Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!

[Ghostmaker]

  Hmmm, I dunno anyone who says other people are threatening their safety by not masking or vaccinating, is sort of placing a good deal of DO IT NOW pressure down.  If you have a medical weakness to this virus, wear a respirator or gas mask, as that will actually work regarding protection from infection, and stop telling other people what to do.  Also, if you are vaccinated, and wearing your gas mask, you are safe.  Leave other people alone.   Now if that is no longer your stance (other people are putting you at risk because they dont wear masks or take vaccines) and you are simply presenting information for people to consider for their own good, so be it.  Past post history points towards that not being the view however.

You realize he was responding to a specific post which had nothing to do with advocating for masks or vaccinations and just talking about what sorts of information people evaluate when looking at the vaccine effectiveness data, right?

  I do, 100 percent.  I am making the point he may not be taking your statements in good faith.  You realize this, right?

Even taking them in bad faith there is literally no way to read what I said as me trying to force someone to do what I want. None. I mean there is a huge difference between "not giving the benefit of the doubt" and "taking a statement which isn't in doubt and simply re-writing it to make shit up." He simply made shit up. And rather than admit it once he has a moment to think about it he just doubles down.

TIL that quoting someone directly is "making shit up."  This guy is a clown.

I believe the term 'kapo' applies better.

[Mistwell]

  Hmmm, I dunno anyone who says other people are threatening their safety by not masking or vaccinating, is sort of placing a good deal of DO IT NOW pressure down.  If you have a medical weakness to this virus, wear a respirator or gas mask, as that will actually work regarding protection from infection, and stop telling other people what to do.  Also, if you are vaccinated, and wearing your gas mask, you are safe.  Leave other people alone.   Now if that is no longer your stance (other people are putting you at risk because they dont wear masks or take vaccines) and you are simply presenting information for people to consider for their own good, so be it.  Past post history points towards that not being the view however.

You realize he was responding to a specific post which had nothing to do with advocating for masks or vaccinations and just talking about what sorts of information people evaluate when looking at the vaccine effectiveness data, right?

  I do, 100 percent.  I am making the point he may not be taking your statements in good faith.  You realize this, right?

Even taking them in bad faith there is literally no way to read what I said as me trying to force someone to do what I want. None. I mean there is a huge difference between "not giving the benefit of the doubt" and "taking a statement which isn't in doubt and simply re-writing it to make shit up." He simply made shit up. And rather than admit it once he has a moment to think about it he just doubles down.

TIL that quoting someone directly is "making shit up."  This guy is a clown.

The "making shit up" is claiming I had even vaguely implied in my opinion of what data I thought people should place more importance on in evaluating vaccine efficacy that this in any way meant I thought you should be "forced to" take the vaccine.

I am still waiting for ANYTHING AT ALL in what I wrote which could even hint at such an implication.

You won't respond to that because you MADE IT UP ENTIRELY.

You also won't respond when someone else said I should be banned for voicing a dissenting opinion - actual totalitarianism. Because you're not really concerned with totalitarianism and it doesn't happen when you see it - you are just concerned with people hearing views which differ from yours.

You guys are just SJW in sheeps clothing. Cancel culture is strong with a few of you. Do whatever is necessary to silence any dissenting view - lie about what they're saying, call in the mob to support that lie, and then call for them to be banned (which yes did just happen in the other thread, and purely because he disagrees with my view and thinks I am "pissing on" the conversation by disagreeing). And make damn sure nobody calls out that demand for a banning if it's a view they don't agree with.

[Mistwell]

FDA grants full (non-experimental) approval to Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine.

So, about that "experimental non-approved" excuse...?

[Pat]

FDA grants full (non-experimental) approval to Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine.

So, about that "experimental non-approved" excuse...?

Yes, I'm sure a rushed and politically-driven approval will allay everyone's concerns.

[Mistwell]

FDA grants full (non-experimental) approval to Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine.

So, about that "experimental non-approved" excuse...?

Yes, I'm sure a rushed and politically-driven approval will allay everyone's concerns.

I am sure you can point to FDA approval of a vaccine which had no political drive behind it? The Polio vaccine surely did.

[moonsweeper]

FDA grants full (non-experimental) approval to Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine.

So, about that "experimental non-approved" excuse...?

Yes, I'm sure a rushed and politically-driven approval will allay everyone's concerns.

Meh...my lawyer will just cite the administrative procedures processes that the FDA has in place that it hasn't followed for this medication, so you know, from a legal standpoint still not an approval...

[moonsweeper]

FDA grants full (non-experimental) approval to Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine.

So, about that "experimental non-approved" excuse...?

Yes, I'm sure a rushed and politically-driven approval will allay everyone's concerns.

I am sure you can point to FDA approval of a vaccine which had no political drive behind it? The Polio vaccine surely did.

So now we are comparing an experimental treatment to a polio vaccine that was approved based on

1.  A very high mortality rate.
2.  Was based on a proven technology that had about a century of study.
3.  There was no therapeutic alternative for prevention.
4. 
...oh never mind, I forgot...

I wasn't responding to someone who argues in good faith...

[Mistwell]

FDA grants full (non-experimental) approval to Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine.

So, about that "experimental non-approved" excuse...?

Yes, I'm sure a rushed and politically-driven approval will allay everyone's concerns.

I am sure you can point to FDA approval of a vaccine which had no political drive behind it? The Polio vaccine surely did.

So now we are comparing an experimental treatment to a polio vaccine that was approved based on

1.  A very high mortality rate.
2.  Was based on a proven technology that had about a century of study.
3.  There was no therapeutic alternative for prevention.
4. 
...oh never mind, I forgot...

