Boosters available Wednesday!

The big issue I have with the “comorbidity” argument is that many are latent.

The same with air pollution deaths in those who reside near freeways and airports.

Do we need a silver bullet?

The same with air pollution deaths in those who reside near freeways and airports.

Do we need a silver bullet?

Or with those who live in "cancer towns" in the US.

It's the silver (and the gold) that's killing all these people.

Or with those who live in "cancer towns" in the US.

It's the silver (and the gold) that's killing all these people.

Cancer aĺley from Ottawa to Chicago.

We knew about this over a quarter century ago.

This is a conspiracy theory.
When used to push anti-vaxx propaganda, it can be potentially harmful. Don't post stuff like this.
  While this may be factually correct, the implication that these hedge funds are somehow using media to bring profit to "big pharma" is a conspiracy theory.
When used to push anti-vaxx propaganda, it can be potentially harmful. Don't post comments like this, please.
That local news (in a region renown for its strong political views on vaccines in general) is more honest or fair on these kind of topics is, if not misinformation, then at least hopelessly naive.
Probably not a conspiracy theory, though.

Don't post a report from ABC news?  I guess local news is now consulting with Qanon before doing their news stories?  A woman in a hospital bed isn't a conspiracy theory?  But when something doesn't fit your narrative, just ignore it, pretend it doesn't exist, and if necvessary censor it or make it shut up. 

Maybe when you overzealous pro covid vaxers can answer for the people that have been harmed by this rather than ignore it and label it as 'misinformation', perhaps then you can have a real discussion with people.  Until then, many are not going to listen to you until you answer the question and acknowledge the people who have been harmed by this.  I did post the video of the woman in the hospital bed after taking this and you removed it.  In spite of your CONTROL and COVERUPS, the facts are still the facts.  If you want to ignore it and get rid of inconvenient truths, that's on you and not on me.  You asked for proof, I provided an example whether you make excuses or not, you still got rid of something that doesn't fit your narrative.  Maybe next time have an answer to people's questions and have a far better counter argument rather than just trying to shut people up and lie about their intentions or their arguments. 

Let's all get along.

Disagree. But share a beer.

Let's all get along.

Disagree. But share a beer.

That's normally my positions.  Sadly leftists and pro covid vaxxers don't seem to tolerate others nowadays. 

The big issue I have with the “comorbidity” argument is that many are latent.

True, but I think in the case of healthy adults and children it's usually obvious what it is and has already presented itself- either significant health issue or morbid obesity or some other factor.

So for healthy adults and children we are talking a level of risk similar to driving a car in the 1960s, perhaps even lower. I think that's a level of risk we can look at tolerating vs. wide-scale disruption and economic upheaval. I mean, you also have to factor in the expected mortality from increased alcoholism, crime, poverty, suicide AND things like childhood development issues, educational issues, etc.

In my view when you raise those costs vs. say, trying to buy the elderly and already sick (many with conditions that are likely to be fatal within 2 years) a few more years....I know it's uncomfortable to think and say, but it really doesn't seem to be worth it.

Don't post a report from ABC news?  I guess local news is now consulting with Qanon before doing their news stories?  A woman in a hospital bed isn't a conspiracy theory?  But when something doesn't fit your narrative, just ignore it, pretend it doesn't exist, and if necvessary censor it or make it shut up. 

Again, hangook77, the issue isn't you posting the report, it is your framing of it.

I'll give you a handy checklist of how to post something that should be okay

1) Does it or you state something as FACT or as OPINION? If you state things as your OPINION, there is more leeway.
2) Are you asserting something or "asking questions"? If you put things in terms of a question, you will be given more leeway.
3) Do you take a report and draw your own conclusions as FACT? If so, that will increase your chances of your post being moderated
4) Is your source from a credible major media outlet, not YOUR definition of credible, but the widely held mainstream definition of credible. If so, then you will probably given more leeway, assuming you didn't do #3.

