JDHillFan Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 42 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: sort of...their comments didn't help, as I said. They were true I will say that rushing the vax was appropriate. Having trump in control was not. Cut and paste - In short order you have gone from dismay over those that won’t follow your preferred booster schedule to defending those that undercut vaccine acceptance based solely on your political preferences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 (edited) 1 minute ago, JDHillFan said: Cut and paste - In short order you have gone from dismay over those that won’t follow your preferred booster schedule to defending those that undercut vaccine acceptance based solely on your political preferences. my original thoughts Edited February 12, 2023 by redtail hawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 17 hours ago, redtail hawk said: CNN, Twitter, FB, Time are all privately owned. They can do what they want but I'd love it if they acted ethically. So is Fox news but you seem to have an ongoing problem here at PPP with that outlet, but not the others. Why? 17 hours ago, redtail hawk said: Re the outliers opinions, they presented them, not endorsed them. These were political opinions, not scientific. I don't believe they were reported as such. They were appealing to authority (which can be valid in certain cases) but these were neither unbiased nor centrist scientific authorities. Again scientific leaders who stated, correctly, that the vax will not provide protection from infection for all nor will it prevent transmission WERE censored on social media. And in this case medical professionals who said its OK to go to mass gatherings during lockdowns WEREN'T censored on social media. Correct on covid=censored. Incorrect on covid, even by your own admission = not censored. Why do you suppose that is? 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 That's all you got @redtail hawk? Laughing at your hypocrisy exposed? You lose. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHillFan Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 On 2/12/2023 at 7:20 AM, redtail hawk said: in other words, stupid and selfish. https://www.euractiv.com/section/all/short_news/sweden-against-giving-eu-approved-covid-jab-to-under-30s/ Several European countries also recommended against the Moderna vaccine for under age 30 people. The vaccine still offered protection against severe illness and death, according to you and many others. Are the scientists and experts in those countries stupid and selfish? Just bad at science? Uncaring? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 16 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: So is Fox news but you seem to have an ongoing problem here at PPP with that outlet, but not the others. Why? Again scientific leaders who stated, correctly, that the vax will not provide protection from infection for all nor will it prevent transmission WERE censored on social media. And in this case medical professionals who said its OK to go to mass gatherings during lockdowns WEREN'T censored on social media. Correct on covid=censored. Incorrect on covid, even by your own admission = not censored. Why do you suppose that is? do you ever actually read any scholarly journals and original papers? I'm wondering if you even hold a bachelors degree re transmission of virus: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31494-y. There are other studies that don't show benefit but you can't, out of hand dismiss the ones that do! re protection from infection: I've presented the US data from the CDC on cases and the significant decrease in cases for those vaxed Finally, I don't like fox. I think they are unethical and purposefully intermingle news and opinion to cloud issues. It's pointless to argue science with someone who cannot interpret of accept data. done with you. 3 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: https://www.euractiv.com/section/all/short_news/sweden-against-giving-eu-approved-covid-jab-to-under-30s/ Several European countries also recommended against the Moderna vaccine for under age 30 people. The vaccine still offered protection against severe illness and death, according to you and many others. Are the scientists and experts in those countries stupid and selfish? Just bad at science? Uncaring? I have no idea what they're thinking but this statement from the article sheds light on their level of concern: “We are monitoring the situation closely and awaiting more data. But anyone who is younger and has recently been vaccinated with Nuvaxovid need not be concerned. The risk is very low, and you can continue with the next dose with another vaccine,” said Sören Andersson, head of the Vaccination Programme Unit, in a statement published on the health agency’s website. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHillFan Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 11 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: I have no idea what they're thinking but this statement from the article sheds light on their level of concern: “We are monitoring the situation closely and awaiting more data. But anyone who is younger and has recently been vaccinated with Nuvaxovid need not be concerned. The risk is very low, and you can continue with the next dose with another vaccine,” said Sören Andersson, head of the Vaccination Programme Unit, in a statement published on the health agency’s website. Imagine awaiting more data. Several European nations - “we may have a potential problem so while we await data all you thirty and under people should hold off or be very choosy about your vax supplier” redhawk - “anyone that doesn’t get repeated boosters is stupid and selfish” Different strokes. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 17 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: do you ever actually read any scholarly journals and original papers? I'm wondering if you even hold a bachelors degree re transmission of virus: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31494-y. There are other studies that don't show benefit but you can't, out of hand dismiss the ones that do! re protection from infection: I've presented the US data from the CDC on cases and the significant decrease in cases for those vaxed I never argued against anything in the paper linked. And yes I read them. I even have authored them. How about you? The fact remains that the vax never achieved 100% efficacy. Only morons would argue such. Yet we had government officials telling the public that if they get the vaccine then they won't get covid or transmit it. Media outlets censored actual scientists who pushed back against this false narrative. You are a moron. I have peer reviewed publications and patents in vaccine development, specifically influenza. You know another respiratory virus. How about you? Umm yeah. 17 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Finally, I don't like fox. I think they are unethical and purposefully intermingle news and opinion to cloud issues. It's pointless to argue science with someone who cannot interpret of accept data. done with you. I have no idea what they're thinking but this statement from the article sheds light on their level of concern: “We are monitoring the situation closely and awaiting more data. But anyone who is younger and has recently been vaccinated with Nuvaxovid need not be concerned. The risk is very low, and you can continue with the next dose with another vaccine,” said Sören Andersson, head of the Vaccination Programme Unit, in a statement published on the health agency’s website. You're a moron. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 48 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Again scientific leaders who stated, correctly, that the vax will not provide protection from infection for all nor will it prevent transmission WERE censored on social media. You';re either lying now, were lying then or write very poorly. Why would I blindly accept your claims on anything? Last response to you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 1 hour ago, redtail hawk said: You';re either lying now, were lying then or write very poorly. Why would I blindly accept your claims on anything? Last response to you. JFC. And you're an MD? Did not our current President among other high ranking officials state over and over and over that if you get the vaccine you cannot get covid and therefore cannot transmit covid? Yes they did. This is wrong. Period. No vaccine is 100% effective first of all, and respiratory virus vaccines are not expected to be even close. Can vaccines slow spread on a public health level? Yes of course. But to tell the public that if you get the vaccine you will not get covid was, is, and always will be wrong. It is wrong because if you get the vaccine you may very well get covid anyway. If you get covid, you can transmit it to others whether you're vaccinated or not. Why is this so hard to understand? We all saw this play out before our eyes over the last few years. You are either being purposely obtuse or you are indeed a moron. Should have stayed for the dual MD/ PhD. Because as an MD you're embarrassing yourself. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 5 hours ago, redtail hawk said: It's pointless to argue science with someone who cannot interpret of accept data. done with you. Nothing is science if it's conducted or interpreted with a preconceived bias. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 On 2/9/2023 at 12:15 AM, cle23 said: Between 1980 and 2006, 1866 HS athletes died suddenly in the US. This isn't some new phenomenon. The coverage is what changed. The internet. The non stop news cycle. The now political bias. This article is from 2009, so zero to do with Covid. An average of 72 HS athletes per year. It's unfortunate, but it happens. And it's not some giant conspiracy. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circulationaha.108.804617 Exactly. The burden of proof is on the “vaccines are causing sudden death” proponents. All I see from them Is anecdotal: “look, another apparently healthy young athlete died suddenly.” This is an example of the Seek And Ye Shall Find type of inductive reasoning. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts