covid 19 vaccine

[oops_ur_dead]

vaccine
no

[Brendan]

vaccine

[Frinckles]

i t

[Stealthbomber16]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/emojis/872934174577819678.png?v=1

[Plotato]

28092

[Light_Yagami]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7rACI-WJEw

Vaccine

Oh Hell No.. They Can Give My Shots To Someone Else.

[Lumi]

how do i vote in this poll? im confused

[Voss]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7rACI-WJEw

Vaccine

Oh Hell No.. They Can Give My Shots To Someone Else.

This is new to me. Are they saying people that take the vaccine have side effects to people on anti psychotics?

[OzyWho]

This is new to me. Are they saying people that take the vaccine have side effects to people on anti psychotics?
It's 10 years old.
It's not talking about vaccines.

Featuring Chill EB - Psycho/pharma spends billions of dollars a year marketing mental 'disorders' & drugs for kids -- yet these drugs are documented by international drug regulatory agencies to cause mania, psychosis, hallucinations, suicide, violence, homicidal ideation, heart attack, stroke and death. What's more, they are being prescribed for psychiatric disorders that are simply a checklist of behaviors.

[Voss]

It's 10 years old.
First we should ask which vaccine they're talking about.

that was going to be my first question, but contextually i assumed the covid19 vaccine.

[OzyWho]

that was going to be my first question, but contextually i assumed the covid19 vaccine.

Yah idk why Light brought it in here tbh, I don't see the connection other than pharmacy industry can't be fully trusted. (not much news there though?)

[Voss]

I thought it might be fun to go down the rabbit hole and see the evidence trail

[yzb25]

how do i vote in this poll? im confused

I think these sorts of polls close quickly after opening. You gotta get your democracy in fast to be heard

[Marshmallow Marshall]

"democracy"

I believe I can vote right now, though. It's either because I'm an admin or because the poll simply isn't closed yet, I'm not sure. To vote, just pick a choice and click "Vote Now".

[Light_Yagami]

This is new to me. Are they saying people that take the vaccine have side effects to people on anti psychotics?

No Im Saiyan Dont Trust Big Pharma In General.. Thats Where The Vaccine Is From Right.. Places Like Pizer And J&J And So On..

[Light_Yagami]

It's 10 years old.
It's not talking about vaccines.

Even Thought Its Not Talking About Vaccines Big Pharma Is A Problem Opioids Some Vaccines.. Some Other Drugs.. Bad Okay Thats All.. All Medication Is Is Legal Drugs.. And Why Cant I Find Zinc In Stores Anymore.. The Supplement

[Voss]

Even Thought Its Not Talking About Vaccines Big Pharma Is A Problem Opioids Some Vaccines.. Some Other Drugs.. Bad Okay Thats All.. All Medication Is Is Legal Drugs.. And Why Cant I Find Zinc In Stores Anymore.. The Supplement

I'm not sure if I understood everything, but basically don't get the vaccine because:
- Big pharma created the vaccines
- Big pharma created opioids and other drugs
- Zinc, the supplement, isn't in stores anymore

What are your qualifications for giving this advice? Outstanding, extensive personal research?

[Marshmallow Marshall]

I'm not sure if I understood everything, but basically don't get the vaccine because:
- Big pharma created the vaccines
- Big pharma created opioids and other drugs
- Zinc, the supplement, isn't in stores anymore

What are your qualifications for giving this advice? Outstanding, extensive personal research?

To be fair, big multinational pharmaceutical companies have too much power for private entities and too little restrictions, both financial and moral. But I will not pretend that is anything close to what Light is talking about... and I'm not sure what exactly he is talking about, actually.
:calix:

[Voss]

To be fair, big multinational pharmaceutical companies have too much power for private entities and too little restrictions, both financial and moral. But I will not pretend that is anything close to what Light is talking about... and I'm not sure what exactly he is talking about, actually.
:calix:

While I do not dispute the outsized power pharmaceuticals have, I do think it's a bit of a logical leap to say that we shouldn't get the vaccine bc of that. After all, the thread technically is about vaccines.

[OzyWho]

I thought it might be fun to go down the rabbit hole and see the evidence trail
I went down the rabbit hole for a total of like 1-2min by pressing the link in the description. ^.^

They claim that mental disorders don't exist because they can't be proven, and unreliable because the diagnosis go by a checklist.
>Both of those reasonings are correct: in psychology almost nothing can be proven (it's like a pseudoscience in that sense?), and diagnoses are done by checklists afaik. But I'm just not sure about the conclusion, especially since psychiatrists themselves seem to be on both side of the fences.

For the claim of psychiatric drugs dumbing down people, they provided proof is a link to a site where you can check up on the side effects of drugs.
>Side effects are indeed a thing, and there probably are medicines/drugs out there that are more bad than worth it. But we just have no way of knowing the extent of it - literally impossible for us imho.


Big pharmacy companies not being trustable is not exactly a new idea. But I'm not exactly aware of anything that points towards mallicious intent. The only times I know where they did damage was caused by either fallacious testing (https://youtu.be/ve4q-1D_Ajo) or doctors mistake.

I guess the closest that I know of where there might be mallicious is intent is the ongoing rumor wrt weed. How each time a big pharmacy company do a research to weed, their tests make it look bad, but when independent researches do it, they find positives to weed; and the former researches are anectdotaly bad. There's like infinite "documentries" on it though.





With regards to the topic of this thread though, here's my pov with it.
In the early 2020, the world health organization got together the best experts they could find and gave them infinite resources in order to come up with a "game plan" for the world so to speak.
That research was which basically all the countries based their actions on for the most part. I informed myself through it and thanks to that I knew in the early 202 that this pandemic would go on for years when most people still hoped or thought it'd last only for months.
The idea was to have the pandemic be on and off for multiple years to let the virus go through everyone in a controlled fashion. From the little superficial that I informed myself, I don't remember vaccines being talked about though. (but it might be, since I pretty much only cared for the summary so to speak)

This brings us more to the current day.
I observed some things:
-People pressuring their goverments, and in return the goverments/countries themselves ask for someone to release some sort of vaccine.
-Obviously thanks to the above, it was a race for the pharmaceutical companies for the money. (though, honestly, it's more the question of who becomes to bigger billionaire)
-There's some strange stuff going like Doctors being ordered to label a cause of death as Covid 19. (though it goes two ways, because many doctors have claimed that covid 19 causes of death have been under-counted due to a lack of tests)
-New laws come about that force vaccines on some people, like teachers. And indirectly forcing everyone due to all the restrictions they'd have otherwise.
-Some funny stuff like some doctors in my area themselves not vaccinating when they really should be lke the highest priority to do so, or how some nurses got caught not vaccinating but instead injecting them vitamins or sometihng like that / and they done it to hundreds. xD

Anyhow, after seeing many strange things, I decide to inform myself once again since the early 2020.
The problem is though that the Youtuber who previously made his content on basically reading and translating research papers to his audiance - that afformentioned research paper was the last he ever submitted. So, what's the next best thing for me? I go to the wold health organization homepage. They've a list of myths that are untrue, like drinking bleach won't cure covid 19 and stuff like that. But no links to any researches whatsoever. Not even statistics are provided there.
It's even worse on the rest of the internet, because not even anectdotal journalist blogs talk about Covid 19. I'm not even sure if Doctors are allowed to talk about it on most of the internet.
I literally can't find any fucking information at all now.

My best bet would be, if I were to vaccinate - I'd do it with a vaccine that was tested for the longest. But tbh, I don't believe everything can be tested so quick.

[OzyWho]

I went down the rabbit hole for a total of like 1-2min by pressing the link in the description. ^.^

They claim that mental disorders don't exist because they can't be proven, and unreliable because the diagnosis go by a checklist.
>Both of those reasonings are correct: in psychology almost nothing can be proven (it's like a pseudoscience in that sense?), and diagnoses are done by checklists afaik. But I'm just not sure about the conclusion, especially since psychiatrists themselves seem to be on both side of the fences.

For the claim of psychiatric drugs dumbing down people, they provided proof is a link to a site where you can check up on the side effects of drugs.
>Side effects are indeed a thing, and there probably are medicines/drugs out there that are more bad than worth it. But we just have no way of knowing the extent of it - literally impossible for us imho.


Big pharmacy companies not being trustable is not exactly a new idea. But I'm not exactly aware of anything that points towards mallicious intent. The only times I know where they did damage was caused by either fallacious testing (https://youtu.be/ve4q-1D_Ajo) or doctors mistake.

I guess the closest that I know of where there might be mallicious is intent is the ongoing rumor wrt weed. How each time a big pharmacy company do a research to weed, their tests make it look bad, but when independent researches do it, they find positives to weed; and the former researches are anectdotaly bad. There's like infinite "documentries" on it though.





With regards to the topic of this thread though, here's my pov with it.
In the early 2020, the world health organization got together the best experts they could find and gave them infinite resources in order to come up with a "game plan" for the world so to speak.
That research was which basically all the countries based their actions on for the most part. I informed myself through it and thanks to that I knew in the early 202 that this pandemic would go on for years when most people still hoped or thought it'd last only for months.
The idea was to have the pandemic be on and off for multiple years to let the virus go through everyone in a controlled fashion. From the little superficial that I informed myself, I don't remember vaccines being talked about though. (but it might be, since I pretty much only cared for the summary so to speak)

This brings us more to the current day.
I observed some things:
-People pressuring their goverments, and in return the goverments/countries themselves ask for someone to release some sort of vaccine.
-Obviously thanks to the above, it was a race for the pharmaceutical companies for the money. (though, honestly, it's more the question of who becomes to bigger billionaire)
-There's some strange stuff going like Doctors being ordered to label a cause of death as Covid 19. (though it goes two ways, because many doctors have claimed that covid 19 causes of death have been under-counted due to a lack of tests)
-New laws come about that force vaccines on some people, like teachers. And indirectly forcing everyone due to all the restrictions they'd have otherwise.
-Some funny stuff like some doctors in my area themselves not vaccinating when they really should be lke the highest priority to do so, or how some nurses got caught not vaccinating but instead injecting them vitamins or sometihng like that / and they done it to hundreds. xD

Anyhow, after seeing many strange things, I decide to inform myself once again since the early 2020.
The problem is though that the Youtuber who previously made his content on basically reading and translating research papers to his audiance - that afformentioned research paper was the last he ever submitted. So, what's the next best thing for me? I go to the wold health organization homepage. They've a list of myths that are untrue, like drinking bleach won't cure covid 19 and stuff like that. But no links to any researches whatsoever. Not even statistics are provided there.
It's even worse on the rest of the internet, because not even anectdotal journalist blogs talk about Covid 19. I'm not even sure if Doctors are allowed to talk about it on most of the internet.
I literally can't find any fucking information at all now.

My best bet would be, if I were to vaccinate - I'd do it with a vaccine that was tested for the longest. But tbh, I don't believe everything can be tested so quick.

In my personal opinion, this whole pandemic and vaccine ordeal feels just Kafkaesque.

[Voss]

I went down the rabbit hole for a total of like 1-2min by pressing the link in the description. ^.^

They claim that mental disorders don't exist because they can't be proven, and unreliable because the diagnosis go by a checklist.
>Both of those reasonings are correct: in psychology almost nothing can be proven (it's like a pseudoscience in that sense?), and diagnoses are done by checklists afaik. But I'm just not sure about the conclusion, especially since psychiatrists themselves seem to be on both side of the fences.

For the claim of psychiatric drugs dumbing down people, they provided proof is a link to a site where you can check up on the side effects of drugs.
>Side effects are indeed a thing, and there probably are medicines/drugs out there that are more bad than worth it. But we just have no way of knowing the extent of it - literally impossible for us imho.


Big pharmacy companies not being trustable is not exactly a new idea. But I'm not exactly aware of anything that points towards mallicious intent. The only times I know where they did damage was caused by either fallacious testing (https://youtu.be/ve4q-1D_Ajo) or doctors mistake.

I guess the closest that I know of where there might be mallicious is intent is the ongoing rumor wrt weed. How each time a big pharmacy company do a research to weed, their tests make it look bad, but when independent researches do it, they find positives to weed; and the former researches are anectdotaly bad. There's like infinite "documentries" on it though.





With regards to the topic of this thread though, here's my pov with it.
In the early 2020, the world health organization got together the best experts they could find and gave them infinite resources in order to come up with a "game plan" for the world so to speak.
That research was which basically all the countries based their actions on for the most part. I informed myself through it and thanks to that I knew in the early 202 that this pandemic would go on for years when most people still hoped or thought it'd last only for months.
The idea was to have the pandemic be on and off for multiple years to let the virus go through everyone in a controlled fashion. From the little superficial that I informed myself, I don't remember vaccines being talked about though. (but it might be, since I pretty much only cared for the summary so to speak)

This brings us more to the current day.
I observed some things:
-People pressuring their goverments, and in return the goverments/countries themselves ask for someone to release some sort of vaccine.
-Obviously thanks to the above, it was a race for the pharmaceutical companies for the money. (though, honestly, it's more the question of who becomes to bigger billionaire)
-There's some strange stuff going like Doctors being ordered to label a cause of death as Covid 19. (though it goes two ways, because many doctors have claimed that covid 19 causes of death have been under-counted due to a lack of tests)
-New laws come about that force vaccines on some people, like teachers. And indirectly forcing everyone due to all the restrictions they'd have otherwise.
-Some funny stuff like some doctors in my area themselves not vaccinating when they really should be lke the highest priority to do so, or how some nurses got caught not vaccinating but instead injecting them vitamins or sometihng like that / and they done it to hundreds. xD

Anyhow, after seeing many strange things, I decide to inform myself once again since the early 2020.
The problem is though that the Youtuber who previously made his content on basically reading and translating research papers to his audiance - that afformentioned research paper was the last he ever submitted. So, what's the next best thing for me? I go to the wold health organization homepage. They've a list of myths that are untrue, like drinking bleach won't cure covid 19 and stuff like that. But no links to any researches whatsoever. Not even statistics are provided there.
It's even worse on the rest of the internet, because not even anectdotal journalist blogs talk about Covid 19. I'm not even sure if Doctors are allowed to talk about it on most of the internet.
I literally can't find any fucking information at all now.

