Vaccine question

[Chuck Naill]

I’m waiting until October because that’s the recommendation I’ve been following for years.

[dneal]

I’m watching the narrative change to “COVID is here to stay” in the liberal media. It’ll be interesting to watch the shift.

[TSherbs]

I’m waiting until October because that’s the recommendation I’ve been following for years.October is when I usually get it, too. But we only have one small pharmacy in my town, and the wait can be long when they are busy.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

100 deaths from Covid per day in my state. We are ranked number one

[Chuck Naill]

Influenza is here to stay. Should not be a surprise. Measles, rubella, mumps, pertussis, yada, yada, yada.

[adhoc]

Without any sarcasm now, I thank you, you actually added value to this conversation.

Even in this attempt (I'll grant you the benefit of the doubt) to compliment, you include a sneer. You're kind of a piece of work, adhoc. No one adds any more or less to the conversation than you do.

The person you are defending, who knows nothing about me, labeled me sexist towards my daughter simply for asking questions about vaccines. You're not in a good company. So no regrets from my side here.

Some people add more, some people add nothing, like Chuck, unless you count hysteria as something productive, which I don't. So yes, I was genuinely shocked that he actually made a worthwhile post.

For example if you woke up and found shit in your toilet, you wouldn't be shocked, you'd think huh, I forgot to flush!
But if you woke up with a pile of shit on your kitchen counter, you would be surprised, wouldn't you?

Thanks for the piece of work comment, I'll take it as a compliment.

[adhoc]

I’m watching the narrative change to “COVID is here to stay” in the liberal media. It’ll be interesting to watch the shift.

It's here to stay for sure. The only thing that'll change is it will probably mutate into something less lethal. And we will have yearly vaccinations or later some pills against it.

I'm 99% sure we got COVID again home. I'm going to get a test tomorrow. We're vaccinated, and we also all had it before already. So if the vaccines don't protect you from getting it, nor from spreading it, only help you get through the infection, then vaccines will never stop it. There's no reason whatsoever to expect vaccines to do that.

[TSherbs]

Some people add more, some people add nothing, like Chuck, unless you count hysteria as something productive, which I don't.

This post would "add something" if you understood what "hysteria" is.

You're just proving my point, now with a dash of stubborn self-righteousness.




Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

If I can encourage one member to take this virus seriously, it is well worth the effort to particiapate in this thread. Perhaps it will save them and their families unnecessary sickness, death, and much sadness.

[adhoc]

This post would "add something" if you understood what "hysteria" is.

Could be. Could also be that your tribalistic nature prohibits you objectivity.

[TSherbs]

This post would "add something" if you understood what "hysteria" is.

Could be. Could also be that your tribalistic nature prohibits you objectivity.I lack objectivity on what "hysteria" means? You really want to say this?

No one has been hysterical on this thread, not even you.

[Chuck Naill]

So, someone wanted to post “completeness” and then discovered the data was anecdotal and subjective. Now they want to say others are hysterical and no capable of objectivity. Sounds like post first, think later.

[adhoc]

This post would "add something" if you understood what "hysteria" is.

Could be. Could also be that your tribalistic nature prohibits you objectivity.I lack objectivity on what "hysteria" means? You really want to say this?

No one has been hysterical on this thread, not even you.

Yes, I find someone who's itching to call people -ism for no reason hysterical.

[TSherbs]

Yes, I find someone who's itching to call people -ism for no reason hysterical.

<rolls eyes>

Of course.





Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

Define “no reason”?

[TSherbs]

Define “no reason”?I wouldn't bother, Chuck. He's just playing a stubborn game here out of some sense of entitlement.

But your decisions are yours.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

Define “no reason”?I wouldn't bother, Chuck. He's just playing a stubborn game here out of some sense of entitlement.

But your decisions are yours.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Understood!!

[Chuck Naill]

I was thinking of two great hysterical people,
Bonhoeffer and John Brown.

[TSherbs]

I was thinking of King George III, sitting at tea, reading the Declaration of Independence, pounding the table and jiggling the china, then shouting out: "What a bunch of hysterical poppycock!"

[dneal]

I was thinking of King George III, sitting at tea, reading the Declaration of Independence, pounding the table and jiggling the china, then shouting out: "What a bunch of hysterical poppycock!"

The irony in this one is almost more than I can stand… LMAO!!!

[Chuck Naill]

You are left without anything to add, yet you do….lol!

[adhoc]

In my country, vector based vaccines are now officially (as per state health authority, NIJZ) more deadly than COVID itself for young women (aged 41 and lower), as per our national statistic.

https://www.rtvslo.si/zdravje/novi-koronavirus/v-ukc-ju-ljubljana-je-zivljenjsko-ogrozena-20-letnica-pri-kateri-obstaja-sum-na-zaplet-po-cepljenju/595562

You can use Google Translate to read the article. This is an article from our national media. A 20 year old is clinically dead 2 weeks after being vaccinated with J&J. Our state vaccination programme lead said she is considering banning J&J vaccine as well now.

[Chuck Naill]

Just got the flu vaccine. Publix pharmacist said they would have the Moderna if approved for 3rd dose.

[Chip]

Three graphs, very simple and clear, from the NY Times.

https://i.imgur.com/RDvk4OQ.jpg


https://i.imgur.com/FvLr4Gq.jpg


https://i.imgur.com/CAejZAy.jpg

Since I live in Wyoming, the information shown above is of immediate interest.

I leave the interpretation to you.

[TFarnon]

I have a lot of questions, but I understand that you (and many others) won't be able to answer them.

I read in the article you linked that the young woman died of a stroke. That risk has been known for at least a few months now. I don't have to ask you about the pathology of the vaccine-induced stroke, because I understand that pathology more or less. However the age of the young woman leads me to ask: did the young woman have a genetic disorder like Leiden Factor V, or Von Willebrand's Disease? Was she on progesterone-only birth control? Did she have a high or low platelet count prior to the vaccination? Did she have hyperfibrinogenemia prior to the vaccination? Did the young woman have hereditary hemochromatosis? All of those can cause coagulopathies, which might be exacerbated by the vaccine.

The other thing I'd like to mention is that COVID infection itself can cause strokes because of hypercoagulability. I assume your national health agency has obtained more information about the patient and is taking that information into consideration.

[dneal]

RE: Pathology of the vaccine induced stroke...

My understanding is that the spikes are cytotoxic, and the strategy with the vaccine is to introduce the spike messenger alone (either encased in lipids or a genetically modified adenovirus). The spikes work like other viruses' spikes, in that they're designed to lacerate or penetrate other cells' structure - and then the rest of the viral process takes over. As an aside, the way the spikes work and the way the virus unfolds and refolds to hijack the victim cell is fascinating.

With this strain of virus in particular, it appears that the lacerations/penetrations usually happen in the lungs; creating the pneumonia problem (and there is a strong argument why forced ventilation compounds rather than corrects, but that's another topic...). Rarely, but commonly enough for us to notice, the virus affects other parts of the body; mainly the brain. The loss of taste and smell, and other sensory oddities are well documented. They're looking now at brain function, decrease in tissue (prefrontal cortex mainly), etc... There will surely be lots of studies on lots of things as time goes on, and we'll see.

Even more rarely, but again common enough for us to notice; is the fatality rate of the vaccine. Statistically insignificant, really; but not if you're the one who dies (or the loved one of one who dies). Generalities don't apply to the specific, oftentimes. This isn't new either. The rollout of the polio vaccine was met with live virus in the vaccine. It was literally paralyzing and killing children. Imagine being a parent then. Vaccine or don't? They of course figured out the problem, corrected it, and then had to earn trust again.

As more data is collected and looked at, the current virus has an infection fatality rate of less than one percent. It's certainly here to stay. It's in animal reservoirs now. We can't socially distance our way to anything. We can face risk and adversity presented by this just like we have other things in human history. This and other threats to humanity certainly aren't going to stop just because we called a time out and took a nap in a safe space.

It grabs at the most primal human (and maybe animal) emotion - fear. Again, think of being a parent when the miraculous polio vaccine came out. The time for imprudent fear of this virus to end is upon us. You know what? It's kinda like the flu. A viral threat that tends to eat away at the edges of our herd. The sick, old, vulnerable, etc... We have a vaccine that works pretty good for that, but the virus still nibbles away. Doesn't matter what the virus' name is, or how it works; when the end is the same. That's kind of like nature. The whole globe is the "Serengeti", albeit exponentially more complex, but it's nature and struggle for life. Compete or don't.

You know there's something wrong when each side relishes a death when it proves their political point.

[Chuck Naill]

I’m old enough to have gotten the sugar cube polio vaccine. It was given at my elementary.

A friend is 70. Her father was a pediatrician. He gave his children every vaccine available.

She contracted polio and has required braces and walking sticks her entire life.

Another MD friend, a bit older than her lived in an iron lung for nearly a year.

I’ve never heard of anyone relishing death. Change the channel.

It’s not like the flu. It’s not like measles. It’s not like pertussis. It’s like the common cold on steroids if you require a similarity.

If the virus can do all that you mentioned, a rational decision would be to obtain the vaccine and if not, mask and distance. Not to support a political candidate, but for those you love, your neighbor, and yourself.

[dneal]

The daily ringings of the echo-chambers just foment fear and irrationality.

Interesting op-ed. Food for thought at any rate.

The Masked Ball of Cowardice (https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/masked-ball-cowardice)

[Chuck Naill]

Food for nothing. Study your 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic requiring masks and distancing. People rebelled then as now.

Is 600k death in the US alone a fluke?

Good grief, what a fucking mentality.

[TSherbs]

I actually think that those younger persons who volunteer the more likely death of the elderly should first submit their own as testament of their bona fides.

From my point of view, a society that does not make all reasonable effort to reduce the unnecessary suffering and death of its elderly (or children...in other words, its most vulnerable members) has no business calling itself compassionate or even legitimate. It is moral bankruptcy of the highest order.

We get such bullshit logic and selfish thinking when other persons' lives can be tossed off as less worthy of being saved from otherwise premature or unwelcome extinction.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

I just wish there were people who would champion the unborn. And, that more avoidable adoptions were available.

And, I think reliable birth control should be free to all.

[adhoc]

I have a lot of questions, but I understand that you (and many others) won't be able to answer them.

I read in the article you linked that the young woman died of a stroke. That risk has been known for at least a few months now. I don't have to ask you about the pathology of the vaccine-induced stroke, because I understand that pathology more or less. However the age of the young woman leads me to ask: did the young woman have a genetic disorder like Leiden Factor V, or Von Willebrand's Disease? Was she on progesterone-only birth control? Did she have a high or low platelet count prior to the vaccination? Did she have hyperfibrinogenemia prior to the vaccination? Did the young woman have hereditary hemochromatosis? All of those can cause coagulopathies, which might be exacerbated by the vaccine.

The other thing I'd like to mention is that COVID infection itself can cause strokes because of hypercoagulability. I assume your national health agency has obtained more information about the patient and is taking that information into consideration.

I, of course, do not have the answers to your questions, as I did not know her. It's not yet proven to be linked to the vaccination, however our ER center said they have "very solid reasoning for suspicion", which is strongly worded, for someone who also said that the "situation is serious" when she was already clinically dead. It is also my understanding, as a complete non-expert, that a person such as she would have elevated risk, possibly much higher, from infection with COVID, than the vaccine. The girl since died, they couldn't save her.

As you said, the risk of a stroke after vaccination [with J&J / AZ) is well known for several months now. I believe I started pointing it out, purely because the numbers did not add up, in early March already. Weeks later, several countries in Europe made official statements confirming it. We should have banned those vaccines now, or at least for younger women.

The tragedy is, that we have since a couple of weeks ago "PCT" requirement, meaning only if you can prove you are either vaccinated, have natural immunity / antibodies to COVID, or a clean fresh test not older than 48 hours (this gets costly very fast), can you do pretty much anything. Be it going to the mall, for a drink, take the bus, go to work, anything really, except grocery shopping in a store that is not within a mall, go to the doctor and some other such necessary exceptions. The only reason this girl got vaccinated was because of this PCT requirement. Now the antivaxers in this country are basically making a martyr out of her and the situation here is, pardon the language, absolutely bat shit insane. I have never in my life seen this country in a state of such incredible violent outbursts and protests.

We're a small country with 5th lowest crime rate in the world, just 100 people peacefully standing in protest somewhere is news worthy. There were 100 thousand people yesterday in the capital because of this death and police had to interfere with water cannons because they blocked off the highway for major part of the country. People are fighting the police even. This is simply never before seen in this country.

And it all could have been prevented by simply doing a bloodwork check before vaccinating or giving her Moderna / Pfizer. We have huge stockpiles of all of the vaccines and you can freely choose whichever you want. The catch? Everyone wants J&J, because you get your PCT requirements fulfilled immediately, as it's the only single shot vaccine.

[Chuck Naill]

The J&J in the US is being questioned.

[Chuck Naill]

700,000 dead in the US. A friend contracted the virus. After getting over the inital symptoms, he continues to have a cough and lethargy. I have no idea if he had the vaccine or chose to distance/mask.

