Unofficial Off Topic Thread

[sk47]

The New COVID Vaccine Roll-Out Is Off to a 'Nightmare' Start as Unsuspecting Customers Get Slapped with Big Bills (msn.com)

New Covid shots cost around $200. Not paid for by increasing the national debt anymore. Guess it is just as well they were ineffective ( at least the earlier ones. No good unbiased evaluation as yet.)

Sponsored

 

[K4fxd]

Now we know for sure the reason they pushed the jab so hard. 200 per shot. It probably was 4 or 500 per dose when we tax payers were footing the bill.

Step right up, get your 200 dollar placebo* and we will shame you into getting a booster in 3 months for another 200.

I'll take "things that don't work" for 200 Alex

*If this is a traditional vaccine it will work until the virus mutates again.

 

[sk47]

Now we know for sure the reason they pushed the jab so hard. 200 per shot. It probably was 4 or 500 per dose when we tax payers were footing the bill.

Step right up, get your 200 dollar placebo* and we will shame you into getting a booster in 3 months for another 200.

I'll take "things that don't work" for 200 Alex

*If this is a traditional vaccine it will work until the virus mutates again.

Hello; Been thinking about why even after the mRNA Covid vaccines failed to be as effective as was hoped, they were pushed so hard for so long. A fair number of possible explanations come to mind. One I have thought about has to do with the anticipated future value of the medical tech behind mRNA.
By that I mean since techniques surrounding the handling of DNA and RNA have improved over the decades some promising new ways to use this tech are possible. One of the advantages of an mRNA vaccine was how quickly such a vaccine can be cooked up. Impressively fast compared to the traditional methods of making a vaccine.

I even understand why the outfits behind mRNA sought to "save the day" with a quickly made Covid19 vaccine. What I do not know is when they began to understand the limitations of the vaccine. We all followed the "change the goalposts" way the rhetoric around the vaccines changed from the start of the release. A result is many do not have faith in the newest vaccine and will not take it. Had the mRNA vaccine gamble worked it would have been lauded as a miracle and set the stage for a new sort of medical path.

I am not ready to throw mRNA medical tech away as I can still see potential. I imagine important things were learned during the past Covid use. I suppose it is possible this most recent Covid vaccine has benefitted from such learning. Should be possible to know if honest information can be had. I will not be taking the new shots. Was offered one at my last doctor visit. I refused. I did take the tetanus shot.
However, there will be plenty of folks who will take the new shots. If none or almost none of them get the newest mutation of Covid such will be a clue.

 

[K4fxd]

However, there will be plenty of folks who will take the new shots. If none or almost none of them get the newest mutation of Covid such will be a clue.

Problem is they don't test anymore unless you ask. My grand daughter had a sore throat and runny nose. I took her to the Dr and they tested her for strep. That came back neg and they then told me it was viral and it would go away in a week. Last year the first thing they did was test for covid. I asked if it could be covid and they said we can test her if you want, I refused.

I am not ready to throw mRNA medical tech away as I can still see potential.

The biggest promise with this technology will be cancer cures. My Father had access to the congressional health insurance plan. He had stage 4 lung cancer which had metastasized into his brain. He was given a 3 month life expectancy.

The plan he was on paid for experimental treatments. He was given an mRNA drug that kept him alive for almost 6 years. (I really want to make a comment here about the health plans.)

Been thinking about why even after the mRNA Covid vaccines failed to be as effective as was hoped, they were pushed so hard for so long. A fair number of possible explanations come to mind. One I have thought about has to do with the anticipated future value of the medical tech behind mRNA.

The biggest reason is always follow the money. I guarantee 99% of the people in power pushing the Jabs had interests in the drug companies. Either stocks or campaign contributions. I'm sure there were and might still be kick backs to Dr's.
It is a standard practice in retail to give "spiffs" to people for selling certain items.

I know Radio Shack gave an extra 20 dollars for every cell phone sold.

 

[sk47]

Hello; Some observations about this story.

