It's Time to Mandate Vaccines

[The Frankish Reich]

2 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

Please explain to me how this dynamic ever changes.

 

I don't give a flip about the vaccine data because cases aren't going away, hospitalizations aren't going away, and people will die vaccinated or not.  

 

 

 

When does the dynamic of "positive test for Big Ben see you in 10 days" ever changes?

 

 

No, hospitalizations for COVID aren’t going away under any current scenario. But “aren’t going to zero” Is kind of different than “are using 100% of our ICU beds.”  Silly argument. 

[Sundancer]

20 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

Please explain to me how this dynamic ever changes.

 

What dynamic? 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

If you need a booster, get boosted. It's not that hard to understand. As more meds and vaccines come out, maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points. But we know what helps. 

 

20 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

I don't give a flip about the vaccine data because cases aren't going away, hospitalizations aren't going away, and people will die vaccinated or not.  

 

Absurd. Vaccinations minimize all of these things, but especially the later two. 

 

20 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

When does the dynamic of "positive test for Big Ben see you in 10 days" ever changes?

 

 

When he gets vaccinated. When we're not in a pandemic anymore. When we have better treatments. 

 

So far only the first one is in his hands. His employer let him make his decision. He made the ten-day decision. For the Bills, Brown and Star probably made the same decision, and likely Beasley too. 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Sundancer

[Chef Jim]

45 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

 

Stop the spread?  Who's lying now?  

[JaCrispy]

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

What dynamic? 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

If you need a booster, get boosted. It's not that hard to understand. As more meds and vaccines come out, maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points. But we know what helps. 

 

 

Absurd. Vaccinations minimize all of these things, but especially the later two. 

 

 

When he gets vaccinated. When we're not in a pandemic anymore. When we have better treatments. 

 

So far only the first one is in his hands. His employer let him make his decision. He made the ten-day decision. For the Bills, Brown and Star probably made the same decision, and likely Beasley too. 

Unfortunately, you’re a couple weeks late Sundancer...already been proven vaccines won’t stop the spread of covid...according to CDC...

And this is a BIG one because it has been a major argument for the “pro mandate” crowd...basically a game changer...

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/06/cdc_director_vaccines_no_longer_prevent_you_from_spreading_covid.html#!

Edited November 19, 2021 by JaCrispy

[Buffarukus]

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

What dynamic? 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

If you need a booster, get boosted. It's not that hard to understand. As more meds and vaccines come out, maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points. But we know what helps. 

 

 

Absurd. Vaccinations minimize all of these things, but especially the later two. 

 

 

When he gets vaccinated. When we're not in a pandemic anymore. When we have better treatments. 

 

So far only the first one is in his hands. His employer let him make his decision. He made the ten-day decision. For the Bills, Brown and Star probably made the same decision, and likely Beasley too. 

 

so is any of this adjacent to natural immunity?

 

any of this included with monoclonal antibodies,  vitamins, excercise, age, horse paste or a s#it ton of other therapeutics or determining factors of severity. interesting that it takes so long to get proper studies in the same time that a vax, sorry THREE vaxes . have been created, tested, distributed *cough* i mean mandated and pronounced 100% safe. now we also have a pill, by the same company. amazing how big pharma and phizer in particular has such remarkable..marketability. incredably precise definitive answers along with top notch state approved testing procedures that none of the other things i mentioned do. 

 

" maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points."

 

ever think we do have alot of data points seeing as there are millions test subjects to base it on and 2 year time frame to make them and they are simply suppressed to the public?

 

if you dig deep you will find some answers from independent scientists but just never seems to make its way to the top of the science chain to give any overwhelming approval or exemptions? so just keep on jabbin it up until that day comes because what else could there possibly be on this planet? "its the best thing to do!" 🤔

 

 

 

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Buffarukus

[Buffarukus]

14 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

Unfortunately, you’re a couple weeks late Sundancer...already been proven vaccines won’t stop the spread of covid...according to CDC...

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/06/cdc_director_vaccines_no_longer_prevent_you_from_spreading_covid.html#!

 

 you have to wait for the corporate media cycle to declare it in unison. otherwise its misinformation. 

[Big Blitz]

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

What dynamic? 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

If you need a booster, get boosted. It's not that hard to understand. As more meds and vaccines come out, maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points. But we know what helps. 