[TSherbs]

48th place worldwide.

I'm embarrassed, and very saddened.

American exceptionalism meets identity politics and scientific ignorance meets internet credulity.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/polarization-over-vaccine-mandate-rules-underscores-difficulty-for-u-s-to-slow-pandemic

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[adhoc]

I actually think that those younger persons who volunteer the more likely death of the elderly should first submit their own as testament of their bona fides.

I don't understand how many people must fail one throughout their educational path to become so fundamentally illiterate as you, but your posts are an eyesore. Vaccines do not prevent one from getting infected and spreading COVID, you can read this fact everywhere. You and your hysterical partner-in-idiocy here are the only people on this world not understanding this fact yet.

Please leave the keyboard and start reading. Collective human knowledge is at your fingertips, yet you choose to spend your time spewing what amounts to verbal diarrhea.

[TSherbs]

I actually think that those younger persons who volunteer the more likely death of the elderly should first submit their own as testament of their bona fides.

I don't understand how many people must fail one throughout their educational path to become so fundamentally illiterate as you, but your posts are an eyesore. Vaccines do not prevent one from getting infected and spreading COVID, you can read this fact everywhere. You and your hysterical partner-in-idiocy here are the only people on this world not understanding this fact yet.

Please leave the keyboard and start reading. Collective human knowledge is at your fingertips, yet you choose to spend your time spewing what amounts to verbal diarrhea.Congratulations on missing my point and not recalling my other posts about the vaccine and it's efficacy. You have weird days, and this appears to be one of them.

Calm the fuck down, and try reading my post again. Hint: it was an argument about making sure that the elderly get all the vaccine protection that they deserve (and also how I feel about people who callously dismiss elderly mortality).

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

I actually think that those younger persons who volunteer the more likely death of the elderly should first submit their own as testament of their bona fides.

I don't understand how many people must fail one throughout their educational path to become so fundamentally illiterate as you, but your posts are an eyesore. Vaccines do not prevent one from getting infected and spreading COVID, you can read this fact everywhere. You and your hysterical partner-in-idiocy here are the only people on this world not understanding this fact yet.

Please leave the keyboard and start reading. Collective human knowledge is at your fingertips, yet you choose to spend your time spewing what amounts to verbal diarrhea.

Sounds like you don’t understand how vaccines work. Disease prevention are exactly how vaccines work.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/conversations/understanding-vacc-work.html

The polio vaccines prevent polio, not just give you a slight limp.

The benefit of the Covid vaccine is to prevent or at least lessen the severity.

Some people are immune compromised such as the elderly and those with co morbidity.

If it makes you feel better to get personal, it’s your call, but it makes you look like you don’t know enough to form a legitimate response.

[TSherbs]

I actually think that those younger persons who volunteer the more likely death of the elderly should first submit their own as testament of their bona fides.

I don't understand how many people must fail one throughout their educational path to become so fundamentally illiterate as you, but your posts are an eyesore. Vaccines do not prevent one from getting infected and spreading COVID, you can read this fact everywhere. You and your hysterical partner-in-idiocy here are the only people on this world not understanding this fact yet.

Please leave the keyboard and start reading. Collective human knowledge is at your fingertips, yet you choose to spend your time spewing what amounts to verbal diarrhea.

Sounds like you don’t understand how vaccines work. Disease prevention are exactly how vaccines work...

He does know. He just misunderstood my post, and was triggered about something.

Or, perhaps, he doesn't care about the increased vulnerability to lethal disease among the elderly. But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. For now.

He probably thought that I meant that he should get vaccinated (or boostered) to protect the elderly. That is exactly not what I said. But that may have been the lens through which he is reading this, even though we are occasionally making other points.

But he can explain, if he feels like it.

[Chuck Naill]

I can only go on what he said, otherwise, I’ll follow your lead.

[Chuck Naill]

A new report says 140K children have lost a parent to COVID-19 in the US. The impact has been devestating. All the more reason to take it serious.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/wellness/the-children-left-behind-140000-kids-lost-a-parent-to-covid-19/ar-AAPdziK?ocid=uxbndlbing

[Cookedj]

I take it serious, but as I talk to my High school students here is a reoccurring theme they want to know - Why are there so many Government officials exempt from taking the shot? Their parents have no choice (Army) and will get kicked out if they refuse. There are many other questions they have, but can't seem to find an acceptable answer other than It's for the greater good.

Side note: Anyone see the Project Veritas videos coming out about the vaccine/BigPharma/Government? Very interesting.

[Chuck Naill]

What government officials are exempt?

[Cookedj]

What government officials are exempt?

All of congress.

[Chuck Naill]

What government officials are exempt?

All of congress.

You answer to your students that the reason for the exemption is the https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/separation_of_powers . If you are qualified to discuss, this could be interesting and why it is important.

[TSherbs]

I take it serious, but as I talk to my High school students here is a reoccurring theme they want to know - Why are there so many Government officials exempt from taking the shot? Their parents have no choice (Army) and will get kicked out if they refuse. There are many other questions they have, but can't seem to find an acceptable answer other than It's for the greater good.

Their history/social studies teacher should explain this. It's a great opportunity to help students see the Constitutional structure at work (as frustrating as it might be).

[kazoolaw]

What government officials are exempt?

All of congress.

You answer to your students that the reason for the exemption is the https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/separation_of_powers . If you are qualified to discuss, this could be interesting and why it is important.

Perhaps you might explain your understanding of the application of the separation of powers applies to vaccine exemptions.

[kazoolaw]

"Correction: Oct. 7, 2021
An earlier version of this article incorrectly described actions taken by regulators in Sweden and Denmark. They have halted use of the Moderna vaccine in children; they have not begun offering single doses. The article also misstated the number of Covid hospitalizations in U.S. children. It is more than 63,000 from August 2020 to October 2021, not 900,000 since the beginning of the pandemic. In addition, the article misstated the timing of an F.D.A. meeting on authorization of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for children. It is later this month, not next week."
-https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/06/health/covid-vaccine-children-dose.html
(emphasis added)

Does the winner of the Victor Cohn Prize for Excellence in Medical Science Reporting publishing a number 14 times the actual statistic bolster or diminish the public's faith in vaccine reporting?

[Chuck Naill]

I’m encouraged that so many have decided to get the vaccine and that cases are declining in the US.

Hopefully all people can have access and live fruitful and productive lives.

[dneal]

"Correction: Oct. 7, 2021
An earlier version of this article incorrectly described actions taken by regulators in Sweden and Denmark. They have halted use of the Moderna vaccine in children; they have not begun offering single doses. The article also misstated the number of Covid hospitalizations in U.S. children. It is more than 63,000 from August 2020 to October 2021, not 900,000 since the beginning of the pandemic. In addition, the article misstated the timing of an F.D.A. meeting on authorization of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for children. It is later this month, not next week."
-https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/06/health/covid-vaccine-children-dose.html
(emphasis added)

Does the winner of the Victor Cohn Prize for Excellence in Medical Science Reporting publishing a number 14 times the actual statistic bolster or diminish the public's faith in vaccine reporting?




Oh ye of little faith. Repent now and pay your tithe/subscription, and all will be forgiven - or face the inquisitor’s wrath.

[Chuck Naill]

Dr. Fauci said a virus won’t develop a variant unless you give it an opportunity.

[TSherbs]

Got my flu shot today.

Have to wait another month or so for my Moderna booster. Sign me up!

NBC News: FDA advisory group recommends Moderna booster for emergency authorization.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/fda-advisory-group-recommends-moderna-booster-emergency-authorization-rcna2850

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

Got my flu shot today.

Have to wait another month or so for my Moderna booster. Sign me up!

NBC News: FDA advisory group recommends Moderna booster for emergency authorization.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/fda-advisory-group-recommends-moderna-booster-emergency-authorization-rcna2850

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Publix Pharmacy said they have the Moderna vaccine, so I'll get it there whenever possible.

[TSherbs]

Got my flu shot today.

Have to wait another month or so for my Moderna booster. Sign me up!

NBC News: FDA advisory group recommends Moderna booster for emergency authorization.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/fda-advisory-group-recommends-moderna-booster-emergency-authorization-rcna2850

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Publix Pharmacy said they have the Moderna vaccine, so I'll get it there whenever possible.It'll likely be Walmart for me.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

Booster just gotten at Publix.

[TSherbs]

Booster just gotten at Publix.How's it feel this time around?

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

Booster just gotten at Publix.How's it feel this time around?

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Absolutely no adverse event. I hiked afterwards and no tiredness at all. Thank you for asking:)

[Empty_of_Clouds]

No boosters here yet except for those with severely compromised immune systems. We do have a disturbing spread of D.variant, and the associated ass-hattery that is inevitable among some sections of society, as well as the usual increase in crass point scoring among the politicians.

[Chuck Naill]

No boosters here yet except for those with severely compromised immune systems. We do have a disturbing spread of D.variant, and the associated ass-hattery that is inevitable among some sections of society, as well as the usual increase in crass point scoring among the politicians.

This is going to sound worse than it is, but it is somewhat good to know that the nonsense is not isolated to the US. As a friend says, it is Darwinisn at work.

[Chuck Naill]

I am reading "I Alone Can Fix It". The first chapter protrays Anthony Fauci and other experts as concerned about what was happening in China. So, can you imagine having information and experience and sounding the alarm while no one wants to listen and then becomeing the wipping boy for speaking out. The book also discusses how Azar was trying to engage with Trump and all Trump wanted to do is blame him for banning flavored e-cigarettes which was costing him votes. It is ironic that while we were going through a national crisis, the concern was loosing an electioin.

[Chuck Naill]

I’m continuing to mask until the grandchildren receive the vaccine.

[Chuck Naill]

Most know I support mask wearing, but I see people out walking on the road, with not another person in sight, wearing one.

[kazoolaw]

Would a treatment replace a vaccine, and make a lock-down unnecessary?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34159342/

[dneal]

Would a treatment replace a vaccine, and make a lock-down unnecessary?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34159342/


https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/35784-Interesting-Video

[Chuck Naill]

Would a treatment replace a vaccine, and make a lock-down unnecessary?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34159342/


Read the study conclusion.

[dneal]

Conclusions: Molnupiravir is the first oral, direct-acting antiviral shown to be highly effective at reducing nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 infectious virus and viral RNA and has a favorable safety and tolerability profile.

[Cookedj]

Studies are starting on the Amish communities in Pennsylvania with zero vaccinations, 93% infection rate and no deaths. They were described as the first communities in the United States to achieve true herd immunity.

[kazoolaw]

Most know I support mask wearing, but I see people out walking on the road, with not another person in sight, wearing one.

https://binj.in/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Nancy-Pelosi-Under-Fire-for-Attending-Maskless-Wedding-of-Oil-Heiress-Ivy-Getty-750x450.jpg
Apparently the rich and the political class are exempt.

[Chuck Naill]

No, their no more exempt than you. I’m sure the speaker has had three doses like me, however. I don’t wear a mask with family since all except the children are vaccinated.

[kazoolaw]

Chuck, is it your impression that Nancy Pelosi is related to Ivy Getty, and that all the maskless attendees as Getty's event wedding were relatives?

[Chuck Naill]

Chuck, is it your impression that Nancy Pelosi is related to Ivy Getty, and that all the maskless attendees as Getty's event wedding were relatives?


Kaz, you only posted a picture without a reference to who was in the photo with the Madam Speaker, the date taken, or what event. Your comment was that rich people are exempt. No one is exempt from the virus. Trump contracted the virus, wouldn't wear a mask, and nearly died as a rich man. Why did you choose to focus on Pelosi?

[kazoolaw]

Chuck, is it your impression that Nancy Pelosi is related to Ivy Getty, and that all the maskless attendees as Getty's event wedding were relatives?


Kaz, you only posted a picture without a reference to who was in the photo with the Madam Speaker, the date taken, or what event. Your comment was that rich people are exempt. No one is exempt from the virus. Trump contracted the virus, wouldn't wear a mask, and nearly died as a rich man. Why did you choose to focus on Pelosi?

Because Pelosi, having ordered the arrest of those on Capitol grounds without a mask, presided at the wedding, and was at a reception at City Hall without a mask, surrounded by the maskless beautiful people.
https://assets.vogue.com/photos/61897998d1ad0068cc0d3ce1/master/w_1920%2Cc_limit/DSC04705.JPG

https://twitter.com/RepKatCammack/status/1420727107735461888/photo/1

[TSherbs]

@kazoolaw Was this function on Capitol grounds? I don't know anything about it.

If your point is that Congress (or Pelosi) is sometimes hypocritical in behavior, well, that is easily granted. In the same way that church leadership is hypocritical. And parents. And spouses. I find "hypocrisy" to be a rather easy arrow to fling at people; there is no one within whom the barb does not stick.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

Chuck, is it your impression that Nancy Pelosi is related to Ivy Getty, and that all the maskless attendees as Getty's event wedding were relatives?