Why you might want to wait to get the new COVID booster (msn.com)

Who can get the new COVID vaccine? (thehill.com)

“One expert on the 14-member panel voted against the majority, saying the new shots should initially be kept only for older people and those at risk of severe illness. However, that person was overruled 13 to 1.”

“it’s not clear how many people will rush to get an updated dose. Only 17% of the U.S. population is up to date on the COVID vaccine series, according to CDC data.”

Hello; I have not been as keenly keeping up with the Covid virus as I did before. I learned about virus infections spreading to a new host species decades ago. A characteristic then as now being the virus starts to be more infectious to the new host and less virulent (less deadly or causes less serious disease) after it has passed thru a new host population long enough. Covid is now endemic and will be with us much like the flu virus. Most of us will not die but ,of course, some will. Similar to a flu.

Guess I should do “a follow the money” take on this new Covid shot as wisely suggested. Perhaps it looks like 83% of the population are avoiding all covid shots.

Frequently Asked Questions about COVID-19 Vaccination | CDC

“Yes. COVID-19 vaccines are working well  to prevent severe illness, hospitalization, and death. However, public health experts are seeing reduced protection over time against mild and moderate disease, especially among certain populations, which is why vaccination recommendations are updated”

“But you may want to consider waiting even longer, the CDC acknowledges. Because you get some natural immunity from a recent infection, waiting up to 3 months to get a booster shot could “extend that protection out by delaying,” explained Dr. Jeffrey Duchin, health officer in Seattle and King County, in a recent briefing on updated vaccinations.”

CDC study: COVID vaccine stronger than natural immunity (news10.com)

“CDC study: COVID vaccine stronger than natural immunity by: Dan Thorn, Nexstar Media Wire

Posted: Oct 30, 2021 / 04:44 PM EDT Updated: Oct 30, 2021 / 04:44 PM EDT”

Hello; Note the date of the link saying the shots are stronger than natural immunity.

 

[sk47]

New COVID Boosters Not Widely Tested in Humans — How Do We Know They Work? (msn.com)



“Dr. Yang described mRNA vaccines as a limited “mock version” of the virus that helps our bodies develop immunity to it without ever actually having to get COVID. So, when we are exposed to the virus itself, our immune system has already produced some of the antibodies necessary to help fend it off, similar to the way other vaccines work.”



Hello; The above is the only part of the story of interest to me just now. The rest of the story seems to be about how the new shots do not need extensive trials before being injected into potentially millions above the age of six months. I will not be in a hurry to get the new shot.

My interest is similar to the same thing I and others took a stance on years ago. It is the human immune system which fights off an infecting virus. The mRNA shots may trigger an immune response to very limited parts of the virus. Specilically some of the external protein spikes.

Others can take up the discussion about the value of the shots. The point I wish to stress is the mRNA Covid shots do not kill a virus nor in any way prevent infection. The shots trigger an immune response of the body to do the tasks. A natural immunity response. The same and likely better response triggered if you happen to be infected by the virus and do recover. The thinking being an infection by the actual virus gives the immune system the entire virus to make antibodies for. All of the spike proteins, not just a few.

Please note- I am not proposing someone get infected as a substitute for taking a shot. That bonehead notion was repeatedly posted a couple years ago. I am again taking the stance that someone who Happens To be infected with acquire a natural immunity following recovery from the infection. That having recovered from the virus naturally ought to mean you have a natural immunity to some strains of the virus.

Take the new shot as you will. Looks like it will cost around $200.

Frequently Asked Questions about COVID-19 Vaccination | CDC

“Yes. COVID-19 vaccines are working well  to prevent severe illness, hospitalization, and death. However, public health experts are seeing reduced protection over time against mild and moderate disease, especially among certain populations, which is why vaccination recommendations are updated”

 

[sk47]

US doctor sounded major alarm over Wuhan lab safety two years before Covid outbreak (msn.com)
Hello; interesting read.

 

[RagmopInKona]

Now we know for sure the reason they pushed the jab so hard. 200 per shot. It probably was 4 or 500 per dose when we tax payers were footing the bill.

