It's Time to Mandate Vaccines

[All_Pro_Bills]

On 11/6/2021 at 3:56 PM, B-Man said:

 

Not so fast, Joe Biden.

 

The 5th Circuit is out with a ruling today issuing a stay on that vaccine mandate.

 

 

The court granted the stay, ruling that there were “grave statutory and constitutional issues.” A stay means they’re stopping it from going into effect, while they continue to consider the merits of the case; It isn’t a decision on the merits of the case yet, but it’s a good indication from their language that they find big problem with the mandate.

The fundamental points of contention is that mandates are not laws.  An administrative decision is not a law.  A decree by a Mayor is not law.  There is no emergency decree or law to revoke the Constitution or the Bill of Rights and the freedoms granted to the individual under those documents.  Administrators, mayors, governors, and even the President are not allowed by the system to dictate law without legislative action or oversight from the judicial branch.  That's why the end around to invoke some workplace standard for safety through OSHA.  But OSHA specifically protects workers from workplace dangers.  Not from some unquantified and nebulous threat from other workers.  So what's the objectively measured threat?  There's a chance I might get sick from you?  What kind of chance?  1%, 10%, 100%.  Let the administration present their facts in court and lets see what the threat is and let them make their case.

[SoCal Deek]

This simply isn’t an OSHA issue and never has been. As I’ve said over and over and over again. Why hasn’t the Biden Administration mandated vaccines? Simple…because they can’t. 

[Orlando Tim]

On 11/6/2021 at 8:56 AM, Sundancer said:

Gotta watch out for teenage girls and the Instagram rumors vs critical thinking. 

“Of course we now know the vaccines are not lasting more than 6 months in most cases.”

So you don't believe high risk patients should get the boosters? What you are quoting is true for high risk patients, which I said a few days after that, but you have keep going there because otherwise you have been wrong. In fact initially you stated that booster would not used at all.

[Sundancer]

17 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

So you don't believe high risk patients should get the boosters? What you are quoting is true for high risk patients, which I said a few days after that, but you have keep going there because otherwise you have been wrong.

 

Your statement is wrong and you stuck to it. It remains wrong even for at risk people, though of course boosters have been shown to help them. 

 

17 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

In fact initially you stated that booster would not used at all.

 

Link? 

 

When you don't find it, say you're wrong.

 

Again. 

[Orlando Tim]

3 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

Your statement is wrong and you stuck to it. It remains wrong even for at risk people, though of course boosters have been shown to help them. 

 

 

Link? 

 

When you don't find it, say you're wrong.

 

Again. 

The vaccines are not losing their efficacy but all at risk people should get the booster? Or are the at risk people all believers in a hoax? 

 

"ALL studies have shown that so far, excepting immunity compromised people, vaccines remain robustly effective for all studied participants"

 

That was in response to the article showing high risk patients need boosters. If you were correct than why would anyone need a booster except the immunity compromised?

 

 

 

 

[JaCrispy]

No need for mandates...enough people are taking it on their own...

[Sundancer]

3 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

The vaccines are not losing their efficacy but all at risk people should get the booster? Or are the at risk people all believers in a hoax? 

 

Losing effectiveness over time is not what you said dingdong. 

 

3 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

 

"ALL studies have shown that so far, excepting immunity compromised people, vaccines remain robustly effective for all studied participants"

 

That was in response to the article showing high risk patients need boosters. If you were correct than why would anyone need a booster except the immunity compromised?

 

 

 

 

 

Vaccines remain effective. 

 

And boosters give added efficacy. 

 

And guess what: your statement, “Of course we now know the vaccines are not lasting more than 6 months in most cases” is still wrong. 

 

But you can't admit it. 

[Big Blitz]

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

Losing effectiveness over time is not what you said dingdong. 

 

 

Vaccines remain effective. 

 

And boosters give added efficacy. 

 

And guess what: your statement, “Of course we now know the vaccines are not lasting more than 6 months in most cases” is still wrong. 

 

But you can't admit it. 

 

 

 

MIA for 13 days.  Hope this isn't true would be terrible.  Guess we'll see.  