Kaz, you only posted a picture without a reference to who was in the photo with the Madam Speaker, the date taken, or what event. Your comment was that rich people are exempt. No one is exempt from the virus. Trump contracted the virus, wouldn't wear a mask, and nearly died as a rich man. Why did you choose to focus on Pelosi?

Because Pelosi, having ordered the arrest of those on Capitol grounds without a mask, presided at the wedding, and was at a reception at City Hall without a mask, surrounded by the maskless beautiful people.
https://assets.vogue.com/photos/61897998d1ad0068cc0d3ce1/master/w_1920%2Cc_limit/DSC04705.JPG

https://twitter.com/RepKatCammack/status/1420727107735461888/photo/1


They are all democrats and vaccinated adults. I see no children.

[kazoolaw]

@kazoolaw Was this function on Capitol grounds? I don't know anything about it.

If your point is that Congress (or Pelosi) is sometimes hypocritical in behavior, well, that is easily granted. In the same way that church leadership is hypocritical. And parents. And spouses. I find "hypocrisy" to be a rather easy arrow to fling at people; there is no one within whom the barb does not stick.

I don't think pastors, parents, or spouses have the power to jail people for doing the things that Pelosi is doing that she would jail others for.

I also think that this is graphic evidence of why there is a distrust of government, particularly on the issue of government COVID edicts. This behavior is proof that masks are unnecessary: if they were shouldn't all these people be wearing them? Vaccine mandates? Were any of these people required to show their cards? Clearly they're not social distancing.

None of these wedding guests, or previous birthday party guests on the East Coast, at the highest levels of government and privilege, demonstrate that COVID precautions are necessary/important. Why should any working class democrat or child [hat-tip to Chuck] think so either.

The photo comes from a reception at City Hall in SanFran for the wedding of Ivy Getty of oil fortune fame. Pelosi officiated. It was a several day event wedding. Photos of the various events and guests show no COVID precautions. Wealth and power must create their own herd immunity.

[TSherbs]

Wealth and power must create their own herd immunity.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

You don't mean this, right?

Your point seems to be that hypocrisy builds mistrust. I agree.

I read that picture as an example of monied interests and privilege. This is nothing new, and had nothing to do with the science of contagion. Not for me, anyway.





Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

I’ve never needed a idol or someone that took the place of me making my own decisions. What Trump or Pelosi do or not do makes no difference. Their hypocrisy is just irritating, but of no personal influence. And, there is hypocrisy on both sides, as I pointed out.


The reason to mask, distance, and get vaccinated is science based. Has nothing to do with politics, what a pro athlete does, famous pastor thinks, or any spokes person for a group

[Chip]

Studies are starting on the Amish communities in Pennsylvania with zero vaccinations, 93% infection rate and no deaths. They were described as the first communities in the United States to achieve true herd immunity.

If the studies are just starting, how do you know this?

Talk radio?

Fox News?

Anti-vax RWW website?

Divine revelation?

How about a source?

[kazoolaw]

[

... the science of contagion.


If those enacting the laws don't obey the laws one conclusion is they don't believe in the efficacy of the legislation, or their science of contagion. Otherwise, why aren't they following the science (and the law?)

[Chuck Naill]

Why does anyone choose to follow the science? Those with a background in science perhaps? Can’t say. I trust people like Michael Olsrholm and Rick Bright.

[TSherbs]

[

... the science of contagion.


If those enacting the laws don't obey the laws one conclusion is they don't believe in the efficacy of the legislation, or their science of contagion. Otherwise, why aren't they following the science (and the law?)


That's not my conclusion. It's it yours?

I already gave you another reason for why some people don't follow the rules: privilege (arrogance of money).

There are many possible motivations for not following the rules. With the wealthy and ruling class, I think it's best to just start with their sense of privilege.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chip]

I trust not only science, but also my experience of how things work.

Medical folks have worn masks when doing surgery or treating infectious diseases for over a century. Seems to help.

When I mow dry grass and such, I wear a mask and suffer less with my allergies. There are bits of plant matter, pollen, etc. on the mask when I'm done.

When I am working with wood or finishes, sanding, etc. I wear a certified respirator mask. Cedar dust is really toxic. When I change the filter after, there's quite a deposit of stuff I'd rather not have in my lungs.

When I fought wildfires, enveloped in smoke, soot, dust, (and yellowjackets), I kept a bandanna over my face and moistened it regularly. When I went off shift, it would be black and caked outside. Years later, some of my firefighting pals, non-smokers, have suffered from emphysema and similar complaints.

Other than hard evidence, observation, and experience, what is there to go on?

[dneal]

Relevant article in The Hill today.

What must never be asked about COVID-19 and vaccines — nor ever revealed (https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/581001-what-must-never-be-asked-about-covid-and-vaccines-nor-ever-revealed)



For the censors out there, this is not an anti-vaccine piece. Just the opposite. I believe vaccines represent the best hope to billions of people around the world. This is simply about our rights as Americans, in the age of COVID-19, to ask certain questions. I say that because, although some will disagree, for many people life seemingly has become a dystopian science fiction movie of “Do as we say” edicts.

And quite sadly, an ugly and potentially harmful “Us vs. Them” mentality has taken hold with some on both sides of the COVID-19 treatment divide. It’s a divide that has appeared because of the consequences of forced or controlled “ignorance.”

During the first few months of the pandemic, you could use Google or another search engine to look up questions such as “What is the survival rate for COVID-19?” or “What is the average age of those getting the virus?” or “Does the virus hit the obese or those with chronic morbidities harder?” or “Where did the virus originate?” or “Has the virus gotten weaker as it has mutated?” But just try to do that now. You’ll find that many of the answers are buried, dating to early 2020, or simply impossible to find.

Why is that? Shouldn’t we Americans be allowed to look up such information and then make judgments ourselves?

In the United States, it can seem as if “They” (typically the politicians or their proxies) have decided “for our own good” that certain questions should not be asked, certain answers should be buried, certain scientists and doctors should be criticized, certain people should be fired, and a certain class should do the thinking for the rest of us.

There is no sane person who does not hope or pray that medical science can at least weaken the threat from the SARS-CoV-2 virus so that we can resume life as it mostly was before COVID-19. That said, everyone — including doctors and scientists in the field of infectious disease — should be able to ask questions or express doubts about certain protocols without being castigated or fired from their jobs.

In this unhealthy “Us vs. Them” dynamic that has sprung up as a toxic byproduct of the pandemic, there are many Americans — politicians, celebrities and Twitter trolls — who are not only calling for the firing of doctors, nurses, firefighters, police officers, military personnel, teachers, pilots, air traffic controllers and U.S. intelligence officers but also taking joy in that possible outcome.

“Fire them.” Can we step back for a second and realize what that punishment truly would mean? Punishing these Americans potentially would deny them the ability to buy food for their children, pay their rent or mortgage, buy gasoline, pay for medicine or pay for the care of loved ones. This is what “Us vs. Them” can produce.

To this point, on a recent “Real Time with Bill Maher,” the liberal host said, “The world recognizes natural immunity. We don’t because everything in this country has to go through the pharmaceutical companies. Natural immunity is the best kind of immunity. We shouldn’t fire people who have natural immunity because they don’t get the vaccine. We should hire them. Yes?” Many doctors have made the same point.

Others have argued that many Americans who have not yet received vaccines are not necessarily anti-vaxxers but simply adults who are waiting as long as possible to see how the effects of the vaccines play out. And our understanding of the COVID-19 vaccines, compared to natural immunity and other questions, remains a moving target.

As one recent story in The Hill reported, “Vaccinated just as likely to spread delta variant within household as unvaccinated: study.” Another story from last week reported, “Immunity from both vaccines, COVID-19 infection lasts at least six months: CDC.”

That is not a criticism or indictment of the vaccines. Everyone should hope for their complete success. The point is, as with all viruses, there is a learning curve. Shouldn’t we want those in charge to know as much as possible, to give them the confidence needed to set policy for the rest of us?

Americans should be rooting for medical science to win the war against the virus. That said, we should still have the option to question any policies — political, medical, or other — that are handed down from those who hold dominion over us and the lives of our children.

The last time I checked, that is our right as American citizens. As President Biden said in his inaugural address, “That’s democracy. That’s America. The right to dissent peaceably within the guardrails of our republic is perhaps our nation’s greatest strength.”

[TSherbs]

dneal, this is one pf those opinion pieces that masks more than it reveals

Here is why: The thesis ends up being no more than "Americans have the right to question policies." My reply: of course they do, and no one questions this "right" nor is trying to take the "right to question" away.

But this isn't the crux of the matter nor the center of legal debate around vaccine requirements, and this is what I mean about how the article masks.

The point is whether Americans have the "right" to refuse or controvert law or other legal directives. Americans have the power to controvert law but not the "right." Americans have the right to question law and even to challenge it in court, but not the right to controvert it (and by "right" I mean the right to break law and suffer no consequences).

And actually, all these things are being "questioned" openly and vigorously and often times even in opinion columns that don't label people "liberal" or "conservative" or whatever.

I "question" my work policies frequently (I am always free to do so), but sometimes I controvert them, and I fully recognize that I have no "right" to do so (without consequences) no matter how correct I am (and I nearly always think that I am correct). One of the risks of controverting workplace rules is termination. I find it weak and whining when persons say, "I shouldn't be fired for breaking this major rule at work" (or for breaking the law). Manual laborers are sometimes fired for simply being late. To lose a job over refusing to follow a health and safety workplace mandate is clear and reasonable. It's the risk we take in controverting rules when we have no right to be free from the consequences of that action.

[TSherbs]

This reminds me of when persons label disagreement and debate as an effort to "cancel." Disagreement is not erasure or punishment. It is simply disagreement (and sometimes debate). At my workplace we have become too reluctant to professionally disagree on pedagogy, and the institution is the worse for that reluctance. We should be "free to disagree" as we work to settle on policy (and I frequently am in a minority on several topics). But once the policy is settled, I know that my compliance is expected, I accept this, and I accept all responsibility for the consequences of my non-compliance. Non-compliance is NOT a "right," especially not in the workplace.

[dneal]

@TSherbs- I disagree with your characterization, and bolded what I perceive the thesis to be.

[TSherbs]

@TSherbs- I disagree with your characterization, and bolded what I perceive the thesis to be.I drew his main point from his last paragraph (conclusion).

What you bolded here I easily concede. Yes, America has a harmful divide on this topic.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Cookedj]

I encourage students with different views to give them, with the rule of everyone listens then asks questions. I want the students to 1) learn how to listen and effectively communicate with people that have different beliefs and 2) Understand why they believe what they believe. If we can't teach it in a controlled environment, the great big world isn't a safe or fun place to learn.

[kazoolaw]

[

... the science of contagion.


If those enacting the laws don't obey the laws one conclusion is they don't believe in the efficacy of the legislation, or their science of contagion. Otherwise, why aren't they following the science (and the law?)


That's not my conclusion. It's it yours?

I already gave you another reason for why some people don't follow the rules: privilege (arrogance of money).

There are many possible motivations for not following the rules. With the wealthy and ruling class, I think it's best to just start with their sense of privilege.

I think that is one of the motivations, yes, along with distain for those not of the wealthy and ruling classes.

[kazoolaw]

I trust not only science, but also my experience of how things work.

Medical folks have worn masks when doing surgery or treating infectious diseases for over a century. Seems to help.

When I mow dry grass and such, I wear a mask and suffer less with my allergies. There are bits of plant matter, pollen, etc. on the mask when I'm done.

When I am working with wood or finishes, sanding, etc. I wear a certified respirator mask. Cedar dust is really toxic. When I change the filter after, there's quite a deposit of stuff I'd rather not have in my lungs.

When I fought wildfires, enveloped in smoke, soot, dust, (and yellowjackets), I kept a bandanna over my face and moistened it regularly. When I went off shift, it would be black and caked outside. Years later, some of my firefighting pals, non-smokers, have suffered from emphysema and similar complaints.

Other than hard evidence, observation, and experience, what is there to go on?

Fauci wrote: "Masks are really for infected people to prevent them from spreading infection to people who are not infected rather than protecting uninfected people from acquiring infection.


"The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through material. It might, however, provide some slight benefit in keep out gross droplets if someone coughs or sneezes on you."

He added: "I do not recommend that you wear a mask, particularly since you are going to a very low risk location."

Fauci has previously been criticized for changing his position on masks. Early on in the pandemic, he advised against wearing face coverings, but that advice evolved over time.

On March 8, 2020, Fauci said "there's no reason to be walking around with a mask," according to Reuters—but this was before the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its guidance on masks on April 3.




The CDC recommended that people wear face coverings "in public settings when around people outside their household, especially when social distancing measures are difficult to maintain."

The changes were made as more information about COVID-19 became available during the pandemic. Fauci has since encouraged mask-wearing in line with the CDC advice. He told NBC News on January 25 that wearing two masks was "common sense."

"So, if you have a physical covering with one layer, you put another layer on, it just makes common sense that it likely would be more effective," he said. "That's the reason why you see people either double masking or doing a version of an N95 [respirator]."

The CDC guidelines were recently updated to say that fully vaccinated people could go without masks in most indoor and outdoor situations, but Fauci has warned that this does not mean everyone can take off their masks yet.