My best bet would be, if I were to vaccinate - I'd do it with a vaccine that was tested for the longest. But tbh, I don't believe everything can be tested so quick.

(My tone is going to change to be a more respectful one in this response)

From this post, it sounds like there are two reasons why you are vaccine hesitant.
1. You can't find research (although what research you are looking for is unclear)
2. It hasn't been tested long enough.

To address the first point:
What is the topic of research that you want to look for? And if it's vaccine research, is there another source you'd be willing to trust? For me, I'd trust my doctor (or other primary care provider). If my doctor is a fuck up, it's beyond my control and the universe will just take me back.

To address the second point:
The way I understand the science behind the vaccine is that the mRNA technology that it's based on has been in development for a decade and a half ish. The "new" part about this is encoding the covid19 protein that the mRNA vaccine is supposed to attack.
https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/52424.html
So, I liken this to the safety of a cars. We trust the new 2022 Toyota Camry as a safe car even though it was developed very recently BECAUSE the underlying technology behind cars have been around for decades on decades.

What would you say is the appropriate amount of wait time for testing? I don't think saying "idk, just an indefinite longer amount" is defensible.

(If anyone thinks my analogies are misleading/bad, please call me out on it).

[OzyWho]

To address the first point:
What is the topic of research that you want to look for? And if it's vaccine research, is there another source you'd be willing to trust? For me, I'd trust my doctor (or other primary care provider). If my doctor is a fuck up, it's beyond my control and the universe will just take me back.

What do you mean by source? Do you mean interpretations of research?
What I'd want is to have access to research to begin with. After all, we are talking about an industry that has a terrible track record with fraud, bribery, lawsuits and scandals. Frankly, I don't know why you would want to put something in your body you can't get any info on, it just sounds absurd to me. Maybe there won't be hundreds of thousands of heart attacks like it was with Vioxx for example, but we're talking about taking something on nothing but blind faith. Even your own doctor is giving you your vaccine on blind faith.




What would you say is the appropriate amount of wait time for testing? I don't think saying "idk, just an indefinite longer amount" is defensible.
I'd feel better if we had any access to how the tests went o begin with. But regards appropriate amount of testing time, from what I can find, some sources say that phase 3 trial can take 1-4 years, some say 10-15 years. First have to get to phase 3 to begin with though. Seems to be that around 2 years should be good, one and a half year the bear minimum.

[oops_ur_dead]

I'd feel better if we had any access to how the tests went o begin with. But regards appropriate amount of testing time, from what I can find, some sources say that phase 3 trial can take 1-4 years, some say 10-15 years. First have to get to phase 3 to begin with though. Seems to be that around 2 years should be good, one and a half year the bear minimum.

Did you know that the flu vaccine is different every year, and is tested for a much shorter period of time than the COVID vaccine was ever tested for? Are you similarly hesitant of getting a seasonal flu shot?

[OzyWho]

Did you know that the flu vaccine is different every year, and is tested for a much shorter period of time than the COVID vaccine was ever tested for?
Idk anything about flu vaccines, but I realize the relevance given the frequent covid 19 mutations.
Where did you get your info on COVID vaccines?

[yzb25]

Frankly, I don't know why you would want to put something in your body you can't get any info on, it just sounds absurd to me. Maybe there won't be hundreds of thousands of heart attacks like it was with Vioxx for example, but we're talking about taking something on nothing but blind faith. Even your own doctor is giving you your vaccine on blind faith.

Well, for me, it's not simply about whether the vaccine is dangerous. It's about whether it's so dangerous it would kill more people than if covid was left to rampage freely - because realistically that's the alternative. Even after accounting for all the covid deaths, you also have to consider the number of people that would die from lack of care due to hospitals surpassing capacity.

So yeah, unless it actually is causing "hundreds of thousands of heart attacks", and you think death statistics are being systematically overstated by entire orders of magnitude, from a utilitarian perspective it seemed like a no brainer to me. If I get a blood clot or something as a result, then fuck my luck lol.

[OzyWho]

What would you say is the appropriate amount of wait time for testing? I don't think saying "idk, just an indefinite longer amount" is defensible.

Ftr, I did re-visit the aforementioned paper and it did predict a vaccine within 12-18 months, so that's cool.



Well, for me, it's not simply about whether the vaccine is dangerous. It's about whether it's so dangerous it would kill more people than if covid was left to rampage freely - because realistically that's the alternative. Even after accounting for all the covid deaths, you also have to consider the number of people that would die from lack of care due to hospitals surpassing capacity.

So yeah, unless it actually is causing "hundreds of thousands of heart attacks", and you think death statistics are being systematically overstated by entire orders of magnitude, from a utilitarian perspective it seemed like a no brainer to me. If I get a blood clot or something as a result, then fuck my luck lol.
Yah, looking at the current death per case ratio for different countries, it seems that it's around 2%. Which is surprising because in the early 2020 the estimates were 2% only if you're over 70 years old. (which I suppose even then was reason enough to do herd protection of the risk group?)

2% is a really high number wtf...

[yzb25]

Ftr, I did re-visit the aforementioned paper and it did predict a vaccine within 12-18 months, so that's cool.



Yah, looking at the current death per case ratio for different countries, it seems that it's around 2%. Which is surprising because in the early 2020 the estimates were 2% only if you're over 70 years old. (which I suppose even then was reason enough to do herd protection of the risk group?)

2% is a really high number wtf...

yeah, it's not really something I can wrap my head around honestly.

[OzyWho]

Ahh, those Google numbers are heavily misleading.
This weekly updated statistic (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm) says that: "For over 5% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death."

For every 100 deaths by COVID-19, only 5 are caused solely by the virus. The other 95 have had other health conditions in addition, with an average of 4 additionals.

Looking at Causes of death and comorbidities in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82862-5) (Comorbidity is "the presence of one or more additional conditions often co-occurring with a primary condition."
The common additional health conditions upon dying from COVID-19 seem to be such as these:
I will just paste the first 10 patients off the table:

Case1: Active smoking, COPD, HIV-infection, obesity, ventricular fibrillation
Case2: Diabetes II, heart failure, hypertension, obesity, OSAS
Case3: Asthma, COPD, hypertension, mesenterial infarction
Case4: Asthma, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, sinus node arrest
Case5: Hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, obesity, OSAS
Case6: Atrial fibrillation, chronic renal failure, COPD, dementia, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, liver cirrhosis
Case7: Hemiplegia, pulmonary embolism
Case8: Dementia, diabetes II, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, rheumatoid arthritis, stroke
Case9: Alcohol abuse, heart failure, obesity
Case10: Active smoking, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, hypertension, ischaemic heart failure, obesity


Now, assuming that the statistics that google gave me that I mentioned in my previous post include every death that includes COVID-19 as a cause - I feel like I want to reduce that ratio to 5% of it's size, because if it included all the Comorbidity cases with an average of 4 additional symptoms and those symptoms are such that I listed; that's like being surprised a 90 y/o dying after getting sick tbh.


Got this idea to look for comorbidities in this podcast (https://youtu.be/WB6yucemJ-o). That's a sad podcast tbh, because the podcaster looks more informed than the Doctor.(?)
The entire comment section seem to be against COVID-19 vaccines. I guess influencers really are influencing, lol. :laugh:

[Brendan]

Ahh, those Google numbers are heavily misleading.
This weekly updated statistic (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm) says that: "For over 5% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death."

For every 100 deaths by COVID-19, only 5 are caused solely by the virus. The other 95 have had other health conditions in addition, with an average of 4 additionals.

Looking at Causes of death and comorbidities in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82862-5) (Comorbidity is "the presence of one or more additional conditions often co-occurring with a primary condition."
The common additional health conditions upon dying from COVID-19 seem to be such as these:
I will just paste the first 10 patients off the table:

Case1: Active smoking, COPD, HIV-infection, obesity, ventricular fibrillation
Case2: Diabetes II, heart failure, hypertension, obesity, OSAS
Case3: Asthma, COPD, hypertension, mesenterial infarction
Case4: Asthma, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, sinus node arrest
Case5: Hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, obesity, OSAS
Case6: Atrial fibrillation, chronic renal failure, COPD, dementia, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, liver cirrhosis
Case7: Hemiplegia, pulmonary embolism
Case8: Dementia, diabetes II, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, rheumatoid arthritis, stroke
Case9: Alcohol abuse, heart failure, obesity
Case10: Active smoking, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, hypertension, ischaemic heart failure, obesity


Now, assuming that the statistics that google gave me that I mentioned in my previous post include every death that includes COVID-19 as a cause - I feel like I want to reduce that ratio to 5% of it's size, because if it included all the Comorbidity cases with an average of 4 additional symptoms and those symptoms are such that I listed; that's like being surprised a 90 y/o dying after getting sick tbh.


Got this idea to look for comorbidities in this podcast (https://youtu.be/WB6yucemJ-o). That's a sad podcast tbh, because the podcaster looks more informed than the Doctor.(?)
The entire comment section seem to be against COVID-19 vaccines. I guess influencers really are influencing, lol. :laugh:

At the end of the day I'm more afraid of a virus that we know nothing about the long-term effects of than a vaccine that was developed by groups of people that are presumably far more intelligent than me or at the very least far more educated in the subject matter. Just look at herpes - causes all sorts of health problems far past the initial infection (various cancers, syndromes, etc.). Shingles from chickenpox would be a more well-known comparison. Covid has been linked to presumed permanent cognitive decline, loss of vision, taste, etc. Viruses are insanely varied and complex.

[OzyWho]

At the end of the day I'm more afraid of a virus that we know nothing about the long-term effects of than a vaccine that was developed by groups of people that are presumably far more intelligent than me or at the very least far more educated in the subject matter. Just look at herpes - causes all sorts of health problems far past the initial infection (various cancers, syndromes, etc.). Shingles from chickenpox would be a more well-known comparison. Covid has been linked to presumed permanent cognitive decline, loss of vision, taste, etc. Viruses are insanely varied and complex.
That's a interesting new perspective tbh. It having long term effects makes it more like Herpes than something like just the common cold or flu.

I had no problems with finding these claims online. At one point I had to ask myself "what is it not linked to?".
But finding evidence seems to be difficult, as they mostly came from "reports". Like someone going to the doctor and saying that they feel fatigued for example.

[oops_ur_dead]

That's a interesting new perspective tbh. It having long term effects makes it more like Herpes than something like just the common cold or flu.

I had no problems with finding these claims online. At one point I had to ask myself "what is it not linked to?".
But finding evidence seems to be difficult, as they mostly came from "reports". Like someone going to the doctor and saying that they feel fatigued for example.

It makes very little logical sense to be wary of a new vaccine but not a new virus. Both have been around for the same amount of time, we have as much knowledge about both. Except one has actually been designed and tested for safety during that time period.

In fact we saw during the SARS outbreak that people who were infected with SARS but survived had significantly diminished long-term lung function compared to people who weren't infected, which is the closest indicator we have to long term effects of the virus.

[yzb25]

Ahh, those Google numbers are heavily misleading.
This weekly updated statistic (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm) says that: "For over 5% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death."

For every 100 deaths by COVID-19, only 5 are caused solely by the virus. The other 95 have had other health conditions in addition, with an average of 4 additionals.

Looking at Causes of death and comorbidities in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82862-5) (Comorbidity is "the presence of one or more additional conditions often co-occurring with a primary condition."
The common additional health conditions upon dying from COVID-19 seem to be such as these:
I will just paste the first 10 patients off the table:

Case1: Active smoking, COPD, HIV-infection, obesity, ventricular fibrillation
Case2: Diabetes II, heart failure, hypertension, obesity, OSAS
Case3: Asthma, COPD, hypertension, mesenterial infarction
Case4: Asthma, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, sinus node arrest
Case5: Hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, obesity, OSAS
Case6: Atrial fibrillation, chronic renal failure, COPD, dementia, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, liver cirrhosis
Case7: Hemiplegia, pulmonary embolism
Case8: Dementia, diabetes II, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, rheumatoid arthritis, stroke
Case9: Alcohol abuse, heart failure, obesity
Case10: Active smoking, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, hypertension, ischaemic heart failure, obesity


Now, assuming that the statistics that google gave me that I mentioned in my previous post include every death that includes COVID-19 as a cause - I feel like I want to reduce that ratio to 5% of it's size, because if it included all the Comorbidity cases with an average of 4 additional symptoms and those symptoms are such that I listed; that's like being surprised a 90 y/o dying after getting sick tbh.


