Reasons why I will not be getting injected for the Wuhan

[Hal]

Vaccine mandates in Australia
https://www.facebook.com/therealrukshan ... 722916269/

[Maddy]

Have not yet read his latest....

The Big Cheat: How Donald Trump Fleeced America and Enriched Himself and His Family

https://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Cheat-Ho ... l_huc_item

I infer that Trump's "fleecing of America" somehow relates, in your mind, to the topic of CoVid injections? As is the norm for this board, why don't you make the connection explicit so that we can examine that thesis?

[yankees60]

Have not yet read his latest....

The Big Cheat: How Donald Trump Fleeced America and Enriched Himself and His Family

https://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Cheat-Ho ... l_huc_item

I infer that Trump's "fleecing of America" somehow relates, in your mind, to the topic of CoVid injections? As is the norm for this board, why don't you make the connection explicit so that we can examine that thesis?

You did not include the response to which I was responding, which shows my response as being perfectly appropriate...

[yankees60]

Have not yet read his latest....

The Big Cheat: How Donald Trump Fleeced America and Enriched Himself and His Family

https://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Cheat-Ho ... l_huc_item

I infer that Trump's "fleecing of America" somehow relates, in your mind, to the topic of CoVid injections? As is the norm for this board, why don't you make the connection explicit so that we can examine that thesis?

You did not include the response to which I was responding nor my full response, which shows my response as being perfectly appropriate.

Context DOES matter.

[Maddy]

If you repost the same thing three times, you get a badge with a megaphone icon next to your name. But I suspect you already know this.

[yankees60]

For those of you who have either received both shots from either Moderna or Pfizer shots or the single Johnson & Johnson AND who will ALSO get the booster shot.....have you heard or read that it is more effective to get a different vaccine for the booster? I.E., if you got Johnson & Johnson shot then it is more effective for you to get one of the other two for your booster shot.

And, if you have read or heard this....did you get a booster shot of a different vaccine than your original vaccine? Or, if you plan to get one....what did you originally get and what will you get.

My first two were Pfizer.

[Mountaineer]

https://overcast.fm/+F1mWd2F8

This is the best discussion about Covid19 and vaccines that I’ve heard yet.

[barrett]

https://overcast.fm/+F1mWd2F8

This is the best discussion about Covid19 and vaccines that I’ve heard yet.

Thanks for posting. That is an excellent source of information from a virologist and, I have to say, one of the more optimistic pieces I have heard. I would recommend skipping the first 16 minutes and the commercials (obviously). That brings the whole segment down to maybe 30 minutes.

[flyingpylon]

FDA panel votes 17-0 to endorse COVID-19 vaccines for kids 5-11 years old in the US.

Dr. Ruben on the FDA panel: "We're never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it. That's the way it goes."

Seems legit.

[Mountaineer]

FDA panel votes 17-0 to endorse COVID-19 vaccines for kids 5-11 years old in the US.

Dr. Ruben on the FDA panel: "We're never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it. That's the way it goes."

Seems legit.

Sounds like we don’t know what is in the bill until we pass it ……….

That went well.

[yankees60]

FDA panel votes 17-0 to endorse COVID-19 vaccines for kids 5-11 years old in the US.

Dr. Ruben on the FDA panel: "We're never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it. That's the way it goes."

Seems legit.

Sounds like we don’t know what is in the bill until we pass it ……….

That went well.

2 things

1) The quote was taken out of context: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pelos ... -is-in-it/

2) Did it not go well? It was passed over 10 years ago? And, in spite of all the Republicans efforts they both neither were able to overturn it due to the public's support for its benefits or able to produce anything to replace it.

[whatchamacallit]

FDA panel votes 17-0 to endorse COVID-19 vaccines for kids 5-11 years old in the US.

Dr. Ruben on the FDA panel: "We're never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it. That's the way it goes."

Seems legit.

Problem is that this now means mandates. I am perfectly fine with someone deciding that is best for their kid.

Natural immunity is real.

[whatchamacallit]

FDA panel votes 17-0 to endorse COVID-19 vaccines for kids 5-11 years old in the US.

Dr. Ruben on the FDA panel: "We're never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it. That's the way it goes."

Seems legit.

Problem is that this now means mandates. I am perfectly fine with someone deciding that is best for their kid.

Natural immunity is real.

Vinay Prasad MD MPH
Kids COVID Vax Vote: Why the FDA's adviser Michael Kurilla Abstained | His important reasoning
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5bU77dr4WM

[I Shrugged]

Here's an interesting explanation of the decline of antibody counts and why it doesn't mean as much as most people think.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arc ... ket-newtab

[Benko]

Given that medicine is now "downstream from culture", am I the only one who is suspect of medical articles in The Atlantic?

[murphy_p_t]

You're not the only one.

Does this article broadly share the same thesis as the argument which was put forward previously.... Namely, you know the jab is working because you got sick shortly after receiving it?

