Vaccine

Multi Sport said:
Ignore this if you don't like facts.

www.justice.gov

Justice Department Announces Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in Its History

American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. (hereinafter together “Pfizer”) have agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from...
www.justice.gov www.justice.gov
Click to expand...
I didn’t know you were such a fierce opponent of off label drug use and marketing.

Guess you also have some sharp words for the people promoting ivermectin….
 
GoldenGate said:
Someone has jumped the shark. "This guy" is not exactly a reputable source.
Click to expand...

It's not just "this guy". DH has a history of posting nonsense here. This article, in fact, would be better received here if DH had created a new sockpuppet (or, if he has one already, used that) since it would not have to overcome the baggage of DH's posting history.
 
GoldenGate said:
Oh and Dr. Cole is a kook, which means "this guy" is also. Dr. Cole, despite being a pathologist, claims to be a horse paste expert and believes we should all be eating it to fight Covid, but that we should not use vaccines because there hasn't been enough research to ensure they are safe. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/08/v...ess-claims-about-safety-of-covid-19-vaccines/

Where did you get this drivel? Can any of you anti-vaxxers explain why you believe horse paste is perfectly acceptable to take, but not a vaccine? Maybe the highly rational crush guy can explain this to the rest of us.
Click to expand...
what is horse paste?
 
Roadrunner said:
I agree that there is a lot of intolerance in our society today. Some are stoking the fears for their own agenda, I presume. In any case, it makes it difficult to have rational, reasoned discussion on solutions when people aren't open to listening. Maybe part of it is that we're uncomfortable with uncertainty. Maybe another part is that it can be difficult to sift through troves of information to figure out what or who is reliable.
Click to expand...
I would add in intentional misinformation by peopel with agendas on both sides of the argument. Frustrates the medical community trying to treat their patients in the trenches.
 
Roadrunner said:
Maybe another part is that it can be difficult to sift through troves of information to figure out what or who is reliable.
Click to expand...
I think in some ways this is the biggest issue. You get different opinions from different "experts", but even worse you get different opinions from the same "expert". I appreciate that science changes over time, but the pace at which it is changing (and oftentimes in direct contradiction to previous "settled" science) raises significant skepticism, and rightly so.

I understand the concept of erring on the side of caution, but when you only focus on the one issue at hand and ignore, or obfuscate, the costs to other issues, that's not effective public health policy. When you mandate only one approach to a problem, when there are others, you lose credibility.
 
GoldenGate said:
Someone has jumped the shark. "This guy" is not exactly a reputable source.
Click to expand...
What point do you find off the mark?

His main point is we don't know what the long term affects of the vaccines are and as such they should not be mandated on people with little to no risk.

That is an entirely reasonable approach.

For those in the very high risk category he advocates them using the vaccine since the benefits outweigh long term risks.

Another entirely reasonable approach.

What part do you find objectionable?
 
On Twitter… My 12-year-old had appendicitis. The ER was overwhelmed with unvaccinated Covid patients and we had to wait 6+ hours. While waiting, his appendix ruptured and had to spend 5 days in hospital; just got hmo bill of $5000. So yeah, your decision to not vaccinate does affect others.

Sounds like not getting vaccinated is causing others pain. But the antiVax will say he didn’t die did he
 
Soccermaverick said:
On Twitter… My 12-year-old had appendicitis. The ER was overwhelmed with unvaccinated Covid patients and we had to wait 6+ hours. While waiting, his appendix ruptured and had to spend 5 days in hospital; just got hmo bill of $5000. So yeah, your decision to not vaccinate does affect others.

Sounds like not getting vaccinated is causing others pain. But the antiVax will say he didn’t die did he
Click to expand...
Twitter is a great source for information. Not saying it isn’t true, but there are some questionable details in that story. First, how did the poster know they where unvax’d, was it by their scarlet letter?
 
J
Kicker4Life said:
Twitter is a great source for information. Not saying it isn’t true, but there are some questionable details in that story. First, how did the poster know they where unvax’d, was it by their scarlet letter?
Click to expand...
Just like this site.. your point.. doesn’t negate the truth of hospitals being overwhelmed
 
Soccermaverick said:
On Twitter… My 12-year-old had appendicitis. The ER was overwhelmed with unvaccinated Covid patients and we had to wait 6+ hours. While waiting, his appendix ruptured and had to spend 5 days in hospital; just got hmo bill of $5000. So yeah, your decision to not vaccinate does affect others.

