Covid Shots

[ctandc72]

No doubt this is complex stuff especially since our understanding of the human body and how it all works is still pretty surface for the most part. But that doesn't mean you start doubting all the people who have spent their lives doing the work because it's less convenient for your narrative. That's dishonest at best and malicious at worst.

I'm not being flip - but if you don't do your own research and you legitimately listened to one of the major news channels - say ABC, CNN, NBC........and listened to CDC guidance, you would have been amused when everyone was buying masks. Because CDC said not to use one, unless you were caring for or around a person who was sick.

Then not very long after it was "wear a mask for everyone's safety".

There were literally people in February on TV promoting local gatherings / events in large cities. There were politicians who said any restrictions on inbound flights from certain countries was not helpful..........this was AFTER the CDC and WHO knew were the initial COVID Infections originated and how it was spreading.

Then CDC's own website made the mistake of posting that COVID was "airborne" (beyond droplets from sneeze / cough). That mistake was recognized by the CDC and taken down.

Do you see where I'm going?

"Listen to the experts" - "Listen to the science."

Okay - I get that. But when would a regular person start to question that the "Experts" might not know much more than the guy with a laptop - since they change their guidance so much?

I don't take anyone's word for important issues without doing my own research. That's just me. And my research isn't a news website or an op ed piece, no matter the publication.

When I want to learn how bad or good a proposed bill / legislation is for example - I go to the source and read the document itself. It's public information. You know how many people I've had call me a liar or accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist when I pointed out FACTS straight from a piece of proposed (or passed) legislation that I read myself - because they heard different from "experts"?

Enough to not argue anymore.

Sponsored

 

[Burkey]

I'm not being flip - but if you don't do your own research and you legitimately listened to one of the major news channels - say ABC, CNN, NBC........and listened to CDC guidance, you would have been amused when everyone was buying masks. Because CDC said not to use one, unless you were caring for or around a person who was sick.

Then not very long after it was "wear a mask for everyone's safety".

There were literally people in February on TV promoting local gatherings / events in large cities. There were politicians who said any restrictions on inbound flights from certain countries was not helpful..........this was AFTER the CDC and WHO knew were the initial COVID Infections originated and how it was spreading.

Then CDC's own website made the mistake of posting that COVID was "airborne" (beyond droplets from sneeze / cough). That mistake was recognized by the CDC and taken down.

Do you see where I'm going?

"Listen to the experts" - "Listen to the science."

Okay - I get that. But when would a regular person start to question that the "Experts" might not know much more than the guy with a laptop - since they change their guidance so much?

I don't take anyone's word for important issues without doing my own research. That's just me. And my research isn't a news website or an op ed piece, no matter the publication.

When I want to learn how bad or good a proposed bill / legislation is for example - I go to the source and read the document itself. It's public information. You know how many people I've had call me a liar or accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist when I pointed out FACTS straight from a piece of proposed (or passed) legislation that I read myself - because they heard different from "experts"?

Enough to not argue anymore.

So you want scientists to make proclamations of absolute certainty and then stick by them for eternity, regardless of the changing evidence?

 

[ctandc72]

So you want scientists to make proclamations of absolute certainty and then stick by them for eternity, regardless of the changing evidence?

You read my post - and that's what you got out of it? Seriously?

No worries - have a good one.

 

[jtmat]

You read my post - and that's what you got out of it? Seriously?

No worries - have a good one.

That was the main point of your post....

I wouldn't own it either....

 

[Burkey]

You read my post - and that's what you got out of it? Seriously?

No worries - have a good one.

Okay - I get that. But when would a regular person start to question that the "Experts" might not know much more than the guy with a laptop - since they change their guidance so much?

I don’t know how. I must be confused....

 

[sk47]

There you go again making assumptions. Already did, many posts back. I have no real or apparent conflicts of interest from any commercial entity. I actually work for a large non-profit health care organization.

Hello; Well good for you and the organization to be distributing the vaccine and not taking any pay nor charging the taxpayers. I can admire that even if I do not always agree with you.

 

[ctandc72]

Hello; Well good for you and the organization to be distributing the vaccine and not taking any pay nor charging the taxpayers. I can admire that even if I do not always agree with you.

Not to be that guy - but I've known plenty of people who make pretty hefty salaries working for "non-profits".

 

[CEHollier]

I am a physical therapist with a sound base of medicine and science. My personal opinion on the COVID19 vaccine is 99.8% of the people who get it survive. IMO the vaccines were rushed through. I'm healthy and have zero comorbidity risks. I'm going to sit back and let everyone who wants the vaccine now BETA test it and decide later if I will take it. Better the devil I know than the one I don't.

 

[Elvis67]

Not to be that guy - but I've known plenty of people who make pretty hefty salaries working for "non-profits".

$670 billion are earned by nonprofit organizations annually. So I'm sure he is doing fine .

 

[sk47]

Not to be that guy - but I've known plenty of people who make pretty hefty salaries working for "non-profits".

Hello; So I may be thinking of organizations like RAM (Remote Area Medicine) which holds free medical clinics in TN several times a year. They do it in TN because TN allows any person with a valid medical license from another state to come in and practice at these clinics. Many states will not let outsiders practice in their state. They do get donations to help cover the expenses.

They treat people for no charge in barns, gyms, civic centers, any any large building they can get. People who do not have any insurance can just show up. They had such a clinic on the LMU (Lincoln Memorial University) campus not far from me. People will line up in the wee hours of the morning to get dental work, eye glasses and outpatient medical care. I currently have a portion of my will to go to that organization if there is anything left.