Got this idea to look for comorbidities in this podcast (https://youtu.be/WB6yucemJ-o). That's a sad podcast tbh, because the podcaster looks more informed than the Doctor.(?)
The entire comment section seem to be against COVID-19 vaccines. I guess influencers really are influencing, lol. :laugh:

Just in case there is a misunderstanding here, the vast majority of these people would not have died when they did if it weren't for COVID. The study is not disputing this. Their cause of death is COVID.

You might look at an obese man with heart disease and high blood pressure and think "they may only have 5-10 years left. Covid has statistically made little difference to their lifespan in such a case". But I am sure the man in question regards those 5-10 years to be highly significant. And if you had a loved one with those conditions, I am sure you'd think very differently.

Furthermore, if you wish to disregard covid deaths where people seem to have a high chance of dying soon, you would need to specify how many years left are considered too few to be regarded as significant, so we can accurately quantify how many should be disregarded.

I don't think it's completely unreasonable the line of thinking you have fallen into here. If someone is going to die in 2 weeks, morbid though it may be, perhaps it matters little if they die in 1 week instead. But I think you're massively overapplying that principle here by disregarding every case where people had at least one secondary condition. The number you disregard should realistically be far less than 95 if you have a soul =P.

[Helz]

Im not sure how to vote here because I do not understand what its asking.

I support the vaccine existing and people taking it but I am very against the idea of forcing people to take it. In a similar line of thinking I am very much against forcing people to wear seatbelts. They should, they are kinda idiots if they dont, but it is a basic human right to take risks with your personal safety.

For the COVID numbers there are financial incentives in America to declare a death as COVID related. In many other countries there are incentives to not report COVID issues. I can't help but feel a little... bitchy or something every time someone points to the numbers and rails on how poorly America is dealing with COVID with those factors in mind. Although to be fair my family is heavily involved in health care and hospital management so I have access to a different perspective than most.

I also feel like the two hardline sides should leave etchother alone. Darwinism should satisfy the ones that want to force it on everyone and the ones who are very against it can simply go about their lives without engaging in an argument with someone who holds a diametrically oppositional view point. Its not like anyone is going to change their minds.

At the end of the day the vaccine does have risks and does not guarantee you wont get COVID. COVID has more risks but there is no guarantee you will get it. This means people must choose to certainly expose themselves to risk to avoid a potential greater risk. I see many people taking the view that people who are against getting vaccinated are irrational or illogical but on the most basic level that makes sense to me. If the vaccine had 0 risk and did guarantee you wouldn't get any form of COVID it would be different.

Its been interesting to see how protected information has been circumvented by employers during this whole thing. On one hand its unethical to force people to disclose their medical information while on the other being vaccinated protects customers, markets well and ensures the company wont have unexpected shut downs.

I am personally much less tolerant of the COVID measures at this point. The vaccine is available to everyone for free at this point so I don't understand the shut down stuff. The people who want to protect themselves can and the people who don't can accept the risk that comes with that decision. Fighting nature is dumb, let it do what it does and let society go back to normal.

I do have a question though. I am totally ignorant on the subject but I keep hearing about how the virus looks engineered. Has anyone dug into the subject that can speak one way or the other on it?

[OzyWho]

The people who want to protect themselves can and the people who don't can accept the risk that comes with that decision.
Interestingly, this viewpoint is only viable for COVID-19.
For regular vaccines, a major reason for healthy people to take the vaccines is to achieve herd immunity for those who can't protect themselves.
Herd immunity for COVID-19 though is nigh on impossible.



I do have a question though. I am totally ignorant on the subject but I keep hearing about how the virus looks engineered. Has anyone dug into the subject that can speak one way or the other on it?
I mean, it did leak out of a laboratory didn't it?
Is it official yet? I know that the Chinese have tried to sweep it under the rug like they always do, but I recall them being asked to not stand in the way of official investigation.

[Helz]

Interestingly, this viewpoint is only viable for COVID-19.
For regular vaccines, a major reason for healthy people to take the vaccines is to achieve herd immunity for those who can't protect themselves.
Herd immunity for COVID-19 though is nigh on impossible.
This might piss some people off but there are some negatives to herd immunity. People that should have naturally died instead survive to reproduce these days weakening our gene pool on a macro scale. As cold as it is to say, having something that culls the population is positive if you consider it from the stance of humans as a species. That and there is simply too many people. I honestly believe just about every other living thing on the planet would be better off if there were less people and we seem incapable as a species of addressing that issue. In areas where the population outgrows its ability to feed and economically support its people our solution has been to step in and increase food and economic support which exacerbates the human suffering. Our direction is unsustainable in many respects imo and as horrible as it is to see people dying the natural control measures that exist within nature are truly necessary in my opinion.


I mean, it did leak out of a laboratory didn't it?
Is it official yet? I know that the Chinese have tried to sweep it under the rug like they always do, but I recall them being asked to not stand in the way of official investigation. Thats as far as I have herd from anyone. Just rumors and some logical assumptions based on how the COVID virus is. Survives well, spreads without showing symptoms, deadly enough to draw a reaction but not massively kill the population, mutates slowly ect.. Its easy to see these factors as ideal in some respects but its still just assumptions (from my ignorant understanding)

[OzyWho]

This might piss some people off but there are some negatives to herd immunity. People that should have naturally died instead survive to reproduce these days weakening our gene pool on a macro scale. As cold as it is to say, having something that culls the population is positive if you consider it from the stance of humans as a species. That and there is simply too many people. I honestly believe just about every other living thing on the planet would be better off if there were less people and we seem incapable as a species of addressing that issue. In areas where the population outgrows its ability to feed and economically support its people our solution has been to step in and increase food and economic support which exacerbates the human suffering. Our direction is unsustainable in many respects imo and as horrible as it is to see people dying the natural control measures that exist within nature are truly necessary in my opinion.

AFAIK
1) We are very very far from overpopulation becoming a problem in the sense of it becoming unsustainable.
2) Better quality of life and health leads to families having less children.

Though,
The math involved in the 1st one doesn't include take global warming in account (though, there's more effective ways to reduce the co2 emissions), and this virus was definitely not taken into account for the 2nd due to it not existing then yet.

[NotPaopan]

Interesting thought. I'll add to this thread.


Interestingly, this viewpoint is only viable for COVID-19.
For regular vaccines, a major reason for healthy people to take the vaccines is to achieve herd immunity for those who can't protect themselves.
Herd immunity for COVID-19 though is nigh on impossible.


Herd immunity isn't possible because selfish countries with home-court advantages hogging up vaccine orders. Not that other countries are too poor to buy it. It's fucking cheap for christ sake. A $2 a pop of AstraZeneca in the EU plus say... other costs like logistical costs (around $300-500 per person) when distributed to other continents/countries like Saint Helena; definitely not a lot compared to the economic losses due to covid19 extending lockdowns, quarantines, limitations, etc.

28107

This is more on the forgiving side of data since reality is far much worse. The data above accounts for the total population per country... in which currently, vaccines are only permitted to individuals of age 18 and up. That's why the most boggling thing here is, despite this privilege, there were still some people who don't want to partake in the vaccination programs. I'm beginning to sound like a commie. Soo, being first to get the vaccine is one thing and should be that way, but hoarding it up to an extra enormous amount is ridiculous.



I mean, it did leak out of a laboratory didn't it?
Is it official yet? I know that the Chinese have tried to sweep it under the rug like they always do, but I recall them being asked to not stand in the way of official investigation.

This is not true; logically speaking. This is nothing but a hoax.

Sure there were reports like these back in the days where Trump is just being racist and using some of the strategies of totalitarian rulers like Hitler or Lenin. "Find a common enemy" *in this context; China* and "to make sure they *the general populace*know who the enemy is" and with it will help Trump unify the Americans and make them more submissive to him.

Assuming this is true. There were two ways they did it.
1. Deliberately - Not possible, there is absolutely no way you would launch a biological weapon near your labs or even in your own country (largest pop in the world) that is currently politically stable. Virologists in WHO already reach an agreement; didn't rule out the possibility, yet it is unlikely that Covid 19 was man-made from Wuhan. It directly opposed our One Belt One Road Initiative. But the more plausible theory in this section is if Covid-19 was man-made and originated in Fort Detrick.

2. Unintentional (Accident) - More likely scenario compared to the first section. But as of now, there isn't much evidence of it. Even if it was... what would you or any country do? China can't be liable for the damages it has done in any way. Doing so would be counter-productive to the whole world. The other theory may be more valid. Why is that? Looking at the past, you can see that "patient zero" came from Wuhan... Yet the first wave of major outbreaks rode throughout the west (US, EU, RIP Italy at that time).

It was only then Asia experienced the major outbreak (second wave of Covid19)... Why is that? Most Asian countries should be exposed first before the West, right? Not that they were near China, Asian countries are more densely populated compared to the west. It should be that way. That's how every virus spread out throughout the entire history. Blaming mobility or logistics isn't also a good argument... Not being rude here, but Wuhan (under Hubei Region) is composed of really poor people and is not what really made China a powerhouse (Hubei Province has 0 SEZs) compared to its SEZs powerhouses like Guangdong or Jiangsu region. Being poor means you really go pack up for a vacation in the western countries that easily. There is nothing much to see in Wuhan... Well, their Yellow Crane Tower is pretty cool. So yeah... To summ it up, Wuhan is not the epicentre, the first infection on people was only tested and discovered there.

Note'y: Just personal opinion. Get out of this forum if you wanted a "reliable" sources from virologist doctors etc. Don't question my credentials lolololol. Not really sure if my info is really updated. TBH, I really don't give a fuck about covid anymore even though I got it thrice.

tl;dr I blame the sugar industries for having so many fat-asses with weak lungs that is prone to covid-19 death.

[Helz]

AFAIK
1) We are very very far from overpopulation becoming a problem in the sense of it becoming unsustainable.
2) Better quality of life and health leads to families having less children.

Though,
The math involved in the 1st one doesn't include take global warming in account (though, there's more effective ways to reduce the co2 emissions), and this virus was definitely not taken into account for the 2nd due to it not existing then yet.

I believe the strongest correlated factor with lower reproductive rates is education although its been a few years sense I dug into the subject. As for being very very far from overpopulation being an issue that really depends on how you look at things. If our existence is a few hundred thousands of years looking at the population explosion over the last 100 years is batshit crazy. We may have made more people in that 100 years than had existed in the rest of our time combined.

At the end of the day we have this one planet. Maybe we can figure out how to leave it and colonize somewhere else but were not taking 10 billion people to that new planet. A tiny amount will go and everyone else will be left behind. The rate we are consuming our natural resources is absolutely unsustainable and we can only say we are far off from it being an issue if we look through the lens of our individual life span.

What will be an issue first will be reduction in quality of life. We got a tiny taste of that with the supply chain being hit recently.

[NotPaopan]

I believe the strongest correlated factor with lower reproductive rates is education although its been a few years sense I dug into the subject. As for being very very far from overpopulation being an issue that really depends on how you look at things. If our existence is a few hundred thousands of years looking at the population explosion over the last 100 years is batshit crazy. We may have made more people in that 100 years than had existed in the rest of our time combined.

At the end of the day we have this one planet. Maybe we can figure out how to leave it and colonize somewhere else but were not taking 10 billion people to that new planet. A tiny amount will go and everyone else will be left behind. The rate we are consuming our natural resources is absolutely unsustainable and we can only say we are far off from it being an issue if we look through the lens of our individual life span.

What will be an issue first will be reduction in quality of life. We got a tiny taste of that with the supply chain being hit recently.

I firmly believe that economic pressure is more of the main reason for the decline rather than education or healthcare. So you're right about the quality of life thingy. I'm fine right now to start a family but the resources that were supposed to be mine will be re-allocated to others needs. Unless you are talking about the conservative people or religious freaks who do not accept or have sex education in developing countries though.

Every country in the world is at stage 3-4 of the demographic transition. Most are already stabilized aside from Africa. It is presumed that the world population would stabilize around 10 billion~ so I don't worry a single bit about the earth as a whole getting overpopulated. What I'm worried about is how some countries' social security is designed like a Ponzi Scheme; the old generation reaps the retirement income benefits, while the younger generation pays for it. But with declining birth rates and increasing retiree rates... this burden falls upon the younger generation. Hence, they have to pay more.

Deeping deeper here. We're talking about the population as "global", but the pop density per country vary. That's why we are currently having a crisis caused by "overpopulation" to some countries.

Water shortages: Becoming a problem in some countries (not you Canada)... say in Baja Cal Mexico. But not so deep that people would die from dehydration. We don't want a repeat of the Cape Town water crisis lol.

Increase water prices to force people to conserve. I personally think this is the only way for some. Salination is inefficient and expensive. Anything that could improve distribution like piping is also cool. In any case. We are using more water than nature to recycle your pee (fuck treatment plants! its always nature! and dolphins)

Meat shortages: Also a thing. With other nations developing (say China). They're adapting to another diet (Western meat yummy yummy) thus increasing demands for meat that it's becoming unsustainable. Good video here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqGI3iMX_co

Improve and accept plant-based (still yuck) meat and/or cell-based (more hopeful in these) lab-grown meat. Or reduce meat intake overall. This solution also helps with our problems with CO2 emissions (those damn farts) and water crisis (animal/dairy industry uses a lot).

Antibiotics Resistances: Caused by overpopulation too. Used extensively in animal agriculture.