Now, these are really simple rules, provided you have patience, discipline, an eye for detail, and can examine your own work critically without getting frustrated about the rules others have set. Some of those qualities you may have, others may not be your strong suits, but you're going to have to use all of those to make sure your posts don't get deleted if you want to discuss this issue.

Again, hangook77, the issue isn't you posting the report, it is your framing of it.

I'll give you a handy checklist of how to post something that should be okay

1) Does it or you state something as FACT or as OPINION? If you state things as your OPINION, there is more leeway.
2) Are you asserting something or "asking questions"? If you put things in terms of a question, you will be given more leeway.
3) Do you take a report and draw your own conclusions as FACT? If so, that will increase your chances of your post being moderated
4) Is your source from a credible major media outlet, not YOUR definition of credible, but the widely held mainstream definition of credible. If so, then you will probably given more leeway, assuming you didn't do #3.

Now, these are really simple rules, provided you have patience, discipline, an eye for detail, and can examine your own work critically without getting frustrated about the rules others have set. Some of those qualities you may have, others may not be your strong suits, but you're going to have to use all of those to make sure your posts don't get deleted if you want to discuss this issue.

Again, hangook77, the issue isn't you posting the report, it is your framing of it.

I'll give you a handy checklist of how to post something that should be okay

1) Does it or you state something as FACT or as OPINION? If you state things as your OPINION, there is more leeway.
2) Are you asserting something or "asking questions"? If you put things in terms of a question, you will be given more leeway.
3) Do you take a report and draw your own conclusions as FACT? If so, that will increase your chances of your post being moderated
4) Is your source from a credible major media outlet, not YOUR definition of credible, but the widely held mainstream definition of credible. If so, then you will probably given more leeway, assuming you didn't do #3.

Now, these are really simple rules, provided you have patience, discipline, an eye for detail, and can examine your own work critically without getting frustrated about the rules others have set. Some of those qualities you may have, others may not be your strong suits, but you're going to have to use all of those to make sure your posts don't get deleted if you want to discuss this issue.

The video news report spoke for itself and the woman in the hospital bed was speaking to what happened to her after she took the shot.  Unless she is lying and faking her injuries.  I love how convenient it is to ignore facts and testimonies.  Is it her opinion that she is in a hospital bed?  Is it my opinion that people I know have told me things about their experiences and that in most cases the media WILL NOT report it becasue it does not fit their narrative?  I call BS on this above. 

There are no rules about sharing news and facts.  But if you wish I will reshare again with only the video and we shall see if it is deleted then.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYjTlfZn7R8









https://www.abc4.com/video/utah-senator-demands-answers-from-cdc-fda-after-hundreds-of-vaccine-patients-suffer-life-altering-injuries/6795982/

www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxqC9SiRh8

The video news report spoke for itself and the woman in the hospital bed was speaking to what happened to her after she took the shot.  Unless she is lying and faking her injuries.  I love how convenient it is to ignore facts and testimonies.  Is it her opinion that she is in a hospital bed?  Is it my opinion that people I know have told me things about their experiences and that in most cases the media WILL NOT report it becasue it does not fit their narrative?

You can simply post it as this-

"Here is one woman's reaction to the vaccine. In my OPINION, reactions such as hers should be taken into consideration when making policy. It is POSSIBLE that we are not being cautious enough in testing and preventing adverse reactions when distributing the vaccines. "

What you can't do- "This woman's sickness PROVES the vaccine is dangerous and does not work. This PROVES that it shouldn't be administered and it isn't working. This PROVES there is a coverup."

Why? It doesn't PROVE any of that.

There are no rules about sharing news and facts.  But if you wish I will reshare again with only the video and we shall see if it is deleted then.

