Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

This is where our community discusses almost anything! While we're mainly a Cambodia expat discussion forum and talk about expat life here, we debate about almost everything. Even if you're a tourist passing through Southeast Asia and want to connect with expatriates living and working in Cambodia, this is the first section of our site that you should check out. Our members start their own discussions or post links to other blogs and/or news articles they find interesting and want to chat about. So join in the fun and start new topics, or feel free to comment on anything our community members have already started! We also have some Khmer members here as well, but English is the main language used on CEO. You're welcome to have a look around, and if you decide you want to participate, you can become a part our international expat community by signing up for a free account.

do you agree with mandatory Vaccinations?

Yes
38
40%
No
54
56%
no coment
4
4%
 
Total votes: 96
nerdlinger
Expatriate
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:56 pm
Reputation: 571
Great Britain

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by nerdlinger »

The official advice changed based on further research into something that was new and unknown.

You can choose to see this as proof that doctors and scientists can’t be trusted, if you’re the sort of person who regards it as a moral failing to change your mind when presented with new evidence. A lot of people who distrust the medical community do seem to fit that description.
User avatar
bossho
Aging Tweaker
Posts: 622
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 6:03 pm
Reputation: 276
United States of America

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by bossho »

@The General and whomever, yes, Fauci does say these things within those interviews at those times, I am not contesting that. In the first clip from an unknown date in 2019 Fauci is clearly answering this question to a guy he seems to know fairly well and answers the question playing the mild mannered General Practitioner role to his buddy when the guy asks Fauci if he should be wearing a mask or (...example 1, example 2) to avoid getting an infectious disease and the need to see the Doctor. Fauci jumps in and tells him to avoid all the paranoia and hype and he does tell him not to wear a mask. In all of 2019 this would have been pretty sage like advice and normal for any GP ( or acting as GP) to say to a patient, all the docs I've seen lately tend to downplay health risks that have become diseases in themselves in the mania they create. It is a way to take the pressure off of the non trained in medicine or science patients as there has been a lot of hype 'for years in our various medias over one thing or another. Like this, "My Doc is so cool, we just have honest and open discussions." That is a style today's Docs all try to cultivate with patients given the small amount of contact time we have with them and the indelible mark their comments leave on our minds. I find Fauci's ability to be as open and frank as he is here to be a nice refreshing break from the usual technocrats that populate at this level. For the first video I don't find Fauci to be careless of misleading at all especially given the date of this video.

2019 was different than March 2020 however and my bet would be that Fauci regrets being such a loose and cool Doc with these comments in the second video. Masks were not yet known to us in the West at that point. He says masks are not needed and he seems to suggest that the medically and scientifically untrained are likely to not wear one ( a mask) properly and also apt to overestimate a mask's stopping power for airborne droplets and viral spreading. He kinda makes a case for American freedom not to wear them as opposed to people seen in China and Korea wearing them, or something to that effect, I'm unsure what he was getting at here but in March 2020 things were not like they became to be just 90 days later after this video was shot, I'd say Fauci regrets his words now and he probably speaks a lot more conservatively now as a result. Still, he does not scare me in that "deep state sort of way" that the Good General might be implying here above as the poster. Sorry if I totally missed the point General, it's happened lots of times before where I missed a poster's intentions, but it does seem like you are going into the Deep State for Fauci here.
User avatar
violet
Expatriate
Posts: 2452
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 3:48 pm
Reputation: 1321

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by violet »

TWY wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:30 pm
clutchcargo wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 6:10 pm Isn't there a fundamental difference comparing things like smoking, obesity and drug use vs covid? You can't 'infect' someone else with it with the former. Self abuse vs a pandemic. Chalk and cheese.
The post I replied to originally wasn't about spreading the virus to others. It was about not providing health care to those that choose not to get the vaccine.

I would agree there is more likelihood of external negative consequences to others with Covid. I'd also point out that there are negative external consequences for the children of people that don't exercise, the family members of drug users, etc etc.

I believe everyone that can get a vaccine should. It is unfortunate that we've had terrible leadership from both our political leaders and our public health leaders. After all, fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me. Remember "Don't wear a mask!"? Makes it much easier for people to tell themselves they'll continue to be careful and not get the vaccine.

Separately, are we going to mandate booster shots? My parents are fully vaccinate - they are both quite elderly. Their doctor has recommended that my father get a booster shot. He's recommended my mother wait as she had moderate side effects from the initial vaccine - and modify her behavior while waiting. Additionally, he's told her not to get a flu shot this year if she gets the vaccine booster later this year. Should she be mandated to get the booster? And how about the next booster?

