- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Just had my annual physical
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:22 am to lsu777
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:22 am to lsu777
quote:
No, no they didn't, thats why the fda issued a notice that it should be monitored. Link your claim?
Dude. LINK
quote:
"I cannot make a direct connection with the vaccine and suspect this is a coincidence," Dr. Hinman says. "The normal incidence of Bell's palsy is roughly 20 people out of 100,000. The Pfizer study examined 38,000 patients, so four cases would be within the normal observed incidence of Bell's palsy."
1 of the placebo recipients also got Bells Palsy.
They have to issue a notice because that can't completely rule it out because no one knows what causes Bells Palsy in normal occurrences.
quote:
You seem to be ignoring anything that doesn't fit your agenda and calling it misinformation.
No. Its literally misinformation.
quote:
And I showed you yesterday tons of headli es that show the media has been pushing the whole "the vaccine and antibodies only give you 3-6 months immunity"
Almost all of those headlines were "at least" 3 months. People, looking for affirmation, change "at least" to "only" in their own heads.
quote:
I have given you tons of rational reasons why people are not going to run out and take the vaccine.
And most of it is based off misinformation and statistical outliers.
quote:
when having a vaccine for a virus that has a mortality rate of less than .03% for those under 60, is the definition of having a vaccine for statistical outliers.
I see as the exact same thing as the flu shot
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:30 am to Salmon
I didn’t link a “failed FDA approval.” I linked an article showing that the FDA was actively complicit in allowing Purdue to market Oxy as a long term care treatment knowing there was no data to back such a claim. That’s not a failed approval, that’s active participation in something to the public’s detriment.
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:31 am to Dixie Normus
And I never claimed the FDA was infallible.
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:34 am to lsu777
quote:
You aren't making sense. You are saying its irrational to not be in a hurry to take a vaccine for a virus that you virtually have zero chance of having serious complications from? Knowing the virus constitutes a greater chance of complications like bells palsey? Talk about irrational.
My response was predicated on the assumption that you were not planning to get the vaccine due to Covid having a 99% survival rate. You’ve been arguing that and I hadn’t seen where you said you were planning to get the vaccine up until now, so I thought it was a safe assumption.
Plus, my response still applies to anyone who is pro flu-shot and gets the flu shot, but does not want to get the Covid vaccine because chances of Covid survival are high.
There is also no direct link between the Covid vaccine and Bell’s palsey. That’s been debunked.
quote:
Just like you statement above which said someone is irrational for not choosing the option that constitutes the greater risk. How fricking warped is that?
Constitutes a greater risk of what?
I only said it’s illogical for a person to say “I’m not getting the Covid vaccine because I am healthy and have a 99% chance of surviving Covid” while at the same time saying “I get the flu vaccine every year”.
If you aren’t getting the vaccine because you don’t trust it, then that’s your opinion. My opinion is the distrust is based on misinformation. The people developing and regulating the vaccine are much smarter than I am and have dedicated their lives to their profession, I’ll defer to them and consult published studies/journals for additional data/information.
This post was edited on 12/17/20 at 8:36 am
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:40 am to jordan21210
I've never once heard anyone use the "why would anyone get a vaccine for a virus with a 99% survival rate" line towards the flu shot.
Ever.
How and why is that rationale suddenly become so popular?
Ever.
How and why is that rationale suddenly become so popular?
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:43 am to Salmon
Thanks for the link, I had saw 16 people had gotten it, 4 is well with in range.
But again, its being blasted all over by the media, can you blame people for being worried?
Atleast 3 months and if you read the articles it says they expect the antibodies to be present for 5-6 months. People read that and don't understand t cell memory and other things so they immediately say...well I'm not taking that shite twice a year.
You do understand, like I said in my first post in this thread, people are not going to read studies. They are going to read the headlines and skim the articles at most.
They do that and then hear fauci, who is supposed to be the leading virus expert, saying we must wear mask and social distance still even if you have it.
So they look at that, read headlines that mutiple people in the UK have had reactions to the virus, and they say why in the frick would I go get that vaccine for a virus that is no worse than the flu? Thats not being irrational its the weighing of the pro and cons.
You seem to be pushing the virus as a way out of the lockdowns. Is your contention that we should do what the government says to get out of timeout? Because that thought process makes people like me think, frick that, ill never get that vaccine then. Not doing that shite, frick the government.
Do you feel its a good precedent to set, take this shot the government tells you to and they will let you go play outside like a good boy?
Which, like I said, is pointless half the time and most people do not take it.
I never took that shite until my wife forced me too and I still think its stupid and a waste of time. Most people are going to see this as the same since they are essentially the same thing.
But again, its being blasted all over by the media, can you blame people for being worried?
quote:
Almost all of those headlines were "at least" 3 months. People, looking for affirmation, change "at least" to "only" in their own heads.
Atleast 3 months and if you read the articles it says they expect the antibodies to be present for 5-6 months. People read that and don't understand t cell memory and other things so they immediately say...well I'm not taking that shite twice a year.
You do understand, like I said in my first post in this thread, people are not going to read studies. They are going to read the headlines and skim the articles at most.
They do that and then hear fauci, who is supposed to be the leading virus expert, saying we must wear mask and social distance still even if you have it.
So they look at that, read headlines that mutiple people in the UK have had reactions to the virus, and they say why in the frick would I go get that vaccine for a virus that is no worse than the flu? Thats not being irrational its the weighing of the pro and cons.