Reduce this and that and so on... Cause and effect.

Limited resources: Coal (Magnolia says we have a lot of it..) Oil (Oh the arabs says this shit will ran out after a few decades. But the Ruskis in the Urals may veto this statement thanks to climate change) Nat Gas (Gonna take long to diminish.. China currently building pipelines to Iran yippie).

Solution: Elon Musk and/or Ernest Rutherford

IoT: Yeah just gonna add this. In case yall don't know. We ran out of ipv4 addresses long ago. But we're transitioning shits with ipv6 yippie. Overpopulation plays a role but this is actually about the huge increase in average device per household.

And all of these problems are caused by overpopulation yeppp. There are long term problems. But humanity is going to fix this, and we'll survive

Oh yeah.. Not being a know it all, that's just my personal view and I'm sure there's a flaw on my statements.

[oops_ur_dead]

Interestingly, this viewpoint is only viable for COVID-19.
For regular vaccines, a major reason for healthy people to take the vaccines is to achieve herd immunity for those who can't protect themselves.
Herd immunity for COVID-19 though is nigh on impossible.

Not really. Herd immunity has been accomplished for much more contagious viruses like measles and polio. It was done so through childhood vaccinations and vaccination mandates in the way of restricting public access to unvaccinated people.

[Helz]

Not really. Herd immunity has been accomplished for much more contagious viruses like measles and polio. It was done so through childhood vaccinations and vaccination mandates in the way of restricting public access to unvaccinated people.

I have not done much research on the subject but when celebrating my mothers birthday recently I had a decent conversation with her about the vaccines. One of the largest issues is that they only 'last' for about a year. This effectively means you would need to both vaccinate 80-95% of the population within that time frame as well as effectively screen incoming and outgoing tourism and immigration. Im not going to say thats impossible but I do not think its viable in a world where the publics trust has been so terribly abused nobody knows what to believe. I personally think that COVID is here to stay but time will tell.


I firmly believe that economic pressure is more of the main reason for the decline rather than education or healthcare. So you're right about the quality of life thingy. I'm fine right now to start a family but the resources that were supposed to be mine will be re-allocated to others needs. Unless you are talking about the conservative people or religious freaks who do not accept or have sex education in developing countries though.

Every country in the world is at stage 3-4 of the demographic transition. Most are already stabilized aside from Africa. It is presumed that the world population would stabilize around 10 billion~ so I don't worry a single bit about the earth as a whole getting overpopulated. That was not my openion. Years back I had a conversation (I think on this forum) on global population growth which led me to diving into a bunch of projections from some section of the UN on global population rates and somewhere along the line I found multiple studies that all put education as the strongest correlated factor with reproduction. That the more educated the person the less kids they bang out. You make enough interesting points I would spend the time to try to figure out where I got the information from if it matters to you but its likely you have touched on the material given some of the points you are making.


What I'm worried about is how some countries' social security is designed like a Ponzi Scheme; the old generation reaps the retirement income benefits, while the younger generation pays for it. But with declining birth rates and increasing retiree rates... this burden falls upon the younger generation. Hence, they have to pay more. I would take this a few steps further and apply it to many structures within many society's but its fair to say I absolutely agree with you and the points I would make would derail the conversation.


Deeping deeper here. We're talking about the population as "global", but the pop density per country vary. That's why we are currently having a crisis caused by "overpopulation" to some countries.

Water shortages: Becoming a problem in some countries (not you Canada)... say in Baja Cal Mexico. But not so deep that people would die from dehydration. We don't want a repeat of the Cape Town water crisis lol.

Increase water prices to force people to conserve. I personally think this is the only way for some. Salination is inefficient and expensive. Anything that could improve distribution like piping is also cool. In any case. We are using more water than nature to recycle your pee (fuck treatment plants! its always nature! and dolphins)

Meat shortages: Also a thing. With other nations developing (say China). They're adapting to another diet (Western meat yummy yummy) thus increasing demands for meat that it's becoming unsustainable. Good video here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqGI3iMX_co

Improve and accept plant-based (still yuck) meat and/or cell-based (more hopeful in these) lab-grown meat. Or reduce meat intake overall. This solution also helps with our problems with CO2 emissions (those damn farts) and water crisis (animal/dairy industry uses a lot). Again I agree with you but I do feel this underscores my point that prior to a point of collapse quality of life suffers. People do not recognize the massive buffer we have with the huge water expenditure to grow grass but at the same time given human nature its likely the masses will have to start taking speed showers before the rich stop watering their lawns. Lab grown meat fascinates the hell out me though. The connection between deforestation and the meat shortage is something I am more concerned with though. Although increases in C02 will increase plant growth the moment the scale tips and we consume more oxygen as a planet than we create that road is going to get ugly. I hope I am wrong in my assumption that it will be how population is finally controlled.


Antibiotics Resistances: Caused by overpopulation too. Used extensively in animal agriculture.

Reduce this and that and so on... Cause and effect. Kinda one of those counterintuitive positions I take but I feel like accelerationism is more appropriate here. As a species we only address issues when dramatic impacts happen so slowing the decline of something essentially prevents it from being addressed. I could ramble about the political and social theory associated with that position but I do feel that the best way to tear down a concept is to support it with flawed reasoning simply because it destroys credibility. On a macro scale the utilitarianist must accept accelerating detrimental issues to limit human suffering on scale.


Limited resources: Coal (Magnolia says we have a lot of it..) Oil (Oh the arabs says this shit will ran out after a few decades. But the Ruskis in the Urals may veto this statement thanks to climate change) Nat Gas (Gonna take long to diminish.. China currently building pipelines to Iran yippie).

Solution: Elon Musk and/or Ernest Rutherford I have found most 'green energy' solutions to be marketing for profit. Its kinda funny when you break down the life span of solar panels and battery's and the carbon footprint of manufacturing and installing them vs burning fossil fuels.

At the same time though we create new ways of accomplishing goals as the current ways become less viable. I doubt anyone is afraid of running out of coal right now but that is in part because we discovered oil and natural gas. I am much more concerned about water, oxygen and food. Even watching how our society handles short term shortages of products with panic buying and secondary market price gouging spells trouble for the future. There is much more on the macro side of intellectual property and large assets that I believe will be a problem in the next 20 years but again, would derail the conversation.

[Stealthbomber16]

At the end of the day I'm more afraid of a virus that we know nothing about the long-term effects of than a vaccine that was developed by groups of people that are presumably far more intelligent than me or at the very least far more educated in the subject matter. Just look at herpes - causes all sorts of health problems far past the initial infection (various cancers, syndromes, etc.). Shingles from chickenpox would be a more well-known comparison. Covid has been linked to presumed permanent cognitive decline, loss of vision, taste, etc. Viruses are insanely varied and complex.

This 100000%.

I'm fucking stupid. I know I'm fucking stupid. These people are way smarter than I am. I am going to choose to put my trust in the people who are smarter than I am instead of potentially suffering from long term respiratory damage that would make me unable to do my job.

[HentaiManOfPeace]

Here's an unpopular opinion. Maybe we needed a pandemic to kill all the dumbasses who don't listen to science. The rise of anti-intellectualism in the West is what's holding society back. I think less than 30% of teens today are skeptical that the world is round. Social media and tapping into feelings instead of data will be the death of our race.

[Oberon]

As opposed to the egregious abuse of human rights that’s been going on for the past 2 years, in the form of lockdowns, curfews, and forcing people to get vaccinated you mean? But I forget socialists care not for rights but for money.

[Plotato]

𝔒𝔥 𝔪𝔦𝔫𝔢 𝔤𝔬𝔡, ℑ 𝔞𝔠𝔠𝔦𝔡𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔩𝔶 𝔥𝔞𝔱𝔥 𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔱 𝔱𝔥𝔬𝔲 𝔞 𝔭𝔦𝔠𝔱𝔲𝔯𝔢 𝔬𝔣 𝔪𝔦𝔫𝔢 𝔠𝔬𝔠𝔨 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔟𝔞𝔩𝔩𝔰...𝔭𝔯𝔦𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔢 𝔡𝔢𝔩𝔢𝔱𝔢 𝔦𝔱!! '𝔏𝔢𝔰𝔱...𝔱𝔥𝔬𝔲 𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔦𝔯𝔢 𝔱𝔬 𝔩𝔬𝔬𝔨? 𝔥𝔞𝔥𝔞 ℑ 𝔧𝔢𝔰𝔱, 𝔡𝔢𝔩𝔢𝔱𝔢 𝔦𝔱...𝔰𝔥𝔬𝔲𝔩𝔡 𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔢 𝔠𝔯𝔞𝔳𝔢... 𝔥𝔞𝔥𝔞 𝔫𝔞𝔶, 𝔟𝔞𝔫𝔦𝔰𝔥 𝔦𝔱...'𝔩𝔢𝔰𝔱?

[Oberon]

Ban thyselve

[HentaiManOfPeace]

Wow, was eradicating smallpox and polio through vaccinations a bad thing, Oberon?

Businesses can always rebuild and people in the west have more than enough shit to do at home without needing to be at a restaurant, bar, or sports game. This is like the the easiest pandemic to endure in the history of mankind. I'm talking to some dumb-dumb anti-vaxxers in a different country from me without me having to leave home while I pull up 20 tabs of hardcore hentai to watch waiting for some poor immigrant to deliver pizza to me. We're living like kings and queens compared to Black Death, smallpox, etc. And if we do go outside, it's a fucking piece of fabric covering your nose and mouth. I deadlifted 405 lbs while wearing one so if I can do that and anti-vaxxers can't, what does that say about their health?

Don't confuse being inconvenienced with being oppressed.

[oops_ur_dead]

Having to take a basket or god-forbid a shopping cart when you go to the grocery store is a human rights violation and literally Auschwitz.

[oops_ur_dead]

Btw this is not an exaggeration I literally had someone tell me to my face that it's "scary" that we've been conditioned and brainwashed into taking baskets when we go to the grocery store.

[OzyWho]

Btw this is not an exaggeration I literally had someone tell me to my face that it's "scary" that we've been conditioned and brainwashed into taking baskets when we go to the grocery store.
Would it be false of me to automatically assume that they're likely schizophrenic and likely to believe in conspiracy theories?

[Voss]

As opposed to the egregious abuse of human rights that’s been going on for the past 2 years, in the form of lockdowns, curfews, and forcing people to get vaccinated you mean? But I forget socialists care not for rights but for money.

Ah yes, we missed the bashing of the libtards. Glad someone's here to be the literal authority on human rights violations.

[Oberon]

Wow, was eradicating smallpox and polio through vaccinations a bad thing, Oberon?

Businesses can always rebuild and people in the west have more than enough shit to do at home without needing to be at a restaurant, bar, or sports game. This is like the the easiest pandemic to endure in the history of mankind. I'm talking to some dumb-dumb anti-vaxxers in a different country from me without me having to leave home while I pull up 20 tabs of hardcore hentai to watch waiting for some poor immigrant to deliver pizza to me. We're living like kings and queens compared to Black Death, smallpox, etc. And if we do go outside, it's a fucking piece of fabric covering your nose and mouth. I deadlifted 405 lbs while wearing one so if I can do that and anti-vaxxers can't, what does that say about their health?

Don't confuse being inconvenienced with being oppressed.
Since you agree with forced vaccinations because they are good you must also agree with slavery because it is undoubtedly similarly effective? A workforce that works for free is every manager’s dream.

[Oberon]

Ah yes, we missed the bashing of the libtards. Glad someone's here to be the literal authority on human rights violations.
What would I do without you trying to stoke flames every time I say something?

[Oberon]

And here’s what your precious little vaccine has done: https://www.myessentialnews.com/post/usdeaths
According to that website in terms of total deaths from all causes 2020 was an average year. Where is this unbelievably deadly virus coming into play?

[oops_ur_dead]

And here’s what your precious little vaccine has done: https://www.myessentialnews.com/post/usdeaths
According to that website in terms of total deaths from all causes 2020 was an average year. Where is this unbelievably deadly virus coming into play?

https://i.imgur.com/JZmuN2T.png

Bro you headass you posted numbers that left out an entire month and a half in 2020 and compared it to full year numbers from previous years. How can you do shit like this and still think "yes, I am intelligent and my opinion on these matters is correct"

Fucking THINK before you post garbage from some stupid ass Spanish health blog lmao.

[Oberon]

Yeah, and I’m quite sure that one month (most of it btw in January when there was no COVID) made all the difference!

[oops_ur_dead]

Big brain thought: leaving out 10% of an entire year won't make a big difference in number of deaths for that year.

[OzyWho]

I missed this, ngl

[Marshmallow Marshall]

I missed this, ngl

I didn't, on the contrary... not constructive and not fun. People are not trying to prove their point is right, they're trying to prove the others wrong out of spite.

[oops_ur_dead]

I didn't, on the contrary... not constructive and not fun. People are not trying to prove their point is right, they're trying to prove the others wrong out of spite.

What's not constructive is posting literal fake news and misinformation lmao.

Or I suppose that to you, making shit up is just as bad as other people telling someone to stop making shit up?