IMO, the horse has left the barn. Any vaccine mandate needed to be implemented up front with clear messaging.
I’d get a second opinion on everything the doctor says.
Despite what angsta states, it’s clear from reading through his posts that angsta supports the free FreePalestine movement.
User avatar
General Mackevili
The General
Posts: 18400
Joined: Tue May 06, 2014 5:24 pm
Reputation: 3397
Location: The Kingdom
Contact:
United States of America

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by General Mackevili »

nerdlinger wrote: Sat Sep 18, 2021 3:01 am The official advice changed based on further research into something that was new and unknown.
Agreed, but they were wrong then (according to they themselves) and giving bad advice, even laughing at people as 'paranoid' who thought you should mask up, and telling people not to, so anyone believing them was wrong.

So the question is, how are people so willing to trust him now, even after they've been factually wrong before? Isn't it logical to assume that they 'might' be giving bad advice at present, and if so, that we won't find out until later on, just like before?

I'm not arguing that they ARE wrong now, I'm just trying to come to a logical understanding of why people are currently labeled 'STUPID' if they don't believe them on everything they're pushing right now at this moment.

I think it's logical to conclude that if you are 100% convinced they have to be right now even AFTER they were wrong in the past and admitted it, then the people who are so confident in them should be more logically labeled 'STUPID,' as it's it's not even debatable if they have previously given wrong, harmful advice (again, according to they themselves).

Again, I'm not calling anyone stupid, or even wrong, just wondering why people are so sure they're right at the moment and why some people who doesn't trust the current 'science' of the week is clearly a total idiot with no common sense. I personally find this illogical and would apply to any situation, not just this pandemic.

Some like to label people who don't believe the mainstream media as 'nutters' or 'tin-hat conspiracists,' but that's so weird considering the FACT that we are often fed complete lies through our governments and media, so I really don't see how anyone is now, today, so sure everything we are told is absolutely correct.

All I'm trying to push is a little more critical thinking, on ALL sides.



And again, believe what you want to believe, and trust who you want to, but just as another clear example (from today) of a flat out lie, told by the government and spread by the media...

From Politico on August 29, 2021:

U.S. airstrike hits suicide bomber, as officials warn of ‘exceedingly dangerous moment’ in Afghanistan

The Pentagon confirmed on Sunday that the U.S. military conducted a drone strike in Kabul, successfully destroying an “imminent” threat to the airport in the Afghan capital where American troops are conducting a massive evacuation effort.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/2 ... ort-507211





So, it's 'confirmed' that the US retaliated on ISIS-K for killing 13 Marines by bombing the hell of some terrorists. That's the official story. You'd be a nutter to not believe it.

Well, they now admit they bombed some dude, killing him and 7 kids, hitting no terrorists. Oops.

They CONTINUED to push this false story even after The New York Times wrote a very convincing article showing it was a total lie. Did they just want to continue lying until after the 9/11 anniversary? I guess that's just a 'conspiracy theory' until it's not at some later point in time.





Today: Pentagon acknowledges Aug. 29 drone strike in Afghanistan was a tragic mistake that killed 10 civilians.

“The Pentagon acknowledged on Friday that a U.S. drone strike in Afghanistan on Aug. 29 that officials said was necessary to prevent an attack on American troops was a tragic mistake that killed 10 civilians, including seven children, an American military official familiar with the investigation,” told the New York Times.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking ... benshapiro

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/17/us/p ... istan.html





Hell, they were still saying they killed a terrorist as recently as 4 days ago:

Pentagon defends deadly drone strike in Kabul

The Pentagon continued to assert Monday that the last U.S. drone strike in Afghanistan was necessary to prevent an attack on U.S. troops, despite a New York Times investigation that raises doubts about the military’s version of events, including whether explosives were in the vehicle that was blown up and whether the driver had a connection to the Islamic State group.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-wor ... -in-kabul/





Again, a completely false story spread around as fact for weeks. This is a perfect example of them telling you false information, and it's not even like it's one of those conspiracies where you have people saying, 'well, I guess we'll never know for sure,' it was a lie even according to they themselves.

And these are 'left-leaning' outlets, not Breitbart News or Steve Bannon's War Room, etc.

It's not at all unreasonable to realize that we're being fed lies, it's clearly a fact. Is it really so crazy to not believe some of the 'science' that seems to be changing so often? Nothing I've said is conspiratory at all, it's just using basic critical thinking, so I don't get how we've come to a place where the people who don't believe current mainstream narratives are nuts.

