Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!

[dkabq]

The whole argument about vaccination involves herd immunity; effectively 'fencing' a pathogen in so that it can't be transmitted.

If the vaccine does not, in fact, prevent transmission then that argument flies right out the window.

Who cares about arguments? Does it reduce deaths or not? Does it reduce hospitalizations or not? If it does reduce deaths and hospitalizations, then it's doing something good. If it doesn't prevent illness but it does reduce hospitalizations and deaths, then it's doing something good.

What are the tradeoffs?  If the vaccines or masks do more harm than they prevent, then we have a problem.

Are you seeing high rates of hospitalizations and deaths from masks and vaccines which exceed the savings in hospitalizations and deaths we're getting from masks and vaccines? This is standard cost benefit analysis. 

You don't want a mask or vaccine, I say OK that's your decision. But from the evidence I have seen, masks and vaccines save more lives than they take, and save more hospitalizations than they cause.

Okay, from that second sentence I may have misinterpreted your earlier statement in my response, then. I apologize for that. I will also acknowledge that early on in the virus especially, hospital capacities were a real factor behind a lot of the concern. As noted earlier, I think if people want to get vaccinated that's great. I just also think there's perhaps a moral obligation to vocally stand against many if not most of the government actions and mandates that have come into play over the past two years. And the societal villainization in parts of our nation of those who make different health choices in good faith. Hence me saying what I did, and supporting the point of view that I do.

FWIW, hospital capacities are always an issue. I have a colleague whose wife works at a local hospital. They consistently bump up against their IC and total beds capacity regardless of covid.

[Zelen]

We can fairly safely say that the masks and lockdowns had a negative impact, psychologically, economically, and on health overall.

As dkalb points out, no one has actually run any real studies demonstrating the tradeoffs of the particular injections. I've always assumed that there was some health benefit for at-risk people, but we never knew the risks of the injections (and still don't, but evidence is gradually coming to light). However, we also know the majority of people aren't at any meaningful level of risk. Driving to work, or going up and down staircases in your home are more dangerous.

Another confounding factor in this analsysis is that we know that the major actors in this play (Pfizer, Moderna, Fauci, CDC/FDA/NIH) are simply brazen liars. They've lied repeatedly & continuously. Some of the propaganda these outlets put out would make Soviets blush. We had to put up with 2 years of lies about masks that everyone who read the literature knew would do nothing. Even today in certain metro areas if you try to use any govt. service you'll get harassed to put on a mask, it's fucking ridiculous.

It's not reasonable to trust these people or entities after all of the lies they told. Anyone who actually read the Pfizer trial knew that their testing didn't demonstrate reduction of transmission, so the recent revelations are only shocking insofar as how many people were eager to lie, and repeat lies, without any evidence.

We also know that drug companies manipulated the trials in numerous ways, including removing participants, ending the trial prematurely, lying about unfavorable data and covering up health events that might've reflected negatively on their product. Why would we trust them to report numbers accurately when we've already seen them lying about the same numbers? Similar manipulations plague basically all of the injection data, even that not directly sponsored by Pharma companies, because the monetary, interpersonal, and political pressure has been so severe.

I think we can generously assume some benefit for the elderly & infirm, but this is difficult to quantify and therefore recommend. A lot of people like to suggest extremely high efficacy of the injections, say 80% or more, but we know those estimates are not realistic because it implies deaths during the 2021 to 2023 period would have been dramatically higher without the injections. But we know that didn't happen because many countries either had low access to these injections, or low population rates taking them. We didn't see extreme death spikes in these regions. In fact we see more excess deaths when less dangerous variants of the Sars-Cov-2 virus were predominant, but not deaths from Covid-19. That's suggestive of something else going on.

[Mistwell]

We can fairly safely say that the masks and lockdowns had a negative impact, psychologically, economically, and on health overall.

We were not discussing lockdowns. Entirely different topic from masks and vaccines.

I do not think masks had that big a negative impact psychologically, economically, or on health overall. Overall they were pretty minor in impact. A lot of whining bitching moaning and complaining but not really a big deal in nearly as meaningful a way as lockdowns or the level of bitching over them.

[Kiero]

Goes to show that killing the virus with herd immunity was never really a legit plan unless either everyone were to be vaccinated immediately and forced to squirrel themselves away like lepers for a bit, or everyone was to be unvaccinated and forced to mingle, thereby getting temporary health edge through exposure, and then again forcing the global economy to grind to a screeching halt through voluntary isolation even were it possible to coordinate everyone in such a weird maneuver. Zero COVID policies on the national level do not work long term anyway because of global factors, and as shown in China, even the most authoritarian overreactions will not stop it through unilateral action by a single country.