 

 

 

[Orlando Tim]

41 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

Losing effectiveness over time is not what you said dingdong. 

 

 

Vaccines remain effective. 

 

And boosters give added efficacy. 

 

And guess what: your statement, “Of course we now know the vaccines are not lasting more than 6 months in most cases” is still wrong. 

 

But you can't admit it. 

You actually think that we are boosting a vaccine that is fully effective? We boost all of the other shots when the effectiveness wanes but this one is being boosted just to extra special sure. 

[dpberr]

The NBA is mandating booster shots for those who opted for the J&J product. You'll take this "shot" and keep these taking shots, and you'll like it. 
 

Don't be upset the "conspiracy theorists" among you keep telling you the news weeks, months in advance. Be concerned that they are.

 

As it pertains to the NBA, I'm amazed at how little criticism has arose from a bunch of largely exceptionally wealthy white men telling a league largely comprised of black men....what they must put into their bodies or else they can't play. Just don't see it being so quietly obeyed in a different decade.   

 

Edited November 9, 2021 by dpberr

[Sundancer]

17 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

You actually think that we are boosting a vaccine that is fully effective? We boost all of the other shots when the effectiveness wanes but this one is being boosted just to extra special sure. 

 

Buffalo Timmy sees this and says vaccines don't work for most people.

 

Don't be as dense as Buffalo Timmy. 

 

[Orlando Tim]

16 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

Buffalo Timmy sees this and says vaccines don't work for most people.

 

Don't be as dense as Buffalo Timmy. 

 

Nice job of not answering the question at hand. This is why no one here takes you seriously. I asked a direct question, and you then lie and don't answer it.

[BillStime]

 

Should this be placed under the GQP Cancel Culture thread or here? lmao

 

 

 

 

[Sundancer]

14 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

Nice job of not answering the question at hand. This is why no one here takes you seriously. I asked a direct question, and you then lie and don't answer it.

 

That's because I already answered it dingong. 

 

"Vaccines remain effective. And boosters give added efficacy."

 

You, however, think that vaccines don't work for most people after six months. And you're sticking to it!

 

In other news, the NYT continues its FOX impersonation, driving the wedge ever deeper. Hate, Inc.

 

[Orlando Tim]

1 minute ago, Sundancer said:

 

That's because I already answered it dingong. 

 

"Vaccines remain effective. And boosters give added efficacy."

 

You, however, think that vaccines don't work for most people after six months. And you're sticking to it!

Once again you lie because it is all you have- I have stated literally for months that I was referring to high risk people, you know that but have to continue the lie. What should expect from an admitted Pfizer employee besides this though?

[Sundancer]

53 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

Once again you lie because it is all you have- I have stated literally for months that I was referring to high risk people, you know that but have to continue the lie.

 

And...you're wrong even though you now try to change your position.

 

Science MAgazine and 780,000 people studied...

 

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm0620

 

From July to October 2021, VE-D for age 65 years was 73.0% for Janssen, 81.5% for Moderna, and 84.3% for Pfizer-BioNTech; VE-D for age ≥65 years was 52.2% for Janssen, 75.5% for Moderna, and 70.1% for Pfizer-BioNTech. Findings support continued efforts to increase vaccination, booster campaigns, and multiple, additional layers of protection against infection.

 

So even for older people, the vaccine "works." 

 

If you were wrong because the data changed or evolved, you'd be a scientist. 

 

But you were just wrong without data to support you. That's the thing that really stupid people get caught up in. 

 

53 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

What should expect from an admitted Pfizer employee besides this though?

 

Now who's lying? The guy who doesn't get jokes. 

 

I checked with my new employer Dr. Fauci and he said this was ok for me to post. Tell me if you fall for this one too. 

 

Edited November 9, 2021 by Sundancer

[Orlando Tim]

3 hours ago, Sundancer said:

 

And...you're wrong even though you now try to change your position.

 

Science MAgazine and 780,000 people studied...