At the end of the day, you don't even have to think about it if you don't want to.

"Life is too important to take seriously."

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh."

Have a story or an anonymous news tip for CEO? Need advertising? CONTACT ME

Cambodia Expats Online is the most popular community in the country. JOIN TODAY

Follow CEO on social media:

Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Google+
Instagram
User avatar
bossho
Aging Tweaker
Posts: 622
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 6:03 pm
Reputation: 276
United States of America

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by bossho »

Points all well taken, thank you General. I get into trouble in my head when I review stuff like this but it's no excuse. It is our burden us to rationally evaluate all the relevant information as you have demonstrated here.
User avatar
JBTrain
Expatriate
Posts: 451
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 3:44 pm
Reputation: 98
Location: Phnom Penh
Contact:

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by JBTrain »

General Mackevili wrote:
nerdlinger wrote: Sat Sep 18, 2021 3:01 am The official advice changed based on further research into something that was new and unknown.
Agreed, but they were wrong then (according to they themselves) and giving bad advice, even laughing at people as 'paranoid' who thought you should mask up, and telling people not to, so anyone believing them was wrong.

So the question is, how are people so willing to trust him now, even after they've been factually wrong before? Isn't it logical to assume that they 'might' be giving bad advice at present, and if so, that we won't find out until later on, just like before?

I'm not arguing that they ARE wrong now, I'm just trying to come to a logical understanding of why people are currently labeled 'STUPID' if they don't believe them on everything they're pushing right now at this moment.

I think it's logical to conclude that if you are 100% convinced they have to be right now even AFTER they were wrong in the past and admitted it, then the people who are so confident in them should be more logically labeled 'STUPID,' as it's it's not even debatable if they have previously given wrong, harmful advice (again, according to they themselves).

Again, I'm not calling anyone stupid, or even wrong, just wondering why people are so sure they're right at the moment and why some people who doesn't trust the current 'science' of the week is clearly a total idiot with no common sense. I personally find this illogical and would apply to any situation, not just this pandemic.

Some like to label people who don't believe the mainstream media as 'nutters' or 'tin-hat conspiracists,' but that's so weird considering the FACT that we are often fed complete lies through our governments and media, so I really don't see how anyone is now, today, so sure everything we are told is absolutely correct.

All I'm trying to push is a little more critical thinking, on ALL sides.



And again, believe what you want to believe, and trust who you want to, but just as another clear example (from today) of a flat out lie, told by the government and spread by the media...

From Politico on August 29, 2021:

U.S. airstrike hits suicide bomber, as officials warn of ‘exceedingly dangerous moment’ in Afghanistan

The Pentagon confirmed on Sunday that the U.S. military conducted a drone strike in Kabul, successfully destroying an “imminent” threat to the airport in the Afghan capital where American troops are conducting a massive evacuation effort.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/2 ... ort-507211





So, it's 'confirmed' that the US retaliated on ISIS-K for killing 13 Marines by bombing the hell of some terrorists. That's the official story. You'd be a nutter to not believe it.

Well, they now admit they bombed some dude, killing him and 7 kids, hitting no terrorists. Oops.

They CONTINUED to push this false story even after The New York Times wrote a very convincing article showing it was a total lie. Did they just want to continue lying until after the 9/11 anniversary? I guess that's just a 'conspiracy theory' until it's not at some later point in time.





Today: Pentagon acknowledges Aug. 29 drone strike in Afghanistan was a tragic mistake that killed 10 civilians.

“The Pentagon acknowledged on Friday that a U.S. drone strike in Afghanistan on Aug. 29 that officials said was necessary to prevent an attack on American troops was a tragic mistake that killed 10 civilians, including seven children, an American military official familiar with the investigation,” told the New York Times.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking ... benshapiro

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/17/us/p ... istan.html





Hell, they were still saying they killed a terrorist as recently as 4 days ago:

Pentagon defends deadly drone strike in Kabul

The Pentagon continued to assert Monday that the last U.S. drone strike in Afghanistan was necessary to prevent an attack on U.S. troops, despite a New York Times investigation that raises doubts about the military’s version of events, including whether explosives were in the vehicle that was blown up and whether the driver had a connection to the Islamic State group.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-wor ... -in-kabul/





Again, a completely false story spread around as fact for weeks. This is a perfect example of them telling you false information, and it's not even like it's one of those conspiracies where you have people saying, 'well, I guess we'll never know for sure,' it was a lie even according to they themselves.

