Biden Admin had Covid vax opponents labeled “domestic violent extremists”

[JDHillFan]

3 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Misled the public.  That’s rich even for you, Anus Man.   Almost as rich as the Kristi Noem beef with entitlement junkies.  That’s literally her base. 

Quiet, doofus. From a CNN Townhall:
 

“But then, during a third exchange, Biden said that since the vaccines “cover” the highly transmissible Delta variant of the virus: “You’re not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations.”

 

I’m sorry that these misleading/false words from our previous president upset you to the point of embarrassing yourself by making it about Noem’s beef. I bet you like beef, don’t you. 
 

Regards,

AM

[Joe Ferguson forever]

5 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

You disliked my post about doctors and scientists being wined and dined at the expense of American lives.

 

Shocker!

 

 

I was a speaker for drug companies for products I believed in.  The last few were NOAC's (novel oral anticoagulants).  Pradaxa was first and was relatively slow to be used despite its obvious advantages over coumadin.  I'm happy to have promoted a superior drug to the then standard of care.  NOACs are now the standard of care.  I never spoke or went to a program for a scheduled drug.  If I was doing pain management, I'd have no problem going as long as a robust discussion was allowed.  It almost always is.  These programs can be very useful but there are those that aren't.  These dinners are the limit that doctors can accept from pharma and that's as it should be.

14 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

He's got a business to run, so no.

and you clearly don't.

[pennstate10]

3 hours ago, teef said:

This is why you like guys like rfk. He had no idea what he’s talking about and you buy into it.  That info.  Wow. 

I cant believe people believe this nonsense.  RFKJ uses big words, sometimes with true medical meanings, but he uses them incorrectly.

 

Antigenic shift and antigenic drift are both meaningful medical terms.  RFKJ uses them incorrectly. 

3 hours ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

The oxycontin lawsuit proved doctors and scientists can be bought and persuaded and that destroyed so many people's lives.

 

It's not bat ***** crazy to second guess everything now, especially after covid.

Yet another batsht crazy statement.  A few docs are crooks, ergo, ipso facto, QED, all docs are crooks.

 

 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

6 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

I was a speaker for drug companies for products I believed in.  The last few were NOAC's (novel oral anticoagulants).  Pradaxa was first and was relatively slow to be used despite its obvious advantages over coumadin.  I'm happy to have promoted a superior drug to the then standard of care.  NOACs are now the standard of care.  I never spoke or went to a program for a scheduled drug.  If I was doing pain management, I'd have no problem going as long as a robust discussion was allowed.  It almost always is.  These programs can be very useful but there are those that aren't.  These dinners are the limit that doctors can accept from pharma and that's as it should be.

and you clearly don't.

Great, but doctors were wined and dined from the makers of oxycontin to push that  the drug was non habit forming which was a flat out lie correct?

3 minutes ago, pennstate10 said:

I cant believe people believe this nonsense.  RFKJ uses big words, sometimes with true medical meanings, but he uses them incorrectly.

 

Antigenic shift and antigenic drift are both meaningful medical terms.  RFKJ uses them incorrectly. 

Yet another batsht crazy statement.  A few docs are crooks, ergo, ipso facto, QED, all docs are crooks.

 

 

How is it crazy?

 

You don't think we could be lied to again?

 

How many lives were ruined because of what was falsely said regarding oxycontin?

[Joe Ferguson forever]

10 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Great, but doctors were wined and dined from the makers of oxycontin to push that  the drug was non habit forming which was a flat out lie correct?

yup.  it was a travesty.  and they were successfully prosecuted.  many bad docs went to jail.

 

There are definitely things I don't like about pharma.  price gouging and finding ways around patent expirations are 2 of the big ones (both could be largely solved by single payer and a national formulary.  but without big pharma, the bugs would have won the antibiotic wars years ago and many cancers would still have a life expectancy of less than a year.  many more conditions where their research investments have paid huge dividends to humanity.

Edited 2 hours ago by Joe Ferguson forever

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

2 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

yup.  it was a travesty.  and they were successfully prosecuted.  many bad docs went to jail.

