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

[irv]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Culturally they do things much different than the US. Many of them need to shop for food each day, they live hand to mouth. Now they are forced to all go out at once between 6a and 10a. Life expectancy already 10 years younger than the US due to poor diet, etc, multi generations in the same house . Also, very poor health care system.


Riddle me this, India is 4x the size of the US, Cases are almost the same as US at 30 million, but deaths are 50% of US deaths despite all the other issues. Could 75% of the "deaths attributed to covid" probably be something else? I'm not say only 6% like the cdc commented that death certificates only said covid, but maybe closer to 12% died due to covid 19.

It's a shame anyone has to die, but without death, there cant be life.


That being said, at some point y'all will be forced to get the vaccine if you want to leave the house. If ya cant beat em you will have to join them or live in exile

C'mon, Ted, everyone knows the PCR test is the most accurate test ever with zero chance of ever getting false positives, and despite of whatever else you might have died of, if you tested positive for covid, you died of covid and nothing else. Get with the program, man.

"Manitoba Chief Microbiologist and Laboratory Specialist: 56% of positive “cases” are not infectious

"PCR testing was invented to find genetic viral material in a sample and has not traditionally been used as the sole method for identifying people suffering from a viral or bacterial disease"
"Dr. Bullard testified that the most accurate way to determine whether someone is actually infectious with Covid is to attempt to grow a cell culture in the lab from a patient sample. If a cell culture will not grow the virus in the lab, a patient is likely not infectious. A study from Dr. Bullard and his colleagues found that only 44% of positive PCR test results would actually grow in the lab"
https://www.jccf.ca/manitoba-chief-m...7YnWc-PlDM2I18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBS9j7nHDsM

[Lordstan]

I have not read this entire thread, so excuse me if my comments have been stated before, but this is my perspective on the vaccine, and really, pretty much all healthcare choices. As many of you know already, I am a family doctor. I say this not as a way of saying I know better than anyone. It merely gives those reading a better understanding of what frames my perspective.

The problem with the US system is that we try to blend freedom of choice with absence of responsibility from the consequences of choices that go bad. This is true of pretty much every system we have,m not just healthcare. Understand that I am not advocating we change, but I think it's important to recognize the weakness that exists.

It happens all the time. People talk about the freedom to makes choices, even bad ones, and how it's their body, etc, BUT then expect health insurance system, and all who pay into that system, to pick up the tab when things go south. For example, people want the freedom to choose to smoke, but then want someone else to pay the tab for the lung cancer and the heart attack/strokes that they got, at least in part due to them exercising their rights.

This kind of all started back when the laws changed that made hospitals unable to refuse treatment to someone, in an emergency situation, because they could not pay. The idea was that it is inhumane to refuse in that instance. While I agree that this is cold, it does remove some of the responsibility from the individual to care for themselves, in a manner of speaking, like making sure they have health insurance or having a doctor to take care of their sinus infection instead of showing up in the ER, or not driving drunk, and other examples( I could go on and on). This along with many other incremental changes, mostly based in compassion, has slowly over time created a system where each of us has the freedom to choose, but expects others to foot the bill. (and if you don't think using your healthcare insurance does not affect everyone else's rates/costs, then you do not understand how health insurance works.)

Now, getting back to COVID vaccine specifically...
IMO, both sides of the equation should be balanced. What I mean is this, if there is a risk to getting the vaccine, there should be a s similar risk for not.

So, on one hand, if you get the vaccine and have a side effect, there is a very robust system in place for the person to be compensated for this event.
and to balance it out, if you choose not to get the vaccine, then get COVID, any healthcare costs should be the responsibility of individual and their family. Jobs should be able to say that sick time cannot be used for COVID related illnesses if you CHOOSE not to get the shot.
I think the same logic/system could apply to many other things as well, like flu shots, colonoscopy, etc. Don't get a flu shot, treatment for flu infection and any complications should not be not covered. No colonscopy? then Colon Cancer treatment is not covered.

To me this is the most fair way to do it. We each get the freedom to make our choices and live with the consequences of them. This may sound harsh, but true freedom comes with significant risk. We have, over time, attempted to remove risk from life. Unfortunately, removing risk through things like shared risk means that we give up a certain amount of that freedom by being obligated to each other.

