It's Time to Mandate Vaccines

[The Frankish Reich]

16 minutes ago, Beast said:

Funny, but I look forward to a future in which this comes true - a future in which biomedical innovation renders a pandemic a manageable problem.

[The Frankish Reich]

On 12/21/2021 at 10:06 AM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

we were also lead to believe the virus hovered over mass gatherings

^This is what I was refuting with my reference to the ACB nomination event. We were led to believe this, and, interestingly, it was true. The virus did, indeed, hover in the air in that room and it did, indeed, infect many attendees, who then brought it into other rooms where it hovered until it was inhaled by the previously uninfected.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/03/politics/trump-covid-amy-coney-barrett-event/index.html

 

The article lists the cases directly traceable to the event. There are no doubt many, many other cases two, three, four, or more degrees of separation from direct contact.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/10/03/us/rose-garden-event-covid.html

 

Of course one of the people who probably got COVID at the ACB even was a fat 74 year old man who had to be choppered to a hospital to be given an experimental treatment developed by a Big Pharma company.

 

Edited December 22, 2021 by The Frankish Reich

[The Frankish Reich]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Now, what was the impact of tens of thousands of people congregating on the streets, week after week, month after month, interacting with one another, close contact, animated conversation as it relates to COVID spread and your flattening of the curve?  

That was a terrible idea at the time. Since that time we've learned that the risk of transmitting COVID (at least the pre-omicron COVID; we have good reason to believe that omicron will behave similarly, but we don't know for sure yet) is extremely low in outdoors environments.

[Orlando Buffalo]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Funny, but I look forward to a future in which this comes true - a future in which biomedical innovation renders a pandemic a manageable problem.

So you think Covid is being managed now? 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

That was a terrible idea at the time. Since that time we've learned that the risk of transmitting COVID (at least the pre-omicron COVID; we have good reason to believe that omicron will behave similarly, but we don't know for sure yet) is extremely low in outdoors environments.

 

It wasn't just "a terrible idea at the time', Frank.  It flies in direct contrast to the 'trust the science and dutifully listen to your leaders' mantra of the day.  The behavior was guaranteed to cause the spread, to infect others, to pump up the curve and result in death to thousands.  And, of course, in spite of curve flattening, we actually lost hundreds of thousands of people as gathering after gathering took place. 

 

That, of course, assumes one only looks at the gatherings.  The fact is--even as you thread yet another needle similar to 'political gamesmanship when a VP candidate tells her constituents to be distrustful of the new vaccine---25,000 people do not spontaneously appear at a protest in Detroit.  Those folks all come from somewhere--by car, by rail, by bus, subway.  They dine at restaurants, eat at fast food places, stop at rest areas, shop at the local 7/11, all while interacting with multitudes of other folks who have interacted with multitudes of other folks.  They stay at hotels, crash at the house of a friend, or the friend of a friend, and do the things that people tend to do when getting together in large numbers.   Oh--and when they were all done, they dispersed back to home, to towns and communities across the country to see friends, families and of course, transmit the virus.  You're free to contend none of that mattered or matters, but it's complete fiction.  

 

But yeah, feel free to hyper-fixate on the political gathering as the real problem with COVID in 2020. 

 

So, back to the original point, which was to point out reasons people would be distrustful of the advice and guidance of politicians,  scientists and folks on the internet suggest trusting in the official narrative is the only path to total enlightenment.  

 

 

Edited December 22, 2021 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[The Frankish Reich]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

25,000 people do not spontaneously appear at a protest in Detroit.  Those folks all come from somewhere--by car, by rail, by bus, subway.  They dine at restaurants, eat at fast food places, stop at rest areas, shop at the local 7/11, all while interacting with multitudes of other folks who have interacted with multitudes of other folks.  They stay at hotels, crash at the house of a friend, or the friend of a friend, and do the things that people tend to do when getting together in large numbers.   Oh--and when they were all done, they dispersed back to home, to towns and communities across the country to see friends, families and of course, transmit the virus.  You're free to contend none of that mattered or matters, but it's complete fiction.  

Again ... this has nothing to do with Amy Coney Barrett or Black Lives Matter protests.

Your contention was that we were told - erroneously in your view - that large gatherings may be superspreader events.

And yes, the ACB nomination event proved that that was true.

The outdoor protests, it turned out, weren't superspreader events in and of themselves. That was just dumb luck since after the fact we discovered that outdoor events are generally safe.

Just substitute "Sturgis Biker Rally" for "BLM Protest" and the same analysis applies. The bikers gathering outdoors = no problem. The bikers gathering in bars = big problem.

Stop trying to inject the political character of the event in this discussion. Large indoor events were a terrible idea pre-vaccination, and are a pretty terrible idea for the unvaccinated today, regardless of whether they are a Rage Against the Machine Reunion Concert or a Ron DeSantis Is Definitely Not Running for President Rally.

2 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

So you think Covid is being managed now? 

We are getting there.

I am vaccinated/boosted, and I am about to attend a large Christmas concert event tonight. I wasn't able to do that last year, and even if I had been, I wouldn't have gone. 