Zero covid was, and is, utter bollocks and completely unnecessary for a virus as trivial as coronavirus. There never needed to be "a plan" or any change from the way past winter respiratory viruses were dealth with.

Cross immunity from other coronaviruses, not to mention prior immunity for anyone who managed to get SARS-COV-1 back in 2003 applies.

Didn't need to vaccinate anyone, didn't have to "force people to mingle", should have just left everyone to get on with it. Like Sweden did.

The whole argument about vaccination involves herd immunity; effectively 'fencing' a pathogen in so that it can't be transmitted.

If the vaccine does not, in fact, prevent transmission then that argument flies right out the window.

Covid jabs aren't vaccines, they're therapeutics. They don't prevent infection or reduce viral load. Ergo, not vaccines, by the pre-2020 definition.

The fact that they had to change the definition of a "vaccine" is pretty telling.

Who here watches Dr. John Campbell on YouTube? He has been going over a lot of Covid-related studies lately and picking them apart. He's constrained by YouTube's benevolent misinformation policies, of course, so all he can do is look at the camera to convey his true thoughts, but what a look he gives when he reads some of these steaming piles of completely fair and unbiased scientific reports.

Most recently he featured a Scottish study on a worrying rise in neo-natal deaths where the authors decided not to divulge the mothers' vaccination status for fear that it might "harm people's confidence in the vaccine." Of course, there was no "public health benefit" to disclosing this information. I'm glad we have rational and completely well-meaning people like this to conduct our most important research and lead our highest institutes. All hail the New World Order!

Nurse John very carefully tiptoes the line to avoid being demonetised on YouTube. But even he is finally waking up to just how fucked up it all is.

The unvaccinated allegedly only hurt other unvaccinated anyway, so it's their own choice.

What the fuck are you talking about? The risk to myself and other people is unchanged from 2019 when everyone was "unvaccinated".

More to the point, the jabs do fuck all to protect you, and worse still if you've had an mRNA jab (Pfizer or Moderna) your sterilising immune system no longer works, and it's likely prior immunity has been stripped away, too. That's why the sudden resurgence of shingles amongst people who'd once had immunity because they had chicken pox as children.

This is the critical thing, for me as someone "unvaccinated", nothing has changed. But everyone who succumbed to the fear porn and allowed themselves to be experimented on, well, the jury is out.

Another confounding factor in this analsysis is that we know that the major actors in this play (Pfizer, Moderna, Fauci, CDC/FDA/NIH) are simply brazen liars. They've lied repeatedly & continuously. Some of the propaganda these outlets put out would make Soviets blush. We had to put up with 2 years of lies about masks that everyone who read the literature knew would do nothing. Even today in certain metro areas if you try to use any govt. service you'll get harassed to put on a mask, it's fucking ridiculous.

It's not reasonable to trust these people or entities after all of the lies they told. Anyone who actually read the Pfizer trial knew that their testing didn't demonstrate reduction of transmission, so the recent revelations are only shocking insofar as how many people were eager to lie, and repeat lies, without any evidence.

We also know that drug companies manipulated the trials in numerous ways, including removing participants, ending the trial prematurely, lying about unfavorable data and covering up health events that might've reflected negatively on their product. Why would we trust them to report numbers accurately when we've already seen them lying about the same numbers? Similar manipulations plague basically all of the injection data, even that not directly sponsored by Pharma companies, because the monetary, interpersonal, and political pressure has been so severe.

In a shocking outbreak of what might even be genuine accountability, the European Public Prosecutor's Office is investigating why the European Commission (headed by Ursula von der Leyen) bought ten doses per person of Pfizer's vaccine: https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/ongoing-eppo-investigation-acquisition-covid-19-vaccines-eu

Worth noting that von der Lying is best buds with Alfred Bourla, Pfizer's CEO. But I'm sure nothing improper took place. The whole thing is rotten from top to bottom, it's been nothing more than a transfer of public money into Big Pharma's coffers.

FWIW, hospital capacities are always an issue. I have a colleague whose wife works at a local hospital. They consistently bump up against their IC and total beds capacity regardless of covid.

