Vaccine Facts -the Debate

[JonC]

This is really simple - if you believe the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks of the vaccine and the risks of covid then get vaccinated. If you believe the risks of the vacvine outweigh the risks associated with the virus then don't get vaccinated.

Don't whine that others get vaccinated....or that others do not....that is none of your business.

It just seems here that the anti-vaxers are afraid they are wrong and want to justify their position. You only need to justify your choice to be vaccinated or not to you or your family.

 

[Reynolds]

This is really simple - if you believe the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks of the vaccine and the risks of covid then get vaccinated. If you believe the risks of the vacvine outweigh the risks associated with the virus then don't get vaccinated.

Don't whine that others get vaccinated....or that others do not....that is none of your business.

It just seems here that the anti-vaxers are afraid they are wrong and want to justify their position. You only need to justify your choice to be vaccinated or not to you or your family.

Likewise the pro vax crowd should stop trying to force others to get vaxed. The resistance is against the threat of force.

 

[Scott Downey]

Likewise the pro vax crowd should stop trying to force others to get vaxed. The resistance is against the threat of force.

That is the main problem, forced medical care against the will of a person. I dont want them making my medical care decisions when I still can. Those in the provaxx crowd in leadership positions of government want to force you to be vaxxed like they are. (Or I suppose they got placebo shots to fake it) LOL!
I read somewhere that some vials were placebo shots as part of the experimental study, so if true, some people did not get the vaccine but thought they did.

There does come a time, when if you live long enough and your mind is gone, or they claim it is, people lead you to where you don't want to go, and you cant do much about that.

 

[Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin]

Those in my age group (Under 30) look at it this way.

I have a 99.998% Chance of surviving COVID, which we know is not a problem in my age group and there's no lasting effects for my friends who've had it
OR
I can get an experimental vaccine created with experimental technology where I *probably* have a 99% chance of being OK, but we're not really sure what's going to happen in 3 to 5 years, so I just gotta trust the medical advice of a Federal Government that employs this dude Rachel Levine - Wikipedia as one of their "trusted medical professionals" and that also thinks it's medically OK to murder babies in the womb.

Now...let's see....what do I trust more? Hmmmm, let me think real hard LOL

Your calculation and outcome will change depending on your age (risk). People need to stop applying their risk profile to those of us healthy as a stud horse on breeding day.

 

[Wingman68]

Dr. Christina Parks - Testimony For Bill To Against Vaccine Mandates

This testimony is happening in my state of Michigan, by a PHD who graduated UofM. She is against the mandate, & tells why. She knows ‘the science’.

 

[JonC]

Those in my age group (Under 30) look at it this way.

I have a 99.998% Chance of surviving COVID, which we know is not a problem in my age group and there's no lasting effects for my friends who've had it
OR
I can get an experimental vaccine created with experimental technology where I *probably* have a 99% chance of being OK, but we're not really sure what's going to happen in 3 to 5 years, so I just gotta trust the medical advice of a Federal Government that employs this dude Rachel Levine - Wikipedia as one of their "trusted medical professionals" and that also thinks it's medically OK to murder babies in the womb.

Now...let's see....what do I trust more? Hmmmm, let me think real hard LOL

Your calculation and outcome will change depending on your age (risk). People need to stop applying their risk profile to those of us healthy as a stud horse on breeding day.

Youngster....

 

[Revmitchell]

This is really simple - if you believe the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks of the vaccine and the risks of covid then get vaccinated. If you believe the risks of the vacvine outweigh the risks associated with the virus then don't get vaccinated.

Don't whine that others get vaccinated....or that others do not....that is none of your business.

It just seems here that the anti-vaxers are afraid they are wrong and want to justify their position. You only need to justify your choice to be vaccinated or not to you or your family.

thats not what it seems at all. That’s just what you want to make it seem. Quite frankly I find most if your rhetoric on this topic disengenuous

 

[Scott Downey]

Dr. Christina Parks - Testimony For Bill To Against Vaccine Mandates

This testimony is happening in my state of Michigan, by a PHD who graduated UofM. She is against the mandate, & tells why. She knows ‘the science’.

Yes, the vaccine is less effective against the variants, YET, they are pushing, BIDEN also, they want 3rd shots, boosters... cause they claim it will do what exactly? She talks about 'negative efficacy' with these vaccines and the covid variants, they get SICKER, the vaccine helps the virus to infect the lungs.. She is really good.

And like she said vaccinated people are spreading covid, this is not an epidemic of the unvaccinated.

 

[Scott Downey]

Dr. Christina Parks - Testimony For Bill To Against Vaccine Mandates

This testimony is happening in my state of Michigan, by a PHD who graduated UofM. She is against the mandate, & tells why. She knows ‘the science’.

I am glad there are people like her and the other virologists and doctors working hard to get out this message. Even so the opposition is intense as is shown on this board as well. The opposition also uses tactics like making fun of the person talking about the problems, character assassinations, disparaging sources, assigning everything about a source false if only a small part of what was said on a website is suspect, calls bringing up the topic and what doctors are saying sinful and false, and are in a highly intolerant, totalitarian, authoritarian and emotionally worked up state. Probably because they feel threatened by the information.