 

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm0620

 

From July to October 2021, VE-D for age 65 years was 73.0% for Janssen, 81.5% for Moderna, and 84.3% for Pfizer-BioNTech; VE-D for age ≥65 years was 52.2% for Janssen, 75.5% for Moderna, and 70.1% for Pfizer-BioNTech. Findings support continued efforts to increase vaccination, booster campaigns, and multiple, additional layers of protection against infection.

 

So even for older people, the vaccine "works." 

 

If you were wrong because the data changed or evolved, you'd be a scientist. 

 

But you were just wrong without data to support you. That's the thing that really stupid people get caught up in. 

 

 

Now who's lying? The guy who doesn't get jokes. 

 

I checked with my new employer Dr. Fauci and he said this was ok for me to post. Tell me if you fall for this one too. 

 

the article you linked to shows hazard rates starting at between .14 and .11 and at end of 6 months it is from .42 and .87- which by any standard is a huge change. I assume you understand that even the .42 is not a strong defense at 6 months.

[Sundancer]

1 minute ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

the article you linked to shows hazard rates starting at between .14 and .11 and at end of 6 months it is from .42 and .87- which by any standard is a huge change. I assume you understand that even the .42 is not a strong defense at 6 months.

That’s a cute cherry picking. And guess what: even that still doesn’t mean the vaccine doesn’t work for most people, like you keep saying. 
 

Go ahead and read what I quoted again. Do it very slowly. 

[GaryPinC]

4 hours ago, Sundancer said:

 

And...you're wrong even though you now try to change your position.

 

Science MAgazine and 780,000 people studied...

 

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm0620

 

From July to October 2021, VE-D for age 65 years was 73.0% for Janssen, 81.5% for Moderna, and 84.3% for Pfizer-BioNTech; VE-D for age ≥65 years was 52.2% for Janssen, 75.5% for Moderna, and 70.1% for Pfizer-BioNTech. Findings support continued efforts to increase vaccination, booster campaigns, and multiple, additional layers of protection against infection.

 

So even for older people, the vaccine "works." 

 

If you were wrong because the data changed or evolved, you'd be a scientist. 

 

But you were just wrong without data to support you. That's the thing that really stupid people get caught up in. 

 

 

Now who's lying? The guy who doesn't get jokes. 

 

I checked with my new employer Dr. Fauci and he said this was ok for me to post. Tell me if you fall for this one too. 

 

The problem with the data you cite is it needs to be broken out by month of full inoculation.  If the immune system is losing efficacy the true magnitude may be hidden given that the sensitivity may diminish a lot from 6-8 months.

 

It seems to me you are referring to vaccine efficacy while Buffalo Timmy is referring to immune system efficacy.

 

I'm afraid the magnitude of immune efficacy and vaccine efficacy loss won't be well quantified until after the winter post-holiday surge.  I'm not going to just trust Pfizer's word on it at this point.

Just glad my parents got boosted and I'll get mine soon as late January is my 1 yr anniversary.

[Orlando Tim]

3 hours ago, Sundancer said:

That’s a cute cherry picking. And guess what: even that still doesn’t mean the vaccine doesn’t work for most people, like you keep saying. 
 

Go ahead and read what I quoted again. Do it very slowly. 

Cherry picking would have been only discussing the .87 because it works for much less than half, but I pulled that from what you sent me so it must be valid.  I do appreciate your continued lying about me, it makes you seem desperate. 

2 hours ago, GaryPinC said:

The problem with the data you cite is it needs to be broken out by month of full inoculation.  If the immune system is losing efficacy the true magnitude may be hidden given that the sensitivity may diminish a lot from 6-8 months.

 

It seems to me you are referring to vaccine efficacy while Buffalo Timmy is referring to immune system efficacy.

 

I'm afraid the magnitude of immune efficacy and vaccine efficacy loss won't be well quantified until after the winter post-holiday surge.  I'm not going to just trust Pfizer's word on it at this point.

Just glad my parents got boosted and I'll get mine soon as late January is my 1 yr anniversary.

If you look at the data he references the drop from month 6-8 is precipitous. He is just attacking because I misunderstood a study that was focused on elderly and thought it was overall. Since then everything he has said has turned out be wrong so he still focused on my self admitted  mistake back in August.