Yep, every single winter, for at least the last 20 years, the NHS is "in crisis". And of course the solution is always yet more money. Even though it's budget has tripled in the last 30 years.

We were not discussing lockdowns. Entirely different topic from masks and vaccines.

I do not think masks had that big a negative impact psychologically, economically, or on health overall. Overall they were pretty minor in impact. A lot of whining bitching moaning and complaining but not really a big deal in nearly as meaningful a way as lockdowns or the level of bitching over them.

Developmental delays in children born since lockdowns and muzzles says otherwise. Not to mention all the mentally ill people who've been driven even further into their psychoses by all the hyped up OCD shit.

So fuck what you think, you're wrong. But keep feeding that delusion of yours that any of this bullshit was justified.

[KindaMeh]

Goes to show that killing the virus with herd immunity was never really a legit plan unless either everyone were to be vaccinated immediately and forced to squirrel themselves away like lepers for a bit, or everyone was to be unvaccinated and forced to mingle, thereby getting temporary health edge through exposure, and then again forcing the global economy to grind to a screeching halt through voluntary isolation even were it possible to coordinate everyone in such a weird maneuver. Zero COVID policies on the national level do not work long term anyway because of global factors, and as shown in China, even the most authoritarian overreactions will not stop it through unilateral action by a single country.

Zero covid was, and is, utter bollocks and completely unnecessary for a virus as trivial as coronavirus. There never needed to be "a plan" or any change from the way past winter respiratory viruses were dealth with.

Cross immunity from other coronaviruses, not to mention prior immunity for anyone who managed to get SARS-COV-1 back in 2003 applies.

Didn't need to vaccinate anyone, didn't have to "force people to mingle", should have just left everyone to get on with it. Like Sweden did.

So I agree that Zero Covid as a concept was and is total bs, hence my writing. I do think it wouldn't be wrong, however, to treat it say somewhat seriously as opposed to as somewhat overly seriously as even the Trump administration did. I think we overreacted. That said, it was new, we knew relatively little, some hospitals were having trouble to the point where national guard had to be sent in and even in my low-COVID (thanks to tyranny) locality some folks I know in medical were complaining about not having enough beds because of this specifically on top of the usual bullshit, (I blame our government sponsored healthcare system and increased demand partly for that, but anyway.) and even to this day it has a hospitalization rate of like 5% and a death rate of 2%, both among the people who actually know and report they have it being recorded as cases and according to most studies. The common flu has a death rate of like .1%. Now to be fair, prior to Omicron the common flu was both a sizable bit more prevalent and virulent, but not more virulent by a factor of x20. Likewise stuff like longhauler symptoms and cetera made COVID a bit of a wildcard. So I think when Trump went for finding a voluntary vaccine, albeit not the lockdowns, that was justified.

Heck, had they wanted to popularize as opposed to mandate wearing masks outside, so be it. It apparently reduces probability a bit, (because basically it spreads via droplets/aerosols from the mouth https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7256510/) allegedly in outdoor areas especially, and so I guess better something than nothing. (https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/09/surgical-masks-covid-19.html) This lowered probability is supposedly true even in most metastudies, though depending on context it may be less effective, and it doesn't have close to 100% protection, cuz it's just a mask. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2014564118

That said, masking wasn't encouraged prior to COVID, despite it reducing non-COVID respiratory diseases. https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(21)00410-1/fulltext 

This for me alongside all my other earlier points says it was still very arbitrary and wrong to mandate it.

From what I understand, immunity from getting COVID does apply, equally well if not significantly better than a vaccine, albeit much like vaccination it doesn't give a 100% immunity. It reduces hospitalization rate just as much if not more than vaccines, though it requires getting COVID first. It should count as being vaccinated and repeatedly boostered, but also that shouldn't matter because the government has no place regulating any of that.

Sweden was better than us, but they weren't perfect. Take a read of this, if you want, but don't pay attention to the author's tilted commentary, pay attention to some of what Sweden did restrict: https://theconversation.com/did-swedens-controversial-covid-strategy-pay-off-in-many-ways-it-did-but-it-let-the-elderly-down-188338

They put caps on numbers of people meeting to like 8, for instance, even back in November 2020. That still would have decimated my locality.

