Science is now cancelled? [USERS NOW BANNED FOR POLITICS]

[Burkey]

It's been proven the jab does not stop infection, so if you get the jab and the infection your chances for long term side effects are doubled.

The problem with using absolutes is that I only need to find one exception to ”the rule” and I can throw your entire argument away.
Ergo, if the vaccine prevents infection in ONE person, I can prove that it does in fact “stop” infection.

Use your words properly.

Sponsored

 

[K4fxd]

Ergo, if the vaccine prevents infection in ONE person, I can prove that it does in fact “stop” infection.

I'll bet you always win the game "twister"

 

[Burkey]

I'll bet you always win the game "twister"

It’s not my fault that you try to use simplistic languange to describe more complex ideas.

 

[K4fxd]

It’s not my fault that you try to use simplistic languange to describe more complex ideas.

Seriously?

On what planet does what I said not make sense?

Here I'll quote myself...

It's been proven the jab does not stop infection, so if you get the jab and the infection your chances for long term side effects are doubled.

So to use your own logic, if I can find ONE person who the jab did not stop from getting infected I am correct.
If I can find one person who develops long term side effects, I am correct.
So in conclusion, If getting the virus can cause long term side effects and the jab can cause long term side effects, if you get both your chances for long term side effects have doubled.

 

[sk47]

You do not get to make the rules, nor will I allow you to force me into such an answer. The naturally immune get to decide for themselves. The unvaccinated get to decide for themselves. The authorities do not get to decide for them. There was no need to write all the other guff you have on copy / paste.

These ARE the rules. Governments employ advisers who have to give advice and then they act upon it. The question is a simple one, should we advise people to be vaccinated or not based on the information we / you have. It is all very well you saying the 'naturally immune' decide for themselves, but how do they know they are naturally immune when you know that they may not be post recovery. All information you know that has been provided to you, so what is your advice to them ? The authorities are not deciding for them, they are advising together with healthcare professionals.

It seems you like to moan and criticise, but when it comes down to it if the decision was yours you cannot make it. Governments and healthcare professionals have to provide advice all the time. You are advised not to smoke or drink excessively. This is no different.

AGAIN what is your advice - vaccinate or not. It really is a simple question with a binary answer

Hello; I already answered the question. Here is my comment.
"The naturally immune get to decide for themselves. The unvaccinated get to decide for themselves. The authorities do not get to decide for them"
"The authorities get to make a case for the shots as best they can. We individuals get to weigh the choices and make a decision."

 

[Gregs24]

What if infection harmed the baby? The virus hasn’t been around long enough to have any data for this….

See, we can both play that game.
You can call it an experimental vaccine, I can call it an experimental virus.

As to your argument re financial burden of hospitalisation, well yes, if the individual wants to pay for their treatment out of their own pocket directly, that would have no financial impact on other people. But they tend to have health insurance do they not? Or is my understanding flawed?

There is no evidence that COVID does any harm to the unborn child BUT if the mother is ill premature delivery is a very real problem.

 

[Burkey]

Seriously?

On what planet does what I said not make sense?

Here I'll quote myself...

So to use your own logic, if I can find ONE person who the jab did not stop from getting infected I am correct.
If I can find one person who develops long term side effects, I am correct.
So in conclusion, If getting the virus can cause long term side effects and the jab can cause long term side effects, if you get both your chances for long term side effects have doubled.

*sighs*
If you say that something CANNOT happen and I show an example of it happening, you’re clearly wrong. Right?

You said the jab “doesn’t“ (meaning CANNOT) stop infection. It DOES prevent infection in MOST people.

Now, I didn’t say that the vaccine would prevent infections in ALL people, primarily because I’m not an idiot.
So, your argument is basically a strawman.

Nobody said that long term side-effects can’t happen either, so again, you’re presenting another strawman.

I can’t believe I had to explain this to you.

 

[Burkey]

There is no evidence that COVID does any harm to the unborn child BUT if the mother is ill premature delivery is a very real problem.

I realise this, but I’m simply making the point that we can all make claims that lack evidence if that’s the way they want to play the game.

 

[sk47]

You can call it an experimental vaccine, I can call it an experimental virus.

Hello; I can find some agreement and some disagreement with this statement. The shots and the virus may both have been created in a lab.
The thing is when we become infected such is not done on purpose the way taking a shot is.
The tone of your posts have been a mix of gloom and doom if we all do not take the shots and that those who do not take the shots are social lowlife types who do not care for their fellow man.

Yet many weeks to months ago and again recently when I posted support for more to get a first shot before some get a second or third as a way to help the greater number of people, the idea got no traction. That a person who needs a transplant deserves to be denied because of not taking a shot. I can go on with this double standard thinking.

Here is one more point little responded to. The shots are new as a medicine injected into people on such a massive scale. I get some of the wishful thinking. I want the shots to be just as safe as you seem to think they are. But if by some yet unknown mechanism there are to be serious bad side effects, then having a large number who did not take them can be a species saving thing.

 

[K4fxd]

I can’t believe I had to explain this to you.

I had to explain it to you because you try to put new meaning to what is said. I'm not a lawyer so I use general terms for the most part. If you want to read posts from a lawyer's perspective I suggest finding a law forum.

I for one will not write 6 paragraphs to define the meaning of the word "is"

 

[GT Pony]

To be fair, the same statement applies to the vaccinated.

True ... and that's by a booster shot is recommended for at least certain people now. Just like a booster is recommended for someone who's already had Covid.

 

[K4fxd]

Just like a booster is recommended for someone who's already had Covid.

Recommended is one thing, MANDATED is another. Yes if having to show proof to enter a business or keep your job that is a mandate or forced.

 

[sk47]

*sighs*
If you say that something CANNOT happen and I show an example of it happening, you’re clearly wrong. Right?

You said the jab “doesn’t“ (meaning CANNOT) stop infection. It DOES prevent infection in MOST people.

Now, I didn’t say that the vaccine would prevent infections in ALL people, primarily because I’m not an idiot.
So, your argument is basically a strawman.

Nobody said that long term side-effects can’t happen either, so again, you’re presenting another strawman.

I can’t believe I had to explain this to you.

Hello; Vaccine immunity does not stop us from being infected. It is not like a bio-hazard suit which keep the virus out. We can be vaccinated and/or have natural immunity then pick up a load of the virus. Once the virus is in our bodies the immune system is ready to fight the virus from the get go. With very good luck the virus is stopped right away. With poor luck the virus invades a few cells but does not do to too much damage.

I guess it may be another spin on the wording, but i do recall lots of times the shots have been called very safe. I could go back and find lots of such comments. I have been contending the shots possibly may have long term side effects for months now and have been getting criticism for such . Good that at least one of you is seeing the light.

 

[GT Pony]

Recommended is one thing, MANDATED is another. Yes if having to show proof to enter a business or keep your job that is a mandate or forced.

Go find someplace else to live where you don't have to follow any rules, regulations, mandates or laws that are made as a goal to end a pandemic and better all people involved.

 

[K4fxd]

Go find someplace else to live

Luckily, or rather I chose to live in a relatively free State.

Sponsored