[OzyWho]

I didn't, on the contrary... not constructive and not fun. People are not trying to prove their point is right, they're trying to prove the others wrong out of spite.
I don't entirely agree on the not constructive part.
Despite what philosophers have thought about reasoning for 2000+ years, I do believe that the last 50+ years of experiments showcasing the human inadequacy of being objective on their own makes for a good case to believe in the hypothesis that human reasoning has evolved to only convince others and to judge the given reasonings of others in return.
There's value in someone being the devil's advocate, even if it starts flawed, because arguing is essential in my view.

Though I agree that it wasn't so productive here as of yet, but I'd definitely never discourage it and always welcome it for as long as it's honest and not just trolling.

[Oberon]

Big brain thought: leaving out 10% of an entire year won't make a big difference in number of deaths for that year.
And according to you the missing month is enough to account for the nee figure of 3.3mln deaths? Which is more than 10% btw?

If there was no COVID prior to March, and we assume COVID caused excess deaths, then we must also assume that the death toll PRIOR to covid would be lower than the death post-COVID. But this is not the case. 400,000 people died in January and 5 days if December - if we say that’s 10% of thw year then more people than expected died BEFORE COVID, which makes no sense lol

[oops_ur_dead]

And according to you the missing month is enough to account for the nee figure of 3.3mln deaths? Which is more than 10% btw?

If there was no COVID prior to March, and we assume COVID caused excess deaths, then we must also assume that the death toll PRIOR to covid would be lower than the death post-COVID. But this is not the case. 400,000 people died in January and 5 days if December - if we say that’s 10% of thw year then more people than expected died BEFORE COVID, which makes no sense lol

Where the fuck are you getting 3.3m deaths? Are you looking at WORLDWIDE deaths comparing them to total deaths in the US?

I have no idea what the fuck you're trying to say in the second paragraph. This is simple man. This doesn't even have to do with COVID, this is basic arithmetic. You're comparing an entire year of data in 2019 to 11 months of data in 2020 and drawing some weird conclusion about how excess deaths only increased by 2%. Even if you're right about COVID you're still making an extremely basic numbers mistake.

If you're actually not trolling I suggest you take the L here man. Even actual children know that you can't compare 12 months of numbers to 11 months of numbers.

[DJarJar]

And here’s what your precious little vaccine has done: https://www.myessentialnews.com/post/usdeaths
According to that website in terms of total deaths from all causes 2020 was an average year. Where is this unbelievably deadly virus coming into play?

2019 - 2,855,000
(source: https://www.myessentialnews.com/post/usdeaths or, as stated there, taken from cdc)

2020 - 3,358,814
(source: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e1.htm)

a 17.6% increase

now you guys can stop arguing and mag can pretend he didn't read this

OH and if you want to argue 17.6% more people dying is not a big increase, then you can look at your own site which shows the past 5 years with the highest increase of any of those years being 3.28%, or in other words, 1/5.37 vs. the increase from 2019-2020.

And this number includes january and february and the first half of march when covid had barely touched the US yet. So the number would look even WORSE for you mag if this were going from say april 2020 - april 2021.

[Renegade]

You know what's funny, is that I totally expected Oberon to be an anti vaxxer.

Vaccines are political now, it is sad.

[Renegade]

Americans (especially the right wing) have got way too used to "muh liberties" and lost all sense of what it means to live in a society.

Imagine these types in the WW2 era, USA would've lost the war.

Polio vaccine came out, there weren't anti vaxxers. You shut your fucking mouth, got in line, and got the shot.

It isn't always about you.

[Voss]

What would we do without oops.

[DJarJar]

cdc only goes through march 2021 so far so looks like if we do march 2020 - feb 2021 we get 3.523 million or a 23.4% increase over 2019, but oh my god it was an average year and covid did nothing

[Renegade]

cdc only goes through march 2021 so far so looks like if we do march 2020 - feb 2021 we get 3.523 million or a 23.4% increase over 2019, but oh my god it was an average year and covid did nothing

Hospital ICUs in the south are full, in September, way before a flu season.

But there's no problem here!

[Voss]

You know what's funny, is that I totally expected Oberon to be an anti vaxxer.

Vaccines are political now, it is sad.

I haven't seen him post about advocating to not get the vaccine, but if you do, let staff know so it can be deleted.

Unfortunately, we do allow blatant misrepresentation of arithmetic.

[Renegade]

I haven't seen him post about advocating to not get the vaccine, but if you do, let staff know so it can be deleted.

Unfortunately, we do allow blatant misrepresentation of arithmetic.

I guess I'm just assuming, reading between the lines of "And here’s what your precious little vaccine has done" kind of stuff.

But I haven't seen anything explicit.

Fake news!

[Renegade]

Texas introduced bounty laws for abortions, I think it is time for blue states to introduce bounty laws for vaxxines.

If someone gets sick from COVID and misses work, they can sue anyone they came in contact with that was unvaccinated in the past week for lost wages plus damages.

If someone dies because the ICU is full of anti vaxxers, they can all be sued for taking up critical resources for extremely easily preventable issues.

Repubs opened a can of worms if we are going to start to allow vigilante bounties to enforce laws.

[rumox]

texas

[Oberon]

Yeah the 3.3 mln deaths is bullshit :)
Sweden doesn’t have the same increase (in fact there is no increase, they’ve had worse years recently). The US and other developed countries have more ‘deaths’ but it’s funny how at the end of December there were 400,000 fewer deaths. Funny how that works.

[oops_ur_dead]

You're the one who brought up the 3.3m number you idiot lmao of course it's bullshit, nobody but you knows where it came from or what it means.

Your point about Sweden is another lie. You can literally look this up and find the numbers: https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/pong/tables-and-graphs/monthly-statistics--the-whole-country/population-statistics-2018-2021-month-and-1998-2020-year/

I have no idea where your 400k fewer deaths figure came from or what it means. Seems like you're just randomly throwing out numbers you read on random no-name blogs and Fox News segments without context.

Look man this has nothing to do with COVID at this point, you're just actually lying and spreading fake news to suit some political agenda. Every single one of your points so far has been demonstrably and objectively false. Surely it must give you pause when you think that it's a valid point to compare a sum total of 11 months of data to a sum total of 12 months of data and draw a conclusion about increase in that total. Honestly, if you genuinely think that's a valid approach and you're not trying to save face or trolling, then you really aren't nearly as good at figuring out numbers as you might think you are. I thought you went to university for this stuff?

[oops_ur_dead]

I'm gonna tap out tho lmao. It's not really possible to have an actual, intelligent discussion with someone who hasn't learned the difference between 11 and 12 yet.

[Oberon]

https://marketmonetarist.files.wordpress.com/2020/11/image-7.png

[oops_ur_dead]

https://i.imgur.com/ojYaZqM.png

This is the second time in the same thread that you've posted total death numbers for a year while leaving out an entire month of that year.

You've gotta be trolling dude. It takes actual mental deficiency to do this multiple times without realizing.

[rumox]

I have to believe this (https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/738/025/db0.jpg) is happening right now. No way you straight face said Sweden has seen a decrease of total deaths, only to link a graph that shows the deaths have increased? Am I missing something?

[Renegade]

https://marketmonetarist.files.wordpress.com/2020/11/image-7.png

Another random blog no one has ever heard of for a source?

Oh right, the MSM is compromised, the CDC is compromised, we have alternative facts.

[Renegade]

Amazing how the goofy right wingers point to Sweden. Sure I love Sweden, let's adopt their socialized system for the states, great idea! Finally we can get universal healthcare.

[Voss]

I guess I'm just assuming, reading between the lines of "And here’s what your precious little vaccine has done" kind of stuff.

But I haven't seen anything explicit.

Fake news!

nah, i think he's trying to imply that covid deaths are fake news, which is something some of my family members say.

i feel bad about moving this thread to circle jerk though, even though it's just one guy ruining the thread.

[Oberon]

nah, i think he's trying to imply that covid deaths are fake news, which is something some of my family members say.

i feel bad about moving this thread to circle jerk though, even though it's just one guy ruining the thread.
Moving this thread to circle jerk when a serious discussion is ongoing, and... the only one trolling was actually you with that half-assed comment about bashing libtards? LOL

[Oberon]

https://i.imgur.com/ojYaZqM.png

This is the second time in the same thread that you've posted total death numbers for a year while leaving out an entire month of that year.

You've gotta be trolling dude. It takes actual mental deficiency to do this multiple times without realizing.
That is the projected number of deaths you fucking idiot
here's a better graph that instead shows the mortality rate (not the total number of deaths).
https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:s teep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F 61bf3a9c-3e20-4c74-92f7-c21d970bb080_1074x663.jpeg

[Oberon]

Funny how that's not that high, is it? Literally every year prior to 2012/2013 was worse for Sweden than last year.

[Oberon]

2019 - 2,855,000
(source: https://www.myessentialnews.com/post/usdeaths or, as stated there, taken from cdc)

2020 - 3,358,814
(source: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e1.htm)

a 17.6% increase

now you guys can stop arguing and mag can pretend he didn't read this

OH and if you want to argue 17.6% more people dying is not a big increase, then you can look at your own site which shows the past 5 years with the highest increase of any of those years being 3.28%, or in other words, 1/5.37 vs. the increase from 2019-2020.

And this number includes january and february and the first half of march when covid had barely touched the US yet. So the number would look even WORSE for you mag if this were going from say april 2020 - april 2021.
Yeah funny how that works. On the 26th of December the number of deaths was around ~2.9mln but now it jumped up by 400,000. This actually does not make sense. If you think about it, the missing data was all from January + 5 days from December. That's 36 days (36 / 365 = ~10%). The extra 400,000 deaths in the final figure are more than 10% of that 3.3mln (I don't want to calculate how much that is and it's not really important, what's important is that it's >= 10%). BUT, 31 of those 36 days were before the pandemic arrived in the US so how could more than 10% have died in 10% of the year if that 10% was supposed to have a lower number of deaths (due to no COVID) than the rest of the year?

[oops_ur_dead]

That is the projected number of deaths you fucking idiot
here's a better graph that instead shows the mortality rate (not the total number of deaths).
https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:s teep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F 61bf3a9c-3e20-4c74-92f7-c21d970bb080_1074x663.jpeg

??? Why would you look at the projected number of deaths for 2020 when 2020 has already happened and we can see the actual number of deaths lmao

Idk where your chart came from but you realize that you can look at the actual Sweden Data Source SCB website and see the numbers for yourself and maybe have your first original thought in your life that didn't come from the media or a random WordPress blog

https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/pong/tables-and-graphs/monthly-statistics--the-whole-country/population-statistics-2018-2021-month-and-1998-2020-year/
https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/pong/tables-and-graphs/monthly-statistics--the-whole-country/population-statistics-2018-2021-month-and-1998-2020-year/
https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/pong/tables-and-graphs/monthly-statistics--the-whole-country/population-statistics-2018-2021-month-and-1998-2020-year/
https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/pong/tables-and-graphs/monthly-statistics--the-whole-country/population-statistics-2018-2021-month-and-1998-2020-year/
https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/pong/tables-and-graphs/monthly-statistics--the-whole-country/population-statistics-2018-2021-month-and-1998-2020-year/

https://i.imgur.com/VxefddX.png

Oh look it's the actual original source data from the Swedish mortality statistics

[Voss]

Moving this thread to circle jerk when a serious discussion is ongoing, and... the only one trolling was actually you with that half-assed comment about bashing libtards? LOL

So you are saying that covid deaths are fake?

[DJarJar]

Yeah funny how that works. On the 26th of December the number of deaths was around ~2.9mln but now it jumped up by 400,000. This actually does not make sense. If you think about it, the missing data was all from January + 5 days from December. That's 36 days (36 / 365 = ~10%). The extra 400,000 deaths in the final figure are more than 10% of that 3.3mln (I don't want to calculate how much that is and it's not really important, what's important is that it's >= 10%). BUT, 31 of those 36 days were before the pandemic arrived in the US so how could more than 10% have died in 10% of the year if that 10% was supposed to have a lower number of deaths (due to no COVID) than the rest of the year?

Yea, it states directly on the CDC page that they are provisional counts which experience a time lag in reporting and get updated as new data is received. Even on your site, it shows a screenshot indicating that only data from jan-june 2020 was available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/provisional-tables.htm when your author wrote his article.

Here is the direct source your author takes a screenshot of to get his death count for 2020 - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
Scroll down to the table and click the blue yearly button to see the count for 2020 is, as i am writing this, 3,390,023


28127

28128

If you're just going to insist the CDC had a conspiracy to first report a lower number to make the libs look bad and then later change it to a higher number to make the libs look good.... well then i don't know what to tell you. It would be a sad existence to only trust figures that agree with your political views. In that conspiracy warped world, why would the CDC have reported the "real" numbers initially?

Is it really so hard to believe that on feb 2nd 2021, the states and counties have not yet all reported their finalized death totals for 2020?

Even on your website, they show these two pictures:
28129

28130

Do you notice how march onwards all the death counts for 2020 are significantly higher than 2019, especially april the first month the pandemic hit in full swing?

28131

Notice the second wave hitting from thanksgiving->winter when idiots stopped following lockdown rules and started travelling again?