 

There are definitely things I don't like about pharma.  price gouging and finding ways around patent expirations are 2 of the big ones (both could be largely solved by single payer and a national formulary.  but without big pharma, the bugs would have won the antibiotic wars years ago and many cancers would still have a life expectancy of less than a year.  many more conditions where there research investments have paid huge dividends to humanity.

Fair statement.

 

But if it can happen once, it can happen again.

[pennstate10]

1 hour ago, JDHillFan said:

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32120383/

Results: The data included 170 million episodes of care and 7.6 million deaths. Turning 65 was associated with a statistically and clinically significant increase in rate of seasonal influenza vaccination. However, no evidence indicated that vaccination reduced hospitalizations or mortality among elderly persons. The estimates were precise enough to rule out results from many previous studies.

 

Is this just bad science?

Its not necessarily bad science, but simply science that is limited by its design.  Design was observational study.

 

Whenever you read about any study, in any medical journal, think about the design.

 

For instance, lets say that your hypothesis is that snow shoveling causes fatal heart attacks.

 

Here are 4 study designs, in order of weakest to strongest.

 

1)  Case report.  a doc publishes a report that some dude was shoveling snow, had a hear attack, and died. No controls.

 

2)  Case series.  A doc publishes that he saw 10 patients in the ER over the last 3 years who were shoveling snow when they developed a heart attack.  No controls.

 

3)  Case control.  A doc studies hear attack patients who are in the hospital, and asks them when they last shoveled snow.  The shovers are the cases, non shovelers are the controls.

 

4)  Cohort study. Men choose either to be shovlers, or hire a neighbor kid, and never touch a shovel.  You then follow these men for months to years, and see if the shovelers have more heart attacks.  Advantage is this is now prospective, with controls.  Disadvantage is that men choose which group they are in.  Maybe younger healthier guys are mostly shovelers, and older sickly guys choose to be non-shovelers.

 

5)  Randomized experiment.  Men are randomly placed into groups where they either shovel or dont.  Conceptually, this is the best experimental design.  Obviously, this type of design is often unethical or not feasible for other reasons.  And these are often very costly studies. The best designs for vaccines are this type of design, where one group gets the vaccine, the other group gets a placebo, and the groups are chosen randomly.  This was the design for the landmark mRNA vaccines, involving ~ 30K volunteers, and published in the NEJM.

 

The linked study above is an observational study.  This is a type of case control, suboptimal as the numbers of cases and controls are far different.  These are generally considered weak evidence in the medical community, and usually more of a hypothesis generating study, as opposed to a definitive study.

[SectionC3]

33 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Great, but doctors were wined and dined from the makers of oxycontin to push that  the drug was non habit forming which was a flat out lie correct?

How is it crazy?

 

You don't think we could be lied to again?

 

How many lives were ruined because of what was falsely said regarding oxycontin?

It's not.  There were some bad docs.  More than a few.  But the vast majority are not that.  

23 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Fair statement.

 

But if it can happen once, it can happen again.

Ever get ripped off by a contractor?  Lousy real estate agent?  Bad lawyer?  Botched police investigation?  Deceitful big box salesman?  Of course something bad can happen, and happen more than once.  But it's not a reason to dispose of baby and bathwater. 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

4 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

It's not.  There were some bad docs.  More than a few.  But the vast majority are not that.  

Ever get ripped off by a contractor?  Lousy real estate agent?  Bad lawyer?  Botched police investigation?  Deceitful big box salesman?  Of course something bad can happen, and happen more than once.  But it's not a reason to dispose of baby and bathwater. 

Bro I have one kidney and owe alot to the medical professionals. I'm not claiming all are bad. I'm saying it could happen again and covid did not help the public" trust the science".

[teef]

3 hours ago, IYKYK said:

Your arrogance is only exceeded by your ignorance. Do you ever think about what you’re posting? 

Yeah.  So you?

2 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:

Teef understands vaccines.

 

😂

 

He waits until others are dropping like flies around him until he gets the flu shot!

 

Good luck.

 

How long does it take for your immune system to generate circulating titers that are protective?

 

Hint: two weeks isn't enough.

 

 

stick to obsessing about trans.  it suits you better.