Actually there are if you draw conclusions and state them as facts that are not supported by the news/resources you share or if the sources are of dubious origin (and I would be somewhat broad with that standard, but you can't just post some crackpot's blog or some random internet newspaper as fact)

And yes, your clips will not be taken down because they are simply local outlets reporting on a story and NOT drawing conclusions, which is what you do.

though they might be taken down under the LI clause reserved for people who post videos with no comment attached

Vaccinated woman in hospital bed = vaccinations don’t work.

I don’t see how I can compete with that logic.

though they might be taken down under the LI clause reserved for people who post videos with no comment attached

Ooo good point.

…So for healthy adults and children we are talking a level of risk similar to driving a car in the 1960s, perhaps even lower. I think that's a level of risk we can look at tolerating vs. wide-scale disruption and economic upheaval. I mean, you also have to factor in the expected mortality from increased alcoholism, crime, poverty, suicide AND things like childhood development issues, educational issues, etc…

It looks like we are going to have live with this for a while.

The risks associated with driving in the 1960s were too high, so we took steps to reduce that risk.

I don’t think we should go into full lock down, but society (save for a few loud voices) seems comfortable with a combination of vaccines and testing.

I want my hospital staff, teachers, food service staff, fellow concert goers and plane/train passengers to be vaccinated AND* tested regularly. In Abu Dhabi, UAE vaccinated people need a PCR every 14 days to have free movement. Unvaccinated is shorter.

There are still many places with ICUs at capacity. This impacts not only Covid patients, but health care in general.

There is no easy solution, but lots of small, incremental solutions.

It looks like we are going to have live with this for a while.

The risks associated with driving in the 1960s were too high, so we took steps to reduce that risk.

I don’t think we should go into full lock down, but society (save for a few loud voices) seems comfortable with a combination of vaccines and testing.

I want my hospital staff, teachers, food service staff, fellow concert goers and plane/train passengers to be vaccinated AND* tested regularly. In Abu Dhabi, UAE vaccinated people need a PCR every 14 days to have free movement. Unvaccinated is shorter.

There are still many places with ICUs at capacity. This impacts not only Covid patients, but health care in general.

There is no easy solution, but lots of small, incremental solutions.

Yes, working the problem, not denying it, is the way toward a solution.

Yes, working the problem, not denying it, is the way toward a solution.

"Solutions" which create whole new problems and are of limited effectiveness are not true solutions. Also, while many problems need to be worked, in some cases non-interfevention or not seeking unattainable perfection may be better.

[video]
https://www.abc4.com/video/utah-senator-demands-answers-from-cdc-fda-after-hundreds-of-vaccine-patients-suffer-life-altering-injuries/6795982/

That's just fine, hangook.

Also, just to address an earlier point, I don't really have a political narrative. Please feel 100% free to post whatever politics you like -- so long as it's relevant to the topic, and more or less honest (ie not obvious trolling).

Opinions are obviously also welcome (so long as they abide by the ToS, of course), again so long as they're not passed off as facts.

If I disagree with an opinion, I won't delete it: I'll argue about it just like everybody else. I mean, some of the most interesting discussions here have been straight up arguments. 

   
   If there is a comment that is demonstrably false (as in, *proven* to be based on incorrect data), and is either overly unpleasant or harmful to the community, it'll get deleted. That's censorship, I guess, but I feel it's justifiable.

  Stuff that falls in the above categories would include:
 - Holocaust denial posts (there have been several of those in the past, for which I have been called a "waffle" for not deleting faster)
 - vaccine=autism (also has popped up a few times, weirdly)
 - eugenics (this usually gets reported like crazy, so is taken down pretty quickly.
 - Stuff mentioned in the ToS.

 I assumed this would be more or less what was required of me as a mod on a public teaching forum, but if there's a lot of disagreement, I'm more than happy to change how these things are dealt with. I mean, the whole point of mods is to keep things pleasant and productive for everybody using the forum, right?

Thoughts/comments, anybody?


Anyway, back on topic, has anybody already taken the booster shots? I though the optimal waiting time between the last shot and the booster was 3 months?