I also note that like 4/5ths of them wound up actively social distancing or whatever and that most have been vaccinated now (70%+ of total according to the internet have "full" vaccination). Which is fine, but something to consider. They didn't go about their lives as they would have otherwise, and the government encouraged social distancing and cetera after trying to accelerate the spread for herd immunity, which as we've gone over is kinda a BS endgame. Would I rather we did it the Swedish way? Sure, would have been better by comparison. But they screwed up too and were arguably a little authoritarian in some ways that were wrong. Also, they encouraged their people to do some things that while I appreciated, you admittedly might not.

On which note, I'll quote myself from a prior conversation regarding vaccines and mortality rates, to go along with that chart Mistwell showed. I do think vaccines have some use. It varies from demographic to demographic how powerful the difference is, whether young or old, preconditions or none, etcetera. "But even still, the numbers seem to say something is going on at least in correlation with respect to deaths, hospitalizations, and even contraction between vaccinated and the unvaccinated. Though those numbers have less disparity for basic vaccination as opposed to booster post-omicron and the virus seemingly adapting to the vaccine or whatever. I'd be willing to believe that the vaccinated are more likely to wear masks and demand masks everywhere, squirrel themselves up like hermits, and avoid the unvaccinated or ill like plague rats, which could be explaining some of this. But at one point nationally there were 10x as many deaths from like omicron among the unvaccinated than the fully vaccinated and boosted. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-compare-covid-deaths-for-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people/ ." So as a therapeutic there is noticeable impact.

Regarding transmission and immunity, dkabq notes that some independent studies were done on vaccines regarding that, and though I think he presumably doesn't especially like or trust most of the ones he read they are presumably out there. I also noted how some were publicized back in early 2021 even on CBS with respect to Delta making immunity weaker. There are more, but I don't want to dump too many cuz that would probably waste both our time. Here's some less independent ones referenced by the UK for instance: https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o298

Point being, they make it somewhat harder to catch the bug, which even by itself and not accounting for viral load reduction when you do have it slows the spread.

Also to clarify, I said ALLEGEDLY about the unvaccinated being a "threat" to the unvaccinated because even were CLAIMS about vaccines being totally effective there true in combination with no risk for fatality and hospitalization, that would just mean that those not receiving the vaccine are only putting themselves and therefore those who accept and have weighed the risk at risk. I was trying to turn their own logic against them, but may have overstepped.

I don't think we disagree on policy, but if you don't concur on where I'm coming from regarding medical facts, I am happy to discuss. I'm not the most informed person out there, but I can at least try to explain why I did what I did with respect to self-care, and why I believe what I do. Things are sometimes blurry and hard to parse with respect to COVID, so I think it reasonable that folks can disagree.

Likewise, the jury as you say is still out on whether and how much these vaccines will cause harm in the long run. Different people will evaluate the risks differently. And especially when it comes to the unknown, it's hard to say what's reasonable.

[dkabq]

Worse...vaccine...ever...
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/22/health/cdc-director-positive-covid/index.html

[Zelen]

Worse...vaccine...ever...
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/22/health/cdc-director-positive-covid/index.html

""""""""""""vaccine""""""""""""

[Stephen Tannhauser]

What's really annoying is a phenomenon I've encountered twice now: Right now I am looking for another job, my previous company having closed down at the end of June, and I'm roving through various employment sites and boards including LinkedIn. That some companies will still idiotically require full vaccination as a condition of employment annoys me, but I don't mind that. What I mind is having that as a policy and then not telling the recruiters or job posters that in the job description.

I don't need to get my hopes up about a very well-suited position only to have the cup dashed from my lips at the last instant; if you'd tell me that this was a requirement, I'd know not to apply in the first place. But it really seems like the virus-paranoid are now not only paranoid about exposure but paranoid about looking paranoid. As if the only way to believe in a "return to normal" is to pretend nobody had to go along with any ethically unconscionable government policies to get there -- not just an elephant in the room, but an elephant everybody's riding while pretending they're standing still.

[Zelen]

What's really annoying is a phenomenon I've encountered twice now: Right now I am looking for another job, my previous company having closed down at the end of June, and I'm roving through various employment sites and boards including LinkedIn. That some companies will still idiotically require full vaccination as a condition of employment annoys me, but I don't mind that. What I mind is having that as a policy and then not telling the recruiters or job posters that in the job description.

I don't need to get my hopes up about a very well-suited position only to have the cup dashed from my lips at the last instant; if you'd tell me that this was a requirement, I'd know not to apply in the first place. But it really seems like the virus-paranoid are now not only paranoid about exposure but paranoid about looking paranoid. As if the only way to believe in a "return to normal" is to pretend nobody had to go along with any ethically unconscionable government policies to get there -- not just an elephant in the room, but an elephant everybody's riding while pretending they're standing still.