An opinion for every season.

[Chuck Naill]

Not for Kaz, but for others, this might provide the indecisive nature of using masks. If aerosolized, masks, of course, make sense for non Trumpians .
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00974-w

[TSherbs]

Remove

[Chuck Naill]

As with wars, when dealing with pandemics, you don’t rehearse, Kaz. Lol!!! Can’t believe I need to say so.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

My comment here could equally apply to several other threads: When dealing with a fluid situation it is hardly surprising that the 'solutions' are also fluid (did ya see what I did there!). It is perhaps a sign of the times that people overlook this in their eagerness to score points or draw attention to assumed flaws.

[kazoolaw]

My comment here could equally apply to several other threads: When dealing with a fluid situation it is hardly surprising that the 'solutions' are also fluid (did ya see what I did there!). It is perhaps a sign of the times that people overlook this in their eagerness to score points or draw attention to assumed flaws.

Now do gain of function.

[kazoolaw]

As with wars, when dealing with pandemics, you don’t rehearse, Kaz. Lol!!! Can’t believe I need to say so.

Sorry Chuck, reality returns:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/poland-latvia-worry-over-russias-war-games-tense-eu-belarus-border-2021-09-02/

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us-troops-play-the-enemy-in-poland-led-war-games-1.509262

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/04/the-secret-way-100-royal-marines-smashed-1500-u-s-soldiers/

[kazoolaw]

My comment here could equally apply to several other threads: When dealing with a fluid situation it is hardly surprising that the 'solutions' are also fluid (did ya see what I did there!). It is perhaps a sign of the times that people overlook this in their eagerness to score points or draw attention to assumed flaws.

What is striking is the inability to say we just don't know yet, we're working on the situation, instead of rushing to say something and then say the opposite with no more proof and think no one will notice.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Ideally that's what I would prefer. Now I am not a political analyst in any way, even the term amateur would be grossly overstating my ability in this regard, but I imagine that elections aren't won on 'we just don't know yet', and encouraging confidence of the people for their leaders is likely not best served by 'we just don't know yet', in the current political climate. However, it does seem to me that there are times when 'we just don't know yet' is used, but usually relating to endeavours that do not have negative personal impact. Perhaps as a species in the kind of societies we create, we don't have sufficient political, emotional or spiritual maturity. We just don't know yet.

[TSherbs]

Perhaps as a species in the kind of societies we create, we don't have sufficient political, emotional or spiritual maturity. We just don't know yet.

American political, emotional, and spiritual maturity has declined.

[dneal]

You do rehearse for wars, pandemics and other disastrous events. First you write operational plans and contingency plans, then you rehearse them through exercises. The DOD does this. Federal and State emergency management agencies do this. The CDC does this.

[Chuck Naill]

As with wars, when dealing with pandemics, you don’t rehearse, Kaz. Lol!!! Can’t believe I need to say so.

Sorry Chuck, reality returns:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/poland-latvia-worry-over-russias-war-games-tense-eu-belarus-border-2021-09-02/

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us-troops-play-the-enemy-in-poland-led-war-games-1.509262

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/04/the-secret-way-100-royal-marines-smashed-1500-u-s-soldiers/

Wars and war games are not the same. So, my previous comments remain intact.

[Chuck Naill]

My comment here could equally apply to several other threads: When dealing with a fluid situation it is hardly surprising that the 'solutions' are also fluid (did ya see what I did there!). It is perhaps a sign of the times that people overlook this in their eagerness to score points or draw attention to assumed flaws.

What is striking is the inability to say we just don't know yet, we're working on the situation, instead of rushing to say something and then say the opposite with no more proof and think no one will notice.


The scientists had previous experience with other virus infections. Once human to human spread was known, measures were instituted. It has only been two years. Anyone could find this out. We don't need to suggest Fauci didn't know anything, just that he didn't know at the time if the virus was aersolized.

So far I have been able to avoid contracting the virus. My friends, my age, who have been infected have had a very difficult time, some lasting months now.

Again, the goal is to protect yourself and others. Do all you can even if you don't understand or agree. There is no harm in wearing a mask indoors and keeping 6 feet apart. If you want the vaccine, it is free. If you don't, be respectful to others. For me, it's the least I can do to be a good citizen.

Since you want people to wait before they know, how do you personally deal with Trump's lies regarding COVID-19? Should he have waited before recommending cures? SHould he have waited before saying it was like "the flu"? I don't expect you to respond objectivily, but I do expect, at least, some honestly that had you been Azar or Fauci, you would have done better.

[dneal]

As someone who has been a participant in both wars and wargames (on multiple occasions), I can attest that they differ primarily in the direct exchange of various projectiles.

The fact remains that rehearsals are conducted for both, just as they are conducted for other potentially disastrous events.

[TSherbs]

Remove

[dneal]

Planning and rehearsing don’t cease at commencement of war. You and Chuck are way out of your depth with this.

[Chuck Naill]

Was the battle of Normandy rehearsed? What about the battle at a little big horn? Was Vicksburg rehearsed? No to each.

[dneal]

You're really grasping now. Yes, Normandy was rehearsed. Big horn? You would have to ask the Indians. They didn't keep a written record. Vicksburg? Maybe. I never looked into it because I've not been particularly interested in Civil War battles.

You don't know what "rehearse" means in this context though.

--edit--

In the spring of 1863, Grant marches the Army of the Tennessee down the west side of the Mississippi River. The troops must rendezvous with the Union navy, which will provide transport for the river crossing into Confederate territory. On the evening of April 16, Rear Adm. David Dixon Porter sneaks his Union fleet past the Confederate batteries at Vicksburg to meet up with Grant. As the boats round De Soto Point, they are spotted by Confederate lookouts who spread the alarm. Although each vessel is hit by Confederate fire. Porter's fleet successfully fights its way past the Confederate batteries and meets up with Grant.

On April 29, Union troops attempt to cross the Mississippi at Grand Gulf. The Union fleet bombards Confederate defenses for five hours, but Grant’s troops are repulsed. Grant moves farther south in search of a more favorable crossing point and eventually finds one in Bruinsburg. In the early morning hours of April 30, infantrymen of the Twenty-fourth and Forty-sixth Indiana Regiments step ashore on Mississippi soil. The two sides clash at Port Gibson and Raymond. By May 14, the state capital of Jackson, Mississippi, is in Union hands. On May 16, Grant encounters Pemberton’s army and they exchange fire at Champion Hill. They clash again on May 17 at the Big Black River. Both battles result in Union victories and force the Confederates to retreat to their fortifications at Vicksburg with the Federals in hot pursuit.

Yes, the Union actions were certainly rehearsed.

[TSherbs]

Remove

[Chuck Naill]

Anyone who thinks you can rehearse for war is on drugs

[Chuck Naill]

I played cowboys and Indians as a youth. Not the same .

As they say, only horse shoes and hand grenadines count when close

[dneal]

As someone who has been a participant in both wars and wargames (on multiple occasions), I can attest that they differ primarily in the direct exchange of various projectiles.

The fact remains that rehearsals are conducted for both, just as they are conducted for other potentially disastrous events.Agreed. War is highly planned, at least at the start when given the time.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk


Planning and rehearsing don’t cease at commencement of war. You and Chuck are way out of your depth with this.



Planning and rehearsing don’t cease at commencement of war.

no shit, dneal

I don't remember claiming otherwise.

I was agreeing with you, for god's sake.

<rolls eyes>

I was clarifying that your "at least..." portion was incorrect. Noting that you were both way out of your depth with this particular topic is not in and of itself cause for offense. I would think you know by now that I am very capable of being insulting when I desire. Did you presume that since I lumped you in with Chuck that it was intended to be?

[dneal]

Anyone who thinks you can rehearse for war is on drugs

ad hominem/horselaugh/red herring

If your assertion is true, Eisenhower and the rest of the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force were on drugs then. See: Exercise Fabius, for example. (hint: it was one of the D-Day rehearsals).

Chuck, you destroy your credibility, not me. Keep up the good work.

[TSherbs]

I was clarifying that your "at least..." portion was incorrect. Noting that you were both way out of your depth with this particular topic is not in and of itself cause for offense. I would think you know by now that I am very capable of being insulting when I desire. Did you presume that since I lumped you in with Chuck that it was intended to be?

Nevermind, dneal. This is exactly the kind of tone and exchange that I am trying to avoid. I retract all my comments.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[TSherbs]

I encourage students with different views to give them, with the rule of everyone listens then asks questions. I want the students to 1) learn how to listen and effectively communicate with people that have different beliefs and 2) Understand why they believe what they believe. If we can't teach it in a controlled environment, the great big world isn't a safe or fun place to learn.

I missed this earlier. This is an excellent position statement.

[Chuck Naill]

Pfizer 18 and over booster to be approved.

[Chip]

As they say, only horse shoes and hand grenadines count when close

Is a hand grenadine a palmful of pomegranate syrup? Or a petite hand grenade? :confused:

[TSherbs]

As they say, only horse shoes and hand grenadines count when close

Is a hand grenadine a palmful of pomegranate syrup? Or a petite hand grenade? :confused:"Brown-eyed women and hand grenadines...."


Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

As they say, only horse shoes and hand grenadines count when close

Is a hand grenadine a palmful of pomegranate syrup? Or a petite hand grenade? :confused:"Brown-eyed women and hand grenadines...."


Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

I just noticed my typo...LOL!! Sorry about that. :)

[TSherbs]

Austria is in some trouble. Anyone heard from adhoc in Slovenia? He and his family ok?

CNN: Austria Covid: Nationwide vaccine mandate announced, lockdown reimposed.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/19/europe/austria-national-lockdown-intl/index.html


Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

I came across this quote and thought of our discussions regarding many concepts, but particulary vaccines.
"Albert Einstein once remarked to the brilliant physicist, Werner Heisenberg, "It is the theory which decides what we can observe." The context in which he made this statement was that our conceptual categories influence what we are observing, even when we honestly believe we are being impartial, neutral, or "objective." Cognitive psychology has produced a large body of research that demonstrates that our raw perceptions are unknowingly modified, filtered, and altered by our beliefs and preconceptions."

So my objectivity is that vaccines are generally well tolerated and effective. Others might think generally they are unsafe or ineffective. Hopefully these are the only criteria. My concern is that anti-vaccine concepts have nothing to do with tolerance or effectiviness.

[dneal]

65043

[Chuck Naill]

Do you equate vaccines with DDT? Asking for a friend.

[dneal]

“Science” thought mosquitoes transmitted polio.

[Chuck Naill]

Ever study the origins of polio? Or,’do you just repost Facebook? Ha!!

[dneal]

ad hominem, argument from ridicule and red herring; but ok I'll play.

"Origins of polio"? please enlighten us all, Chuck. I don't think you understand the meaning of "origin".

[dneal]

65072

[Chuck Naill]

No reasonable reply???

[TSherbs]

I came across this quote and thought of our discussions regarding many concepts, but particulary vaccines.
"Albert Einstein once remarked to the brilliant physicist, Werner Heisenberg, "It is the theory which decides what we can observe." The context in which he made this statement was that our conceptual categories influence what we are observing, even when we honestly believe we are being impartial, neutral, or "objective." Cognitive psychology has produced a large body of research that demonstrates that our raw perceptions are unknowingly modified, filtered, and altered by our beliefs and preconceptions."

So my objectivity is that vaccines are generally well tolerated and effective. Others might think generally they are unsafe or ineffective. Hopefully these are the only criteria. My concern is that anti-vaccine concepts have nothing to do with tolerance or effectiviness.Einstein's comment seems quite wise to me.

[dneal]

No reasonable reply???

There’s no reasonable question to reply to.

[dneal]

I came across this quote and thought of our discussions regarding many concepts, but particulary vaccines.
"Albert Einstein once remarked to the brilliant physicist, Werner Heisenberg, "It is the theory which decides what we can observe." The context in which he made this statement was that our conceptual categories influence what we are observing, even when we honestly believe we are being impartial, neutral, or "objective." Cognitive psychology has produced a large body of research that demonstrates that our raw perceptions are unknowingly modified, filtered, and altered by our beliefs and preconceptions."

So my objectivity is that vaccines are generally well tolerated and effective. Others might think generally they are unsafe or ineffective. Hopefully these are the only criteria. My concern is that anti-vaccine concepts have nothing to do with tolerance or effectiviness.Einstein's comment seems quite wise to me.

While Chuck’s comment is self-contradicting. “My objectivity is that…”

[TSherbs]

I came across this quote and thought of our discussions regarding many concepts, but particulary vaccines.
"Albert Einstein once remarked to the brilliant physicist, Werner Heisenberg, "It is the theory which decides what we can observe." The context in which he made this statement was that our conceptual categories influence what we are observing, even when we honestly believe we are being impartial, neutral, or "objective." Cognitive psychology has produced a large body of research that demonstrates that our raw perceptions are unknowingly modified, filtered, and altered by our beliefs and preconceptions."