 

[JonC]

thats not what it seems at all. That’s just what you want to make it seem. Quite frankly I find most if your posts retoric and disengenuous

Perhaps this speaks more to your discernment and the degree to which your position blinds your reasoning.

If, to you, deciding to take a vaccine (any vaccine) is more complicated than weighing the benefits-risks of the vaccine against the risks of the virus then you are making it more difficult than it needs to be. This is probably why your posts are often obsessed with the topic.

That you view this as disengenuous rhetoric highlights my point.

I state the process is one of weighing benefits and risks - that people will come to different decisions about their health. You engage ad hominem.

 

[JonC]

Likewise the pro vax crowd should stop trying to force others to get vaxed. The resistance is against the threat of force.

I absolutely agree. Both the anti-vaxers and pro-vaxers are agenda driven.

What people should do is consider the risks and potential benefits of the vaccine against the risks associated with the virus.

Some may decide the vaccine is less risky to them. They should be allowed to make that decision.

Others may decide the virus is less risky to them than the vaccine. They should be allowed to make that decision.

But agenda driven people (both anti-vaxers and pro-vaxers) do not want to allow people this freedom.

@Revmitchell 's conclusion that allowing people to weigh pros and cons is wrong and those who support this freedom to make medical decisions are disengenuous demonstrates the problem.

There are good reasons people may decide to be vaccinated. There are good reasons people decide not to take the shot. People should be allowed to determine for themselves which course of action is best for them.

 

[JonC]

The resistance is against the threat of force.

BTW, resistance is an element that cannot be overlooked. And the South will rise again

That said - part of my argument against pro-vaxers and anti-vaxers is that they want to make decisions for other people.

One side wants the vaccine pulled (or people pressured not to be vaccinated) and the other wants forced (or pressured) vaccinations.

So there is some resistance (on my part) as I abhor other people (outside my family and my chosen doctors) trying to control my health.

It is one thing to think the vaccibe is your best choice. It is another to try to force this conclusion on other people.

It is one thing to think you are better off without the vaccine. It is another thing to try to force this conclusion on other people

People need to be allowed their own choices regarding their health.

Neither the pro-vax nor anti-vax agendas are people centered. They are about power and control.

 

[Wingman68]

Does not matter. We are not promised tomorrow....much less 36 years.

The vaccine is less than a year old. So that would be 2056 if vacvinated when first made avaliable.

You consistently show that you do not read what others write. His sister had 39 yrs of misery due to vaccine ‘side effects’. Blew right through that, heh?

 

[JonC]

You consistently show that you do not read what others write. His sister had 39 yrs of misery due to vaccine ‘side effects’. Blew right through that, heh?

I did. I just do not see how it applies unless it is one of the mRNA vaccines being discussed. It's like not going to a hospital because a relative died in a hospital. There is no correlation.

Why do you believe people should not be afforded the right to decide themselves to take or not take a vaccine?

 

[Reynolds]

BTW, resistance is an element that cannot be overlooked. And the South will rise again

That said - part of my argument against pro-vaxers and anti-vaxers is that they want to make decisions for other people.

One side wants the vaccine pulled (or people pressured not to be vaccinated) and the other wants forced (or pressured) vaccinations.

So there is some resistance (on my part) as I abhor other people (outside my family and my chosen doctors) trying to control my health.

It is one thing to think the vaccibe is your best choice. It is another to try to force this conclusion on other people.

It is one thing to think you are better off without the vaccine. It is another thing to try to force this conclusion on other people

People need to be allowed their own choices regarding their health.

Neither the pro-vax nor anti-vax agendas are people centered. They are about power and control.

The entire pro vax agenda is becoming more and more suspicious. If the vax is as good as proponents claim, there is no need to try to force it. Problem is it has done nothing Biden, Faucci, or CDC said it would.
We were told by the above that:
1. Vaxed people could not get symptomatic Covid.
2. Asymptomatic people could not transmit Covid.
3. We could reach herd immunity by a combination of post infection survivors and vaccinating those without antibodies.
We are already past the orig numbers they said we needed for herd immunity. Delta has completely broken through the vaxes and viral loads prove this.
We now know all three are lies. When will the next lie surface.

 

[JonC]

The entire pro vax agenda is becoming more and more suspicious. If the vax is as good as proponents claim, there is no need to try to force it. Problem is it has done nothing Biden, Faucci, or CDC said it would.
We were told by the above that:
1. Vaxed people could not get symptomatic Covid.
2. Asymptomatic people could not transmit Covid.
3. We could reach herd immunity by a combination of post infection survivors and vaccinating those without antibodies.
We are already past the orig numbers they said we needed for herd immunity. Delta has completely broken through the vaxes and viral loads prove this.
We now know all three are lies. When will the next lie surface.

The pro-vaxers are just as misleading as the anti-vaxers....I agree completely.