[DJarJar]

Yeah funny how that works. On the 26th of December the number of deaths was around ~2.9mln but now it jumped up by 400,000. This actually does not make sense. If you think about it, the missing data was all from January + 5 days from December. That's 36 days (36 / 365 = ~10%). The extra 400,000 deaths in the final figure are more than 10% of that 3.3mln (I don't want to calculate how much that is and it's not really important, what's important is that it's >= 10%). BUT, 31 of those 36 days were before the pandemic arrived in the US so how could more than 10% have died in 10% of the year if that 10% was supposed to have a lower number of deaths (due to no COVID) than the rest of the year?

and, by the way, 400,000 is only around 12% of 3.3 million, so it's not far off from 10% and again, your source took the figure at feb 2nd 2021, when not all death counts across all counties and states were finalized for 2020.

In fact, directly from the CDC site your source directly links repeatedly (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/provisional-tables.htm) it clearly states "Provisional counts may differ by approximately 2% from final counts, due to rounding and reporting variation."

So, there is literally all 12% of the difference accounted for. happy?

[DJarJar]

let's conspiracy theorize and say the 2% is made-up by the evil libs! Okay, take YOUR figure of 2.9 million which YOUR site shows is missing 10% of the year. Add 10% of 2.9 million to 2.9 million and you get 3.19 million, aka still a total increase of 11.7% over YOUR source's value for 2019.

Of course just adding an exact 10% is wrong and ignores variance in death rate throughout the year. The correct values are shown above, after all. Of course, if you believe covid is a hoax then january 2020 and the end of december 2020 should have been at the highest death rates of the year since it's in winter, so we'd have to add MORE than 10%. But even when we use only YOUR OWN source, even if we underestimated just to make you look better, you are STILL CLEARLY WRONG.

[Stealthbomber16]

Oberon

Exactly one year ago you posted this graph in the skwirl discord
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/366165788136177677/755147210517381346/image0.png
and we discussed how it's not accurate because it doesn't show all of the data. Your picture cut off 9 months of data. The graph displayed on the website cut off 5 months of data. You posted outdated data from a website that was already posting outdated data.

You literally ADMITTED to not reading all of the data.
https://i.ibb.co/sVvy9KH/truetrue.jpg

It is now a full year later.

My question to you is simple: how have you not learned in the last year that you need to do all of your own research before starting an argument? You can't just find random graphs from random sources. Anyone can make a graph look like how they want it to look. Hanlon's razor tells me that you aren't doing this on purpose, I don't think you're maliciously manipulating data to create a false premise because you're here trying to peddle it still. Where are you getting your data from? What is your method of finding these half-baked statistics?

[SuperJack]

weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

everyone is stupid!

[Voss]

It's sad that y'all have to expel so much effort to, point by point, deconstruct someone's argument; this individual being someone that has shown multiple times to wade into an argument refusing to even read sources let alone understand them.

[OzyWho]

It's sad that y'all have to expel so much effort to, point by point, deconstruct someone's argument; this individual being someone that has shown multiple times to wade into an argument refusing to even read sources let alone understand them.
Worlds purest contrarian.

[Plotato]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4PE9k25TEY

[Oberon]

and, by the way, 400,000 is only around 12% of 3.3 million, so it's not far off from 10% and again, your source took the figure at feb 2nd 2021, when not all death counts across all counties and states were finalized for 2020.

In fact, directly from the CDC site your source directly links repeatedly (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/provisional-tables.htm) it clearly states "Provisional counts may differ by approximately 2% from final counts, due to rounding and reporting variation."

So, there is literally all 12% of the difference accounted for. happy?
Here we go again. 10% of deaths came from a period when there was no COVID but that means that in that period there was an AVERAGE number of deaths compared to the rest of the year. How does that occur in the context of a deadly virus when the virus hadn’t even been introduced yet? It should be lower than 10% in January.

[Oberon]

DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND THAT IT DOESN’T MAKE SENSE FOR JANUARY TO HAVE THE SAME NUMBER OF DEATHS AS THE REST OF THE YEAR AS COVID HAD NOT BEEN INTRODUCED YET? IT SHOULD HAVE A LOWER NUMBER OF DEATHS.

it’s basic fucking math and common sense

[oops_ur_dead]

https://i.imgur.com/MqOInUP.png

January has fewer deaths than pretty much every other month lmao.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/figures/mm6826a5-F.GIF

Historically, number of deaths in January is higher than every other month. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/mm6826a5.htm

[oops_ur_dead]

It's sad that y'all have to expel so much effort to, point by point, deconstruct someone's argument; this individual being someone that has shown multiple times to wade into an argument refusing to even read sources let alone understand them.

It's not like it takes time, Oberon's posts are usually so fucking stupid that it takes like one minute to find some critical issue like leaving out an entire month's worth of data or cutting off a timeseries graph before COVID started.

I don't think Oberon will ever be convinced, he's too far gone. He even prides himself on not thinking critically. This is more about highlighting blatant misinformation and lying from him, for the sake of other people. I'm pretty sure Oberon has done more to hurt conservatives/Republicans than help by making it so obvious how bad their arguments and stances are.

[Oberon]

It's not like it takes time, Oberon's posts are usually so fucking stupid that it takes like one minute to find some critical issue like leaving out an entire month's worth of data or cutting off a timeseries graph before COVID started.

I don't think Oberon will ever be convinced, he's too far gone. He even prides himself on not thinking critically. This is more about highlighting blatant misinformation and lying from him, for the sake of other people. I'm pretty sure Oberon has done more to hurt conservatives/Republicans than help by making it so obvious how bad their arguments and stances are.
If I’m so wrong why are you spending so much effort attacking my intelligence? Lmao

[oops_ur_dead]

My severe ADHD mandates that I write at least an essay every time I post, but it only takes one sentence to invalidate your arguments.

[Renegade]

Where are you getting your data from? What is your method of finding these half-baked statistics?

Probably Parler, right wing loser twitter, people like Cernobitch and Cucker Carlson. "Alternative Media" these slapdash plandemic blogs are great I think he should share more of his sources.

*cue dumbfound cucker face here*

[Renegade]

https://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-12-at-10.15.20-AM.png

[Marshmallow Marshall]

What's not constructive is posting literal fake news and misinformation lmao.

Or I suppose that to you, making shit up is just as bad as other people telling someone to stop making shit up?

It's interesting that you spontaneously think my post was about you :P. You're far from being the only culprit here. But if the hat fits...

For the record, I too wonder where the heck Mag is getting his data from lol. But you all are trying to prove eachother wrong instead of simply seeking truth and trying to prove your point constructively (now you'll say that in your case it's legitimate because he's the one bringing in weird data and interpretations, but you also did before the weird data). It's not healthy, it's not fun, and it's not useful. Like, there's no reason to carry on.

And Ozy, I wasn't saying debate is bad at all. I was saying this was not debate, but rather what could be colloquially described as shit flinging. I'm a big fan of the former, but deeply dislike the latter.

[Stealthbomber16]

It's sad that y'all have to expel so much effort to, point by point, deconstruct someone's argument; this individual being someone that has shown multiple times to wade into an argument refusing to even read sources let alone understand them.

The point of an argument like this isn’t to change the individuals mind but to provide a theatre for people who maybe aren’t so sure or haven’t done the research.

[Voss]

The point of an argument like this isn’t to change the individuals mind but to provide a theatre for people who maybe aren’t so sure or haven’t done the research.

It'd be nice to have just some sort of copy/paste block showing that Oberon doesn't read and shouldn't be taken seriously. Kind of hard to do that from this thread because there are so many blocks of content.

Then again, eventually someone could point to that block and call it stale.

[Oberon]

Americans (especially the right wing) have got way too used to "muh liberties" and lost all sense of what it means to live in a society.

Imagine these types in the WW2 era, USA would've lost the war.

Polio vaccine came out, there weren't anti vaxxers. You shut your fucking mouth, got in line, and got the shot.

It isn't always about you.
Yeah I am pretty sure Jefferson Davis said something similar about Abraham Lincoln wanting to abolish slavery.

[Voss]

It's interesting that you spontaneously think my post was about you :P. You're far from being the only culprit here. But if the hat fits...

For the record, I too wonder where the heck Mag is getting his data from lol. But you all are trying to prove eachother wrong instead of simply seeking truth and trying to prove your point constructively (now you'll say that in your case it's legitimate because he's the one bringing in weird data and interpretations, but you also did before the weird data). It's not healthy, it's not fun, and it's not useful. Like, there's no reason to carry on.

And Ozy, I wasn't saying debate is bad at all. I was saying this was not debate, but rather what could be colloquially described as shit flinging. I'm a big fan of the former, but deeply dislike the latter.

The things you are referring to as "shit flinging" happened after someone tried to derail the thread with implications of a voodoo fake numbers conspiracy. Which was not what the original thread was about.

It'd have been much more tactical and pragmatic for Oberon to present the findings first and say hey, I'm confused as to why the numbers are changing/inconsistent/not following logical trends. Instead he lead with "THE LEFT IS COMMITTING TERRIBLE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS", which is super antagonistic and not debate friendly. And now it seems you're surprised and disappointed that it has turned into a "shit flinging" where everyone is trying to disprove everyone (but you really mean Oberon here). Although you really shouldn't be.

One really shouldn't try to approach serious debates like a mafia game. There's no need to be antagonizing or reaction testing or to try and convince people to do something. Proper constructive debates would be more productive if you read the room you're dealing with, try to see where your stance is, where their stance is, and find the fundamental differences as to why you disagree.

Oberon has said many many times he's so proud to be antagonizing ("that's just my personality"), proud to not read other people's sources in a topic, nor his own. This is not good faith debating, and you defending everyone does not contribute to that environment that you (and I) seek/wish to have here.

I really prefer Ozy's way of approaching and talking about these more taboo positions and topics. He genuinely seems to be interested in other people's opinions and asks questions. I don't really mind that there isn't the follow through as I like to think all parties in the discussion have gained something valuable from the exchange.

[oops_ur_dead]

It's interesting that you spontaneously think my post was about you :P. You're far from being the only culprit here. But if the hat fits...

For the record, I too wonder where the heck Mag is getting his data from lol. But you all are trying to prove eachother wrong instead of simply seeking truth and trying to prove your point constructively (now you'll say that in your case it's legitimate because he's the one bringing in weird data and interpretations, but you also did before the weird data). It's not healthy, it's not fun, and it's not useful. Like, there's no reason to carry on.

And Ozy, I wasn't saying debate is bad at all. I was saying this was not debate, but rather what could be colloquially described as shit flinging. I'm a big fan of the former, but deeply dislike the latter.

What is the alternative? Should we ignore someone trying to blatantly spread misinformation and fake data/news?

[oops_ur_dead]

It'd be nice to have just some sort of copy/paste block showing that Oberon doesn't read and shouldn't be taken seriously. Kind of hard to do that from this thread because there are so many blocks of content.

Then again, eventually someone could point to that block and call it stale.

Warning: By his own admission, Oberon purposefully does not read, evaluate, nor think critically about any opinion he disagrees with, and in fact, he often does not even read or evaluate his own sources. When discussing matters of politics with him, it is safe to assume anything he posts is a falsehood unless evaluated independently by yourself or another person. Any discussion with him will end in an intellectual black hole, as he will refuse to consider other viewpoints and ignore your posts, and never admit that anything he has posted is wrong even if proven so. Tread carefully.

[Voss]

Warning: By his own admission, Oberon purposefully does not read, evaluate, nor think critically about any opinion he disagrees with, and in fact, he often does not even read or evaluate his own sources. When discussing matters of politics with him, it is safe to assume anything he posts is a falsehood unless evaluated independently by yourself or another person. Any discussion with him will end in an intellectual black hole, as he will refuse to consider other viewpoints and ignore your posts, and never admit that anything he has posted is wrong even if proven so. Tread carefully.

I'm seriously considering making this my signature.

[Renegade]

Yeah I am pretty sure Jefferson Davis said something similar about Abraham Lincoln wanting to abolish slavery.

Now that's a twisted response. Comparing getting a vax (and saving lives) to slavery.

Delusional.

[yzb25]

What is the alternative? Should we ignore someone trying to blatantly spread misinformation and fake data/news?

Are you actually concerned anyone on the site would be swayed by mag's posts tho? Conversely, can you name a single republican/conservative leaning person on the site who reads these threads and has their mind changed after seeing mag's points dismantled? I really struggle to see the positive utility to this discussion, on a political level.

[Voss]

Are you actually concerned anyone on the site would be swayed by mag's posts tho? Conversely, can you name a single republican/conservative leaning person on the site who reads these threads and has their mind changed after seeing mag's points dismantled? I really struggle to see the positive utility to this discussion, on a political level.

I guess the other alternatives here would be to do nothing and let fake interpretations grow here, or close the thread immediately? Are those or any other alternatives better?

[Voss]

I guess the other alternatives here would be to do nothing and let fake interpretations grow here, or close the thread immediately? Are those or any other alternatives better?

err close the thread immediately when the content veers off topic.

[Oberon]

err close the thread immediately when the content veers off topic.
Since the infraction you gave me is bullshit as other people insulted me and I wasn’t the first to start on the personal insults, I’ll give you something real to infract me for: suck my cock!

[oops_ur_dead]

Are you actually concerned anyone on the site would be swayed by mag's posts tho? Conversely, can you name a single republican/conservative leaning person on the site who reads these threads and has their mind changed after seeing mag's points dismantled? I really struggle to see the positive utility to this discussion, on a political level.

I agree, Mag probably doesn't really convince anyone (tho I do recall someone actually being swayed to vote for Biden where they were undecided before because of one of these discussions, I forget who). But I also don't like the idea of allowing anyone to effectively spam misinformation and fake news. What should happen, in your opinion?

