TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
It’s called King’s privilege to be able to be complex. You don’t have to understand it, you just have to deal with it.
The official COVID-19/Coronavirus Discussion Thread...aka I hope I don't get the Rona
- Thread starter Goldie
- Start date
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
I think boosters are effective but I think my recently acquired natural immunity is just as effective or more. That’s my reasoning and that’s all there is to it. The data you’re saying isn’t being released isn’t proving effectiveness obviously so my stance wouldn’t be changed if it was released anyway.
I think you and others see things as absolutes. Either you’re 100% transparent on every single thing or you’re not transparent at all. I understand the nuance and considerations that have to be made by leaders; right, wrong, or indifferent. I’ve been in those positions.
So my point and position is that I can see scenarios where data should be withheld. If you can’t imagine such a scenario I’m not mad at that. We just different, no one better than the other.
Iceberg_Taylor
THE FINAL BOSS
Under no circumstances should data be withheld when talkin about something experimental that goes into your body. I’ve been in leadership positions as well snd there’s no leadership in not serving the same ppl you’re suppose to be LEADING. Holding out information is agenda seeking.
Spin it anyway you want ….
Spin it anyway you want ….
Last edited:
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
Ok.
Obviously others feel differently.
I’m just a pragmatist so I look at the results more than the could be’s, for better or worse.
Was mass rollout of the vaccine needed to save lives? Yes.
Could this info we have slow that rollout? Yes.
Is this info critical and/or will it harm people? No.
Then it goes against our main goal and shouldn’t be released.
Some might say the main goal was making money not saving lives, but lives were saved nonetheless so you can’t say it wasn’t a goal. They could have put sugar water in the needle if it was only about money.
Lol my guy we're talking about a global pandemic that if it hasn't killed u, fucked your health up, or caused u to lose your job, it completely altered your way of life for the worse the last two years. This is more than some job title u held somewhere.
Why would I expect anything less than transparency and accountability? Especially if you're forcing me to live my life a way u say I have to.
Hypothetically, If it turns out the virus did come from a lab, would u be okay with a cover up for the sake of international harmony?
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
Of course not, the people in charge would have to be held accountable.
But I thought we were talking about noble lies regarding the vaccines? How we get on origins?
If we need to get as many vaccines out as possible and they are 99.99% safe and 90% effective, I’m not putting anything out that reduces the rate of adoption if that information is not critical or harmful. Those are the decisions any leader has to make, from the construction foreman to the CEO.
DOS_patos
Unverified Legion of Trill member
I’m starting to think you are a heavy and early drinker.
these two things don’t make sense
Just curious where u draw the line. NIH reasoning for wanting to squash Wuhan lab debate early on was exactly for "scientific international harmony". It's a slippery slope once u just let mfs decide what we can and can't see.
But u don't need to get out as many vaccines as possible. U just need the most at risk to get them. The vaccines do the job for the ppl that really need them. The vast majority don't need em.
U are over stating it's effect outside of the 65+ and certain comorbidity groups.
CDC child Covid hospitalization rates are also likely exaggerated. They won't share that data either.
Kids don't need Covid vaccines. WHO doesn't think so either. Covid isn't a threat to them. But if the CDC data purposely doesn't differentiate between "hospitalized with vs for Covid" it allows them to throw unnecessary rules on your children and make life harder for u if u don't comply.
How is this being a good leader? Lol
Big picture brotha big picture.
If saving lives and ending the pandemic was their top priority they would've made sure there was global vax equity.
Instead u got the US government fighting with Moderna to share it's patent in legal disputes to split the profit
U have Pfizer reneging their pledge to share their patents with poorer countries so they can make their own
U have children and healthy adults being forced out of their jobs and everyday establishments for not accepting a pharmaceutical product they don't need simply bc the government said so
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
In theory? Lol.
So death rates didn’t go down for the vaxxed vs. unvaxxed? So the people that got vaxxed just so happened to be ones that wouldn’t have died anyway?
Using your milk analogy, all other factors being equal, if 98% of people that drink milk don’t break a leg and 80% of people that don’t drink milk do, is milk not good at preventing a broken leg?
