Vaccine

:D:D:D
It's funny you still don't know what that means.

To quote dad4, he said "vax alone is not enough". I'm agreeing with him, and postulating one possible answer to his question since he hasn't articulate his (but we can all guess what it likely is).

In any case thanks for the laugh. You always bring a smile to my day.

I know perfectly well what it means. You seem to think it is an effective argument technique, despite your alleged "Oxford debate" training.
 
For what to be “over”? The Government overreach?
Overreach. You think we went too far. Got it.

So, what, if anything, should we have done? Beginning in March 2020, what measures have you supported to limit hospitalizations and deaths from covid?

Supported at the time. I’m not asking what you now support, with the benefit of hindsight.
 
:D:D:D
It's funny you still don't know what that means.

To quote dad4, he said "vax alone is not enough". I'm agreeing with him, and postulating one possible answer to his question since he hasn't articulate his (but we can all guess what it likely is).

In any case thanks for the laugh. You always bring a smile to my day.
If you are proposing “vaccinate, then open up”, remember that you have to actually do the innoculations.

“half-assed vaccination effort, fill the ICU, then ration care” is a completely different plan.
 
If you are proposing “vaccinate, then open up”, remember that you have to actually do the innoculations.

“half-assed vaccination effort, fill the ICU, then ration care” is a completely different plan.

The issue with that is that not everywhere is in danger of rationed care. So you could fully open up California, Florida, Texas now under your rational. You couldn't open up highly vaxxed Vermont, Oregon or Washington.

I'm disappointed you went that way as a result....was hoping you would have gone to your what was needed. Would have been fun. :confused:
 
Don't agree with everything in the piece but an interesting part is why the highly Christian areas aren't really afraid of COVID, but the less religious parts of the country are. It echoes the entire COVID Interventionalism-as-religion argument we've talked about here.

 
Overreach. You think we went too far. Got it.

So, what, if anything, should we have done? Beginning in March 2020, what measures have you supported to limit hospitalizations and deaths from covid?

Supported at the time. I’m not asking what you now support, with the benefit of hindsight.

You didn't ask me. but allow me to butt in with my opinion. Back when we didn't have a vaccine and the only alleged cures were no better than dancing in the moonlight on midsummer night, it made sense to practice things that we knew how to do and could afford -- masks and distancing, for instance, and restricting businesses whose benefits did not outweigh the risks involved (the image that comes easily to mind is fitness centers). I think that after a couple of months of that when we had found out more about the disease we could have relaxed the restrictions to something more sensible, but by then people had taken political positions without any relation to reality. Now that we have several choices of effective vaccines, and reports of medicines that may be cures, it's well past time to stop whining.
 
The issue with that is that not everywhere is in danger of rationed care. So you could fully open up California, Florida, Texas now under your rational. You couldn't open up highly vaxxed Vermont, Oregon or Washington.

I'm disappointed you went that way as a result....was hoping you would have gone to your what was needed. Would have been fun. :confused:

Strawman.
 
Any vaccine works by strengthening your body's immune system so that it is better able to fight off the infection if you get it. Did you think perhaps that it wrapped your body in an invisible protective shield that the virus could not penetrate?
We leave that up to masks, don't you remember? Please elaborate on the " so to be effective, you have to already have the disease in you". Do you mean that the vaccine is more effective if you've already been infected with the disease, or does the vaccine infect you with the disease and then it becomes effective? I'm trying to understand soccer forum internet medicine. I'm rusty.
 
Don't agree with everything in the piece but an interesting part is why the highly Christian areas aren't really afraid of COVID, but the less religious parts of the country are. It echoes the entire COVID Interventionalism-as-religion argument we've talked about here.


Now I see where you get your strawman habit from.
 
Overreach. You think we went too far. Got it.

So, what, if anything, should we have done? Beginning in March 2020, what measures have you supported to limit hospitalizations and deaths from covid?

Supported at the time. I’m not asking what you now support, with the benefit of hindsight.

You could do what I suggested from the beginning and rather than have blanket national or statewide lockdowns you reserved them (and whatever effectiveness they had) for periods of severe COVID, you could have moved a lot of activities outdoors (I was saying this in April 2020), and you could have had a more productive mask policy that emphasized N95/KN95 production instead of cloth masks (again was saying this in April 2020). You could have also said, hey, maybe the BLM protests weren't the best idea in the middle of a pandemic (particularly after we came down on the churches), schools should have been open in fall of 2020, citizens encouraged to get exercise and vitamin D, not deliberately lied to them about health policies and been honest with them, not played politics with the vaccine, fired/retired Fauci (who has been a disaster on messaging), sheltered the nursing homes (I came out against the Cuomo policies in March 2020), and not exempted certain high risk things (like air travel and construction) when you actually were doing lockdowns.
 