[barrett]

Here's an interesting explanation of the decline of antibody counts and why it doesn't mean as much as most people think.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arc ... ket-newtab

Thanks for posting this, Shrugged. It's a fascinating look at how antibodies actually work.

[whatchamacallit]

Given that medicine is now "downstream from culture", am I the only one who is suspect of medical articles in The Atlantic?

I definitely gave it the side eye as well.

Here is some more actual thinking coming from Atlantic writer.


"If someone is willing to be a fireman, if someone is willing to be a policeman, if someone is willing to go into a burning building and says, 'I'm just not that afraid of COVID and I don't want to take the vaccine,' that should be enough," Flanagan said.

"You shouldn't be losing a job, you shouldn't be furloughed without pay, the guy that saves lives because he doesn't want to take the vaccine. It's ridiculous," she added.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... irits.html

[WiseOne]

Dr. Ruben on the FDA panel: "We're never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it. That's the way it goes."

Seems legit.

Was that intended to be sarcastic?

Here are some other ideas on how to find out if the vaccine is safe:

1. Do the standard clinical trials. These vaccines underwent at most 2 months of a phase 3 trial, which is VERY inadequate. In the case of J&J, there were only 400 subjects which made their trial grossly underpowered.

2. Institute a national, well organized monitoring program. Insteading of wasting everyone's time on histrionic pronouncements and shoddy data reporting, the CDC could have signed up randomly selected vaccine recipients for systematic monitoring. I also would have liked them to come up with a better way to define and report "cases". Relying on the clunky VAERS system was a very poor decision, IMHO. I went through that system to report my mom's side effect. Very few people would have been able to navigate it without having their report thrown out for technical deficiencies. Basically that VAERS decision amounted to "we could care less and we don't want to hear about any side effects."

Short of this, the idea of subjecting healthy children, who have a vanishingly low risk from COVID that is even less than their risk from the ordinary flu, to a nearly untested vaccine utilizing an equally untested technology, with the potential for unknown long term effects that could cause life-long health issues, is....well, I just really don't have words to describe it. It's ethically indefensible.

[Xan]

Both of your suggestions, WiseOne, do involve giving people the vaccine in order to find out whether or not it's safe.

[WiseOne]

Both of your suggestions, WiseOne, do involve giving people the vaccine in order to find out whether or not it's safe.

OK let me spell it out for the logistically challenged.

Once the emergency approvals for the vaccines were issued and the push to vaccinate the entire US population began, the long accepted safety standards went out the window. i.e. it was no longer possible to fully test the vaccines' safety and efficacy in accordance with long accepted practices. Those practices were put into place after the thalidomide disaster in particular, but also after careful consideration over a long period of time. Throwing them out the window is not something that should be done lightly.

Given the above, the only alternative was to monitor for adverse events after the fact. If you have any better ideas on how to do this, I'm all ears. Or, if you wish to make the case that it is not necessary to monitor for adverse events, do tell.

I personally would have preferred an approach of offering the vaccine to people at high risk for COVID complications but not to healthy individuals until clinical trials could be completed and/or a careful monitoring system put into place. But as I indicated above, and as anyone not living under a rock for the past year undoubtedly is aware, that ship sailed a long time ago.

What I am NOT happy about is giving people the vaccine (and especially mandating it) with no systematic effort to monitor for adverse events, and a policy of only responding to things that come to light purely by accident.

[flyingpylon]

Dr. Ruben on the FDA panel: "We're never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it. That's the way it goes."

Seems legit.

Was that intended to be sarcastic?

Yes, sorry for not including a sarcasm emoji.

[Maddy]

Both of your suggestions, WiseOne, do involve giving people the vaccine in order to find out whether or not it's safe.

If this is the de facto new protocol for testing experimental treatments--simply try them out on large human populations and see what happens--we're in for a real ride. As WiseOne points out, what's happening in the case of these newfangled therapies constitutes such a radical departure from longstanding (and well-considered) standards as to demand a very clear, well-articulated justification. And given the CDC's own statistics, that justification hasn't been, and probably will never be, forthcoming.

If you can short-cut your way past most human subjects protections in this instance, where the risks posed to the vast majority of people is no greater than the flu, you've essentially done away with ALL human subjects protections--not to mention the longstanding legal and ethical constraints around informed consent. Frankly, I think we have a whole lot more to fear from the abandonment of these protections than we ever did from the coronavirus.

[Benko]

Frankly, I think we have a whole lot more to fear from the abandonment of these protections than we ever did from the coronavirus.

Hypothesis: most of this has nothing to do with medicine, this is just part of the larger picture, and history suggests there is room for considerable concern.

[murphy_p_t]

Frankly, I think we have a whole lot more to fear from the abandonment of these protections than we ever did from the coronavirus.

Hypothesis: most of this has nothing to do with medicine, this is just part of the larger picture, and history suggests there is room for considerable concern.

If it were about medicine, Ivermectin would be much more widely available. (Like in india, africa, Mexico, etc) Vitamin D would be encouraged as a standard regimen. There would not be a move to inject children, for whom the corona-cold is a microscopic risk.