Step right up, get your 200 dollar placebo* and we will shame you into getting a booster in 3 months for another 200.

I'll take "things that don't work" for 200 Alex

*If this is a traditional vaccine it will work until the virus mutates again.

I got covid 3 times AFTER getting the pokes, managed to not get it till then. Wife was forced to get them for her job, and has tested + 6 times since, but wasn't even sick for years till the poke.
As soon as they pushed everyone most have health insurance, I figured this type thing would start.
Call it tin hat all you want but the world has an aging population, and no way to fund the public retirement ponzi scheme.
This is the way they cull the hurd of older retired that are huge cost to the system. Call it crazy, but most that passed were in nursing home care.
Time will tell, your grand kids will know for sure when the files get un classified . But a illness that only takes out those with costly medical problems, seems susp.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Great; now we have to watch out for falling anti-matter too

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03043-0

 

[Caballus]

Hello; Clear that you have the talking points down pat.

Haha. Talking points? That's a good one. Talking points of for politicians (a profession I have little time for, to put it mildly). I guess I can use the talking points to run for local dog catcher LOL. Anyway, thanks for the laugh. I admire your sense of humor.

From the well used gambit of what is a pitbull type dog. That somehow the reports of fatal attacks are not accurate because the dog may not be a true pitbull to this new one to me that "pitbulls are by definition a cross-breed. So, what is a purebred pitbull would be the first question" I will settle for any dog which has the physical characteristics of a pitbull type. They are pretty distinctive in the way they look.

Sounds like the Supreme Court definition of porn, "I know it when I see it." You have YOUR definition and everyone else has THEIR definition. So, per your point, there is no such thing as a pure bred pitbull and the classification is unclear and useless from a legal perspective.

I do not know if she "trained" the dog to kill small animals. Pretty sure a bloodhound can pick up scents without being trained. I concede a person will have to somehow let the dog know if a particular scent is to be followed.

Your husky did not need to be trained to kill chickens. How prevalent are chickens in Siberia? Any dog needs to be trained and conditioned. Without it, no dog is predictable.

The very common "it is the owner" is something i have heard often. I did have a link to a story about a man who raised two pit types from pups. He did not show up for work and could not be reached. He was found in his home after having been killed by his own dogs. My next door neighbor, before he died, had a Pitt also raised from a pup. One day it turned on one of his family. Now I saw for years how he and his family treated their other dogs. EDIT- no reason to think the pitt was somehow badly treated. They were good to the other dogs.

There is also no reason to think the dog was well trained. He may have had chicken dowsed in hot sauce strung around his neck. The interweb is definitely a thorough and reliable source.

I will not dispute the "socialize" a dog to not kill chickens. Never tried it. At the time I did not have any chickens. After a while my neighbor did not have any either. But I do not plan to have another dog so likely will not have need.

Herein lies the issue. If someone has never trained or socialized a dog using techniques we now know work, there's no way to blame a dog for its actions. It's no different than tying a woman to a chair and determining that she's a witch if she drowns when we dunk her in a lake or thinking that tying hotsauce soaked chicken around a dog's neck will teach it something positive--outdated thinking.

How about we consider the type of dog most of us think of as pittbull types to be that. Pure bred or no I can pick one out. If someone has one they need to figure a lot of folks will see it the same way and not let one run loose. Keep it on a stout lead. Better yet have a muzzle on it. That way I will not be wary. Better I do not feel the need to act first. Same for a german shepard, a rottweiler and other big dogs.

Punish dogs for our own irrational fears. Interesting approach.

Admittedly, my perspective is limited. It's from a combination of personal hobby under normal conditions as well as combat experience with dogs. In the latter environment, like people, you see what each well-trained individual is really all about. From that limited perspective, I conclude that no matter how we slice it, it comes back to training and conditioning. There are no bad breeds, only irresponsible owners. Otherwise, everyone has an opinion.
https://nypost.com/2023/09/28/dog-trainer-shares-3-dog-breeds-he-would-never-own/

The answer to the question, what is my point. Point is dogs have been used for sport fighting longer than the Victorian era.

