Vacci-Nation [CLOSED DUE TO DISRESPECTFUL, INSULTING, POLITICAL POSTS

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by spike021

My sister is fully vaccinated, my parents are getting their first Moderna doses today, and my brother is getting a dose of one of them today.

I'm the odd man out since I'm not super high-risk but also not an essential worker.

Lol my wife and I are the same. The rest of our immediate families are at some stage of vaccinated. MD just opened up registration for everyone this week, so we will be attempting up for an appointment tomorrow.

[spike021]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Lol my wife and I are the same. The rest of our immediate families are at some stage of vaccinated. MD just opened up registration for everyone this week, so we will be attempting up for an appointment tomorrow.

We don't fully open up for another week.

I was hoping my county would ease up on health restrictions a bit more since I'm a bit of a fatty (mostly just out of shape plus COVID pounds) but not super fatty but doesn't look like it's gonna happen.

[spcmafia]

Originally Posted by spike021

We don't fully open up for another week.

I was hoping my county would ease up on health restrictions a bit more since I'm a bit of a fatty (mostly just out of shape plus COVID pounds) but not super fatty but doesn't look like it's gonna happen.

Just tell any future girls "Hey' there's more to love."

[spike021]

Originally Posted by spcmafia

Just tell any future girls "Hey' there's more to love."

"There's more to love but it wasn't enough for the vaccine admin to give me one early!"

[wbradley]

I'm on a list to be texted by a local pharmacy when AstraZeneca becomes available.

Ironically, there's a good chance my new kitty cat and I will be vaccinated on the same day.

He's half Husky. lol

[p1l0t]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

It seems to me you are changing the subject and, I'm sorry but I have no idea what Freddy Mercury has to do with this. The fact, and I submit that it is an immutable fact, is that in complex societies, very few to none of the decisions we as individuals make affect only us as isolated individuals. Everything I do has some impact on others. No decision I make has an effect that is limited to me alone. Whatever you think cost benefit analysis has to do with this, in the end it is not all about you. Is just isn't.



I find myself skeptical of the anti-vaccine arguments you make. They seem illogical and flimsy and virtually every explanation you offer muddies the water further. At some point, I'd appreciate it if you'd do some soul searching and confront the real reasons for your opposition. If you'd care to share it, we could perhaps, have a productive dialog.

It's not just me, it's anyone who the virus is not really harmful too. Why do they need to be vaccinated? Why not just vaccinate the high risk people? You're introducing them to more risk than the virus itself. You guys really have to get off your 'science' high horse too. The science isn't totally in yet, other wise it would be FDA approved, it's only an emergency authorization that pushed through by govt.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[TylerLieberman]

Originally Posted by wbradley

I am a very pro-vaccination individual and I have probably prosthetized here regards to this on more than one occasion now. Unfortunately I might also tend to repeat myself.

I just want to point out to everyone (unless advised otherwise by their physician), if you are opposed to being vaccinated, YOU are the problem right now.

lol

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

Uhhhhhh.... yes gentlemen, the part about the booster shots every 6 months....

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I don't see anything in that sentence that says you need a booster every 6 months, only that they are studying whether a booster is needed, as others have already pointed out.

If it turns out it does need a booster every 6 months, I don't see that happening .

[p1l0t]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I don't see anything in that sentence that says you need a booster every 6 months, only that they are studying whether a booster is needed, as others have already pointed out.



If it turns out it does need a booster every 6 months, I don't see that happening .

I don't know if it were up to some of the people in this thread I think they would say that the govt should be choosing what gets injected into your body...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[wbradley]

More realistically, the government of my country is on the hook financially if vaccine refusers keep the embers burning and burning with 1) fatality and severe illness among those individuals and their cohorts, and 2) newly emergent strains of the virus that endanger the entire population again arise as a result. So they could make it undesirable for people to go unvaccinated just as they discourage people from failing to file a tax return or pay parking tickets for that matter.

If your private health insurer is ok with you being unvaccinated, so be it. If your government is forced to restrict the unvaccinated in any way, it would most likely occur after tragedy has occurred. It's just how things work in the tumultuous democracy we have witnessed time and time again.

[dpfarr]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

It's not just me, it's anyone who the virus is not really harmful too. Why do they need to be vaccinated? Why not just vaccinate the high risk people? You're introducing them to more risk than the virus itself. You guys really have to get off your 'science' high horse too. The science isn't totally in yet, other wise it would be FDA approved, it's only an emergency authorization that pushed through by govt.

The effects of covid aren’t discrete. You’re not going suffer a,b,c because variables x,y,z apply to you. That’s not my interpretation, it’s data.

Science high horse?

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

It's not just me, it's anyone who the virus is not really harmful too. Why do they need to be vaccinated? Why not just vaccinate the high risk people? You're introducing them to more risk than the virus itself. You guys really have to get off your 'science' high horse too. The science isn't totally in yet, other wise it would be FDA approved, it's only an emergency authorization that pushed through by govt.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Because today's low risk people are tomorrow's high risk people. That's how mutation works. If the virus has time to start multiplying in your body, there is a small chance that a mutation develops every single time the virus multiplies.

If your body can compensate for some original strain you are infected with, great. But if it takes too long to develop the antibodies the virus could mutate into something you have more difficulty dealing with. The early strain dies off, but that just leaves the new strain to kick your ass. Then you pass it off to someone biologically similar to you and it kicks their ass, even though the virus strain you received originally isn't that big of a deal to either of you.

Perhaps that person was vaccinated against the original strain but you weren't. You, by being unvaccinated, allowed the virus time to multiply and mutate, while that other person reduced your risk by taking steps to prevent that mutation. Basically unvaccinated people are volunteering to be a new Patient 0.

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

It's not just me, it's anyone who the virus is not really harmful too. Why do they need to be vaccinated? Why not just vaccinate the high risk people? You're introducing them to more risk than the virus itself. You guys really have to get off your 'science' high horse too. The science isn't totally in yet, other wise it would be FDA approved, it's only an emergency authorization that pushed through by govt.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

You're still in narrow self-interest mode. Look. If you catch the virus or some future version of it you may be asymptomatic and never know you had it ... or you may die from it. The fact - again indisputable - is that

you


don't


know


what


will


happen.


Last spring some morons at UT Austin (I think) had a covid party. They got together and invited one or more known Covid positive people. You know, just to party and see who could catch it.

A month later a young fella who attended was in Methodist Hospital in the Houston Medical Center. He told a nurse, "you know I thought this virus stuff was a joke. I guess it's not." Then he died.

I really don't understand your mindset. I'm trying to be as gentle with this as I can, but you make that difficult. Say you knew with certainty the virus would not harm you, but that you could still infect other people if you caught it. You have no way of knowing if the first clause is true. The second is known with certainty to be so. What about them? If you contract it, you can still infect others who the virus might not be so kind to. They could die. So, what I hear you saying is, "hey - I am confident I'll do fine if I catch this thing and I don't give a Phlying Philistine Phuck about anybody else. If you catch it from me tough shit."

Is that what the Queen reference meant? Another One Bites the Dust You would enjoy being an agent of the harshest form of natural selection? You do realize you are making the strongest possible argument in favor of stringent Vaccine Passports, right?

Edit: I've gone back and forth on the Passport idea. You are getting very close to selling me on them.

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I don't see anything in that sentence that says you need a booster every 6 months, only that they are studying whether a booster is needed, as others have already pointed out.

If it turns out it does need a booster every 6 months, I don't see that happening .

Actually, they don't use the word needed. All they are looking at is the immune reaction over time and a booster's potential impact on that. There is no judgement as to necessity.