Resochin to combat Malaria prevalent then in all of Africa and most of South America - tried Resochin once for a Lagos flight, had severe stomach pain, dropped it and decided Malaria could not be worse ( and the cure for Malaria was to swallow more Resochin).
Flying to South America on a regular monthly basis I'd have had to eat Resochin all my flying days...

 

that was Nino. the yellow book. as important as your passport. all sorts of shots and stuff. we had five of the group on our truck, out of 20, get malaria. not sure much could be worse. fortunately, i was not one. 

[Nino]

6 hours ago, CaptainQuintero said:

  I think with issues like this, you defer to people who know more than you. Unless you have a degree level understanding of immunology/biotechnology etc then find someone who is. The media/government/Facebook isn't qualified to give you any credible advice.

  There are plenty of qualified people freely available who can produce credible information eg

https://twitter.com/andrew_croxford?s=09

 Is just one of countless others trying desperately to stem and counter the tide of misinformation spreading. There isn't any claim going around about the vaccine/testing that hasn't been thoroughly explained, evaluated and debunked by him and many other like him.

  Brilliant minds are spreading their knowledge, for free, at the click of a button.

Oh, I wouldn't say so - I found some very good advice on Facebook a few days ago ... :

 

Seriously now,  thank you for the link to Andrew !!

My go-to information centre during this pandemic is this :

https://www.statnews.com/

Very much recommended.

[Nino]

13 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

that was Nino. the yellow book. as important as your passport. all sorts of shots and stuff. we had five of the group on our truck, out of 20, get malaria. not sure much could be worse. fortunately, i was not one. 

Still have my last 2 yellow books just in case .... ?

[Ken Gargett]

Just now, nino said:

Still have my last 2 yellow books just in case .... ?

mine was actually canary yellow!

i might still have it - rarely throw anything - but it would be thirty years old now. 

[potpest]

Course it can, just not in pandemic levels

So what do you mean by "the virus will come back" if we get to a high vaccination level you could end up with between 0-500 cases per year which doesn't spread in the population.

I maybe arguing semantics here but as far as I'm concerned that is it eradicated. i.e. no more outbreaks.

No outbreaks of polio in the UK since the 70's because the vaccination rate is high and remains high.
The only outbreaks of polio in Europe have been in countries where vaccination levels are low.


Sent from my SM-G770F using Tapatalk

[Fugu]

17 hours ago, Peekay said:

Anyone claiming that vaccines are perfectly fine and safe are either entirely ignorant or outright lying.

No one is saying that. Just keep it to the facts.

[Fugu]

7 hours ago, CaptainQuintero said:

  Brilliant minds are spreading their knowledge, for free, at the click of a button.

For each brilliant mind there’s ten dimwits popping up like mushrooms. (holding in particular for Twitter) ?

[Meklown]

1 hour ago, potpest said:

between 0-500 cases per year which doesn't spread in the population.

That's exactly what I meant, in case I was misunderstood. That's what I mean when I say "not in pandemic levels". Thanks for helping to clarify ?

It's still present, it will still come back, just not beyond a level that regular medical services cannot cope with.