I wasn't responding to someone who argues in good faith...

I am arguing in good faith. I was not comparing the vaccines I was responding to the point Pat made concerning political pressure behind a vaccine. There absolutely was political pressure behind the polio vaccine. That has zero to do with any other details of the polio vaccine. But sure, name any other vaccine which didn't have political pressure behind it? I can't think of one. The diphtheria one had political pressure too. My point is that political pressure behind a vaccine hasn't made anyone hesitate about that vaccine in the past so why is that a good reason to not get this vaccine? I mean, part of the process of any vaccine being approved IS POLITICAL PRESSURE. It would be difficult to get a new vaccine approved without any political pressure behind it.

[oggsmash]

  Weapons of Mass Destruction.  Spreading Democracy.  Not quite sure how it is hard to understand that a federal government that overtly lies and deceives the public can not understand how it seems to be running short on good will.

[deadDMwalking]

Clearly the vaccine has different impacts based on your political affiliation.  For registered Democrats, affiliated Independents and more liberal political parties it saves lives and reduces the severity of the disease.  For Republicans and conservatives in general, it targets their reproductive organs, shrinking their testicles/ovaries and making them infertile. 

As long as people in rural areas agree not to come into the city where Democrats are shedding virus everywhere because of their vaccine, I think we'll all be fine. 

I mean, except for the people who die needlessly, but that'll just exacerbate the ongoing shift of populations from rural to urban areas. 

[Eirikrautha]

FDA grants full (non-experimental) approval to Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine.

So, about that "experimental non-approved" excuse...?

Yes, I'm sure a rushed and politically-driven approval will allay everyone's concerns.

I am sure you can point to FDA approval of a vaccine which had no political drive behind it? The Polio vaccine surely did.

Google "Cutter Vaccine."  120,000 administered, 40,000 sick, 51 paralyzed, 5 dead.  All in the rush to get the polio vaccine out.  Even your own examples defeat you.  You really are a buffoon.

(Brace for the 10 paragraph response that nitpicks minute details to prove that his flippant generalized response didn't actually refer to polio vaccine mistakes, and oh, yeah, in another thread last week you didn't say exactly what he thought you should say, so that means you're a totalitarian, too!)

[Mistwell]

  Weapons of Mass Destruction.  Spreading Democracy.  Not quite sure how it is hard to understand that a federal government that overtly lies and deceives the public can not understand how it seems to be running short on good will.

Except they lied to the people during the years other vaccines were approved and you (I think?) were cool with those vaccines? Shoot we lied ABOUT vaccines (Tuskegee experiment) and you were (I think?) cool with those vaccines.

[Mistwell]

FDA grants full (non-experimental) approval to Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine.

So, about that "experimental non-approved" excuse...?

Yes, I'm sure a rushed and politically-driven approval will allay everyone's concerns.

I am sure you can point to FDA approval of a vaccine which had no political drive behind it? The Polio vaccine surely did.

Google "Cutter Vaccine."  120,000 administered, 40,000 sick, 51 paralyzed, 5 dead.  All in the rush to get the polio vaccine out.  Even your own examples defeat you.  You really are a buffoon.

(Brace for the 10 paragraph response that nitpicks minute details to prove that his flippant generalized response didn't actually refer to polio vaccine mistakes, and oh, yeah, in another thread last week you didn't say exactly what he thought you should say, so that means you're a totalitarian, too!)

No moronboy that's WHY I cited that. The polio vaccine had terrible issues, and yet WERE ALL COOL WITH IT. It had political pressure, and yet WERE ALL COOL WITH IT. Relative to this vaccine, I think you could say the Polio vaccine had more issues and political pressure behind it than this one, right? Is your tiny brain getting my point yet?

[Pat]

FDA grants full (non-experimental) approval to Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine.

So, about that "experimental non-approved" excuse...?

Yes, I'm sure a rushed and politically-driven approval will allay everyone's concerns.

I am sure you can point to FDA approval of a vaccine which had no political drive behind it? The Polio vaccine surely did.

The Salk polio vaccine? Just weeks after it was distributed, inoculated children started coming down the very disease the jab was supposed to prevent. Public health completely fucked up the response, including denying it was happening, before pulling first some of the doses, then shutting down the program entirely, less than a month after they started. Turns out, one of the labs had failed to deactivate some of the live viruses used in the vaccine. They were infecting the very kids they were supposed to protect.

This completely destroyed public trust in Salk's vaccine, and it wasn't until Sabin's vaccine came out 5 years later, that the public was wiling to try another jab. Even for a disease as terrifying as polio.

This is why we take our time when it comes to vaccines. Rushing them is dangerous. Vaccines are probably the greatest medical breakthrough in the last 200 years, but their history is littered with dark episodes like the rollout of the Salk vaccine.

[Pat]

No moronboy that's WHY I cited that. The polio vaccine had terrible issues, and yet WERE ALL COOL WITH IT. It had political pressure, and yet WERE ALL COOL WITH IT. Relative to this vaccine, I think you could say the Polio vaccine had more issues and political pressure behind it than this one, right? Is your tiny brain getting my point yet?

They were not cool with it. As I mentioned, the infected kids destroyed public trust, and it was only a few cases.

It was also not politicized to the same degree. The 1955 rollout wasn't a grand governmental program. It was sponsored by the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, through their March of Dimes fundraiser. The government had more of an enforcement/regulatory role (it was the Surgeon General who pulled the vaccine from the market).