The issue with that is that not everywhere is in danger of rationed care. So you could fully open up California, Florida, Texas now under your rational. You couldn't open up highly vaxxed Vermont, Oregon or Washington.

I'm disappointed you went that way as a result....was hoping you would have gone to your what was needed. Would have been fun. :confused:
“Do the bare minimum to avoid care rationing” is a third plan, I suppose.

Not a smart plan, of course. But it is a plan.
 
You didn't ask me. but allow me to butt in with my opinion. Back when we didn't have a vaccine and the only alleged cures were no better than dancing in the moonlight on midsummer night, it made sense to practice things that we knew how to do and could afford -- masks and distancing, for instance, and restricting businesses whose benefits did not outweigh the risks involved (the image that comes easily to mind is fitness centers). I think that after a couple of months of that when we had found out more about the disease we could have relaxed the restrictions to something more sensible, but by then people had taken political positions without any relation to reality. Now that we have several choices of effective vaccines, and reports of medicines that may be cures, it's well past time to stop whining.
Internet medicine again? What cures are forthcoming? Are you referring to maybe, possibly, expanding on disease management capability? Or is there a magical pill on the FDA's horizon. Pills are where the money is. Easy to manufacture, easy to patent, easy to stockpile, and resiliant to staying on pharmacy shelves. Easy money.
 
“Do the bare minimum to avoid care rationing” is a third plan, I suppose.

Not a smart plan, of course. But it is a plan.

If rationing care is your concern (which you articulated it was), I fail to see why it isn't a "smart plan". It addresses your stated concern (don't flood the hospitals) while at the same time pursuing the underlying approach outlined in the English approach.
 
“Do the bare minimum to avoid care rationing” is a third plan, I suppose.

Not a smart plan, of course. But it is a plan.
You mention "care rationing" a lot. The lockdown and the fear mongering actually caused, far more "care rationing" and "care avoidance" than the actual Covid infection did. The full extent of the repercussions of the lockdown and fear "care rationing/avoidance" are still yet to be seen.
 
Overreach. You think we went too far. Got it.

So, what, if anything, should we have done? Beginning in March 2020, what measures have you supported to limit hospitalizations and deaths from covid?

Supported at the time. I’m not asking what you now support, with the benefit of hindsight.
Vaccine Passports and Mandates
Mask Mandates
The list goes on and on….

Should we talk about Australia? I know it’s your Utopia, but is also the benchmark for overreach.
 
We leave that up to masks, don't you remember? Please elaborate on the " so to be effective, you have to already have the disease in you". Do you mean that the vaccine is more effective if you've already been infected with the disease, or does the vaccine infect you with the disease and then it becomes effective? I'm trying to understand soccer forum internet medicine. I'm rusty.

I thought I was pretty clear. Vaccines work by helping your body produce antibodies that can kill or weaken the virus inside your body. Is this news to you?
 
You could do what I suggested from the beginning and rather than have blanket national or statewide lockdowns you reserved them (and whatever effectiveness they had) for periods of severe COVID, you could have moved a lot of activities outdoors (I was saying this in April 2020), and you could have had a more productive mask policy that emphasized N95/KN95 production instead of cloth masks (again was saying this in April 2020). You could have also said, hey, maybe the BLM protests weren't the best idea in the middle of a pandemic (particularly after we came down on the churches), schools should have been open in fall of 2020, citizens encouraged to get exercise and vitamin D, not deliberately lied to them about health policies and been honest with them, not played politics with the vaccine, fired/retired Fauci (who has been a disaster on messaging), sheltered the nursing homes (I came out against the Cuomo policies in March 2020), and not exempted certain high risk things (like air travel and construction) when you actually were doing lockdowns.
You have a very selective memory. You also spent a good 16 months here telling people that masks do not work. Nor did you support any of the original closures- indoor or outdoor.

Had we followed your advice at the time, we would have had a nationwide prime spike in April/May 2020. Peak would have been over long before your new N95 factories came online. Best guess for that plan is the old Imperial College 2.2 million deaths estimate.

About 3x as many deaths as we got with what we did.
 
Back
Top