The whole "herd immunity" thing was nonsense (from both sides).

We agree on this part.

BUT where we may disagree is with the anti-vaxers. You may decline a vaccine - I respect that as it is your right....YOUR choice. But don't take that choice away from others.

You are not qualified to judge between all of these different opinions.

Just let others alone (as the pro-vaxers should) and let them make choices for themselves.

We are not qualified to have an opinion except regarding our own health.

 

[Reynolds]

The pro-vaxers are just as misleading as the anti-vaxers....I agree completely.

The whole "herd immunity" thing was nonsense (from both sides).

We agree on this part.

BUT where we may disagree is with the anti-vaxers. You may decline a vaccine - I respect that as it is your right....YOUR choice. But don't take that choice away from others.

You are not qualified to judge between all of these different opinions.

Just let others alone (as the pro-vaxers should) and let them make choices for themselves.

We are not qualified to have an opinion except regarding our own health.

I don't want to take the opportunity away from others. I also want the pro vax establishment to be completely honest. If the vaccine is indeed causing the virus to mutate and making the virus more dangerous for all, that information must be acknowledged. They must be honest and in the open about antibody-dependent enhancement.
The vaxed do not have the right to become super spreaders and breeders for mutations. The huge viral loads in the vaxed Delta infected people is alarming.

 

[Scott Downey]

I don't want to take the opportunity away from others. I also want the pro vax establishment to be completely honest. If the vaccine is indeed causing the virus to mutate and making the virus more dangerous for all, that information must be acknowledged. They must be honest and in the open about antibody-dependent enhancement.
The vaxed do not have the right to become super spreaders and breeders for mutations. The huge viral loads in the vaxed Delta infected people is alarming.

The pro vaxx crowd is not allowing for any dissent! They have a hardline intolerance, many companies are declaring vaccine mandates, or else some kind of punishments, Biden talked to them and got his wish.

 

[JonC]

I don't want to take the opportunity away from others. I also want the pro vax establishment to be completely honest. If the vaccine is indeed causing the virus to mutate and making the virus more dangerous for all, that information must be acknowledged. They must be honest and in the open about antibody-dependent enhancement.
The vaxed do not have the right to become super spreaders and breeders for mutations. The huge viral loads in the vaxed Delta infected people is alarming.

Neither the pro-vaxers or the anti-vaxers will be honest. They have agendas.

You do not know that vacvinated people will become super-spreaders. You do not know that the unvaccinated will become super-spreaders.

You are entitled to your opinions when making decisions about your health as you will live or die with the consequences.

I am likewise entitled to my opinions when making decisions about my health - for the same reasons and with the same consequences.

But you are not entitled to spread opinions and guesses, put one doctors opinion over another's, when dealing with other people's decisions because you are not qualified to do so.

You say that you do not believe the CDC. But really you do- when they agree with your opinions (in December the CDC put out that the vaccibe can cause Bell's palsy and heart danage....you agree with that - but disagree with their conclusions).

We do not have the right to tell other people our opinions about their medical health.


If I have a coworker who has an uptake of alpha particles I can tell him chelating agents are avaliable at medical. If it were me, I would go through the treatment. But I would never tell him that he should take the chelating agent (he could die....I'm not qualified to tell him what he should and should not do to address the radiation).

He would have to weigh the risks of the chelating agent with the risk associated with having radioactive particles in his body that would not reach anywhere near its half-life during his lifetime. But it would be his decision - uninfluenced by my opinions.

 

[JonC]

I don't want to take the opportunity away from others. I also want the pro vax establishment to be completely honest. If the vaccine is indeed causing the virus to mutate and making the virus more dangerous for all, that information must be acknowledged. They must be honest and in the open about antibody-dependent enhancement.
The vaxed do not have the right to become super spreaders and breeders for mutations. The huge viral loads in the vaxed Delta infected people is alarming.

Neither the pro-vaxers or the anti-vaxers will be honest. They have agendas.

You do not know that vacvinated people will become super-spreaders. You do not know that the unvaccinated will become super-spreaders.

You are entitled to your opinions when making decisions about your health as you will live or die with the consequences.

I am likewise entitled to my opinions when making decisions about my health - for the same reasons and with the same consequences.

But you are not entitled to spread opinions and guesses, put one doctors opinion over another's, when dealing with other people's decisions because you are not qualified to do so.

You say that you do not believe the CDC. But really you do- when they agree with your opinions (in December the CDC put out that the vaccibe can cause Bell's palsy and heart danage....you agree with that - but disagree with their conclusions).

We do not have the right to tell other people our opinions about their medical health.


If I have a coworker who has an uptake of alpha particles I can tell him chelating agents are avaliable at medical. If it were me, I would go through the treatment. But I would never tell him that he should take the chelating agent (he could die....I'm not qualified to tell him what he should and should not do to address the radiation).

He would have to weigh the risks of the chelating agent with the risk associated with having radioactive particles in his body that would not reach anywhere near its half-life during his lifetime. But it would be his decision - uninfluenced by my opinions.