 

 

Absurd. Vaccinations minimize all of these things, but especially the later two. 

 

 

When he gets vaccinated. When we're not in a pandemic anymore. When we have better treatments. 

 

 

He was vaccinated.  

 

Your definition of a pandemic is this never ends.  

 

 

You just MOVED THE GOAL POSTS again from "15 days.......to 45 days.....Till we get the vaccine.......to when we get to 75% vaccinated........to....when we get a cure (better treatments)

 

 

Go f yourselves.  You've all lost your minds.  

 

 

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

So far only the first one is in his hands. His employer let him make his decision.

 

"Your employer let you make your decision."

 

 

Fortunately few people on earth can do what Ben does and won't get fired.  

 

The little people.....not so much

 

 

And Ben is vaccinated 

 

 

[Sundancer]

44 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

Unfortunately, you’re a couple weeks late Sundancer...already been proven vaccines won’t stop the spread of covid...according to CDC...

And this is a BIG one because it has been a major argument for the “pro mandate” crowd...basically a game changer...

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/06/cdc_director_vaccines_no_longer_prevent_you_from_spreading_covid.html#!

 

Sigh. More incomplete words from the CDC. Data shows pretty clearly that transmission risk falls off faster for vaxxed people. So actually she's wrong, but as usual, erring on the side of being overly cautious. 

45 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

so is any of this adjacent to natural immunity?

 

Sure. Natural immunity is awesome. But you have to live through Covid and spread covid longer to get it. Not ideal. 

 

[Orlando Tim]

4 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Ok. Here we go:

- mandates are appropriate for all adults. Period. 
- mandates are appropriate for older

children.  I think the studies were

typically first done on 12 and ups. And that’s a good line. 
- whether a mandate is needed for younger children is probably debatable. I see the science as warranting vaccines. But I will say that there is room for debate here, such that a mandate may not be necessary or appropriate for, say, 5 to 10 year olds. 

And by the way, the “vaccine does not stop you from spreading the infection” is just silly. No, it is not perfect. But greatly reduces the risk

of spread is still a great thing. 

I honestly do thank you for stating your beliefs. As I have stated several times your belief that children should be required to get a vaccine that has minimal advantages for then without a long term study makes you immoral. The fact that you believe you can tell another adult what is best for them is egomaniacal. Lastly you literally said a few posts ago that the science is still out on kids, which means you are willing to use children as test subjects to protect from something that is of minimal risk to them. 

[The Frankish Reich]

32 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I honestly do thank you for stating your beliefs. As I have stated several times your belief that children should be required to get a vaccine that has minimal advantages for then without a long term study makes you immoral. The fact that you believe you can tell another adult what is best for them is egomaniacal. Lastly you literally said a few posts ago that the science is still out on kids, which means you are willing to use children as test subjects to protect from something that is of minimal risk to them. 

I didn’t say “the science is still out” re kids and COVID vaccines. The science is most definitely in: they are safe and effective. I would like to see more epidemiological data about risk of spread among children for one thing. We continue to mandate measles vaccines even though an individual kid’s chances of getting it - THANKS TO THE HIGH VACCINE RATE - is low. Nothing immoral about that. You need to study your ethics. 

[Precision]

I am vaccinated and believed in the first round of vaccinations.  This second round I have my doubts but am firmly against mandates.

 

I do have a couple of questions for the pro-mandate crowd.

 

Since this pandemic is going to require multiple vaccinations over an extended time how do you mandate and track that everyone is "all caught up with their shots, at the correct interval between shots"?  If the shots were a one time event I could see you having a chance.  We're at 3 shots now and who knows how many more shots will need to be administered and for how long.

 

Most idiots have trouble getting their taxes done every year.  Tell me how to force these same people to get shots, for themselves and their children, every 6 months?  Know that any "enforcement" will disproportionally impact the poor. 

 

Logistically are you going to have everyone run around with a tattered vaccine card to show at the entrance of every business/event or are we going to get more creative and tattoo QR codes on people or add a chip?  If you allow the government to put what they want into your body do you have a say if they want to put something on the outside of your body?