And these are 'left-leaning' outlets, not Breitbart News or Steve Bannon's War Room, etc.

It's not at all unreasonable to realize that we're being fed lies, it's clearly a fact. Is it really so crazy to not believe some of the 'science' that seems to be changing so often? Nothing I've said is conspiratory at all, it's just using basic critical thinking, so I don't get how we've come to a place where the people who don't believe current mainstream narratives are nuts.

At the end of the day, you don't even have to think about it if you don't want to.

One can certainly should pick and choose what to believe, hopefully based on some intelligent analysis which goes beyond "I don't trust the government".

Highest Current hospitalizations per 100,000/Vaccination rate:

Georgia 56/44
Alabama 55/41
Florida 52/56 (mask mandate ban)
West Virginia 51/40
South Carolina 50/45( mask mandate ban)
Texas 48/50 (mask mandate ban)
Tennessee 48/44 (mask mandate ban)

I know there are lots of folks who will say I don't trust those statistics, or others I could easily put up, or that they have nothing to do with vaccine hesitancy or mask wearing in the face of studies that show they do. You can call them whatever you like, I'm perfectly comfortable with stupid given available data, although allowances can be made for the incredibly selfish or sociopathic.

PS my leftist media covered reports of civilian deaths from the drone strike almost as soon as it took place, as well as the Pentagon reports. Because I chose to get vaccinated doesn't mean I trusted the Pentagon reporting.






Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk







Using Tapatalk
User avatar
General Mackevili
The General
Posts: 18400
Joined: Tue May 06, 2014 5:24 pm
Reputation: 3397
Location: The Kingdom
Contact:
United States of America

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by General Mackevili »

bossho wrote: Sat Sep 18, 2021 5:43 am Points all well taken, thank you General. I get into trouble in my head when I review stuff like this but it's no excuse. It is our burden us to rationally evaluate all the relevant information as you have demonstrated here.
Yeah, that's really all. I just wish everyone, including myself, would try to think of things more critically.

Hell, I wish I were making this up, but literally between my posts CNN publishes a new article on it.

Remember 5 minutes ago when it was 'common knowledge' that anyone who isn't selfish' should definitely go out and get the booster shot so that you don't kill everyone else if you're a teen or older? Well, they're NOW (literally breaking news right now) saying that people 65 and older (and high risk) should get the booster shot, not everyone 16 and older like before.





FDA vaccine advisers vote to recommend booster doses of Covid-19 vaccine in people 65 and older and those at high risk

(CNN)Vaccine advisers to the US Food and Drug Administration voted Friday to recommend emergency use authorization of a booster dose of Pfizer's vaccine six months after full vaccination in people 65 and older and those at high risk of severe Covid-19.

The decision came after members of the FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee rejected a broader application to approve booster doses of Pfizer's vaccines in everyone 16 and older six months after they are fully vaccinated. Members of the committee expressed doubts about the safety of a booster dose in younger adults and teens, and complained about the lack of data about the safety and long term efficacy of a booster dose.

Biden administration officials have previously announced a plan to begin administering booster doses to the general population during the week of September 20, pending signoff from the FDA and US Centers for Disease Control.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/17/health/f ... index.html





So, 5 minutes ago, if you're 60 year old, and you said that you weren't planning to get the 'safe and effective' booster shot for your current 2 shots that are waning, you were some selfish piece of shit who gave no fucks about anyone else, and truly the enemy of society. Or maybe just retarded. Hell, maybe both.

But now you're a responsible, caring, towing the line citizen of the world just 'following the science,' and now ANYONE who thinks otherwise is all of those things above.

And sure, we all know there are crazies out there, I'm not saying there aren't, but anyone looking at all of this logically should realize that the media has been making a strong push to make you more scared and filled with fear than you probably ought to be. Surely this isn't some new concept to anyone that the media have (and likely will again) push an agenda that causes more fear than is rational or warranted on a subject.

Is it POSSIBLE that in the days/months/years ahead the 'science' will start revealing that maybe they've had some numbers wrong along the way? Maybe healthy people at any age shouldn't get it, as it doesn't outweigh the risks of possible effects. Maybe males are having more blood clots than they earlier thought. Maybe they do notice a trend of young women getting pregnant less often after getting 2 jabs than the same group of unvaccinated women. Maybe the vaccinated are spreading it in larger numbers than the unvaccinated because they are less likely to show symptoms, therefore take less precautions and interact with more people before they realize they've been spreading it. Just maybe.