[Orlando Buffalo]

10 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

A.

We are getting there.

I am vaccinated/boosted, and I am about to attend a large Christmas concert event tonight. I wasn't able to do that last year, and even if I had been, I wouldn't have gone. 

Omicron is making more people sick quicker than anything before it by a pretty large margin regardless of vaxxed status, so if you were afraid last year you should be afraid this year if you are making decisions based on numbers or science, but you make sense if you make decisions politically 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

58 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Again ... this has nothing to do with Amy Coney Barrett or Black Lives Matter protests.

Your contention was that we were told - erroneously in your view - that large gatherings may be superspreader events.

And yes, the ACB nomination event proved that that was true.

The outdoor protests, it turned out, weren't superspreader events in and of themselves. That was just dumb luck since after the fact we discovered that outdoor events are generally safe.

Just substitute "Sturgis Biker Rally" for "BLM Protest" and the same analysis applies. The bikers gathering outdoors = no problem. The bikers gathering in bars = big problem.

Stop trying to inject the political character of the event in this discussion. Large indoor events were a terrible idea pre-vaccination, and are a pretty terrible idea for the unvaccinated today, regardless of whether they are a Rage Against the Machine Reunion Concert or a Ron DeSantis Is Definitely Not Running for President Rally.

Friend, my original post dealt with trust--nothing more, noting less.  From there, you painted me as a conspiracy theorist (false), used the term "Big Pharma" then thanked me for not using it (what's that all about again?), and--apparently in your zeal to  keep politics out of it, took a shot at DJT for kinda maybe getting COVID at the ACB event which you've insisted wasn't about ACB. 

 

You jump to a lot of conclusions, and so far you've not hit on one.  If my contention was that we were told 'erroneously', I would have used that very word.  The way I see it is really pretty simple:

 

• We were told that certain behaviors would result in the deaths of millions, and that failure to comply with lawful guidelines and recommended practices could/would result in your arrest and marked you as a malcontent in the eyes of society.  
• However, when people violated said protocols in massive numbers, they were encouraged to continue doing so and in many cases, political leaders marched with them.  Even Dr Fauci, he of "Don't have dinner with grandma and two of your three siblings!"  offered a very tepid and impotent message to those folks, in those groups, who violated guidelines and protocols said to ensure the survival of the people;

So, when I look consider the two bullet points above, I can only come up with three logical scenarios to address the disconnect:

1. Fauci and/or our political leadership was totally incompetent and thus, should not be trusted without question in the future;
2. Fauci and/or our political leadership was not being truthful, nor transparent, and as a result, were willing to let things play out however they played out, and thus should not be trusted without question in the future;
3.  Fauci and/or our political leadership knew the risk associated with these mass gatherings, knew the virus would be transmitted amongst and beyond attendees, and simply let it happen, and thus should not be trusted without question in the future. 

 

I noticed you wordsmithed again, btw.   This was the throwaway line you included this time:   The outdoor protests, it turned out, weren't superspreader events in and of themselves.    Putting aside for a second that the prevailing scientific wisdom at the time directly contradicted this and there was no political or scientific appeal to the protestors to just hold off until COVID was under control I'm interested in what you meant by "in and of themselves"?  

 

Here's a Frankish style spoiler--I'll tell you what I think you meant.  I think what you meant was in retrospect, people outside and socially distanced and masked in a purely outdoor setting posed relatively low risk of infection transmission, and you simply don't want to address that virtually every other action leading up to actually appearing at the event posed a very high risk and likely lead to untold numbers of infected and dying.  

 

I completely agree on the Sturgis Bike Rally, though I would point out that we know how folks arrive at Bike Week and generally speaking it's completely different than arriving at a protest in the middle of the Boston.  I'd also point out that the Sturgis Bike rally crowd likely feels quite differently than you do on transmission, and simply said "Ah screw it, they're full of ***".    

 

Of course, that brings me back full circle to the reasons many folks are distrustful of the messaging points.  I'm not sure why I have to be the sane voice in the room that points out "...mass gatherings do not happen 'in and of themselves', ever.". 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 22, 2021 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[The Frankish Reich]

On 12/21/2021 at 10:06 AM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

We were lead to believe that shuttering in and locking down was the answer to successful pandemic management, and while most complied, we were also lead to believe the virus hovered over mass gatherings

This is exactly what you said. Those damn fools (or manipulative liars; sometimes it's one, sometimes the other, sometimes, paradoxically, both) "lead (sic) us to believe that the virus hovered over mass gatherings."

That.

Is.

Exactly.

What.

An.

Airborne.

Virus.

Does.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said:

This is exactly what you said. Those damn fools (or manipulative liars; sometimes it's one, sometimes the other, sometimes, paradoxically, both) "lead (sic) us to believe that the virus hovered over mass gatherings."

That.

Is.

Exactly.

What.

An.

Airborne.

Virus.

Does.

That is exactly what I have said repeatedly.  When did you first come to this country? Your command of the language is quite good. 