So my objectivity is that vaccines are generally well tolerated and effective. Others might think generally they are unsafe or ineffective. Hopefully these are the only criteria. My concern is that anti-vaccine concepts have nothing to do with tolerance or effectiviness.Einstein's comment seems quite wise to me.

While Chuck’s comment is self-contradicting. “My objectivity is that…”Einstein is the wise one here, not you, or I, or Chuck.

No offense.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Empty_of_Clouds]

As the geneticists say - 'You get what you screen for'

[Chip]

A global study shows that masks are effective especially when combined with other measures.

"Mask-wearing is the single most effective public health measure at tackling Covid, reducing incidence by 53%, the first global study of its kind shows.

Vaccines are safe and effective and saving lives around the world. But most do not confer 100% protection, most countries have not vaccinated everyone, and it is not yet known if jabs will prevent future transmission of emerging coronavirus variants. Globally, Covid cases exceeded 250 million this month. The virus is still infecting 50 million people worldwide every 90 days due to the highly transmissible Delta variant, with thousands dying each day.

Now a systematic review and meta analysis of non-pharmaceutical interventions has found for the first time that mask wearing, social distancing and handwashing are all effective measures at curbing cases – with mask wearing the most effective.

'This systematic review and meta analysis suggests that several personal protective and social measures, including handwashing, mask wearing, and physical distancing are associated with reductions in the incidence of Covid-19,' the researchers wrote in the BMJ.

They said the results highlight the need to continue mask wearing, social distancing and handwashing alongside vaccine programmes."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/17/wearing-masks-single-most-effective-way-to-tackle-covid-study-finds?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[Chuck Naill]

I began masking April 4, 2020. I hate wearing a mask. I remember going to a grandson's baseball game and being the only person in the area with a mask and feeling like I was over reacting.

If I remember correctly, there was a reduction in influenza during the first two years of the pandemic. Perhaps those preventative measures paid off.

[TSherbs]

I went to an indoor farmers market yesterday. I was surprised by how many persons were ignoring the "request" that all attendees wear masks. Entire families were unmasked. In Maine we are actually on an increasing third wave of positive cases, and my local hospital just announced that all their surgical beds are now filled. Elective surgeries are now again being delayed. Also, 23% of Maine schools have been declared "outbreaks" of Covid transmission. We're having a problem among unvaxxed children and adults, and it is straining our schools and hospitals...again ...

[Chuck Naill]

Reminds my again of my manager who defined insanity as doing the same things over and over expecting a different result @tsherbs.

[dneal]

Yet you do the same things over and over again, Chuck. Hmmm, I wonder if there's a meme for that.

[Chuck Naill]

Did you mean to say something?

[dneal]

*yawn*

[Chuck Naill]

I take that as, I’ve just be one up’d.

[dneal]

I take that as, I’ve just be one up’d.

Yes Chuck, you have been one up'd; many times. Thanks for acknowledging it.

[Chuck Naill]

Vaccine experts "think" thrice vaccinated adults to be protected from the Omicron variant. Lets hope so.

[TSherbs]

Vaccine experts "think" thrice vaccinated adults to be protected from the Omicron variant. Lets hope so.

Agreed. Got my Moderna booster last Friday.

[Chuck Naill]

Vaccine experts "think" thrice vaccinated adults to be protected from the Omicron variant. Lets hope so.

Agreed. Got my Moderna booster last Friday.

I’m pleased, @tsherbs.

[Chuck Naill]

Maybe it’s time to consider getting a vaccine, all. Get the information and make it your choice .

[TSherbs]

Recent update on political affiliation (by county) and Covid death rates (since May 2021, when the vaccine became widely available).

Nothing surprising here, sadly. Our country has a real problem:

NPR: Pro-Trump counties now have far higher COVID death rates. Misinformation is to blame.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate

[dneal]

Perfect example of the politicization of a pandemic, and the use of "journalism" / rhetoric to reinforce "confirmation bias"

It's shameful.

This 15 minute clip is a discussion of the danger of narratives fomenting distrust in politicians, government, and now "science".

"The quality of the debate is critical to good outcomes..."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8Y2ibm40DE

[Chuck Naill]

Recent update on political affiliation (by county) and Covid death rates (since May 2021, when the vaccine became widely available).

Nothing surprising here, sadly. Our country has a real problem:

NPR: Pro-Trump counties now have far higher COVID death rates. Misinformation is to blame.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate

I didn't notice you post. I just posted in the other vaccine thread.

[Chuck Naill]

And political office holders,
Trump appears to have exposed dozens, if not hundreds, of people, including his 77-year-old opponent, to a potentially deadly illness. It was a remarkable demonstration of his selfish indifference to the health and welfare of everyone around him. And in the same way that he refused to act on his own infection — until it was almost too late — he also refused to act to stem a pandemic that, at the time of his positive test, had killed more than 200,000 Americans."
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/04/opinion/biden-trump-covid-test.html

[dneal]

A perfect example of the problem alluded to in the YouTube clip. Political narratives reinforcing tribalism, from a mainstream publication.

[Chuck Naill]

But Trump's action resonate not at all with some. Blame the messenger.

[dneal]

Yes, Trump has caused many to lose their faculty of reasoning, on the left and right. While he shares in the blame, so do those who don't have the mental acuity to remain unaffected by it. He does indeed appear to live in people's heads.

[Chuck Naill]

As the death rate in counties that voted for him shows........:haha:

[dneal]

Chuck, your TDS and lack of composure are showing again.

[Chuck Naill]

Chuck, your TDS and lack of composure are showing again.

I am having fun with you, @dneal. Hopefully you are also having fun.

[dneal]

Not really. Metaphorically beating a 6-year old at chess isn't particularly fun.

[Chuck Naill]

Not really. Metaphorically beating a 6-year old at chess isn't particularly fun.

It is better than letting a fraud radicalize.

[dneal]

A fraud can't radicalize you if you don't let him. Curiously, that "fraud" was successful at radicalizing both sides - but one can't see that if they have a blind spot.

[Chuck Naill]

A fraud can't radicalize you if you don't let him. Curiously, that "fraud" was successful at radicalizing both sides - but one can't see that if they have a blind spot.

You're continuing to ignore the obvious, but it is what I have come to expect. Perhaps more less radicalize heads will respond. Sorry if it is not the "chuck" you want, but the only @dbeal is getting to be a boor. Do you know what that means?

[dneal]

Ignore the obvious? I pointed it out. Trump has no effect on my emotional state. I neither love nor hate the man. I agreed with some of his policies, and not others.

You are triggered into vitriol by him. Did he radicalize you, or exacerbate a previous radicalization?

He also seems to negatively affect your spelling, grammar, and ability to form cogent thoughts.

You'll have to decide which "Chuck" you want to be. One is capable of interesting discourse. The other sounds like a crazy man on a park bench, shouting nonsense at passersby.

I'd pick the former if I were you, but maybe that only comes in rare moments of lucidity - when you're not triggered.

[Chuck Naill]

Ignore the obvious? I pointed it out. Trump has no effect on my emotional state. I neither love nor hate the man. I agreed with some of his policies, and not others.

You are triggered into vitriol by him. Did he radicalize you, or exacerbate a previous radicalization?

He also seems to negatively affect your spelling, grammar, and ability to form cogent thoughts.

You'll have to decide which "Chuck" you want to be. One is capable of interesting discourse. The other sounds like a crazy man on a park bench, shouting nonsense at passersby.

I'd pick the former if I were you, but maybe that only comes in rare moments of lucidity - when you're not triggered.

I doubt anyone here would agree with your assessment, but , honey, I understand why you need to think that way.

[dneal]

Oh Chuck 'honey', I can easily demonstrate my case if you would like. But it would take one of your lucid moments to grasp it, and I suspect it would more likely trigger you back into being the "other" Chuck - and therefore waste each other's time.*

*see what I did there? lol

[Chuck Naill]

Oh Chuck 'honey', I can easily demonstrate my case if you would like. But it would take one of your lucid moments to grasp it, and I suspect it would more likely trigger you back into being the "other" Chuck - and therefore waste each other's time.*

*see what I did there? lol

Please try sweetie.

[dneal]

I'll wait for you to regain your composure. You're in your triggered state now. "ACK!!!"

[Chuck Naill]

😂👍👍

[Chuck Naill]

Bob Dole has died.
“ I'm a Trumper," Dole said at one point during the conversation. But he added at another, "I'm sort of Trumped out, though."

[dneal]

The nonsense / emoticon Chuck has taken over, I see.

Sad, very sad.

[Chuck Naill]

The nonsense / emoticon Chuck has taken over, I see.



Sad, very sad.

Unfortunately we have but one radicalized @dneal.

[Chuck Naill]

Can’t believe you didn’t vote for your boy.

[dneal]

Chuck, I can always tell when you're triggered by your multiple posts that consist of feeble troll attempts.

[Chuck Naill]

I’m not triggered at all. I just keep posting to see how far you will go. The military did you no good or your education experience, practical.

[dneal]

The military did you no good or your education experience, practical.

Chuck, that "sentence" makes absolutely no sense. Like I also pointed out, your penchant for nonsensical statements also increases with how triggered you are.

[Chuck Naill]

The military did you no good or your education experience, practical.

Chuck, that "sentence" makes absolutely no sense. Like I also pointed out, your penchant for nonsensical statements also increases with how triggered you are.

Everything you post is connected to your army experience.

[dneal]

Chuck, that was a wild swing. Try again.

[Chuck Naill]

Chuck, that was a wild swing. Try again.

Suffering from PTSD is nothing insignificant

[dneal]

Nope. Been examined for that and don’t have any. I’m extremely well adjusted.

Another wild swing. Try again.

[Chuck Naill]

Well,
You’re just plain……

[TSherbs]

Vaccine experts "think" thrice vaccinated adults to be protected from the Omicron variant. Lets hope so.

Agreed. Got my Moderna booster last Friday.

It was actually a full 24 hours later that I felt a bit punk, but not too bad (this time)....

[Bold2013]

Felt worse after my booster than my initial series. Still was able to work and weight train but was more than just placebo effects.

[Chuck Naill]

Felt worse after my booster than my initial series. Still was able to work and weight train but was more than just placebo effects.

I am glad to here you chose to get the booster. I have a friend with long Covid who has suffered for months and has had several doctor office visits for testing. I don't want to have to spend the money on long Covid treatment and feeling bad. If it is anything like the tick bite I got in 2015, I want to avoid.

[TSherbs]

Felt worse after my booster than my initial series. Still was able to work and weight train but was more than just placebo effects.

I am glad to here you chose to get the booster. I have a friend with long Covid who has suffered for months and has had several doctor office visits for testing. I don't want to have to spend the money on long Covid treatment and feeling bad. If it is anything like the tick bite I got in 2015, I want to avoid.
Hospitals in my area are overrun with both Covid and other respiratory cases. In my local ICU, the Covid cases are all unvaxxed patients (spokesperson said on the news).

[Chuck Naill]

Felt worse after my booster than my initial series. Still was able to work and weight train but was more than just placebo effects.

I am glad to here you chose to get the booster. I have a friend with long Covid who has suffered for months and has had several doctor office visits for testing. I don't want to have to spend the money on long Covid treatment and feeling bad. If it is anything like the tick bite I got in 2015, I want to avoid.
Hospitals in my area are overrun with both Covid and other respiratory cases. In my local ICU, the Covid cases are all unvaxxed patients (spokesperson said on the news).

Could there be pressure from friends and family not to get the vaccine? I mean, if you want to, but your friends and family are being vocal in not taking the vaccine, is this prevalent?

[TSherbs]

Here's one of the craziest suggestions that I've heard in a while. Liberals can go batshit, too:

The Hill: A newspaper crosses an uncrossable line to 'punish' a class of Americans | TheHill.

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/590723-a-newspaper-crosses-an-uncrossable-line-to-punish-a-class-of-americans

[Chuck Naill]

I've most likely contracted the Omicron variant from the children. After three days my symptoms are a sore throat, cough, and a combination of stopped up and running nose. My morning fever readings are also low as usual, around 96. Like Fauci said, we are all going to wind up with Omicron.

The reason I say "most likely" is because other family members tested positive with the same symptoms. We are fully vaccinated.

I am never for forced vaccination. I'd rather win that goal through an evidenced based approach, but it has been more difficult by misinformation and wanting to find a scape goat rather than being practical in accessing one's situation and making an informed consent.

I used to work for an end of life (hospice/palliative) agency. I encountered families who got angry and the very mention of the word. I was told hundreds of times by people they hoped they would never need hospice.

Anyway, whatever I have is starting pass. I've taken noting but an anti- inflammatory for the sore throat and some vitamin c I was given.

[TSherbs]

Take care, Chuck.

[Chuck Naill]

Take care, Chuck.

Thank you, Ted. We are all doing well.

[Chuck Naill]

I think for now, the vaccines have done their job in my situation. I still have some drainage, but no sore throat and just an occasional cough. More of a four day cold.

[Chuck Naill]

All is back to normal. Vaccine did the job. Had a conversation with an anti COVID vaccine buddy. He said despite his efforts, he has not been able to get infected. He claimed to have some lab values that protect him. Hates masks. Loves Trump. Sound familiar? Also believes that if you use synthetic oil you can never go back. Probably also believes you can't mix nitrogen with air in your tires.