Thanks. I get it now. I thought you were talking specifically about so-called "pitbulls," a (non)breed that is only a couple hundred years old and does not trace its lineage to Roman fighting dogs. Guess I made the mistake of reading what you actually wrote:

I hate pitbulls. They have been bread to fight for thousands of years.

 

[K4fxd]

Triggered are you?

If a breed of dog is bread to fight for thousands of years and you cross it with dogs of a different breed. Then breed that line for fighting characteristics for hundreds of years, it can be said that dog has been bred for fighting for thousands of years.

 

[Caballus]

Triggered are you?

If a breed of dog is bread to fight for thousands of years and you cross it with dogs of a different breed. Then breed that line for fighting characteristics for hundreds of years, it can be said that dog has been bred for fighting for thousands of years.

Huh? Is that like, if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

 

[Caballus]

Triggered are you?

If a breed of dog is bread to fight for thousands of years and you cross it with dogs of a different breed. Then breed that line for fighting characteristics for hundreds of years, it can be said that dog has been bred for fighting for thousands of years.

Seems like you are the one who is triggered LOL:

 

[sk47]

Punish dogs for our own irrational fears. Interesting approach.

Admittedly, my perspective is limited. It's from a combination of personal hobby under normal conditions as well as combat experience with dogs. In the latter environment, like people, you see what each well-trained individual is really all about. From that limited perspective, I conclude that no matter how we slice it, it comes back to training and conditioning. There are no bad breeds, only irresponsible owners. Otherwise, everyone has an opinion.

Hello; I see you are not going to leave this alone. I figure the "punish" part in your mind is my suggestion some dogs ought to have a muzzle when out and about. Maybe you even include being on a stout leash.
Now I get the point. From dogs are wonderful and people (including bad owners) are the overall problem point of view. I am sure dogs do not like to wear a muzzle. From having dogs, myself I also know they like to run free when out and about.
From your point of view my attitude is out of date. I will plead guilty to that. A thing which ought to be obvious is pretty much all current dog owners do not train and socialize their dogs. At least the owners I know. I will even admit if I ever have another dog i will try some of the up to date approaches at training.

However, if I see a big dog when out and about, I will personally be some relaxed if it is on a stout lead held by a strong enough person. I will be even more relaxed if that big dog has a muzzle on its snout. That way I will not have to get ready to kill the dog and deal with the owner. This is the main point. The dog may not like to be on a lead. May even hate a muzzle but could save some lives including the dogs.

I refer to the episode posted when three boxers came at me. I intended to do my best to kill as many as I could. I did not have to try as the dogs responded to the owners call to stop and come back to him. That was a decent outcome. Not great because the prospect of fending off three decent sized dogs was going to be a problem. For a short time, I expected to be mauled.
I knew from experience with a German Shepard about putting the bicycle between me and the dog. But that was one dog.

But hey, I get it. From your point of view dogs are not the problem. It is the bad owners. Do you ever show up after a child has been mauled to explain that to the child's parents?

 

[sk47]

Man admits dangerous-dog attack on police horse (msn.com)

“A video posted on social media shows a dog repeatedly biting the horse, which tries to jump up and turn away.’

“The force said the dog began attacking the horse "unprovoked" and Candermir was unable to control the dog or get him away from PH Urbane.”

“The Met said it was at this point Candermir put the dog back on a lead - "after no attempt to help during the incident".”

"This very shocking event could have been easily avoided if the dog was being responsibly looked-after and was on a lead.”

"This case illustrates why always having control of your dog is so important."

Hello; No information as to if the dog was put down which would be my preference. Taken from the owner would be my next preference.

This is of interest in that the attack was against a horse. Animal lovers may have a dilemma.

Just the first dog attack story after making my prior post a few minutes ago. The reports of dog attacks are reported pretty much every day.

Sponsored