TOPIC: Try discussing here....

It's also missing the point that I always see mentioned of "even if a study shows a slightly elevated risk of myocarditis from the vaccine, having Covid also carries a higher risk of myocarditis that has already been proven'

To the myocarditis point it seems like the risk of vaccine related myocarditis is dwarfed by the risk covid related myocarditis.



www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm?s_cid=mm7035e5_w

No comments or judgments one way or the other but it seems to me the myocarditis risk is over stated.

NightGod wrote: It's also missing the point that I always see mentioned of "even if a study shows a slightly elevated risk of myocarditis from the vaccine, having Covid also carries a higher risk of myocarditis that has already been proven'

So, really, barring the absurd idea of doing a worldwide complete lockdown to wipe out covid, what we could actually say is; the new baseline risk of myocarditis is slightly higher than it was pre-covid.
Basically all of humanity is either going to have the slightly higher risk due to the vaccine or slightly higher risk because they got covid.
Well, ok, not EVERYONE will have that slightly higher risk; the people that DIE from covid won't have that slightly higher risk. Good for them.

kurtreznor wrote:

NightGod wrote: It's also missing the point that I always see mentioned of "even if a study shows a slightly elevated risk of myocarditis from the vaccine, having Covid also carries a higher risk of myocarditis that has already been proven'

So, really, barring the absurd idea of doing a worldwide complete lockdown to wipe out covid, what we could actually say is; the new baseline risk of myocarditis is slightly higher than it was pre-covid.
Basically all of humanity is either going to have the slightly higher risk due to the vaccine or slightly higher risk because they got covid.
Well, ok, not EVERYONE will have that slightly higher risk; the people that DIE from covid won't have that slightly higher risk. Good for them.

Pretty sure we're agreed here, but note that the risk of vaccine related myocarditis is LESS than the risk of CoVID related myocarditis, as noted above.

balthasar wrote: What we do know is that vast majority of people being hospitalized, and dying, are unvaccinated people.

All studies aside, this is what it comes down to for me. Is it possible that there are negative side effects from the vaccine? Sure. But it all still comes back to the above statement. I keep seeing this stuff and can't help but think we're seeing Darwinism at play.

balthasar wrote: The point about myocarditis is followed by the speaker saying they can't prove that there is a higher risk without an actual study, so I am not sure why that is your focus in this video. We get it, you don't think the vaccine helps, and nothing is going to change your mind. What we do know is that vast majority of people being hospitalized, and dying, are unvaccinated people.

I didn't say it doesn't help. I said there have been no long-term studies. But it doesn't seem to be as safe as advertised (some make it sound riskless) and since it's only 65% effective for two to six months, it's not so effective either. Even vaxxed can get COVID, and even vaxxed can spread it. So I don't understand this antipathy against people who think their risk from the shot is greater than the disease, or why the assumption that the vaxxed need to be protected from the unvaxxed. As the population gets the shot, you're going to be more likely to catch it from a fellow vaxxed person. I honestly try to be logical about things, but when our leaders resort to blackmail I wonder why they can't just be honest and point to facts and data?. And why have 40k nurses and doctors chosen unemployment over taking the vaccine? One assumes they put some thought into their decision.

And before you say that the vaccines have been fully approved, they haven't. There is one that has been approved www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine

But you can't get it in the US. The only ones we can get are still the experimental shots under EUA which are NOT fully approved, despite what most people assume..

And since my doctors have already told me to be careful with my ticker, I don't want to risk taking shots that could make my already-above-average chance of a heart attack become 71-times more likely. Will studies prove or disprove that number? Who can say. Let's find out. I'll wait.

We also know they changed the definition of "vaccine" and "unvaccinated." It doesn't mean "never vaxxed." When they say "vaccinated" they mean "got the shot two or more weeks ago." Everyone else is considered "unvaxxed." And there is no test for COVID-19 specifically. The test detects all corona viruses, including common cold and flu, which is why the number of common flu cases went to almost zero last year; they all got called "COVID" instead. How many of the hospitalized "COVID cases" are actually bad reactions to the vaccine and being labeled as "unvaxxed COVID cases?" The waters are murky at best, and the people in charge seem to be making things murkier by stopping OSHA from tracking vaccine injuries. Seems like they're just trying to keep the panic alive.

Maybe I'd be more inclined to believe the blue-state lockdown/mandate politicians if they actually believed what they say, but they obviously don't. They ignore their own mandates and makes excuses when caught. Even BIden leaves off his mask walking through restaurants, coughing into his right hand before shaking hands with unsuspecting people.

Even noted opposite-of-a-right-wing-extremist Bill Maher (not a doctor) has said the pandemic is over, and it's time to get back to normal.

I honestly wish good health and happiness to all my friends, and anyone else reading this, and I hope all of our decisions re: vaccines work out

I honestly don’t know how to respond to a wall of misinformation. I guess I’ll try doing it with a picture. Is the bottom line in each graph perfectly flat at zero? No. But it’s a heck of a lot lower than the top line. I will never understand how people can talk themselves into the idea that being on the top line is somehow better, or safer.

BeLinda Mathie wrote: I honestly don’t know how to respond to a wall of misinformation. I guess I’ll try doing it with a picture. Is the bottom line in each graph perfectly flat at zero? No. But it’s a heck of a lot lower than the top line. I will never understand how people can talk themselves into the idea that being on the top line is somehow better, or safer.