[dneal]

Glad you’re better, but you do realize the only vaccine evidence you have is that it didn’t vaccinate you.

[TSherbs]

I think for now, the vaccines have done their job in my situation. I still have some drainage, but no sore throat and just an occasional cough. More of a four day cold.

Glad you're doing better, Chuck.

[Chuck Naill]

I try to not think about the number of Americans dying daily and the number of people deciding not to vaccinate or at minimum, stay apart or mask.

[dneal]

I try to not think about the number of Americans dying daily and the number of people deciding not to vaccinate or at minimum, stay apart or mask.

Clearly you haven't had success with that.

[Chuck Naill]

1300 per day dying of Covid

[Chuck Naill]

900,000 dead.

If you've chosen to not get a vaccine, please also decide to not take up space in the ICU wards.

[dneal]

You're going to get Covid anyway. The prophet Fauci said so. Remember?

[TSherbs]

1300 per day dying of Covid

Hopefully this number is falling now. I actually have not checked recently, but cases in my area are falling. My local hospital has been full, but I did hear that it eased up a little this past week. We'll see.

[TSherbs]

NYT reports 7-day average deaths at 2600. Still high. Predictions were that hospitalizations would peak in Feb, so will see. Stay well, everyone. Get your shots, use your masks, and practice good hygiene. We are still doing all of this at my school. Our case numbers have peaked already and have been on the decline (only 2 positive cases yesterday out of 700 tests...not bad!). Currently no positive cases in my mother's nursing home...yay!

[kazoolaw]

Good news about your Mom.

[Chuck Naill]

"There is a largely unacknowledged moment in critical care when doctors and nurses shift from caring for the patients in front of us to caring for their loved ones. Often these two aims are not inconsistent: Even when family members like these are not ready to stop life-prolonging interventions or ask for a treatment that is unlikely to work, they are speaking on behalf of the patient. But increasingly I wonder if it is possible to go too far to accommodate family. When a patient is at the end of life, what is our responsibility to those who will be left behind?

On another recent shift, I received a call from a colleague at a different hospital. He was caring for a patient in his 60s with severe respiratory failure after a coronavirus infection. The patient’s family was desperate for him to be transferred to our hospital, a larger institution with greater resources. But intensive care unit beds were a scarce resource, and there was no clear medical reason for the transfer. His team had already done everything that we would do, and the simple act of transferring someone so sick could be catastrophic. I was the critical care doctor on call, charged with accepting transfer requests, and it would have been easy to say no. But then there was the matter of his family."

Something for you anti vaccine folks to consider from those in the ICU.

[dneal]

Yes. Now consider that if Fauci hadn't funded gain of function research for bat corona viruses, and lied about it repeatedly; we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. If he hadn't lied about cloth masks and "if you get the vaccine you won't get covid", those folks who were and are infected with Omicron might have not been wandering around ignorant in their blissful but mistaken security.

Something for you Fauci-ites to think about when you consider the deaths from covid and those in the ICU.

In more recent news, Fauci's lockdown strategy did nothing. Maybe we should have listened to those "fringe" epidemiologists instead...

Johns Hopkins study (https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf)


While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.

[Chuck Naill]

600 in ICU's here.

[dneal]

600 in ICU's here.

Blame Fauci. He wrote the check for it.

[Chip]

600 in ICU's here.

Blame Fauci. He wrote the check for it.

Fox News blows the whistle, and you all bark.

≈*≈*≈

Hatred of Anthony Fauci reflects hate of the American state

https://www.thenationalnews.com/opinion/comment/2022/01/26/hate-for-anthony-fauci-is-an-attack-on-the-us-state/

Vitriol for Washington’s most prominent doctor goes beyond mere political opportunism.

A striking feature of the coronavirus pandemic as a political phenomenon in the US is a pair of strange cults centered on Dr Anthony Fauci, the unassuming 81-year-old director, since 1984, of America’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Liberal celebration of him is often exaggerated, and even neurotic. Is there really the need for such an idol? But right-wing loathing often borders on the psychotic.

There are rational explanations for why virulent hatred of Dr Fauci has become a major hallmark of right-wing discourse. But there are also deep-seated ideological and emotional aspects that, while explicable, remain deeply disturbing.

The accusations are absolutely flabbergasting. Tucker Carlson, a host on Fox News, insists Dr Fauci was responsible for “creating” the coronavirus and he was also somehow at fault for the Aids epidemic in the 1980s, according to some leading Republican politicians.

Dr Fauci stands preposterously accused of running a campaign to torture and murder puppies. Fox News host Lara Logan compared him with vicious Nazi concentration camp doctor Josef Mengele who conducted infamous human experiments.

Her colleague Jesse Waters urged activists to “ambush” him with questions culminating in one that was called the “kill shot”, after which “Boom! He is dead!” Both Waters and the network dismissed the obvious violence of this rhetoric as purely metaphorical.

Wyoming Senator Anthony Bouchard went all the way, bluntly saying Dr Fauci should be killed and that only the method remained in question. “After prosecution, the chair, the gallows, or lethal injection?” he asked on Facebook.

Unsurprisingly after all that, Dr Fauci and his family have been subjected to death threats and require constant protection.

But why? Let’s start with the obvious. The pandemic has been a defining feature of the past two years. It is therefore either going to be a political benefit or cost to different factions.

Unless one has an effective solution – and with this unpredictable pandemic that’s not easy, as US President Joe Biden has discovered to his political cost – the simplest way of politically exploiting a crisis is to pin all blame on a villain supposedly from the other side.

Had the pandemic begun under a Democratic president, that would have been an automatic solution. Many liberals treated the previous administration, under Donald Trump, as morally culpable rather than confused, inept and completely out of its depth.

But that wouldn’t work for the right because it would involve blaming Mr Trump. So, another figure was necessary and Dr Fauci was quickly identified. That was intensified as he was perceived as challenging Mr Trump’s more bizarre comments, and cast as a political enemy of the beloved leader.

Since Dr Fauci is so enthusiastically embraced by most liberals, during both the Trump and Biden presidencies, it’s almost axiomatic from a right-wing perspective that there’s something deeply wrong with him.

But that doesn’t explain the depth and violence of the hatred towards him on the far right – traditional conservative Republican senators, by contrast, generally say they like and admire Dr Fauci and don’t understand the uproar.

For the first year of these attacks, Dr Fauci basically kept a low profile. But increasingly over the past 12 months, he has angrily countered condemnations of him by right-wing politicians and some media pundits.

He has proffered two main theories for why he is so viciously besieged. First, as he said explicitly to Senator Rand Paul, there is a clear fundraising element to attacks on him. Apparently shamelessly defaming him is indeed good business.

The second argument he makes is that when right-wing ideologues denounce him, “they’re really criticizing science, because I represent science”. This drew howls of protest from the ideological right as the height of bureaucratic arrogance, but there is plenty of truth to it.

For some on the religiously inflected right, science and fact are indeed mistrusted because they challenge the primacy of faith. But, although many liberals might think so, that is not a crucial part of the anti-Fauci cult.

Instead, most who despise him are happy to embrace other self-appointed “experts”, some of whom may even have a science background, but who crucially make alternative and, for their purposes, politically useful claims. It is not a hostility to purported expertise so much as a hostility to Dr Fauci’s version of expertise.

At the heart of this resentment lies not the image of a “man of science”, which few can genuinely judge, but an embodiment of the state and the institutions through which it promotes shared social interests like public health.

In these pages, I recently wrote that the January 6 attack on Congress was fundamentally part of a broader assault on the American state. So is the campaign of vitriol against Dr Fauci.

[TSherbs]

[... .

In these pages, I recently wrote that the January 6 attack on Congress was fundamentally part of a broader assault on the American state. So is the campaign of vitriol against Dr Fauci.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

I read your entire post. This excerpt is the thesis, and I agree.

The question is, into what new form will this animus and vitriol next morph?

[dneal]

NYT, WashPost, CNN, MSNBC, etc... blows the whistle, and you all bark.


Fixed that for you.

--edit--

Ooops, forgot "The National News".

"They hate Anthony Fauci because they hate the American state"

Yeah, that's not a dog whistle.

Keep barking Chippy.

[Chip]

Since you're unable to refute any of the points in the piece, you respond with the usual slobber and snark.

You'd better start wearing a bib, sport.

[dneal]

Refute what? A silly opinion piece? That's all you ever have - and the snark.

My "Fauci wrote the check..." comment is simply the same bullshit you guys post. I figured that's the highest level of conversation you're capable of having. Anything more sensible - like the documents I've already shared demonstrating that Fauci wasn't "keeping a low profile" (as your shit article claims) - just gets snark.

So let's just look at: "For the first year of these attacks, Dr Fauci basically kept a low profile.", Chippy.

I've already posted the links and documents. Fauci was involved with funding gain of function research. His own emails show it. He testified no money went to that, and changed his story that it wasn't by definition, and the NIH changed the definition. Fauci was involved with the "lab leak is a conspiracy theory" phone call. He in fact wanted the email to stop. Fauci was involved with labeling Stanford, Harvard and Oxford epidemiologists (and Fauci isn't one, by the way) as "fringe" epidemiologists.

So no, Chippy; if Fauci was keeping a low profile; it appears it was simply to cover his ass. But he did manage to spend a lot of time on TV telling us to not wear masks, wear masks, wear 3 masks, and other bullshit. Your dipshit writer blames that on Trump and Tucker. No, "Mr. I-am-the-science" did a fine job destroying his own credibility all by himself while he was supposedly keeping a low profile.

None of that came from Fox, by the way. I don't watch Fox. But "blah blah, Fox News dog whistles, blah blah" is your typical (and tired) snark. You don't even see your hypocrisy, do you? "blah, blah Fox; but here's my propaganda I think is fact...". Dear god how dense must you be?

There seems to be a proportional relationship between clarity of thought, ability to construct a sensible argument and blue kook-aide consumed. You must be pissing Noodler's Bay State Blue by now.

Now put me back on ignore - or actually just stick your pouty toddler lip out and claim to. What's the count now? 3 times? I suppose you could also go to your tried and true stupid ass picture option. We both know how this goes.

[Chuck Naill]

Ironically, the same people that vilify Dr. Fauci are advocates for Ivermectin, an unproven medication. Some doctors are using telemedicine to provide a prescription at a cost of $90.
https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/npr/2022/02/09/1079183523/what-a-bottle-of-ivermectin-reveals-about-the-shadowy-world-of-covid-telemedicine/

[dneal]

Ironically, the same people who vilify ivermectin, a proven medication; are advocates for Dr. Fauci, a proven quack. How did all that masking and vaccination and boosters work out for you? If you get the shot, you won't get covid, right? That's what Fauci said, right?

See how that does nothing to further conversation? That's a rhetorical question, because your history (like Chip's) shows that you don't.

If this is what you guys want, I'm happy to play. Snark is easy.

[dneal]

That Study of Face Masks Does Not Show What the CDC Claims (https://reason.com/2022/02/07/that-study-of-face-masks-does-not-show-what-the-cdc-claims/?fbclid=IwAR0LiuO_89HgomZPaciX_AKTcl5i1-svn4k_RnNPKrB3Gp9cGWQg9O6SaS4)
The agency further undermines its credibility by desperately trying to back up conclusions it has already reached.

A new study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) supposedly shows that wearing a face mask in public places dramatically reduces your risk of catching COVID-19. The CDC summed up the results in a widely shared graphic that says wearing a cloth mask "lowered the odds of testing positive" by 56 percent, while the risk reduction was 66 percent for surgical masks and 83 percent for N95 or KN95 respirators.

If you read the tiny footnotes, you will see that the result for cloth masks was not statistically significant. So even on its face, this study, which was published in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report on Friday, did not validate the protective effect of the most commonly used face coverings—a striking fact that the authors do not mention until the end of the sixth paragraph. And once you delve into the details of the study, it becomes clear that the results for surgical masks and N95s, while statistically significant, do not actually demonstrate a cause-and-effect relationship, contrary to the way the CDC is framing them.

That framing is part of a broader pattern. In 2020, the CDC went from dismissing the value of general mask wearing to describing it as "the most important, powerful public health tool we have." In September 2020, then–CDC Director Robert Redfield asserted, without any evidence, that masks were more effective at preventing infection than vaccines would prove to be. Even before the spread of the highly contagious omicron variant, Redfield's successor, Rochelle Walensky, implied the same thing, exaggerating the evidence supporting mask use in a way that made vaccination seem inferior.

The CDC consistently bends over backward to validate its recommendation that everyone, including children as young as 2, wear masks. It is thereby undermining its already damaged credibility by distorting what we actually know. In this case, the CDC is asserting a causal relationship without considering alternative explanations for the results it is touting.

The researchers identified 1,528 California residents who tested positive for COVID-19 between February 18 and December 1, 2021, then matched them to 1,511 California residents who tested negative. The "controls" were similar to the "cases" in terms of age group, sex, and the region of California where they lived but were not necessarily similar in other ways that could affect the odds of testing positive. That crucial point by itself means it is impossible to say whether masking accounts for the differences highlighted by the CDC.