[Renegade]

suck my cock!

hot

[yzb25]

I agree, Mag probably doesn't really convince anyone (tho I do recall someone actually being swayed to vote for Biden where they were undecided before because of one of these discussions, I forget who). But I also don't like the idea of allowing anyone to effectively spam misinformation and fake news. What should happen, in your opinion?

Stealth's opinion was swayed due to different discussions happening simultaneously, iirc. It wasn't really connected to any shitfling with mag.

May I ask why the thought of allowing people to "spam misinformation and fake news" causes you distress? Personally, it bothers me when I'm concerned it will spread. I don't care if a television is playing fox news in a secluded forest, and I'm the only one who happens to see it. And I care much more when powerful people spread fake news than randos on the internet.

Anyway, to answer the question, in my ideal world, each person would try to exercise self control and reply only to posts they find interesting, or when they think a valuable discussion could come out of it. If they struggle to see the value of the subsequent discussion, they wouldn't hit send. Inane posts would be ignored, or given a short but polite reply - in other words, a level of attention befitting the value of the post. They certainly wouldn't be goaded into further arguing for their views, because that physcally increases the length and quantity of inane discussions.

[OzyWho]

Are you actually concerned anyone on the site would be swayed by mag's posts tho? Conversely, can you name a single republican/conservative leaning person on the site who reads these threads and has their mind changed after seeing mag's points dismantled? I really struggle to see the positive utility to this discussion, on a political level.
I think most would never had double checked the stats that Mag posted, if oops didn't start it.
I know I wouldn't have.

[DJarJar]

Stealth's opinion was swayed due to different discussions happening simultaneously, iirc. It wasn't really connected to any shitfling with mag.

May I ask why the thought of allowing people to "spam misinformation and fake news" causes you distress? Personally, it bothers me when I'm concerned it will spread. I don't care if a television is playing fox news in a secluded forest, and I'm the only one who happens to see it. And I care much more when powerful people spread fake news than randos on the internet.

Anyway, to answer the question, in my ideal world, each person would try to exercise self control and reply only to posts they find interesting, or when they think a valuable discussion could come out of it. If they struggle to see the value of the subsequent discussion, they wouldn't hit send. Inane posts would be ignored, or given a short but polite reply - in other words, a level of attention befitting the value of the post. They certainly wouldn't be goaded into further arguing for their views, because that physcally increases the length and quantity of inane discussions.

May I ask why the thought of allowing people to argue with mag causes you distress?

Mag and oops seem to enjoy themselves enough or else idk why they’d keep initiating these things

Personally when I see some BS from mag it inspires me to actually research the subject myself, looking at the sources and determining the truth for myself. If not for him, I’d likely be almost completely isolated away from his viewpoints which worries me a little. I don’t want to live in an echo chamber and forget how to critically think like so many others. So I guess you could say I see it as a bit of helpful exercise that also leads to me learning more about issues I might otherwise ignore.

[SuperJack]

Sometimes I don't think Mag actually beleives what they say, and just like taking the hottake on arguements.
Mag can be very intelligent when they choose to be.

Sometimes I think they do all this so that people actually look into the curent issue/topic to really learn about it.

I've solved it. Its all a psycological trick by mag to make everone else better people.

[oops_ur_dead]

Stealth's opinion was swayed due to different discussions happening simultaneously, iirc. It wasn't really connected to any shitfling with mag.

May I ask why the thought of allowing people to "spam misinformation and fake news" causes you distress? Personally, it bothers me when I'm concerned it will spread. I don't care if a television is playing fox news in a secluded forest, and I'm the only one who happens to see it. And I care much more when powerful people spread fake news than randos on the internet.

Anyway, to answer the question, in my ideal world, each person would try to exercise self control and reply only to posts they find interesting, or when they think a valuable discussion could come out of it. If they struggle to see the value of the subsequent discussion, they wouldn't hit send. Inane posts would be ignored, or given a short but polite reply - in other words, a level of attention befitting the value of the post. They certainly wouldn't be goaded into further arguing for their views, because that physcally increases the length and quantity of inane discussions.

I'll be honest man, I mostly debate because it's fun. It's like a never-ending series of logic puzzles where you gotta spot the mistake in each individual post.

I'm a bit less optimistic about how impressionable people are than you are. I think that seeing unchallenged points, especially when they're falsified to be provocative, makes a subtle subconscious impression on people. Especially when the same talking point is seen multiple times in different contexts. I know I've personally repeated talking points and factoids that actually ended up being false when I looked into them and I had no idea where I even picked them up from.

As aamirus said, it's also useful to look into the viewpoints of other people, and also understand how they think.

Maybe I'm also still hopelessly optimistic that mag will one day get tired of always being wrong and take a close look at himself to figure out why that is. That is, if he isn't trolling, which I can't be sure of.

[OzyWho]

I'll be honest man, I mostly debate debunk because it's fun. It's like a never-ending series of logic puzzles where you gotta spot the mistake in each individual post.
Fixed it for you. ^.^:cheesy:

Edit: also, yeah, I'd 100% had taken the posted statistics at face value if it wasn't for oops and aamirus. I appreciate that.

[Oberon]

Ya know, I wasn’t gonna say this out of respect for yzb but I find it deeply ironic that Voss egged me on (and then infracted me) yet doesn’t believe the CDC could be lying.

[Oberon]

Warning: By his own admission, Oberon purposefully does not read, evaluate, nor think critically about any opinion he disagrees with, and in fact, he often does not even read or evaluate his own sources. When discussing matters of politics with him, it is safe to assume anything he posts is a falsehood unless evaluated independently by yourself or another person. Any discussion with him will end in an intellectual black hole, as he will refuse to consider other viewpoints and ignore your posts, and never admit that anything he has posted is wrong even if proven so. Tread carefully.
What the fuck are you even on about? Literally nothing was proven wrong. I am disputing the CDC data because it’s garbage. 400,000 extra deaths literally makes no sense. How does one fail to report a death? It is literally the most clear outcome you could have - dead or not dead. It’s not even deaths with COVID which we could be debating about. And yet they missed out on so many deaths? Btw if we say that 266,000
people died in January then the death rate is actually off by 6% - 3 times the amount that the CDC gave! Bullshit.

Also funny how that 0.4mln figure corresponds closely to the number of deaths from COVID - 0.377mln

[Oberon]

Ya know, I wasn’t gonna say this out of respect for yzb but I find it deeply ironic that Voss egged me on (and then infracted me) yet doesn’t believe the CDC could be lying.
I also find it funny people use such terms as antivaxxer to describe those reticent about the vaccine. The COVID vaccine is not like other vaccines, for 3 big reasons. Many people are in doubt over the lethality of COVID so telling them to get the vaccine for something that is fairly benign is a bit much, it offers little advantage (and also little risk but from their perspective the risk is unnecessary). Second, it is actually abusive to force people to get vaccinated, and illegal. And immoral. Funnily all these people are probably thr same crowd who would be very pro-abortion but the second an old white man tells them what to do with their bodies they jump right along. My body = your choice? If you believe that people shoild be pressured into getting vaccinatrd (which doesnt really make sense, as the vaccine is not inoculating), then make that your motto! LOL

Third, unlike other vaccines which have a decade or more of research behind them, the COVID vaccine is a year old. Not sure who’s the ‘antivaxxer’ here in terms of thinking ability.

[oops_ur_dead]

What the fuck are you even on about? Literally nothing was proven wrong. I am disputing the CDC data because it’s garbage. 400,000 extra deaths literally makes no sense. How does one fail to report a death? It is literally the most clear outcome you could have - dead or not dead. It’s not even deaths with COVID which we could be debating about. And yet they missed out on so many deaths? Btw if we say that 266,000
people died in January then the death rate is actually off by 6% - 3 times the amount that the CDC gave! Bullshit.

Also funny how that 0.4mln figure corresponds closely to the number of deaths from COVID - 0.377mln


I also find it funny people use such terms as antivaxxer to describe those reticent about the vaccine. The COVID vaccine is not like other vaccines, for 3 big reasons. Many people are in doubt over the lethality of COVID so telling them to get the vaccine for something that is fairly benign is a bit much, it offers little advantage (and also little risk but from their perspective the risk is unnecessary). Second, it is actually abusive to force people to get vaccinated, and illegal. And immoral. Funnily all these people are probably thr same crowd who would be very pro-abortion but the second an old white man tells them what to do with their bodies they jump right along. My body = your choice? If you believe that people shoild be pressured into getting vaccinatrd (which doesnt really make sense, as the vaccine is not inoculating), then make that your motto! LOL

Third, unlike other vaccines which have a decade or more of research behind them, the COVID vaccine is a year old. Not sure who’s the ‘antivaxxer’ here in terms of thinking ability.

Warning: By his own admission, Oberon purposefully does not read, evaluate, nor think critically about any opinion he disagrees with, and in fact, he often does not even read or evaluate his own sources. When discussing matters of politics with him, it is safe to assume anything he posts is a falsehood unless evaluated independently by yourself or another person. Any discussion with him will end in an intellectual black hole, as he will refuse to consider other viewpoints and ignore your posts, and never admit that anything he has posted is wrong even if proven so. Tread carefully.

[Voss]

I also find it funny people use such terms as antivaxxer to describe those reticent about the vaccine. The COVID vaccine is not like other vaccines, for 3 big reasons. Many people are in doubt over the lethality of COVID so telling them to get the vaccine for something that is fairly benign is a bit much, it offers little advantage (and also little risk but from their perspective the risk is unnecessary). Second, it is actually abusive to force people to get vaccinated, and illegal. And immoral. Funnily all these people are probably thr same crowd who would be very pro-abortion but the second an old white man tells them what to do with their bodies they jump right along. My body = your choice? If you believe that people shoild be pressured into getting vaccinatrd (which doesnt really make sense, as the vaccine is not inoculating), then make that your motto! LOL

Third, unlike other vaccines which have a decade or more of research behind them, the COVID vaccine is a year old. Not sure who’s the ‘antivaxxer’ here in terms of thinking ability.

Vaccine mandates and abortions are a false equivalency and a Faux News talking point. And I'm pretty sure we can talk about vaccines without expanding the scope into abortions.

But I'm not surprised. Reminds me of the time you started ranting about climate change when we were talking about riots and protests. Typical Oberon tactic to change the subject when they debate gets tough. Is this the point where we start talking about Texas and guns and maybe George Floyd?

[OzyWho]

Yeah funny how that works. On the 26th of December the number of deaths was around ~2.9mln but now it jumped up by 400,000. This actually does not make sense.
Ftr, I'm pretty sure this's due to bureaucracy.
At the end of the year, especially where government is concerned, everything has to be set in order so the new upcoming year can be started from a blank slate.

Maybe someone here has experience in bookkeeping or accounting for government thingies, or something like that, and elaborate on that a little? But yeah, AFAIK that's normal - unless I'm misunderstanding something here, which might well be the case.

[DJarJar]

mag source - updated dec 31, 2020 and containing provisional data from 2/1/2020 - 12/26/2020
2,913,144 deaths

Mag's site shows january 2020 had:
264,000 deaths.

2,913,144 + 264,000 = 3,177,144 deaths.

Let's stop here for you mag. 3,177,144 deaths from Jan 1 2020 to Dec 26 2020 as listed on your site.

Your site lists 2019 as 2,855,000.

3177144 / 2855000 = an 11.28% increase.

Are these numbers simple enough for you to follow? Are we just going to insist now that even the numbers coming directly from your site are fake? Oberon

[oops_ur_dead]

Vaccine mandates and abortions are a false equivalency and a Faux News talking point. And I'm pretty sure we can talk about vaccines without expanding the scope into abortions.

But I'm not surprised. Reminds me of the time you started ranting about climate change when we were talking about riots and protests. Typical Oberon tactic to change the subject when they debate gets tough. Is this the point where we start talking about Texas and guns and maybe George Floyd?

Ironic how liberals think it's okay to force people to take vaccines that kill you but get mad when cops force George Floyd to die (btw George Floyd actually died of fentanyl overdose).

[oops_ur_dead]

New conspiracy theory: George Floyd took the experimental COVID vaccine, they knew he was gonna die, so they got some cops to stage a killing to cover up the dangers of the vaccine.

I figured it out.

[Stealthbomber16]

I also find it funny people use such terms as antivaxxer to describe those reticent about the vaccine. The COVID vaccine is not like other vaccines, for 3 big reasons. Many people are in doubt over the lethality of COVID so telling them to get the vaccine for something that is fairly benign is a bit much, it offers little advantage (and also little risk but from their perspective the risk is unnecessary). Second, it is actually abusive to force people to get vaccinated, and illegal. And immoral. Funnily all these people are probably thr same crowd who would be very pro-abortion but the second an old white man tells them what to do with their bodies they jump right along. My body = your choice? If you believe that people shoild be pressured into getting vaccinatrd (which doesnt really make sense, as the vaccine is not inoculating), then make that your motto! LOL

Third, unlike other vaccines which have a decade or more of research behind them, the COVID vaccine is a year old. Not sure who’s the ‘antivaxxer’ here in terms of thinking ability.