I don't have all of the answers (if any, LoL), but as a man who plans to kids, and with a vaccine that was way less effective after a few months than they had originally thought against a virus that is possibly less deadly/dangerous than they've thought, I think it's a logical decision to decide and wait for more 'science.' And this isn't even taking into consideration the threats/rewards countries are giving. I don't hear a lot about herd immunity anymore, do you? I thought that was the scientific goal, and once 70%ish of us were immune through either 2 vaxxes or infection we could all go about our merry way. I think the US is at about 80%, but did that happen? No, it's getting worse. In NYC you can't eat, drink or even shop at grocery stores without your ID and vaccine passport (or they're saying they'll start it soon, I've lost track). 'Good, this will keep those disgusting conservatives out of society. Oops, it actually prohibits blacks at a higher rate than whites from entering most places.' Where is the racial justice outcry over such a clearly 'racist' law? It's racist to ask for an ID when you vote because it's so much harder for black to get IDs, but it's fine to bar them from all establishments without an ID plus a vaccination passport? I seriously fail to see some logic here.

Even if you think, 'well, even if the numbers aren't 100% accurate, they're probably close enough to make an educated decision on,' you might be wrong about that, too. I mean, many of us could agree that if they're off by 50% or even 100%, that it's still valuable data and we can probably come to a reasonable conclusion about benefits/risks, so what do I care if it's not exact. Well, what if you they told you themselves that they have unfortunately put the infection rate at 10 or 24 TIMES what they had been saying it was? 24 times is 2,400%!! That's way off when trying to use the data to come to a logical conclusion about something. And if the CDC was giving estimates of infections that were off by 24X, isn't it also safe to assume that maybe the death rate (number of deaths divided by the number of infections) is probably waaaaaaay overestimated?? That's using pretty sound logic, right? (If 2 people died, and you assume only 100 people were infected, you would say the death rate is 2%, but if 24 TIMES that number of people were actually infected, that would mean 2,400 were infected, but still only 2 died, that would put the death rate at 0.008%) That's quite a different death rate.





Source that CDC has admitted being 10 or 24 times off their estimations:

Actual Coronavirus Infections Vastly Undercounted, C.D.C. Data Shows

The difference between recorded infections and the actual prevalence in the data was highest in Missouri, where about 2.65 percent of the population was infected with the virus as of April 26, although many people might not have felt sick. This number is about 24 times the reported rate: nearly 162,000 compared with the 6,800 thought to have been infected by then.

The results confirm what some scientists have warned about for months: that without wider testing, scores of infected people go undetected and circulate the virus.

“Our politicians can say our testing is awesome, but the fact is our testing is inadequate,” Dr. Hensley said. “These are exactly the kind of studies we need right now.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/27/heal ... matic.html





So really, it is your body/health, and everyone should put some serious thought into it. It would even be different if this vaccine was in an effort to eradicate Covid, but that's not even the goal (right now, at least), and definitely weird to have to protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated by vaccinating them, and then later making sure they all get booster shots because the don't even work as much as we were told they would in the first place. We keep calling it an 'effective' vaccine, but I can't be the only one that thinks unusual that this vaccine requires others to take it for it to 'work' like it's supposed to. Do people getting the yellow fever vaccine before going to Africa make sure that everyone there also has the vaccine? This has all been very strange, and I don't see how the people who think so are the crazy, selfish ones.

At the rate the 'science' is evolving (just like how the 'science' literally evolved between my last two posts, and it now looks like booster shots will only be for those 65 and older, and those with serious risks) it's anyone's guess where the 'science' will be in 6 months or a year from now. Some countries are vaccinating grade school children right now, and I think we can all agree that we hope it's perfectly fine and that they'll realize that the 30,000 women in the UK who have complained of menstrual cycle disruptions after the vaccine are being silly, and that when they say that the 'scientists don't yet understand exactly how vaccines could cause period changes' is nothing to worry about.

If 'does it lower the chances of infection' and 'does it lower the chances of death and/or side-effects' with Covid are the ONLY two factors you care about at all, then by all means, there's your answer, but some of us will be waiting for a bit more info, that's all.

PS-Nothing I've said can even be called 'anti-vax' or even 'vaccine-hesitant,' as I'm specifically talking about the new Covid vaccines. If some weirdo says they don't find Chris Rock funny, that in NO SAY suggests they don't find any blacks funny, but that's the logic that's being used too often right now.
"Life is too important to take seriously."