You seem to be pushing the virus as a way out of the lockdowns. Is your contention that we should do what the government says to get out of timeout? Because that thought process makes people like me think, frick that, ill never get that vaccine then. Not doing that shite, frick the government.
Do you feel its a good precedent to set, take this shot the government tells you to and they will let you go play outside like a good boy?
quote:
I see as the exact same thing as the flu shot
Which, like I said, is pointless half the time and most people do not take it.
I never took that shite until my wife forced me too and I still think its stupid and a waste of time. Most people are going to see this as the same since they are essentially the same thing.
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:49 am to lsu777
quote:
Thanks for the link, I had saw 16 people had gotten it, 4 is well with in range.
there may have been 16 among ALL the vaccine trails, but then that would be 100,000+ participants, which would still be well within normal incidence range
quote:
Which, like I said, is pointless half the time and most people do not take it.
Trust me. I know. Which is part of my frustration. On average only like 40% of people get the flu shot.
I don't have high hopes that the % will be any higher for COVID.
And my worry is that we will continue to have cases and governments will continue to use that as justification to keep restrictions.
I just view the vaccine as the most effective way to remove that last justification that governments have to continue restrictions (cases)
Its either the vaccine or a complete overthrow of the government, and no one seems to be ready for the latter, so I say we all try for the former
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:49 am to Salmon
quote:
I've never once heard anyone use the "why would anyone get a vaccine for a virus with a 99% survival rate" line towards the flu shot.
To both of you,
This is said all the time. I hear people literally every year say, frick that, not worried about the flu, shite doesn't work half the time anyways.
I only take it because my wife essentially makes me by bitching enough to get me to do it. I hadn't had the flu since 4th grade until after I started taking it(I know they have nothing to do with each other), dumb luck, I know but the point is why bother?
Thats how many are looking at it. Whats the point if we still are going to have to wear mask.
Again like I said, I will be getting the vaccine, but its not irrational to say....well I have a very very low risk of any serious complications from the virus, I think i am going to wait a while on the vaccine.
I never wanted to get into this huge argument, as I will be taking it. My whole point was from the beginning, you have the media and politicians that are putting out info that pushes their agendas. People read those and say frick it, rather take my chances with the virus.
Posted on 12/17/20 at 8:54 am to Salmon
quote:
And my worry is that we will continue to have cases and governments will continue to use that as justification to keep restrictions.
I just view the vaccine as the most effective way to remove that last justification that governments have to continue restrictions (cases)
Its either the vaccine or a complete overthrow of the government, and no one seems to be ready for the latter, so I say we all try for the former
Well I don't have high hopes that the government will give up that power and faucci saying we still need to wear mask and social distance, doesn't help for sure. The whole new normal thing doesn't spark hopes for me either.
Government has never really ever willfully given up power, I think it will be up to the voters on the state level to put tons of pressure on them to make it happen.
quote:
Trust me. I know. Which is part of my frustration. On average only like 40% of people get the flu shot.
I don't have high hopes that the % will be any higher for COVID.
I dunno if it will be that high. And like I mentioned, is it even going to matter? They have been putting out tons of rhetoric about needing to keep up the measures, that mutiple shots will be required etc.
Maybe I am jaded by my hate from the government, I dunno but seems they always find a new excuse to keep power.
Posted on 12/17/20 at 9:00 am to lsu777
quote:
Government has never really ever willfully given up power, I think it will be up to the voters on the state level to put tons of pressure on them to make it happen.
Absolutely. And if we were to remove the "cases" justification, that pressure would have even more power.
Posted on 12/17/20 at 11:28 am to jordan21210
quote:
Well that’s just willful ignorance then.
And there’s nothing you can do about that
Posted on 12/17/20 at 6:11 pm to Salmon
quote:
We don't know this
This is where our thinking differs. You see "no definitive proof of serious side effects" and decide it's worth taking. I see "no definitive proof of safety" and think it's not worth the risk.
And the government shouldn't have any excuse not to reopen once the virus is available to everyone regardless of how many people choose to take it. Obviously those that choose not to take it have weighed the risks and are okay with contracting the virus. We aren't asking the government to protect us
Posted on 12/23/20 at 5:14 pm to rebel cat
Takes 3 years to work the kinks out of a vaccine. I have dna that makes it much harder for me to get the virus and if I do get it, it is in a milder form. Also have a gene that counteracts the cytokine storm.
Vaccine should only be for elderly and those with comorbidities.
New strains coming out. How many shots are you gonna get?
Vaccine should only be for elderly and those with comorbidities.
New strains coming out. How many shots are you gonna get?
Posted on 12/27/20 at 11:44 am to Salmon
quote:
Also to reiterate, the COVID vaccine was not rushed through development. It was developed faster due to allocation of resources and funding.
You don’t see the difference between human testing for less than a year compared to four or more years?
“The overall development of a vaccine consists generally of a discovery phase, a pre-clinical phase, the clinical development phase (phases I to III) and the post licensure phase (phase IV), and it takes on an average about 10 to 15 years.”
This post was edited on 12/27/20 at 11:48 am
Posted on 1/1/21 at 11:32 am to rebel cat
quote:It’s a rushed vaccine for a virus that’s been here less than a year and has a 99% survival rate. People are still asked to wear masks and social distance after getting the vaccine. What’s the long term side effects of it?
What's your reason for not taking it? For your safety and the people your around daily.
Popular
Back to top


1