The mask analysis was limited to 652 cases and 1,176 controls who "self-reported being in indoor public settings during the 2 weeks preceding testing and who reported no known contact with anyone with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection during this time." Overall, the subjects who said they "always" wore masks in indoor public settings were 56 percent less likely to have tested positive than the subjects who said they "never" wore masks. The comparison presented in the CDC's graphic is based on a subgroup of 534 subjects who "specified the type of face covering they typically used."

It seems obvious that people who "always" wear masks in indoor public places are more COVID-cautious than people who "never" do. While the researchers adjusted for vaccination, which unsurprisingly was more common among people who had tested negative, they "did not account for other preventive behaviors that could influence risk for acquiring infection." If mask wearers tend to avoid crowded spaces, spend less time indoors with strangers, and/or are more likely to keep their distance from other people—all of which are plausible—those precautions could partly or fully explain the differences that the CDC attributes to masking.

Data from the study reinforce the point that masking rates were not the only potentially relevant way in which subjects who tested negative differed from subjects who tested positive. While 78 percent of the COVID-positive subjects sought testing because they had symptoms consistent with the disease, that was the motivation for just 17 percent of the COVID-negative subjects. People in the latter group were nearly 50 percent more likely to say they had sought testing simply because they were curious about whether they had been infected—a motivation that suggests greater concern and caution. The COVID-negative subjects were nearly three times as likely to report that they were tested because they were undergoing a medical procedure, a prospect that may have made them especially keen to avoid infection.

While the possibility of systematic differences in "other preventive behaviors" is enough reason to be skeptical of the way the CDC is presenting these results, the study has several other problems.

When the researchers called people for interviews, just 13 percent of those who had tested positive and 9 percent of those who had tested negative answered the phone and agreed to participate. Those low participation rates make you wonder how representative the people interviewed by the researchers were.

The COVID-positive people who did not answer the phone may have been especially ill, for example, while the COVID-negative people who did participate may have been especially eager to discuss their experiences—perhaps because they had dodged the virus and attributed that outcome to precautions such as masking. The researchers note that "generalizability of this study is limited to persons seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing and who were willing to participate in a telephone interview, who might otherwise exercise other protective behaviors."

The fact that people knew their own test results may have introduced another bias. People who wore masks but nevertheless caught COVID-19 may have inferred that they were not as careful as they should have been, making them less likely to report that they "always" took that precaution. Conversely, people who tested negative may have retrospectively exaggerated the extent to which they wore masks.

University of California, San Francisco, epidemiologist Vinay Prasad, who discusses these and other weaknesses of the study in a recent Substack post, also notes that the purported effects described by the CDC are "implausibly large." Last September, a report on a randomized trial in Bangladesh described an 11 percent reduction in the risk of symptomatic infection among villagers who wore surgical masks. Now the CDC is claiming that surgical masks "lowered the odds of testing positive" by 66 percent—an effect six times as large. Walensky, meanwhile, has averred that wearing a mask "reduc[es] your chance of infection by more than 80 percent," although the CDC cited no evidence to support that startling claim.

"The paper is entirely, irredeemably flawed," Prasad concludes. "Its flaws are so evident that it should not have been published [or] promoted. When an issue is deeply polarizing, publishing bad science helps no one. It cannot convince skeptics, proponents don't need convincing, and it deepens mistrust in institutions."

Prasad has long been skeptical that general masking, especially with cloth coverings, has an important effect on virus transmission. He co-authored a recent review of the literature that described the evidence supporting the CDC's recommendations as weak:

Facemask efficacy is based primarily on observational studies that are subject to confounding and on mechanistic studies that rely on surrogate endpoints (such as droplet dispersion) as proxies for disease transmission. The available clinical evidence of facemask efficacy is of low quality and the best available clinical evidence has mostly failed to show efficacy, with fourteen of sixteen identified randomized controlled trials comparing face masks to no mask controls failing to find statistically significant benefit in the intent-to-treat populations. Of sixteen quantitative meta-analyses, eight were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks, and the remaining eight supported a public mask intervention on limited evidence primarily on the basis of the precautionary principle. Although weak evidence should not preclude precautionary actions in the face of unprecedented events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, ethical principles require that the strength of the evidence and best estimates of amount of benefit be truthfully communicated to the public.

In his Substack post, Prasad laments that the CDC has not sponsored any randomized controlled trials to verify the effectiveness of face masks, which he calls "a catastrophic research failure," especially when it comes to "universal masking" in K–12 schools and day care centers. Even if you find the existing evidence more persuasive than Prasad does, the CDC's lily gilding is troubling. The agency has flagrantly failed to make sure that information on this subject is "truthfully communicated to the public."

While "well-fitting face masks and respirators effectively filter virus-sized particles in laboratory conditions," the authors of the California case-control study note, "few studies have assessed their real-world effectiveness in preventing acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 infection." Given this study's severe limitations (eight of which the researchers explicitly note), it does not do much to fill that gap. The CDC nevertheless claims the study shows that "consistently wearing a comfortable, well-fitting face mask or respirator in indoor public settings protects against acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 infection."

Both this study and the Bangladesh trial suggest that cloth masks are not effective in real-world settings—or at least that their benefits are not big enough to generate statistically significant results. But even on that point, the CDC, which only recently acknowledged that N95s are more effective than cloth masks, is maddeningly evasive. The CDC concedes that "a respirator offers the best protection," which is not quite the same as admitting that cloth masks may provide little or no protection against infection, especially by omicron.

The CDC's handling of this study has implications that extend beyond the empirical question of how well masks work. In this case and others, the agency has proven that it cannot be trusted to act as an honest broker of scientific information. The result is that Americans are increasingly skeptical of anything the CDC says, even when it is sensible and well-grounded. While the CDC's desperate attempts to back up conclusions it has already reached may be aimed at protecting its reputation and credibility, they have the opposite effect.

[Chuck Naill]

[... .

In these pages, I recently wrote that the January 6 attack on Congress was fundamentally part of a broader assault on the American state. So is the campaign of vitriol against Dr Fauci.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

I read your entire post. This excerpt is the thesis, and I agree.

The question is, into what new form will this animus and vitriol next morph?

An abstracted quote from a recent NYT article,
"McConnell repudiated his own party. “We saw what happened,” he told reporters. “It was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election, from one administration to the next. That’s what it was.”

Just as the January 6th even has been redefined by some, there are other more level heads that see untruths to be ultimately damaging. The insistent wrangling over masks, vaccines, and distancing looks to many of us as pure nonsense when the intent is just to survive and take care of those we know and love.

I'd say McConnell, no dumb bunny, is seeing a light at the end of the Trump tunnel and he knows it's safe for a person without courage to now speak out.

It is time to move on. If Trump can find a way to win without both the popular vote and electorial college, he will try. That's more concerning than Covid-19 at this point.

[TSherbs]

.

I'd say McConnell, no dumb bunny, is seeing a light at the end of the Trump tunnel and he knows it's safe for a person without courage to now speak out.


Maybe. But I don't trust that snake for anything except his own self-interest and that of his party. He can flip on anything he states as soon as the prevailing wind shifts. He's another politician whose time has come and gone, but we will hold onto him longer than is good for the country. So gross.

[Chip]

Now put me back on ignore - or actually just stick your pouty toddler lip out and claim to.

I don't have to take you off ignore to read your post. You misunderstand the function of the ignore toggle. It's not a religious vow or absolute cancellation. It simply gives me a choice between seeing what you post (with one click) and not seeing it, with the latter option most frequent.

You seem to have an oddly simplistic notion of the simplest stuff.

[dneal]

Now put me back on ignore - or actually just stick your pouty toddler lip out and claim to.

I don't have to take you off ignore to read your post. You misunderstand the function of the ignore toggle. It's not a religious vow or absolute cancellation. It simply gives me a choice between seeing what you post (with one click) and not seeing it, with the latter option most frequent.

You seem to have an oddly simplistic notion of the simplest stuff.

Oh I know how the function works. You’re the one who repeatedly needs to declare you’re going to ignore me (or not). So there are no simplistic notions here. I know people who say that are never able to follow through. I’m just pointing out your hypocrisy and lack of self discipline.

[Chip]

Can you actually come up with quotes?

I've not repeatedly declared anything about you and the ignore function. That's a delusion.

One of the things that makes you so annoying.

[TSherbs]

I encourage students with different views to give them, with the rule of everyone listens then asks questions. I want the students to 1) learn how to listen and effectively communicate with people that have different beliefs and 2) Understand why they believe what they believe. If we can't teach it in a controlled environment, the great big world isn't a safe or fun place to learn.

@Cookedj. I missed this post, Cookedj. I entirely agree.

I am also wondering, since you started this thread (and my memory ain't great), what did you decide about getting vaccinated? I am a high school teacher, but we were not required to get vaccinated (strongly urged, repeatedly). And protocols, at times, were different for different teachers depending on their vax status. How about for you? (If you don't mind sharing)

PS: I am vaxed and boosted.

[dneal]

Can you actually come up with quotes?

I've not repeatedly declared anything about you and the ignore function. That's a delusion.

One of the things that makes you so annoying.

I’ll start with a later one, because the projection in the first sentence is delicious; with the truth now clearly demonstrated.


I obviously annoy you much more than you annoy me. While I find your mental contortions mildly amusing, I'll go on mostly ignoring your posts.

See Chippy? Just a toddler who declares “I’m still ignoring you”. At least you had some sense of self awareness and recognition of your inability to follow through that time.

Here’s another.


You are the very definition of boring and nasty.

Ignore list for you.

Bye.

Whenever someone feels it necessary to proclaim this sort of thing, I laugh because they - as you exemplify - are full of shit. The behavior of petulant toddlers in proclamation and in action.

[Chuck Naill]

Can you actually come up with quotes?

I've not repeatedly declared anything about you and the ignore function. That's a delusion.

One of the things that makes you so annoying.

Unless you want this thread to be about @dneal, stop responding. You've made your point.

[dneal]

Can you actually come up with quotes?

I've not repeatedly declared anything about you and the ignore function. That's a delusion.

One of the things that makes you so annoying.

Unless you want this thread to be about @dneal, stop responding. You've made your point.

Maybe he should use the ignore function. LOL!!!

[Chuck Naill]

Vaccines continue to reduce serious infections and ICU beds.

The data shows vaccinated patients have reduced viral loads resulting in reduced serious symptoms.

[dneal]

What data? All I see is you saying so. It's like a mantra you keep repeating, hoping it will be true.

"Vaccines will keep me from getting covid..."
"Masks work..."
"Trust Fauci..."
"Trust 'the science'...."

Look at Table S26 of the Moderna trial (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NE/Moa2113017). 16 deaths in both the vaccine and placebo groups.

How about Table S4 of the Pfizer trial (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NE/Moa2110345)? 15 deaths in the vaccine group and 14 in the placebo group.

How about your personal experience? Fully vaccinated with booster, and you got covid.

P.T. Barnum was right.

67556

[Chuck Naill]

Why do people wear a mask when spreading insecticide, herbicide? Why do surgeons wear masks and latex gloves? Why did I have to wash my hands for 15 minutes before volunteering in the NICU? According to @deneal, just for grins.

@deneal, if I bought you for what you think your worth and sold you for what you are worth, I’d be a wealthy man.

[Chuck Naill]

I’d rather err on the side of caution. I would not want to have blood on my hands putting out something I watched on YouTube

[dneal]

Chuck is triggered and flinging shit hoping something will stick. LOL

p.s.: I don't feel like bothering with whatever thread you tried the "Spotify" troll in, but I don't have Spotify. Just more desperate attempts at trolling. Pitiful.

p.p.s.: Don't think I didn't notice you conveniently dodged providing any substantiation to your claims, and just went to the attempt at insult. It's what you do.

Remember, this is the level of discourse you've created.

[Chuck Naill]

Ever know someone with "Long Covid'? It was another motivation to get the vaccine and adopt other rational measures.

[TSherbs]

Dr. Campbell reviews what looks like a definitive study on increased cardiac risk from mRNA vaccines, particularly Pfizer and especially with teenaged males:

https://youtu.be/Hb1Xm1uaedU

[Chuck Naill]

And a video posted on Nov. 25 by John Campbell, a British retired nurse and science educator who has amassed a strong YouTube following during the pandemic, has received over 2 million views. In the video, Dr. Campbell, who has a doctorate in nursing education but is not a physician, reads the abstract and says that if the findings are correct, it would be “incredibly significant.” But are they? He’s not so sure.

Even though Campbell doesn’t mention the expression of concern, he says he’s surprised by the abstract typos, lack of clear data and methodology, and even by the fact that Gundry sells groceries on his website. “I must have worked with about 20 or 30 cardiologists over my career, and I can’t remember any having a grocery facility,” he says 20 minutes into the video.