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh."

Have a story or an anonymous news tip for CEO? Need advertising? CONTACT ME

Cambodia Expats Online is the most popular community in the country. JOIN TODAY

Follow CEO on social media:

Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Google+
Instagram
User avatar
JBTrain
Expatriate
Posts: 451
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 3:44 pm
Reputation: 98
Location: Phnom Penh
Contact:

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by JBTrain »

General Mackevili wrote:
bossho wrote: Sat Sep 18, 2021 5:43 am Points all well taken, thank you General. I get into trouble in my head when I review stuff like this but it's no excuse. It is our burden us to rationally evaluate all the relevant information as you have demonstrated here.
Yeah, that's really all. I just wish everyone, including myself, would try to think of things more critically.

Hell, I wish I were making this up, but literally between my posts CNN publishes a new article on it.

Remember 5 minutes ago when it was 'common knowledge' that anyone who isn't selfish' should definitely go out and get the booster shot so that you don't kill everyone else if you're a teen or older? Well, they're NOW (literally breaking news right now) saying that people 65 and older (and high risk) should get the booster shot, not everyone 16 and older like before.





FDA vaccine advisers vote to recommend booster doses of Covid-19 vaccine in people 65 and older and those at high risk

(CNN)Vaccine advisers to the US Food and Drug Administration voted Friday to recommend emergency use authorization of a booster dose of Pfizer's vaccine six months after full vaccination in people 65 and older and those at high risk of severe Covid-19.

The decision came after members of the FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee rejected a broader application to approve booster doses of Pfizer's vaccines in everyone 16 and older six months after they are fully vaccinated. Members of the committee expressed doubts about the safety of a booster dose in younger adults and teens, and complained about the lack of data about the safety and long term efficacy of a booster dose.

Biden administration officials have previously announced a plan to begin administering booster doses to the general population during the week of September 20, pending signoff from the FDA and US Centers for Disease Control.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/17/health/f ... index.html





So, 5 minutes ago, if you're 60 year old, and you said that you weren't planning to get the 'safe and effective' booster shot for your current 2 shots that are waning, you were some selfish piece of shit who gave no fucks about anyone else, and truly the enemy of society. Or maybe just retarded. Hell, maybe both.

But now you're a responsible, caring, towing the line citizen of the world just 'following the science,' and now ANYONE who thinks otherwise is all of those things above.

And sure, we all know there are crazies out there, I'm not saying there aren't, but anyone looking at all of this logically should realize that the media has been making a strong push to make you more scared and filled with fear than you probably ought to be. Surely this isn't some new concept to anyone that the media have (and likely will again) push an agenda that causes more fear than is rational or warranted on a subject.

Is it POSSIBLE that in the days/months/years ahead the 'science' will start revealing that maybe they've had some numbers wrong along the way? Maybe healthy people at any age shouldn't get it, as it doesn't outweigh the risks of possible effects. Maybe males are having more blood clots than they earlier thought. Maybe they do notice a trend of young women getting pregnant less often after getting 2 jabs than the same group of unvaccinated women. Maybe the vaccinated are spreading it in larger numbers than the unvaccinated because they are less likely to show symptoms, therefore take less precautions and interact with more people before they realize they've been spreading it. Just maybe.

I don't have all of the answers (if any, LoL), but as a man who plans to kids, and with a vaccine that was way less effective after a few months than they had originally thought against a virus that is possibly less deadly/dangerous than they've thought, I think it's a logical decision to decide and wait for more 'science.' And this isn't even taking into consideration the threats/rewards countries are giving. I don't hear a lot about herd immunity anymore, do you? I thought that was the scientific goal, and once 70%ish of us were immune through either 2 vaxxes or infection we could all go about our merry way. I think the US is at about 80%, but did that happen? No, it's getting worse. In NYC you can't eat, drink or even shop at grocery stores without your ID and vaccine passport (or they're saying they'll start it soon, I've lost track). 'Good, this will keep those disgusting conservatives out of society. Oops, it actually prohibits blacks at a higher rate than whites from entering most places.' Where is the racial justice outcry over such a clearly 'racist' law? It's racist to ask for an ID when you vote because it's so much harder for black to get IDs, but it's fine to bar them from all establishments without an ID plus a vaccination passport? I seriously fail to see some logic here.