 

[Orlando Tim]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I didn’t say “the science is still out” re kids and COVID vaccines. The science is most definitely in: they are safe and effective. I would like to see more epidemiological data about risk of spread among children for one thing. We continue to mandate measles vaccines even though an individual kid’s chances of getting it - THANKS TO THE HIGH VACCINE RATE - is low. Nothing immoral about that. You need to study your ethics. 

The fact that you keep comparing childhood illnesses to Covid means I am wasting my breath. The measle vaccine protects children, the Covid vaccine is to protect the elderly. If Covid only had numbers like we do with kids across the board we would not be discussing it much less have a vaccine for it. I though am getting to the point you might not be immoral, you simply have not thought this through. 

[Big Blitz]

1 hour ago, Precision said:

I am vaccinated and believed in the first round of vaccinations.  This second round I have my doubts but am firmly against mandates.

 

I do have a couple of questions for the pro-mandate crowd.

 

Since this pandemic is going to require multiple vaccinations over an extended time how do you mandate and track that everyone is "all caught up with their shots, at the correct interval between shots"?  If the shots were a one time event I could see you having a chance.  We're at 3 shots now and who knows how many more shots will need to be administered and for how long.

 

 

 

And imagine thinking they can do this......with 8 billion people 

 

 

Either they intend to live in a permanent state of protocols and control, or they have no clue how admit what we should be doing right now is what we could have been doing all along  - they won't admit this so they're doubling down. 

 

Basically if life can go back to normal (it isn't) say 6 months from now, that means it absolutely can......yesterday. 

 

 

They STILL cannot answer how the dynamic today is different then it will be 1 or 5 years from now.    

[All_Pro_Bills]

52 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

And imagine thinking they can do this......with 8 billion people 

 

 

Either they intend to live in a permanent state of protocols and control, or they have no clue how admit what we should be doing right now is what we could have been doing all along  - they won't admit this so they're doubling down. 

 

Basically if life can go back to normal (it isn't) say 6 months from now, that means it absolutely can......yesterday. 

 

 

They STILL cannot answer how the dynamic today is different then it will be 1 or 5 years from now.    

It's all basically trial and error.  

[The Frankish Reich]

2 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

The fact that you keep comparing childhood illnesses to Covid means I am wasting my breath. The measle vaccine protects children, the Covid vaccine is to protect the elderly. If Covid only had numbers like we do with kids across the board we would not be discussing it much less have a vaccine for it. I though am getting to the point you might not be immoral, you simply have not thought this through. 

I told you - read up on the branch of philosophy known as ethics.

You are adopting an extreme libertarian position, which is fine as long as you understand what you're doing. You don't. 

[Sundancer]

11 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I honestly do thank you for stating your beliefs. As I have stated several times your belief that children should be required to get a vaccine that has minimal advantages for then without a long term study makes you immoral. The fact that you believe you can tell another adult what is best for them is egomaniacal. Lastly you literally said a few posts ago that the science is still out on kids, which means you are willing to use children as test subjects to protect from something that is of minimal risk to them. 

If Covid was killing kids but not adults like it’s killing elderly, EVERYONE would be rushing to get vaccines and boosters, and triple masked without question. 
 

We don’t give two ***** about the elderly though. “Let them get vaccinated but I don’t need to play any other role helping to keep them safe.” 

[billsfan5121]

56 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

If Covid was killing kids but not adults like it’s killing elderly, EVERYONE would be rushing to get vaccines and boosters, and triple masked without question. 
 

We don’t give two ***** about the elderly though. “Let them get vaccinated but I don’t need to play any other role helping to keep them safe.” 

You really do love making broad generalizations about the unvaccinated. How can you say the unvaccinated doesn’t care about the elderly, but in every post tell us that getting vaccinated prevents the spread and hospitalizations? Wouldn’t that imply that an elderly person with the vaccine is safe? I don’t understand the logic here. If I am 80 and get the vaccine, shouldn’t it be my expectation that it doesn’t matter what you do because my risk is diminished? According to the charts you love posting, I should be ok shouldn’t I?

 

Now back to generalizing the unvaccinated as not giving a $@&t about the elderly. You really need to get off your high horse acting like getting the vaccine is some sort of noble decision to benefit all of humanity, because it’s not. You have picked this hill to die on while you likely make other decisions in your life that scream “I only care about myself.” Am I right? Does every choice you make have the benefit of everyone else above yourself? I doubt it. 
 