[The Frankish Reich]

48 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

Omicron is making more people sick quicker than anything before it by a pretty large margin regardless of vaxxed status, so if you were afraid last year you should be afraid this year if you are making decisions based on numbers or science, but you make sense if you make decisions politically 

I am no youngster, and I regularly visit my elderly parents. The risk-benefit calculus clearly weighed against attending thousand-plus people events at this time last year.

I am triple vaccinated now, so our my parents, and there is good reason to believe (in fact, it would be truly surprising if the opposite were true) that the recently vaccinated/boosted are very unlikely to have a severe case of COVID.

My response was rational then. It's rational now. It's the world around us that's different, at least for those of us not cowering in fear at a little jab.

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

That is exactly what I have said repeatedly.  When did you first come to this country? Your command of the language is quite good. 

That may have been what you meant to say. What you said is "they lead (sic)* us to believe that the virus hovered over mass gatherings," as in they led* us to believe something that isn't true. Otherwise your sentence made no sense whatsoever.

 

*May we pause for a moment to consider the irony.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

4 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I am no youngster, and I regularly visit my elderly parents. The risk-benefit calculus clearly weighed against attending thousand-plus people events at this time last year.

I am triple vaccinated now, so our my parents, and there is good reason to believe (in fact, it would be truly surprising if the opposite were true) that the recently vaccinated/boosted are very unlikely to have a severe case of COVID.

My response was rational then. It's rational now. It's the world around us that's different, at least for those of us not cowering in fear at a little jab.

That may have been what you meant to say. What you said is "they lead (sic)* us to believe that the virus hovered over mass gatherings," as in they led* us to believe something that isn't true. Otherwise your sentence made no sense whatsoever.

 

*May we pause for a moment to consider the irony.

 

Oh damn.  That pesky led v lead thing again.  Perfection is elusive, and I'll learn from this.  Disclaimer:  I struggle to consistently spell separate and satellite correctly, bureaucrat always trips me up, and I frequently spell kayak backwards.  

 

What did you mean by "...in and of themselves" as it related to the protests last year?  

 

[JaCrispy]

Cole Beasley likely got covid from vaxxed players...now, he is being punished for 10 days, while those same vaxxed players, who gave it to him, can play as soon as they test negative...

 

I will never comply so long as the insane are running the asylum...😉

 

 

[Orlando Buffalo]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I am no youngster, and I regularly visit my elderly parents. The risk-benefit calculus clearly weighed against attending thousand-plus people events at this time last year.

I am triple vaccinated now, so our my parents, and there is good reason to believe (in fact, it would be truly surprising if the opposite were true) that the recently vaccinated/boosted are very unlikely to have a severe case of COVID.

My response was rational then. It's rational now. It's the world around us that's different, at least for those of us not cowering in fear at a little jab.

The world has not changed much since the beginning of the pandemic the same people are in danger, older, obese, with heart or lung problems. The vaccine is showing little effect on Omicron, you simply are being told you are safe by the people who told you to lock down last year. I do truly hope you and your family enjoy your holidays together and I am glad you feel safe.

[BillStime]

4 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

Cole Beasley likely got covid from vaxxed players...now, he is being punished for 10 days, while those same vaxxed players, who gave it to him, can play as soon as they test negative...

 

I will never comply so long as the insane are running the asylum...😉

 

 

 

Don't tempt karma...

 

 

[billsfanmiamioh]

7 hours ago, BillStime said:

 

Don't tempt karma...

 

 

Yeah she’s pretty trustworthy. Just like the unmasked schools are 3.5x more likely to have an outbreak? That “study” (and many others used by the CDC for policy making) is complete joke 😂😂😂

Edited December 23, 2021 by billsfanmiamioh

[Tiberius]

The unvaccinated are clogging our hospitals and stressing out the health care system. 

[plenzmd1]

Heard something interesting today...similar to what should have happened with the stimmy checks if Uncle Joe cared more about the vax than votes.

 

No more federal aid of any kind...SS, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Rent Assistance, Public Housing, Student Loan forgiveness...all of it suspended until you show proof of vaccination.

 

I mean if Uncle Joe wants to take peoples money  away if they are not vaxed via employer mandate, why not the constituency that makes their money off the federal government?

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

14 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

Heard something interesting today...similar to what should have happened with the stimmy checks if Uncle Joe cared more about the vax than votes.

 

No more federal aid of any kind...SS, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Rent Assistance, Public Housing, Student Loan forgiveness...all of it suspended until you show proof of vaccination.

 

I mean if Uncle Joe wants to take peoples money  away if they are not vaxed via employer mandate, why not the constituency that makes their money off the federal government?

 

 

Because he can’t. Just like the many other things he’s tried but doesn’t have the authority to do. 

[aristocrat]

20 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

Heard something interesting today...similar to what should have happened with the stimmy checks if Uncle Joe cared more about the vax than votes.

 

No more federal aid of any kind...SS, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Rent Assistance, Public Housing, Student Loan forgiveness...all of it suspended until you show proof of vaccination.

 

I mean if Uncle Joe wants to take peoples money  away if they are not vaxed via employer mandate, why not the constituency that makes their money off the federal government?

 

 

 

That would be the end of the Democratic party right there.