Yep. Understand this totally. Lack of clear communication on this point is a huge red flag, and I suspect you're right ... They're trying to pretend this is normal and not at all a huge break with normal practices. I've never seen an employer outside of specific healthcare related jobs asking about this stuff, and I imagine many employers are being coy specifically because asking medical history runs afoul of various laws.

On the plus side:

[Ratman_tf]

What's really annoying is a phenomenon I've encountered twice now: Right now I am looking for another job, my previous company having closed down at the end of June, and I'm roving through various employment sites and boards including LinkedIn. That some companies will still idiotically require full vaccination as a condition of employment annoys me, but I don't mind that. What I mind is having that as a policy and then not telling the recruiters or job posters that in the job description.

I don't need to get my hopes up about a very well-suited position only to have the cup dashed from my lips at the last instant; if you'd tell me that this was a requirement, I'd know not to apply in the first place. But it really seems like the virus-paranoid are now not only paranoid about exposure but paranoid about looking paranoid. As if the only way to believe in a "return to normal" is to pretend nobody had to go along with any ethically unconscionable government policies to get there -- not just an elephant in the room, but an elephant everybody's riding while pretending they're standing still.

Yep. Understand this totally. Lack of clear communication on this point is a huge red flag, and I suspect you're right ... They're trying to pretend this is normal and not at all a huge break with normal practices. I've never seen an employer outside of specific healthcare related jobs asking about this stuff, and I imagine many employers are being coy specifically because asking medical history runs afoul of various laws.

I had a job opportunity with A Big Software Company, and the recruiter asked if I had gotten the vaccine. I told him no. The topic apparently was a sticking point for getting the job.
As a humorous aside, and I told the recruiter this, I have worked the past 10 months at a grocery deli. While they encourage it, getting the vaccines is not mandatory.

And I lick all the food before it goes out. 

While not an optimal situation, Covid has been a good reason to get out of the software development gig and into a union job with decent bennies and more stability.

[oggsmash]

   Big corporations now have the easiest political sorting tool you could devise with the vax.  Since it also trends that white men are unlikely to get all the shots it also acts as a nice boost for AA as well.  Well done societal engineers....well done. No need to toss applicants resumes in the trash for checking the "white" and "male" boxes, the vax can do the same job and even build a narrative around "safety" around it.

[jhkim]

   Big corporations now have the easiest political sorting tool you could devise with the vax.  Since it also trends that white men are unlikely to get all the shots it also acts as a nice boost for AA as well.  Well done societal engineers....well done.

From the statistics I've seen, white people are more likely than black people to get the vaccination. In the most recent data I find:

Black: 59%
White: 64%
Hispanic: 67%
Asian: 87%

Source: https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-by-race-ethnicity/

CDC data showed an even bigger gap back in 2021, with non-Hispanic white people well ahead of both black people and Hispanic, but the gap apparently has narrowed over time such that they're all pretty close to each other.

[oggsmash]

   Big corporations now have the easiest political sorting tool you could devise with the vax.  Since it also trends that white men are unlikely to get all the shots it also acts as a nice boost for AA as well.  Well done societal engineers....well done.

From the statistics I've seen, white people are more likely than black people to get the vaccination. In the most recent data I find:

Black: 59%
White: 64%
Hispanic: 67%
Asian: 87%

Source: https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-by-race-ethnicity/

CDC data showed an even bigger gap back in 2021, with non-Hispanic white people well ahead of both black people and Hispanic, but the gap apparently has narrowed over time such that they're all pretty close to each other.

  I think you can not see the obvious if it hit you in the face.  I do think it is fun that the CDC knows the difference between white people and hispanics, but the FBI does not.   Wrong think whites are way lower down than any other group on those vax rates, and boomers are heavily over represented (white people no one has to reject with AA).  You also post stats about whites when I specifically said white MEN.

[Ratman_tf]

Pfizer executive admits they lied about the vaccine preventing transmisison of the disease. A lie perpetuated by the CDC, the WHO, the White House, and many others.

Everyone involved should be sacked. And that sack should be tossed into the mariana trench.

[dkabq]

Biden's INSANE Anti-Science Push For Fifth COVID Shot | Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9GpSf4uwH8

https://sensiblemed.substack.com/p/the-cdc-director-just-got-covid-she