I have personally seen many many people die from this disease. I am in favor of all adults getting the vaccine. I am waiting on the data for children to come out before deciding on if I think it's worth it for them.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The doctors and nurses and medical workers who have dealt with this awful disease on the front lines deserve far more credit for their efforts and sacrifices than they ever will get. I am sure it bothers some of them to hear all the minimization and outright denialism and conspiracy theories coming from some quarters.

[G1911]

.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Anecdotal evidence is either valid, or it is not. I do not think it is worth much of anything, but anecdotal evidence that supports the pro-fear agenda should be equally inadmissible as the anti-fear agenda then.

Nobody in my peer group has had a tough time with Covid at all. 2 of have had a tough time with what appear to be from the vaccination. I don't think this means anything, as the anecdotal is inherently difficult to validate and relies on marginal sample sizes.

I'd like to see the other argument held to the same standard though, those reporting the opposite experience in their circle should also be referred to non-anecdotal evidence. That never seems to happen.

As one of my favorite sites likes to say, the plural of anecdote is not data. But there is a lot of data out there on which to draw, although one can debate its significance.

[G1911]

.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Now that's a good line.

Science based medicine. You might like it, they are fond of pointing out various logical fallacies in arguments made by advocates of some positions. They love deconstructing appeal to nature arguments, for example.

[Lordstan]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The doctors and nurses and medical workers who have dealt with this awful disease on the front lines deserve far more credit for their efforts and sacrifices than they ever will get. I am sure it bothers some of them to hear all the minimization and outright denialism and conspiracy theories coming from some quarters.

I am kind split on the topic, tbh.

I know how serious the disease is and how many it has killed, but I also think the politicization of this has definitely created some misconceptions about the true reality. I read that there was a poll taken where 70% of those self identifying as Democrats stated there was greater than a 50% chance of being admitted with Covid. The Republican number was closer to 50% of people thought the risk was over 50%. We know the true number is 1-5%.

On the other side, we have lots of people who think that the hospitals have been exaggerating the death numbers by manipulating death certificates. This is a significant oversimplification as most people do not understand how doctors(not hospitals I might add) complete official Death Certificates. For example, Let's say someone has Heart Failure that is stable, and then gets COVID. The COVID causes the person's overall health to be compromised and the Heart Failure worsens. Now, if that person dies from the Heart Failure, the correct way to complete the Death Cert is put Heart Failure as the first cause of death, but also to add COVID as part of the cause as well.The rationale is that if the person did not get COVID, their Heart Failure may not have worsened and caused the death at that time.

It's understanding examples like these that show how the news media and politicians, on both sides, have really failed the American people in explaining the full story.

In a way, this illness has been both minimized and overblown at the same time. Only in America, could we pull of such an amazing feat!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Lordstan

I am kind split on the topic, tbh.

I know how serious the disease is and how many it has killed, but I also think the politicization of this has definitely created some misconceptions about the true reality. I read that there was a poll taken where 70% of those self identifying as Democrats stated there was greater than a 50% chance of being admitted with Covid. The Republican number was closer to 50% of people thought the risk was over 50%. We know the true number is 1-5%.

On the other side, we have lots of people who think that the hospitals have been exaggerating the death numbers by manipulating death certificates. This is a significant oversimplification as most people do not understand how doctors(not hospitals I might add) complete official Death Certificates. For example, Let's say someone has Heart Failure that is stable, and then gets COVID. The COVID causes the person's overall health to be compromised and the Heart Failure worsens. Now, if that person dies from the Heart Failure, the correct way to complete the Death Cert is put Heart Failure as the first cause of death, but also to add COVID as part of the cause as well.The rationale is that if the person did not get COVID, their Heart Failure may not have worsened and caused the death at that time.

It's understanding examples like these that show how the news media and politicians, on both sides, have really failed the American people in explaining the full story.

In a way, this illness has been both minimized and overblown at the same time. Only in America, could we pull of such an amazing feat!

Exactly. It's not binary. The virus can certainly be the straw, or brick, that breaks the camel's back, even if the camel had a weak back to begin with. That does nothing in my mind to minimize the role of the virus in that death.

And agree about the politicization, on both sides.