Sounds like not getting vaccinated is causing others pain. But the antiVax will say he didn’t die did he
Click to expand...
Tyrant Cowards

But one distinction between children and adults has, until now, held tight: adults, collectively, are supposed to protect children, and not the other way around. Sadly, coronavirus seems to have put paid even to this most basic moral certainty. It has become acceptable for adults to demand that children act to protect them. This shameful state of affairs turns traditional moral values on their head.

The latest example of this role reversal can be seen in the pressure to vaccinate healthy children against Covid despite almost complete agreement that the vaccine is of little medical benefit to them. As vaccinated children will still be able to transmit the virus, the sole purpose of the proposed roll-out seems to be to make teenagers provide psychological reassurance to fretful adults.
 
Aussies have been told to avoid talking to their neighbours and to wear a mask when driving alone.

Now let’s look at sunny Queensland. In January, the state’s health authorities made it compulsory to wear a mask while driving alone. Health minister Yvette D’Ath explained the reasoning as follows: ‘We want clear, concise instructions for everyone to follow… So if you put on your mask as soon as you leave the front door – no questions, no exceptions – then that’s much easier to follow.’ This certainly reveals the health authorities’ low view of people’s intelligence. If they don’t trust Queenslanders to operate a mask, why trust Queenslanders to operate a car?

Australia’s most populous state, New South Wales, is not immune to such absurdity, either. In July, chief health officer Dr Kerry Chant provided the ultimate excuse, in the name of tackling Covid, for ignoring people you don’t want to talk to: ‘If you run into your nextdoor neighbour, in the shopping centre, at Coles or Aldi or any other grocery shop, don’t start up a conversation.’

Coo Coo down under....in here too.
 
Desert Hound said:
What point do you find off the mark?

His main point is we don't know what the long term affects of the vaccines are and as such they should not be mandated on people with little to no risk.

That is an entirely reasonable approach.

For those in the very high risk category he advocates them using the vaccine since the benefits outweigh long term risks.

Another entirely reasonable approach.

What part do you find objectionable?
Click to expand...

Who is "this guy" you are relying on for your "expert" information? Where did you get this nonsense? You just blew up this thread quoting what appears to be a manifesto from an unidentified person who relies on a pathologist who has been debunked and is a crazy horse paste advocate. There is nothing legitimate in the manifesto or horse paste guy's theories that support the notion that any potential long term risks of getting vaccinated outweigh the potential long term risks of not getting vaccinated.
 
GoldenGate said:
Oh and Dr. Cole is a kook, which means "this guy" is also. Dr. Cole, despite being a pathologist, claims to be a horse paste expert and believes we should all be eating it to fight Covid, but that we should not use vaccines because there hasn't been enough research to ensure they are safe. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/08/v...ess-claims-about-safety-of-covid-19-vaccines/

Where did you get this drivel? Can any of you anti-vaxxers explain why you believe horse paste is perfectly acceptable to take, but not a vaccine? Maybe the highly rational crush guy can explain this to the rest of us.
Click to expand...
Factcheck.org? Speaking of drivel.
 
espola said:
It's not just "this guy". DH has a history of posting nonsense here. This article, in fact, would be better received here if DH had created a new sockpuppet (or, if he has one already, used that) since it would not have to overcome the baggage of DH's posting history.
Click to expand...
No doubt he's considered your posting history.
 
GoldenGate said:
Who is "this guy" you are relying on for your "expert" information? Where did you get this nonsense? You just blew up this thread quoting what appears to be a manifesto from an unidentified person who relies on a pathologist who has been debunked and is a crazy horse paste advocate. There is nothing legitimate in the manifesto or horse paste guy's theories that support the notion that any potential long term risks of getting vaccinated outweigh the potential long term risks of not getting vaccinated.
Click to expand...
I note you conveniently ignore the points.

1) We do not know if there are any long terms issues with the vaccines. This statement is 100% correct. We started vaxxing people less than a year ago.
2) The next point was if we do not know long term affects of the vaccines, maybe we should not rush to mandate them. That is an entirely rational point
3) The other point made was that some people are in a high risk group. They should get vaxxed because of their risk factors. That is an entirely rational point.

Those are the 3 main points the person was talking about.

Which ones do you find offensive? Anti vax? Or anti science? And why?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top