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
I don’t do slippery slope arguments in a debate. It’s a hypothetical that can’t be justified objectively, but I take your point.
As far as most at risk, yes I agree that it should have been targeted at them. But those most at risk come into contact with others not at as high a risk. So they should be encouraged as well.
But what do you want? For the messaging to identify every single scenario? Get vaxxed if you’re old, get vaxxed if you come into contact with the old, get vaxxed if you have an immune issue, get vaxxed if you have a BMI over 35, don’t get vaxxed though if you had covid within the last 6 months, and don’t get vaxxed if you have these specific allergies, unless you also have these immune deficiencies then do get vaxxed… and on and on and on.
Same thing is being said about masks now. Cloth masks have been known to do very little. So when all of this started do you say, well if you don’t have a KN95, don’t mask at all. Or do you say anything is better than nothing?
In both cases, no one was getting harmed by getting a vaccine they may not need or by wearing a mask that may be less effective than an N95. But a lot of people were getting helped by these things. So I don’t mind them encouraging everyone to do both, needed or not. Where I did disagree was where it was forced on people and you can check my record in here to know that.
If grandma or grandad is vaxxed their grandchild doesn't need to be vaxxed. That easily solves that problem. If u think otherwise then u don't really believe in the vaccines.
Lol u must have forgotten what doctors/physicians were like before the pandemic. It's not nearly as complicated as u are drawing it out and could have been done bc other countries were doing it.
Couple things here.
First, if all the government did was "encourage" and not mandate, I'd probably be indifferent on this convo. There are consequences to not complying so I'd use a different term.... coerced?
Second, while so far the data shows most people aren't harmed by the vaccines (then again who knows if mfs withholding data all willy nilly? [see Pfizer 75 years]) ppls livelihoods ARE being harmed by NOT getting a shot that, once again, they don't need.
Not for themselves and not to protect grandma and grandad
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
I can see the coerced argument and again, do not agree with that. Coercion through mandates and the like I’ve voiced my displeasure with on many occasions here.
I just don’t see the issue with putting out a blanket statement that everyone get vaxxed if the message is better received and adoption is improved which helps the majority of people that it can. Messaging to mass populations is an EXTREMELY difficult task and I think that difficulty gets overlooked until you’re the one in charge of doing so. Over complicating it dilutes the message and hinders its objective.
And you couldn’t rely on messaging through doctors because many people don’t even go to the doctor regularly. So who else would they go to for all of the particulars? At a time when people were encouraged (mandated in some cases) to stay home and when the healthcare system was already overwhelmed?
But we stray from the original point again. And on that original point we just disagree. I think there are certainly scenarios where withholding info is warranted. Was it warranted with every aspect of the pandemic? I’d confidently assume not. Was it warranted in some respects? I’d confidently assume so. I don’t take the hardline stance that you and others do, but I respect your opinion.
DOS_patos
Unverified Legion of Trill member
Vaxxed have died from COVID and unvaxxed have survived it.
As for your milk response….I have nothing so f your reply.
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
To your first point, we’re talking death rates, not just living or dying.
To your second point, I respect it, lol.
If another country can do it so can we. If another country can acknowledge nat immunity then so can we. It's really that simple I don't know if it can be simplified anymore than that.
Mandates exacerbated the overwhelmed healthcare systems. U fired people that didn't need to be fired for not accepting a product they didn't need to begin with. Some of which were staff who were safer to be around than some of the vaxxed who got to stay. If public health was the #1 goal they literally worked against it.
We don't know if it's warranted unless the data comes out lol. Maybe there's nothing to hide then fine but I'd still wanna know. But if it turns out they misled us on crucial information u would probably no longer defend your stance.
I think u are just more trustworthy of the process than I am which is fine.......
.......I guess
Pretty sure if these were still "trump's vaccines" america would be flipped over right now.
"They can lie to me as long as THEY establish it's for my benefit"
They followed them on errthang 'cept natural immunity
Doesnt take an expert