But opponents of the vaccine have used the video as confirmation that the mRNA vaccines are going to provoke “a massive unimaginable amount of extra heart attacks.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/12/no-credible-evidence-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-dramatically-increase-heart-attack-risk-contrary-to-flawed-abstract/

[TSherbs]

And a video posted on Nov. 25 by John Campbell, a British retired nurse and science educator who has amassed a strong YouTube following during the pandemic, has received over 2 million views. In the video, Dr. Campbell, who has a doctorate in nursing education but is not a physician, reads the abstract and says that if the findings are correct, it would be “incredibly significant.” But are they? He’s not so sure.

Even though Campbell doesn’t mention the expression of concern, he says he’s surprised by the abstract typos, lack of clear data and methodology, and even by the fact that Gundry sells groceries on his website. “I must have worked with about 20 or 30 cardiologists over my career, and I can’t remember any having a grocery facility,” he says 20 minutes into the video.

But opponents of the vaccine have used the video as confirmation that the mRNA vaccines are going to provoke “a massive unimaginable amount of extra heart attacks.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/12/no-credible-evidence-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-dramatically-increase-heart-attack-risk-contrary-to-flawed-abstract/

Chuck, this study you cite above is not the study that just came out this January from the JAMA.

What's nice about Campbell's videos is that he summarizes the key findings in the first 5 minutes and reviews the actual research and provides all links in his video descriptions.

The study, to its credit, neither recommends for or against the use of vaccines in young people. It is simply reporting cases of confirmed myocarditis following vaccine doses (the median diagnostic delay was two days). This diagnostic rate is compared against a standardized rate from two years prior to Covid pandemic. The report is informative, if not definitive.

[Chuck Naill]

And a video posted on Nov. 25 by John Campbell, a British retired nurse and science educator who has amassed a strong YouTube following during the pandemic, has received over 2 million views. In the video, Dr. Campbell, who has a doctorate in nursing education but is not a physician, reads the abstract and says that if the findings are correct, it would be “incredibly significant.” But are they? He’s not so sure.

Even though Campbell doesn’t mention the expression of concern, he says he’s surprised by the abstract typos, lack of clear data and methodology, and even by the fact that Gundry sells groceries on his website. “I must have worked with about 20 or 30 cardiologists over my career, and I can’t remember any having a grocery facility,” he says 20 minutes into the video.

But opponents of the vaccine have used the video as confirmation that the mRNA vaccines are going to provoke “a massive unimaginable amount of extra heart attacks.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/12/no-credible-evidence-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-dramatically-increase-heart-attack-risk-contrary-to-flawed-abstract/

Chuck, this study you cite above is not the study that just came out this January from the JAMA.

What's nice about Campbell's videos is that he summarizes the key findings in the first 5 minutes and reviews the actual research and provides all links in his video descriptions.

The study, to its credit, neither recommends for or against the use of vaccines in young people. It is simply reporting cases of confirmed myocarditis following vaccine doses (the median diagnostic delay was two days). This diagnostic rate is compared against a standardized rate from two years prior to Covid pandemic. The report is informative, if not definitive.

Ted, he would not be a source for me regarding vaccines. https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/ten-points-to-remember/2022/02/07/15/57/myocarditis-after-bnt162b2

[dneal]

Perfect example of how Chuck is entrenched in narratives. He reads the "gossip column" level of political analysis, which is why he doesn't actually know anything. He only knows what some pundit said.

Dr. Campbell, for example, simply explains medical studies for his viewers. "Factcheck" (who have made themselves an oxymoron), ignore facts and spread the equivalent of gossip. Since opponents of the vaccine have used Dr. Campbell's videos to advance their argument, Dr. Campbell must be vilified - even though the topic is a discussion of a study and not Dr. Campbell's personal opinions. The "shoot the messenger" logical fallacy, mixed with strawmen arguments and ad hominem. It's not surprising these are so appealing to Chuck.

Chuck goes on to ignore what conflicts with his pseudo-point. One only has to read what Chuck didn't bold. But that's typical of the kook-aide drinkers, and I'm reminded of Chuck's embarrassing mistake of his cite of ivermectin studies and his hilarious emphasis of "elucidate" (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/35784-Interesting-Video?p=344637&viewfull=1#post344637). It's not unlike another poster's feeble attempts to portray Kant as some pre-Nazi, furiously Googling for articles for the self-satisfying "harrumph"; only to discover his "proof" contradicts his argument.

[Chuck Naill]

I have a long history with antivaccine "experts" which has led to much harm in childhood disease prevention. Not one expert has ever caused pediatricians to change recommendations. Wakefield has been debunked. Shouldn't we treat each other as well as we treat our pets?

We all are adults here and can decide what and who to listen to in order to come to what is best of us and those for whom we have a measure of influence. YMMV, as always, is operative.

If you read the American College of Cardiology link I posted, at least you will know what professionals trained in cardiology think. However, if you want to listen to videos of non specialists making money on videos, that's also an option.

[TSherbs]

I have a long history with antivaccine "experts" which has led to much harm in childhood disease prevention. Not one expert has ever caused pediatricians to change recommendations. Wakefield has been debunked. Shouldn't we treat each other as well as we treat our pets?

We all are adults here and can decide what and who to listen to in order to come to what is best of us and those for whom we have a measure of influence. YMMV, as always, is operative.

If you read the American College of Cardiology link I posted, at least you will know what professionals trained in cardiology think. However, if you want to listen to videos of non specialists making money on videos, that's also an option.

I appreciated your ACC link, which I read in its entirety. I was only linking Campbell because of the information, from a more recent study, reviewed in it. I was making no recommendation about the efficacy or overall risk of vaccines in a pandemic. It is merely the information that the vaccine appears (strongly correlated) with increased risk of cardiomyopathy. This does NOT mean that teens should not get the shot. It is information for decision-making in a larger context, as you say.

By the way, Campbell is PRO-vaccine. As he states repeatedly. But his study-reviews have little to do with his general vaccine/science position. He makes his reviews in order to bring the scientific data to the general public.

[TSherbs]

Ted, he would not be a source for me regarding vaccines.

That's not what he is. He reviews complicated scientific data from research for the general public. He is careful to review and summarize the various studies that are published. He always examines even the authors of the studies and what other research they have done and where. He supports science and sound conclusions all the way.

And if you disagree with his reviews of Ivermectin studies, then you should listen more carefully. He is very precise where he thinks that people know the research and where they have it wrong (there are both fools and wise people on this topic).

[dneal]

Turns out Chuck is the science denier. ROFL!!!

[TSherbs]

What happens, unfortunately, on some of these threads is that political and cultural animus get in the way of an exchange of the actual information (and the QUALITY) from research studies. We should on these pages more often just share the information and leave the argumentation out of it. I am trying to be better about that concerning the science.

[TSherbs]

Here is the full text (free) of the JAMA article. Campbell always provides his resource links for anyone to access and read for themselves. Here is this one:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2788346

[Chuck Naill]

Vaccines, masks, and distance should be observed. Any information otherwise could encourage poor practices. Enough have died. I choose to er on the side of caution and legitimate information. Sorry if it offends .

[Chuck Naill]

The unvaccinated must or might be a bit concerned about getting around others. Or, maybe they are emboldened to say, "hey virus, do your worse". However, I tend to think their bark is bigger than their bite. Consider the members here who act like they know something, but wouldn't want to take a chance on their spouse or child.

When you walk the walk of science, you realize you've done all you can.

[dneal]

Chuck is hilarious. He thinks a YouTube guy is suspect because he might be making a little money from videos, but has no problem with big Pharma raking in billions vaccinating everybody in the nation - especially those who (as previously posted CDC data shows) have essentially zero risk of dying from the virus. Then there is the issue of Chuck admitting to having Pfizer stock.

Wait, ignore one guy because there might be profit, but listen to the other guys where there is a hell of a lot of profit. YouTube guy is lying for money, but big Pharma, and a former Pharma salesman who holds Pharma stock? Yeah, profit couldn't possibly a motive there. Hypocrisy anyone?

Chuck likes to post about nurses, and that we should listen to them. But the guy in the video is a nurse, so we should ignore him. He's not qualified to speak on covid stuff. Hypocrisy anyone?

Now we have this:

TSherbs: "Hey, here's a video of a professional medical educator talking about a recent JAMA paper".

Chuck: "AAAAAAK!!!! MISINFORMATION!!!! FACT CHECK!!!! "Vaccines will keep me from getting covid... Masks work... Trust Fauci...Trust 'the science'...."

Chuck, your narrative is crumbling but you cling desperately to it. It's beyond hypocrisy and is at full blown "useful idiot" stage.

--edit--

Here you go Chuck. Since you say we should listen to nurses (except when you say we shouldn't), and you like watching YouTube... a nurse detailing her experiences to Senator Johnson:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=5SVO0lc_1_o

[TSherbs]

Vaccines, masks, and distance should be observed. Any information otherwise could encourage poor practices...

Chuck, the JAMA article is exactly what we want MORE of, not less of: editorial-reviewed research conducted by highly qualified persons, published in a top publication. We can't suppress or deny the information out of fear of how *some* people might respond. Knowledge is good.

[Chuck Naill]

Vaccines, masks, and distance should be observed. Any information otherwise could encourage poor practices...

Chuck, the JAMA article is exactly what we want MORE of, not less of: editorial-reviewed research conducted by highly qualified persons, published in a top publication. We can't suppress or deny the information out of fear of how *some* people might respond. Knowledge is good.

What I posted from the Academy of Cardiology is positive, Ted. Yes, but only good knowledge is good.

"Just found this from February 2022. Not sure if I am posting a duplicate study. https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2022/02/02/20/05/myocarditis-cases-reported-after
"Conclusions:
Based on passive surveillance reporting, myocarditis is a rare adverse event following mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination and occurs most commonly in adolescent boys and young men.

Perspective:
These findings suggest that many young patients with vaccine-associated myocarditis have a relatively benign clinical course. Given that VAERS is a passive reporting system, under- or over-reporting of myocarditis cases is possible. Further study will be needed to evaluate myocarditis risk after booster vaccination."

For me the "passive surveillance reporting is problematic when attempting to provide a more evidenced based conclusion, but I do understand it is all we have.

The problem is that anti vaccine types will use anything to justify themselves and encourage others to do the same.

[TSherbs]

].

The problem is that anti vaccine types will use anything to justify themselves and encourage others to do the same.

But that's not a problem that means suppressing the information.

This is the same reason that some parents want certain books removed from school curriculums. They are scared that kids will be influenced in directions that are harmful, one way or another.

Inconvenient truths need to come to the light despite our fears. Encouraging parents to have their teen sons vaxed with an mRNA dose without telling them the increased risk (and benefits) would, knowing this info, be an ethical and medical wrong. Very bad practice.

[TSherbs]

Again, you seem to think that I am arguing against vaccination. I am not. I am for sharing research data with the public.

[dneal]

Again, you seem to think that I am arguing against vaccination. I am not. I am for sharing research data with the public.

I'll take a break from imitating the "other" Chuck for a moment.

I admit to a bit of smug satisfaction in seeing you type this, and this has been my experience with the forum since covid and Trump. One side is incapable of discussing anything rationally, choosing to paint their opponent into a corner with mischaracterization, straw men, and snark.

I am under the impression you have me on ignore - not that I care - but if you do happen to glance at this then perhaps you might consider some replies you have written as well (particularly as regards a certain orange person); now that you can see how frustrating it is.

[Chuck Naill]

Again, you seem to think that I am arguing against vaccination. I am not. I am for sharing research data with the public.
Me to, but there are better sources, Ted. @dneal posts this guys stuff. He’s not even a MD. @deneal wrongly says Fauci is not a practicing doctor. This dude couldn’t practice if he wanted.

[TSherbs]

Again, you seem to think that I am arguing against vaccination. I am not. I am for sharing research data with the public.
Me to, but there are better sources, Ted. @dneal posts this guys stuff. He’s not even a MD. @deneal wrongly says Fauci is not a practicing doctor. This dude couldn’t practice if he wanted.

Chuck, the man isn't giving medical advice. He is reviewing published literature. He's a teacher, like myself, reading and summarizing research data. This is what he did for a living, too (he was an instructor in online resources and learning).

[Chuck Naill]

Again, you seem to think that I am arguing against vaccination. I am not. I am for sharing research data with the public.
Me to, but there are better sources, Ted. @dneal posts this guys stuff. He’s not even a MD. @deneal wrongly says Fauci is not a practicing doctor. This dude couldn’t practice if he wanted.

Chuck, the man isn't giving medical advice. He is reviewing published literature. He's a teacher, like myself, reading and summarizing research data. This is what he did for a living, too (he was an instructor in online resources and learning).

Okay, listen to whom you trust, Ted.

[Chuck Naill]

If the strategy to get folks vaccinated has drastically failed, and lockdowns were a terrible idea, now in hindsight, what would have been a better strategy to curb deaths?

[dneal]

If the strategy to get folks vaccinated has drastically failed, and lockdowns were a terrible idea, now in hindsight, what would have been a better strategy to curb deaths?

This was posted almost a year ago.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UO3Wd5urg0

[Chuck Naill]

Anyone else?