Will you get vaccinated against COVID once it's available?

[G1911]

.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yeah, the problem is all of the major actors involved in getting information to the public -- on whom one had to rely unless you could somehow get your hands on the primary material -- had and have a bias or agenda resulting in spin. President Trump wanted, among other things and I mostly won't go there, to downplay things (for different possible motives). Drs. Fauci and Birx were walking a tightrope trying (I think) to be relatively truthful but at the same time not going too far to anger President Trump. President Biden wanted to get elected. CNN and MSNBC just wanted to make the Trump administration look bad. Fox News wanted the reverse. The WHO did not want to alienate China. China of course would do anything to hide its negligence (or worse, if they are guilty of worse.) The CDC, God only knows. And so on. When the truth is filtered through bias and agenda, you get a freaking mess.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Incidentally, as to the constitutional point, I don't think we actually got to an appellate decision on First Amendment issues other than freedom of religion, but courts typically go pretty far to uphold so-called "time, place and manner" restrictions on what superficially are absolute First Amendment rights such as speech and assembly. It's a fascinating area of the law, for sure. But the bottom line is that our rights are not nearly as absolute as the Bill of Rights reads ("Congress shall make NO law ……").

In that regard, I believe a few lower courts denied requests for injunctions against some of the COVID-19 regulations but haven't studied that. If it ever got to the Supreme Court, I would think the current iteration of the Court would be very concerned with individual liberties, but that's just informed speculation.

[buymycards]

Putting all of the political bullshit aside - I live in a small city of 3000 people. Yesterday, one of our firefighters died after a short battle with Covid. He was healthy, fit, and 30 years old.

Be careful. Wear a mask. Avoid crowds. Protect yourself.

[buymycards]

After talking to his family today, I learned that he didn't believe in wearing a mask. Even though, as a firefighter, he could have received a vaccine during the initial wave of vaccinations, but he refused to get one.

This mask/vaccine controversy reminds me of when I was in Viet Nam. We were issued flak vests, which were hot and very heavy. Many of the soldiers left them behind. When the mortar shells started exploding around us, those of us who were wearing our vests were thanking God that we wore our vests, while those who didn't wear their vest were probably begging God to keep them alive, while thinking - "why in the hell didn't I wear my flak jacket?" More than a few soldiers were wounded or died because they weren't wearing their flak vests.

The mask/vaccine issue is the same thing, except it is much easier to don a mask or receive a vaccine than it is wear a flak jacket while trudging through a hot, humid jungle. I wonder how many people who were in intensive care wards with a respirator tube shoved down their throat were wondering - "why in the hell didn't I just put on my mask?"

[G1911]

.

[irv]

Originally Posted by G1911

The key difference being that data suggests taking the field in a war zone brings a significant risk of being shot.

I know someone who was attacked by a shark. Does that make it a reasonable thing for me to fear, and refuse to go swimming? No.

Anecdote is still not data. So I just looked it up. The CDC's best estimate for the 18-49 age group is 500 deaths per 1,000,000 infections. The worst scenario is 1,700 deaths per 1,000,000 infections. Every study has found most fatalities have multiple major comorbidities, are centered in the obese and weak, and risk increases with age (49 year's are lumped with 18's, and still only projects at 500 in a 1,000,000). These projections are for the overall, lumping in the healthy and unhealthy. They report a grand total of 6,513 deaths in the 30-39 age group, again, centered in those who were unhealthy to begin with, and studies (we can't question scientists, right?) suggest most of whom were obese. 1 in 2,000 infections is a .0005% risk (actually, the total risk is even less than that. CDC data tells us there are many more deaths in the 40-49 group than 30-39, almost triple in fact, and of course, many people will simply not get infected, but I'll even be generous and completely ignore these factors).

Estimates are estimates, projections are projections. Maybe the real is a bit higher, maybe it's a bit lower. Even if we go ahead and increase it 1,000%, far more than the worst case projections, the risk is still so tiny it's essentially a rounding error.

I sure hope that everyone demanding that healthy 30 year olds change their life is following their own advice and changing their lifestyle over all of the things they have a .0005% projected risk of dying from. Because wow, it's a lot of things for them to keep track of, much less act upon. There's really nothing else to say in this thread, people will feed off the public hysteria and anecdote, or take a look at the numbers and do some basic risk analysis. Neither side is really going to budge at this point.

Another great post, G1911.

I still truly wonder what is going on and why these vaccines are being pushed so hard on people?

Yesterday, I posted some links to stories about some who have gotten ill and were hospitalized after receiving the shots on Face Book and almost immediately I received notice from FB that they didn't meet community standards??
What could possibly be their "community standards" when factual and truthful links/stories from well known media sources are not allowed?

Also, during the recent hockey games and being bombarded with vaccine commercials every 5-10 minutes trying to convince and brainwash everyone into getting the vaccines, alluding to if you don't, life, as we once knew it, will never return to normal unless you do, why is their never any mention of the possible side affects like have already been mentioned in this thread?

If you watch other advertisements regarding other medications, the list of possible side affects and/or possible issues they mention is through the roof!
I believe the listing/the mentioning of possible side affects is a requirement by law but yet there is nothing, zero mention of any with these vaccines?

[buymycards]

Originally Posted by G1911

The key difference being that data suggests taking the field in a war zone brings a significant risk of being shot.

I know someone who was attacked by a shark. Does that make it a reasonable thing for me to fear, and refuse to go swimming? No.

Anecdote is still not data. So I just looked it up. The CDC's best estimate for the 18-49 age group is 500 deaths per 1,000,000 infections. The worst scenario is 1,700 deaths per 1,000,000 infections. Every study has found most fatalities have multiple major comorbidities, are centered in the obese and weak, and risk increases with age (49 year's are lumped with 18's, and still only projects at 500 in a 1,000,000). These projections are for the overall, lumping in the healthy and unhealthy. They report a grand total of 6,513 deaths in the 30-39 age group, again, centered in those who were unhealthy to begin with, and studies (we can't question scientists, right?) suggest most of whom were obese. 1 in 2,000 infections is a .0005% risk (actually, the total risk is even less than that. CDC data tells us there are many more deaths in the 40-49 group than 30-39, almost triple in fact, and of course, many people will simply not get infected, but I'll even be generous and completely ignore these factors).

Estimates are estimates, projections are projections. Maybe the real is a bit higher, maybe it's a bit lower. Even if we go ahead and increase it 1,000%, far more than the worst case projections, the risk is still so tiny it's essentially a rounding error.

I sure hope that everyone demanding that healthy 30 year olds change their life is following their own advice and changing their lifestyle over all of the things they have a .0005% projected risk of dying from. Because wow, it's a lot of things for them to keep track of, much less act upon. There's really nothing else to say in this thread, people will feed off the public hysteria and anecdote, or take a look at the numbers and do some basic risk analysis. Neither side is really going to budge at this point.

Why don't you have your name in your post? What are you afraid of?