Lel's start with one piece of "misinformation."

www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html

So, as I said, at least some of the "unvaccinated" cases and deaths are people who got the shot 14 or fewer days prior. How many? We don't know.

But we know this: www.cnbc.com/2021/07/30/cdc-study-shows-74percent-of-people-infected-in-massachusetts-covid-outbreak-were-fully-vaccinated.html

Brad Mortensen wrote:

BeLinda Mathie wrote: I honestly don’t know how to respond to a wall of misinformation. I guess I’ll try doing it with a picture. Is the bottom line in each graph perfectly flat at zero? No. But it’s a heck of a lot lower than the top line. I will never understand how people can talk themselves into the idea that being on the top line is somehow better, or safer.

Lel's start with one piece of "misinformation."

www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html

So, as I said, at least some of the "unvaccinated" cases and deaths are people who got the shot 14 or fewer days prior. How many? We don't know.

The vaccine isn’t maximally effective until 10-14 days after the first (J&J) or second shot (Pfizer/Moderna). That shouldn’t be surprising—the immune system takes some time to mount an effective response to the vaccine. Why would you expect it to provide instant, full protection? The flu shot also takes about two weeks to kick in. Many medicines don’t provide an instant, complete benefit. (For example, antibiotics often take 2-3 days to start working, and antidepressants take 4-6 weeks to build up in the body and take effect.) This is a very strange criticism.

BeLinda Mathie wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

BeLinda Mathie wrote: I honestly don’t know how to respond to a wall of misinformation. I guess I’ll try doing it with a picture. Is the bottom line in each graph perfectly flat at zero? No. But it’s a heck of a lot lower than the top line. I will never understand how people can talk themselves into the idea that being on the top line is somehow better, or safer.

Lel's start with one piece of "misinformation."

www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html

So, as I said, at least some of the "unvaccinated" cases and deaths are people who got the shot 14 or fewer days prior. How many? We don't know.

The vaccine isn’t maximally effective until 10-14 days after the first (J&J) or second shot (Pfizer/Moderna). That shouldn’t be surprising—the immune system takes some time to mount an effective response to the vaccine. Why would you expect it to provide instant, full protection? The flu shot also takes about two weeks to kick in. Many medicines don’t provide an instant, complete benefit. (For example, antibiotics often take 2-3 days to start working, and antidepressants take 4-6 weeks to build up in the body and take effect.) This is a very strange criticism.

I don't. I'm saying that there should be three lines: no vax, partial vax, and fully vaxed. Lumping the first two together is misleading and can mask vaccine injuries by labeling them as a "COVID epidemic of the unvaxxed."

To be clear, I'm not saying I'm right and everyone else is wrong. I'm saying I have questions, and "shut up and get jabbed" (which no one here has actually said) doesn't answer them.

If this virus would have hit 20 years ago before the advent of social media everyone would have had their shots by now.

#listentoyourdoctorandnotonlinebullshit

Brad Mortensen wrote:

BeLinda Mathie wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

BeLinda Mathie wrote: I honestly don’t know how to respond to a wall of misinformation. I guess I’ll try doing it with a picture. Is the bottom line in each graph perfectly flat at zero? No. But it’s a heck of a lot lower than the top line. I will never understand how people can talk themselves into the idea that being on the top line is somehow better, or safer.

Lel's start with one piece of "misinformation."

www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html

So, as I said, at least some of the "unvaccinated" cases and deaths are people who got the shot 14 or fewer days prior. How many? We don't know.

The vaccine isn’t maximally effective until 10-14 days after the first (J&J) or second shot (Pfizer/Moderna). That shouldn’t be surprising—the immune system takes some time to mount an effective response to the vaccine. Why would you expect it to provide instant, full protection? The flu shot also takes about two weeks to kick in. Many medicines don’t provide an instant, complete benefit. (For example, antibiotics often take 2-3 days to start working, and antidepressants take 4-6 weeks to build up in the body and take effect.) This is a very strange criticism.

I don't. I'm saying that there should be three lines: no vax, partial vax, and fully vaxed. Lumping the first two together is misleading and can mask vaccine injuries by labeling them as a "COVID epidemic of the unvaxxed."

To be clear, I'm not saying I'm right and everyone else is wrong. I'm saying I have questions, and "shut up and get jabbed" (which no one here has actually said) doesn't answer them.

I firmly believe in "you do you" as my kids say, but just to point something out. Both my father and grandfather were in the service, both went overseas and were in wars (multiple). Back in their times before they were deployed they were both told to "shut up and get jabbed". In their terms they got "inoculated" by the government before they were shipped out. There was no choice, just like they couldn't choose to keep their long hair. They were told to line up and roll up your sleeve and both had multiple "jabs" of stuff they knew nothing about to supposedly protect them from whatever disease, anthrax, whatever was creeping around in the jungles of other countries. No one said anything, no one resisted because the service doctors said it was the best thing to do and that you "don't want to catch any shit overseas". They believed what they were told. Not today, thanks to social media bullshit and f'd up politics no one trusts anything anymore. But whatever. You do you I say. I'm glad your healthy and ok Brad. I miss seeing your comments on the forums, you always were very "spirited" and passionate when it came to talking TD and Tokens. Would be nice to do a run with you again one day when TD gets back into the Cons full swing.