I can maybe concede on hesitancy for the third point but the other two are just closed minded…

1. It is extremely easy to find statistics and cases of COVID’s lethality, as demonstrated in this thread. Even a mild increase in deaths would demonstrate that covid is potentially lethal, and we’ve shown a more-than-mild increase. r/HermanCainAward

2. I agree that it’s abusive to force someone to get vaccinated… good thing you can choose to not get vaccinated, right? The government is not forcing us to get vaccinated (at least in the US. Can’t speak for Romania.) It is NOT illegal for an employer to force employees to be vaccinated. If you don’t like it, you’ll have to find other work. I view it the same as other, normal drug tests.

Abortion is a completely unrelated topic that is generally based around ethical/moral issues and doesn’t really have a place in this discussion so I won’t address that point.

[Voss]

I think it was already mentioned in the thread that having concern about getting the vaccine due to how long its been out is related to the following points.

- the flu vaccine is also redone every year
- the technology behind the vaccine is not one year old. Having a concerns out this is similar to someone having concerns about getting into a 2021 honda odyssey.

[Voss]

I'd love to hear how those two equivalencies are false though.

[OzyWho]

I think it was already mentioned in the thread that having concern about getting the vaccine due to how long its been out is related to the following points.

- the flu vaccine is also redone every year
- the technology behind the vaccine is not one year old. Having a concerns out this is similar to someone having concerns about getting into a 2021 honda odyssey.
That was my concern, among others.
You make it sound like my individual concerns reflect that of everyone.

I'm fairly certain that the most popular concern against the vaccines around the world is people seeing more and heavier side effects from them as they should from published statistics.

There's a little bit of double standard in that regard on the web, as I see it. On the one hand - seemingly everything has been linked to long term effects of the virus and it needs more testing/research/studies. On the other hand - don't worry about the possible vaccine side effects, as disastrous as some of the cases it might be, because they're rare, no need for more research.

Some people knowing personally more cases of bad side effects than should be statistically likely might make for an anecdotal case, as that's not how statistics work. And it doesn't help that so many rely on "I heard of that one guy who personally knows x cases of y side effect". But I see it as a perfectly human reason for concern.


Btw, SB16, here in my country - teachers are (technically not for a few months still) forced to vaccinate to be allowed to work as teachers. And even without that, the amount of restrictions people have if not vaccinated makes for a bad case for "you've a choice".
That teacher thing is weird tbh. Because children are not a risk group, while on the other hand doctors, who're in contact with risk groups daily, are not mandated to get vaccinated. :/

[Voss]

That was my concern, among others.
You make it sound like my individual concerns reflect that of everyone.

I'm fairly certain that the most popular concern against the vaccines around the world is people seeing more and heavier side effects from them as they should from published statistics.

There's a little bit of double standard in that regard on the web, as I see it. On the one hand - seemingly everything has been linked to long term effects of the virus and it needs more testing/research/studies. On the other hand - don't worry about the possible vaccine side effects, as disastrous as some of the cases it might be, because they're rare, no need for more research.

Some people knowing personally more cases of bad side effects than should be statistically likely might make for an anecdotal case, as that's not how statistics work. And it doesn't help that so many rely on "I heard of that one guy who personally knows x cases of y side effect". But I see it as a perfectly human reason for concern.



I will repeat that if one's qualms for taking the vaccine are primarily the length of time it's been around, they should be equally hesitant of "new" technologies such as cars or even new generation cell phones. It is true that the virus has been around only for a year and a half (almost 2?) and we don't know a lot about it, but mRNA technology is not new at all.




Btw, SB16, here in my country - teachers are (technically not for a few months still) forced to vaccinate to be allowed to work as teachers. And even without that, the amount of restrictions people have if not vaccinated makes for a bad case for "you've a choice".
That teacher thing is weird tbh. Because children are not a risk group, while on the other hand doctors, who're in contact with risk groups daily, are not mandated to get vaccinated. :/

Ozy, are your doctors private sector workers, and the teachers public sector workers? That could explain why the mandate exists for teachers and not doctors. Also, isn't it "whataboutism" to say that teachers shouldn't be vaccinated because doctors don't have a mandate?

[OzyWho]

I will repeat that if one's qualms for taking the vaccine are primarily the length of time it's been around, they should be equally hesitant of "new" technologies such as cars or even new generation cell phones. It is true that the virus has been around only for a year and a half (almost 2?) and we don't know a lot about it, but mRNA technology is not new at all.
yah, I'm just saying how you made it sound like.




Ozy, are your doctors private sector workers, and the teachers public sector workers? That could explain why the mandate exists for teachers and not doctors.
I don't follow tbh. AFAIK, both are present in both - private and public sectors - and neither is above law.

Regardless though, looking this up - I seem to have missed something. They're apparently waiting The European Medicines Agency to finish their research, probably October, approving that it's safe to vaccinate children from age 5; they're discussing wether or not to mandate children from that age to vaccinate. Discussion about teachers is not even a discussion.
Looking more into it, it seems that the French Government has mandated that children aged 12 to 17 must be vaccinated by 30 September 2021 - so at least we're not the first by any means.



Also, isn't it "whataboutism" to say that teachers shouldn't be vaccinated because doctors don't have a mandate?
True. But that doesn't nullify that "what about" concern, nor excuse the double standard imho. But you're right.

[Stealthbomber16]

Regardless though, looking this up - I seem to have missed something. They're apparently waiting The European Medicines Agency to finish their research, probably October, approving that it's safe to vaccinate children from age 5; they're discussing wether or not to mandate children from that age to vaccinate. Discussion about teachers is not even a discussion.
Looking more into it, it seems that the French Government has mandated that children aged 12 to 17 must be vaccinated by 30 September 2021 - so at least we're not the first by any means.

I could see how someone might be put off by this. Fair enough.

[HentaiManOfPeace]

Since you agree with forced vaccinations because they are good you must also agree with slavery because it is undoubtedly similarly effective? A workforce that works for free is every manager’s dream.

Vaccinations aren't anywhere as evil as slavery, you dumbass fuck. Maybe this pandemic was needed to wipe out people with lower intellect such as yourself.

I work as a risk engineer and I've already calculated the risk of getting side effects of ALL of the vaccine types are less than the chances of dying with COVID-19. We're talking 3-4 significant figures worth of risk difference.

Feel free to be tough about not wearing a mask. I'll be laughing in a year when you contract that shit as I'll be at 100% lung diffusion capacity when you can only run half the distance you used to.

[OzyWho]

I could see how someone might be put off by this. Fair enough.
The school that my mom works in has a boy who looks like he'll likely die from his vaccine. Something with the heart, idk the details.
The teachers are not big fans of this discussion of mandating vaccines on children that's going around.

[oops_ur_dead]

That was my concern, among others.
You make it sound like my individual concerns reflect that of everyone.

I'm fairly certain that the most popular concern against the vaccines around the world is people seeing more and heavier side effects from them as they should from published statistics.

There's a little bit of double standard in that regard on the web, as I see it. On the one hand - seemingly everything has been linked to long term effects of the virus and it needs more testing/research/studies. On the other hand - don't worry about the possible vaccine side effects, as disastrous as some of the cases it might be, because they're rare, no need for more research.

Some people knowing personally more cases of bad side effects than should be statistically likely might make for an anecdotal case, as that's not how statistics work. And it doesn't help that so many rely on "I heard of that one guy who personally knows x cases of y side effect". But I see it as a perfectly human reason for concern.


Btw, SB16, here in my country - teachers are (technically not for a few months still) forced to vaccinate to be allowed to work as teachers. And even without that, the amount of restrictions people have if not vaccinated makes for a bad case for "you've a choice".
That teacher thing is weird tbh. Because children are not a risk group, while on the other hand doctors, who're in contact with risk groups daily, are not mandated to get vaccinated. :/

I disagree about your statement that we aren't "allowed" to worry about vaccine side effects. I actually think it's the opposite, that people are being extremely cautious about the vaccines and that you haven't heard of a huge number of problems should be reassuring. If you remember, early in 2021 world governments pretty much shut down the AZ vaccine because of a scare about an increased number of blood clots. Even though an extremely small number of people had it, and tbh I don't even think a causal link or even a conclusive correlation was established, a lot of countries stopped vaccinating people with AZ, and a lot of countries still don't vaccinate young people with it. Even though many more children have died from COVID (children are, of course, very unlikely to die from COVID) than everyone who's died from these supposed vaccine-linked blood clots.

Long-term side effects are a scare point. No vaccine has ever had long-term side effects, with the exception of viruses that for whatever reason are deadlier upon second infection (like dengue fever). All adverse effects are limited to 2 months post-vaccination. Meanwhile, COVID has been shown to have long-term side effects, such as reduced lung capacity due to tissue damage, neurological symptoms, and effects on fertility. It's bizarre to me that people worry more about long-term effects from a vaccine than the virus itself, you know the virus is also just as new as the vaccine and we have just as little data about its long-term effects, right?

Vaccine mandates are also nothing new, they've happened before, they just haven't been politicized and turned into a wedge issue. When I moved to the US I had to get blood tests showing I have specific vaccines for them to even let me in. They even had to test me for tuberculosis.

[Renegade]

The school that my mom works in has a boy who looks like he'll likely die from his vaccine. Something with the heart, idk the details.
The teachers are not big fans of this discussion of mandating vaccines on children that's going around.

Anecdotes like these without any real information are just scare tactics.

[Renegade]

7 billion people breath air a day, some of them die the next day.... Hmmmmmm.... makes you wonder

[OzyWho]

Anecdotes like these without any real information are just scare tactics.
I don't think anyone's laughing nor plotting malevolent tactics.

[Voss]

I think the better word is confirmation bias, Renegade.

[Voss]

isn't it?

[OzyWho]

I think the better word is confirmation bias, Renegade.
Don't you think it'd have been slightly better of you to ask for circumstances before making any presumptions?
Like, I don't think there'd be any confirmation bias involved if he was rushed to hospital right after the injection. I don't know the full story. But these presumptions I'm hearing here of "evil deliberate scare tactics" or proclaiming confirmation bias before knowing any of the circumstances - they're worrying to see for me.

[Renegade]

Don't you think it'd have been slightly better of you to ask for circumstances before making any presumptions?
Like, I don't think there'd be any confirmation bias involved if he was rushed to hospital right after the injection. I don't know the full story. But these presumptions I'm hearing here of "evil deliberate scare tactics" or proclaiming confirmation bias before knowing any of the circumstances - they're worrying to see for me.

I mean, that's what I'm saying.

Saying things like "so and so a friend of so and so said someone who got the shot is dying from it".

Need more information.

Otherwise, why say it at all?

[OzyWho]

I mean, that's what I'm saying.

Saying things like "so and so a friend of so and so said someone who got the shot is dying from it".

Need more information.

Otherwise, why say it at all?
Fair enough.

[Voss]

Don't you think it'd have been slightly better of you to ask for circumstances before making any presumptions?
Like, I don't think there'd be any confirmation bias involved if he was rushed to hospital right after the injection. I don't know the full story. But these presumptions I'm hearing here of "evil deliberate scare tactics" or proclaiming confirmation bias before knowing any of the circumstances - they're worrying to see for me.

I genuinely thought saying something is confirmation bias is nicer than scare tactics, bc the latter implies something sinister.

[Voss]

I admit, if my mom died from the vaccine, i'd probably find it hard to advocate getting the vaccine, but (barring something genetic), I should still try and remember death from covid is orders of magnitude more likely.

That's hypothetical me fighting confirmation bias, right?

[SuperJack]

Hi I'm SuperJack

[Helz]

On the issue of numbers dead from the vaccine when I looked at the CDC data set a while back I want to say it was around 20 something thousand. I was going to pull it up to reference here but it looks like now you have to get approved to view it and such. Probably to curve an anti-vax argument.

I personally still wont get it given its effective time line. It does not look like infection rates are really being impacted. I also question how the argument changes to 'Its not suppose to prevent you from getting it, its suppose to make it less lethal if you get it' when discussions about people getting it who are already vaccinated. That basically invalidates the ethical premise for mandating it by saying 'if everyone got it the problem would go away.' And if that was the goal wouldent it make more sense to get 7.7 billion vaccinations stocked up and do everyone at once?

Still, I think the risk of death is tiny and if they come out with one that lasts forever, or even at least 10 years or so I will probably go for it. Until that happens I don't think this pandemic will ever end.

Something tangential I am curious about hearing you guys thoughts on is the molnupiravir treatment. I was talking with my family about it who have careers in healthcare and they saw it as the largest risk. It basically hurts the virus by mutating it which greatly increases the chances for the virus to create another stable (and potentially more deadly/contagious) variant in a virus that is otherwise extremely low mutating. Im not sure if this is something discussed in news outlets or not given I dont really use them but I have been surprised how many people I have talked to about it have not even herd of the issue.

[Helz]

It looks like most scientists no longer consider it an appropriate management strategy for the virus that causes COVID-19.

-The vaccine does not prevent individuals that have it from spreading it
-The vaccine does not totally prevent individuals that have it from getting sick
-The vaccine is effective for a very short amount of time
-Only 70% of Americans got the vaccine sense it was available (Some due to the dangers of getting it)
-Production and supply chain limitations make it improbable to have everyone get the vaccine at once for 3-6 months which seems the only way to achieve herd immunity

Im curious if anyone's opinion has changed. Especially on the note of mandated vaccines and boosters. I feel like requiring individuals to take the risks involved with the vaccine is only justified by the potential of eliminating it and if herd immunity is not attainable its not ethical.