Even if you think, 'well, even if the numbers aren't 100% accurate, they're probably close enough to make an educated decision on,' you might be wrong about that, too. I mean, many of us could agree that if they're off by 50% or even 100%, that it's still valuable data and we can probably come to a reasonable conclusion about benefits/risks, so what do I care if it's not exact. Well, what if you they told you themselves that they have unfortunately put the infection rate at 10 or 24 TIMES what they had been saying it was? 24 times is 2,400%!! That's way off when trying to use the data to come to a logical conclusion about something. And if the CDC was giving estimates of infections that were off by 24X, isn't it also safe to assume that maybe the death rate (number of deaths divided by the number of infections) is probably waaaaaaay overestimated?? That's using pretty sound logic, right? (If 2 people died, and you assume only 100 people were infected, you would say the death rate is 2%, but if 24 TIMES that number of people were actually infected, that would mean 2,400 were infected, but still only 2 died, that would put the death rate at 0.008%) That's quite a different death rate.





Source that CDC has admitted being 10 or 24 times off their estimations:

Actual Coronavirus Infections Vastly Undercounted, C.D.C. Data Shows

The difference between recorded infections and the actual prevalence in the data was highest in Missouri, where about 2.65 percent of the population was infected with the virus as of April 26, although many people might not have felt sick. This number is about 24 times the reported rate: nearly 162,000 compared with the 6,800 thought to have been infected by then.

The results confirm what some scientists have warned about for months: that without wider testing, scores of infected people go undetected and circulate the virus.

“Our politicians can say our testing is awesome, but the fact is our testing is inadequate,” Dr. Hensley said. “These are exactly the kind of studies we need right now.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/27/heal ... matic.html





So really, it is your body/health, and everyone should put some serious thought into it. It would even be different if this vaccine was in an effort to eradicate Covid, but that's not even the goal (right now, at least), and definitely weird to have to protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated by vaccinating them, and then later making sure they all get booster shots because the don't even work as much as we were told they would in the first place. We keep calling it an 'effective' vaccine, but I can't be the only one that thinks unusual that this vaccine requires others to take it for it to 'work' like it's supposed to. Do people getting the yellow fever vaccine before going to Africa make sure that everyone there also has the vaccine? This has all been very strange, and I don't see how the people who think so are the crazy, selfish ones.

At the rate the 'science' is evolving (just like how the 'science' literally evolved between my last two posts, and it now looks like booster shots will only be for those 65 and older, and those with serious risks) it's anyone's guess where the 'science' will be in 6 months or a year from now. Some countries are vaccinating grade school children right now, and I think we can all agree that we hope it's perfectly fine and that they'll realize that the 30,000 women in the UK who have complained of menstrual cycle disruptions after the vaccine are being silly, and that when they say that the 'scientists don't yet understand exactly how vaccines could cause period changes' is nothing to worry about.

If 'does it lower the chances of infection' and 'does it lower the chances of death and/or side-effects' with Covid are the ONLY two factors you care about at all, then by all means, there's your answer, but some of us will be waiting for a bit more info, that's all.

PS-Nothing I've said can even be called 'anti-vax' or even 'vaccine-hesitant,' as I'm specifically talking about the new Covid vaccines. If some weirdo says they don't find Chris Rock funny, that in NO SAY suggests they don't find any blacks funny, but that's the logic that's being used too often right now.
The gap in vaccination rates between white and black and Hispanic adults was significantly reduced in recent weeks . Hopefully that trend will continue. The most reliable predictor of vaccination status continues to be support for Donald Trump, not race (see recent NBC survey).

I'm sure a low death rate is great consolation to the families of the 658k and counting dead in the US.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Using Tapatalk
User avatar
General Mackevili
The General
Posts: 18400
Joined: Tue May 06, 2014 5:24 pm
Reputation: 3397
Location: The Kingdom
Contact:
United States of America

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by General Mackevili »

JBTrain wrote: Sat Sep 18, 2021 7:02 am One can certainly should pick and choose what to believe, hopefully based on some intelligent analysis which goes beyond "I don't trust the government".

Highest Current hospitalizations per 100,000/Vaccination rate:

Georgia 56/44
Alabama 55/41
Florida 52/56 (mask mandate ban)
West Virginia 51/40
South Carolina 50/45( mask mandate ban)
Texas 48/50 (mask mandate ban)
Tennessee 48/44 (mask mandate ban)

I know there are lots of folks who will say I don't trust those statistics, or others I could easily put up, or that they have nothing to do with vaccine hesitancy or mask wearing in the face of studies that show they do. You can call them whatever you like, I'm perfectly comfortable with stupid given available data, although allowances can be made for the incredibly selfish or sociopathic.