 

[sk47]

$670 billion are earned by nonprofit organizations annually. So I'm sure he is doing fine .

Hello; Interesting.

 

[shogun32]

So you want scientists to make proclamations of absolute certainty and then stick by them for eternity, regardless of the changing evidence?

the CDC has been dogmatically sticking to the Masks or else mantra despite ALL of their studies posted on their site going back 15 years, and even the most recent one say they don't work. Nobody with a brain claims a <2% change as a significant finding, but only the dishonest CDC has the hutzpah to publish it's less than 2% results (just like all the other studies) and then declare that masks are effective because we said so.

I have no problem scientists jumping the gun, getting something badly wrong and then APPOLOGIZING for it. But changing the narrative on the sly, or refusing to address challenges in an open and fair-handed manner puts paid the lie that they are following the science. That was the problem with the HCQ "studies" they pretended to undertake - they rigged it, then ignored their peers calling them out on their dishonesty, and steadfastly claim their test is the gospel truth. Nobody would be upset if they did the studies HONESTLY and showed that indeed it didn't work as previously claimed.

The AZ vax is getting ripped by US officials no less for failure to properly disclose. Right or wrong AZ stacked the pool 1:2 ratio. The NIH/CDC had a major cow over a 1:2 population ratio when it was over an Ivermectin study. Just watch them brush that aside when discussing AZ.

As none of us are privy to the internal deliberations of the powers at be, all we can do is speculate as to why the obvious efforts are not being expended to find treatments but instead it's vax, vax, vax all day and all night. I'm sure the people sitting in a hospital staring a 40% chance of eventual death would appreciate some interest shown their way.

 

[CJJon]

the CDC has been dogmatically sticking to the Masks or else mantra despite ALL of their studies posted on their site going back 15 years, and even the most recent one say they don't work. Nobody with a brain claims a <2% change as a significant finding, but only the dishonest CDC has the hutzpah to publish it's less than 2% results (just like all the other studies) and then declare that masks are effective because we said so.

I have no problem scientists jumping the gun, getting something badly wrong and then APPOLOGIZING for it. But changing the narrative on the sly, or refusing to address challenges in an open and fair-handed manner puts paid the lie that they are following the science. That was the problem with the HCQ "studies" they pretended to undertake - they rigged it, then ignored their peers calling them out on their dishonesty, and steadfastly claim their test is the gospel truth. Nobody would be upset if they did the studies HONESTLY and showed that indeed it didn't work as previously claimed.

The AZ vax is getting ripped by US officials no less for failure to properly disclose. Right or wrong AZ stacked the pool 1:2 ratio. The NIH/CDC had a major cow over a 1:2 population ratio when it was over an Ivermectin study. Just watch them brush that aside when discussing AZ.

As none of us are privy to the internal deliberations of the powers at be, all we can do is speculate as to why the obvious efforts are not being expended to find treatments but instead of vax, vax, vax all day and all night. I'm sure the people sitting in a hospital staring a 40% chance of eventual death would appreciate some interest shown their way.

Masks don't work? What bullshit...like almost all of your posts.

 

[Rinzler]

the CDC has been dogmatically sticking to the Masks or else mantra despite ALL of their studies posted on their site going back 15 years, and even the most recent one say they don't work. Nobody with a brain claims a <2% change as a significant finding, but only the dishonest CDC has the hutzpah to publish it's less than 2% results (just like all the other studies) and then declare that masks are effective because we said so.

I have no problem scientists jumping the gun, getting something badly wrong and then APPOLOGIZING for it. But changing the narrative on the sly, or refusing to address challenges in an open and fair-handed manner puts paid the lie that they are following the science. That was the problem with the HCQ "studies" they pretended to undertake - they rigged it, then ignored their peers calling them out on their dishonesty, and steadfastly claim their test is the gospel truth. Nobody would be upset if they did the studies HONESTLY and showed that indeed it didn't work as previously claimed.

The AZ vax is getting ripped by US officials no less for failure to properly disclose. Right or wrong AZ stacked the pool 1:2 ratio. The NIH/CDC had a major cow over a 1:2 population ratio when it was over an Ivermectin study. Just watch them brush that aside when discussing AZ.

As none of us are privy to the internal deliberations of the powers at be, all we can do is speculate as to why the obvious efforts are not being expended to find treatments but instead it's vax, vax, vax all day and all night. I'm sure the people sitting in a hospital staring a 40% chance of eventual death would appreciate some interest shown their way.

So damn annoying. The CDC has not proclaimed that masks prevent Covid. They have never claimed that they prevent Covid. They HAVE claimed that it reduces the chance of transmission by blocking large droplets. That's it. That's all.

You all or nothing people are literally the worst. You make a bad faith argument, then claim correctness in the fact that your own bad faith argument is full of holes. You are making yourself seem the victor by arguing points that don't need to be made or are flat out incorrect.

This is the reason everyone is confused. THIS IS. Not because of changing guidance. The CDC saying we don't need masks, getting more evidence, then saying that we do is not confusing. It's not suspicious. It's not malicious. It's not dishonest. It's how the information works.

This is a classic case of some people needing to sit the hell down.

 

[CJJon]

$670 billion are earned by nonprofit organizations annually. So I'm sure he is doing fine .

My company puts back hundreds of millions of dollars into our community every year. Part of our charter actually. We spend huge sums in health related research too (all self-funded, no conflicts) that you have benefited from.

Sponsored