So I’d love to know how I don’t care about the elderly because I’m unvaccinated? Here’s the reality. You don’t know me or my family. What you don’t know is that I haven’t been to church in 18 months because of the pandemic. I haven’t been to any public events in 18 months. I’ve made many sacrifices because I’m not vaccinated because of my own personal choice. But someone unvaccinated and living responsibly doesn’t fit your narrative that we are out, spreading COVID to everyone. So keep generalizing that we are a detriment to society.

 

Whats funny is I have heard numerous stories of the vaccinated that would suggest maybe they should evaluate their own view of “protecting” others. I have a coworker who came down with COVID symptoms but decided to go to a basketball game anyways because she was vaccinated. So even though she thought she had it, and we know she can spread it, she went anyways. So who is more in the wrong here? The vaccinated coworker or me who is unvaccinated and doesn’t go to public events despite feeling great? I’m guessing you’ll say both but I’d love to know what makes me such a problem to society. 

[Sundancer]

59 minutes ago, billsfan5121 said:

You really do love making broad generalizations about the unvaccinated. How can you say the unvaccinated doesn’t care about the elderly, but in every post tell us that getting vaccinated prevents the spread and hospitalizations? Wouldn’t that imply that an elderly person with the vaccine is safe? I don’t understand the logic here. If I am 80 and get the vaccine, shouldn’t it be my expectation that it doesn’t matter what you do because my risk is diminished? According to the charts you love posting, I should be ok shouldn’t I?

 

Now back to generalizing the unvaccinated as not giving a $@&t about the elderly. You really need to get off your high horse acting like getting the vaccine is some sort of noble decision to benefit all of humanity, because it’s not. You have picked this hill to die on while you likely make other decisions in your life that scream “I only care about myself.” Am I right? Does every choice you make have the benefit of everyone else above yourself? I doubt it. 
 

So I’d love to know how I don’t care about the elderly because I’m unvaccinated? Here’s the reality. You don’t know me or my family. What you don’t know is that I haven’t been to church in 18 months because of the pandemic. I haven’t been to any public events in 18 months. I’ve made many sacrifices because I’m not vaccinated because of my own personal choice. But someone unvaccinated and living responsibly doesn’t fit your narrative that we are out, spreading COVID to everyone. So keep generalizing that we are a detriment to society.

 

Whats funny is I have heard numerous stories of the vaccinated that would suggest maybe they should evaluate their own view of “protecting” others. I have a coworker who came down with COVID symptoms but decided to go to a basketball game anyways because she was vaccinated. So even though she thought she had it, and we know she can spread it, she went anyways. So who is more in the wrong here? The vaccinated coworker or me who is unvaccinated and doesn’t go to public events despite feeling great? I’m guessing you’ll say both but I’d love to know what makes me such a problem to society. 

I made a broad generalization that if kids were dying like the elderly, our attitude would be different to vaccination. Nothing you said addressed that hypothetical. 

 

Everyone has the choice on vaccination. Everyone has a choice to be a shut in and never come out again. I’d suggest that your mental health would be better if you went to church and interacted with people in person, whether you’re vaccinated or not. That’s way more important than Covid spread. That is opinion, based on a lot of Covid data by the way.
 

 And I’d doubly suggest, based on those pesky science-y charts that you don’t like, that getting vaccinated is a very low risk and high reward proposition. 
 

I go to everything. I mask only when asked. I am anti mandate. And I think people who do not have a particular complication should get vaccinated. 

[Orlando Tim]

9 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I told you - read up on the branch of philosophy known as ethics.

You are adopting an extreme libertarian position, which is fine as long as you understand what you're doing. You don't. 

stating that it is wrong forcing children to get a vaccine without any long term studies for an illness that has minimal effect on them is not extreme, what is wrong with you? I will guarantee you that there are more side effects for the Covid vaccine among children than lives saved, and by a large amount 

 

[Orlando Tim]

3 hours ago, Sundancer said:

If Covid was killing kids but not adults like it’s killing elderly, EVERYONE would be rushing to get vaccines and boosters, and triple masked without question. 
 

We don’t give two ***** about the elderly though. “Let them get vaccinated but I don’t need to play any other role helping to keep them safe.” 

"Either you force people to do as I tell them or you don't care if everyone dies". Got ya buddy.