PS my leftist media covered reports of civilian deaths from the drone strike almost as soon as it took place, as well as the Pentagon reports. Because I chose to get vaccinated doesn't mean I trusted the Pentagon reporting.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
Careful now, even The Atlantic (far, far Left leaning) is telling us we can't trust those numbers, and even called the 'hospitalization rates' the 'most reliable pandemic number,' and that it's now 'losing meaning.'

Again, I wish I were making this up, but when they start telling you that you that the most reliable pandemic number is misleading, how is it not fair to say there's at least a sane bit of room for concern of the data we're being given? This is from 4 days ago:





Our Most Reliable Pandemic Number Is Losing Meaning

A new study suggests that almost half of those hospitalized with COVID-19 have mild or asymptomatic cases.

From the start, COVID hospitalizations have served as a vital metric for tracking the risks posed by the disease. Last winter, this magazine described it as “the most reliable pandemic number,” while Vox quoted the cardiologist Eric Topol as saying that it’s “the best indicator of where we are.” On the one hand, death counts offer finality, but they’re a lagging signal and don’t account for people who suffered from significant illness but survived. Case counts, on the other hand, depend on which and how many people happen to get tested. Presumably, hospitalization numbers provide a more stable and reliable gauge of the pandemic’s true toll, in terms of severe disease. But a new, nationwide study of hospitalization records, released as a preprint today (and not yet formally peer reviewed), suggests that the meaning of this gauge can easily be misinterpreted—and that it has been shifting over time.

The study found that from March 2020 through early January 2021—before vaccination was widespread, and before the Delta variant had arrived—the proportion of patients with mild or asymptomatic disease was 36 percent. From mid-January through the end of June 2021, however, that number rose to 48 percent. In other words, the study suggests that roughly half of all the hospitalized patients showing up on COVID-data dashboards in 2021 may have been admitted for another reason entirely, or had only a mild presentation of disease.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/arch ... ng/620062/









So again, those are definitely some 'scary' numbers to look at, but are they really telling you what you think they are telling you? According to The Atlantic, no, those numbers are likely only half as scary as they appear to be (and even that analysis could change next week/month).

And I'm glad to hear that you didn't believe the government when they said they showed those damn terrorists who the big boss is by killing two of them but instead had killed a random dude and 7 children, but I'd still like to understand how you also seem to mostly trust them on the virus data? To me it's illogical, and I'm really just trying to understand how that works. That's where I feel it's completely illogical to ridicule those that don't think we have accurate data on Covid or to believe the US government when they say they nailed two imminent threats, but that it somehow makes perfect sense to trust them on the Covid data, but obviously know they're lying about other stories.

:o
"Life is too important to take seriously."

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh."

Have a story or an anonymous news tip for CEO? Need advertising? CONTACT ME

Cambodia Expats Online is the most popular community in the country. JOIN TODAY

Follow CEO on social media:

Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Google+
Instagram
User avatar
General Mackevili
The General
Posts: 18400
Joined: Tue May 06, 2014 5:24 pm
Reputation: 3397
Location: The Kingdom
Contact:
United States of America

Re: Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations

Post by General Mackevili »

JBTrain wrote: Sat Sep 18, 2021 7:02 am I know there are lots of folks who will say I don't trust those statistics, or others I could easily put up, or that they have nothing to do with vaccine hesitancy or mask wearing in the face of studies that show they do.

JBTrain wrote: Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:51 am
I'm sure a low death rate is great consolation to the families of the 658k and counting dead in the US.
Well, I'm pretty sure what's definitely not a great consolation to these poor families who lost loved ones is the fact that the guy in charge of the Covid response was laughing and calling people paranoid for wearing masks when directly asked about it in public, and even told everyone they shouldn't be wearing masks, both in 2019 and 2020, and then later helped mandate them in places. He was 'sure' of it in 2020. Very sad. But I'm more interested in the data than the emotions, as emotions seem to be what could be driving the 'science' in the wrong directions.

2019:



2020:

"Life is too important to take seriously."

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh."

Have a story or an anonymous news tip for CEO? Need advertising? CONTACT ME

Cambodia Expats Online is the most popular community in the country. JOIN TODAY

Follow CEO on social media:

Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Google+
Instagram
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Deefer, ExPenhMan, laredo, orichá, Semrush [Bot], Spigzy, WildAlaskaKen, Zyzz and 1695 guests