Because it kills more people than it saves. Because it disperses an untested foreign object throughout the body. Because a comprehensive patent trail proves racketeering with respect to the parties involved (CDC, Pfizer, Moderna, J&J).
Forgive me for my post to you regarding bias.Forgive me, English isn't my first language so I still don't quite get what you mean.
As you've noted, I haven't been part of the discussion. All I've posted was the correction to an article that was linked, because I know from experience that many people read the original article but not the correction made later. (That's just human psychology, that has nothing to do with anybody in particular on this forum.)
I also don't intend to be part of the discussion for two reasons: 1) I don't like to involve myself until I feel like I know enough about a topic. I have very high standards for myself - ask anyone.
2) I'm a moderator, so I have a 'duty' to stay neutral.
I called out Larry on moral grounds that have nothing to do with Covid - wishing a group of people would die is despicable. That has nothing to do with the group itself either - swap lefties for righties, women, men, jews, gays, what have you, and I would have responded the same.
If you want to know how I feel about Covid vaccines itself - I'm for personal choice on the basis of the liberal moral principle of self-ownership. Everyone should decide for themselves if they do or do not want to get vaccinated, as each individual's situation is different. I only want that decision to be based on true information rather than misinformation. (Hence me posting the correction to the article linked, and beyond that, staying out of it.) In practice, that probably means contemplating your own moral principles, and discussing your situation with your doctor and coming up with a treatment plan together.
(Most doctors and scientists truly care about the truth of the medicine and doing what's best for the patients (the two are intertwined) - you don't last very long in the profession if you don't. Of course, as anywhere, there are exceptions. Psychopaths, frauds, etc. I'm trained as a scientist, although not currently working in the field, and I've met both kinds.)
In addition to that, I feel rather disgruntled with the current trend of religiously politicizing everything and constantly arguing in bad faith.
"Vaccines and scientists and doctors are the next coming of Jesus! Praise the lord Fauci! If you ask any questions, you're against science itself! Clap for the heroes of the NHS!" Barf.
"Vaccines and doctors and scientists are literally evil! They're hiding the truth from you and only want your money! Don't believe anything you're told!" Barf.
If that's what you mean when you say
then I will say, yes, there are people who act like that.
There are also people who act like that on the anti-covid side. (Aren't we all anti-covid? LOL. I'll just assume you mean pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine.)
Confirmation bias is human psychology, it has little to do with the ideas themselves.
The first claim is simply not true. It is only killing more people vaccinated than other vaccinations in the past. However, it isn't killing more people than it is saving, unless you look at the data involving children being vaccinated. Children are not dying of Covid unless they have one of the comorbidities, but they are dying of the vaccinations (due to allergens). So, in that, there is substantial evidence against vaccinating children with mRNAs.
I actually think the jab kills more people than it saves, @Anomaly. I appreciate you being highly skeptical. Perhaps give this a perusal.
This is fair. I respect your stance and position. However, this is a call to emotion. You have a right to your feelings, but not a right to push them onto other people as a form of 'truth'.
VAERS system does not say 150,000, yet the article claims that. The number is actually 15,000 according to the reports at the given date, if you look at the scientific journal listed. The link in the article doesn't even say what the main article says, which gives rise to speculation. Yes, I'm skeptical of everything, no matter what it is, and I don't base my knowledge off of the article, but the sources from the article and the actual studies. Currently the data suggests upwards of 16,000 deaths due to vaccinations. If you look at the projected (hypothesized) rate of how many people are saved due to vaccinations (again this data is not very reliable because we can never know this for sure) it is statistically around 500,000 people. What we do know, is that once you have the vaccine and you get Covid, your chance of dying is decreased; however, the rates do not change significantly if you are among those that are not at risk of dying from Covid to begin with.
I disagree that it is no longer a pandemic, I fear a rough winter, especially because the common sense of the matter is that we are done with itForgive me, English isn't my first language so I still don't quite get what you mean.
As you've noted, I haven't been part of the discussion. All I've posted was the correction to an article that was linked, because I know from experience that many people read the original article but not the correction made later. (That's just human psychology, that has nothing to do with anybody in particular on this forum.)
I also don't intend to be part of the discussion for two reasons: 1) I don't like to involve myself until I feel like I know enough about a topic. I have very high standards for myself - ask anyone.
2) I'm a moderator, so I have a 'duty' to stay neutral.
I called out Larry on moral grounds that have nothing to do with Covid - wishing a group of people would die is despicable. That has nothing to do with the group itself either - swap lefties for righties, women, men, jews, gays, what have you, and I would have responded the same.
If you want to know how I feel about Covid vaccines itself - I'm for personal choice on the basis of the liberal moral principle of self-ownership. Everyone should decide for themselves if they do or do not want to get vaccinated, as each individual's situation is different. I only want that decision to be based on true information rather than misinformation. (Hence me posting the correction to the article linked, and beyond that, staying out of it.) In practice, that probably means contemplating your own moral principles, and discussing your situation with your doctor and coming up with a treatment plan together.
(Most doctors and scientists truly care about the truth of the medicine and doing what's best for the patients (the two are intertwined) - you don't last very long in the profession if you don't. Of course, as anywhere, there are exceptions. Psychopaths, frauds, etc. I'm trained as a scientist, although not currently working in the field, and I've met both kinds.)
In addition to that, I feel rather disgruntled with the current trend of religiously politicizing everything and constantly arguing in bad faith.
"Vaccines and scientists and doctors are the next coming of Jesus! Praise the lord Fauci! If you ask any questions, you're against science itself! Clap for the heroes of the NHS!" Barf.
"Vaccines and doctors and scientists are literally evil! They're hiding the truth from you and only want your money! Don't believe anything you're told!" Barf.
If that's what you mean when you say
then I will say, yes, there are people who act like that.
There are also people who act like that on the anti-covid side. (Aren't we all anti-covid? LOL. I'll just assume you mean pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine.
Confirmation bias is human psychology, it has little to do with the ideas themselves.
Forgive me, English isn't my first language so I still don't quite get what you mean.
As you've noted, I haven't been part of the discussion. All I've posted was the correction to an article that was linked, because I know from experience that many people read the original article but not the correction made later. (That's just human psychology, that has nothing to do with anybody in particular on this forum.)
I also don't intend to be part of the discussion for two reasons: 1) I don't like to involve myself until I feel like I know enough about a topic. I have very high standards for myself - ask anyone.
2) I'm a moderator, so I have a 'duty' to stay neutral.
I called out Larry on moral grounds that have nothing to do with Covid - wishing a group of people would die is despicable. That has nothing to do with the group itself either - swap lefties for righties, women, men, jews, gays, what have you, and I would have responded the same.
If you want to know how I feel about Covid vaccines itself - I'm for personal choice on the basis of the liberal moral principle of self-ownership. Everyone should decide for themselves if they do or do not want to get vaccinated, as each individual's situation is different. I only want that decision to be based on true information rather than misinformation. (Hence me posting the correction to the article linked, and beyond that, staying out of it.) In practice, that probably means contemplating your own moral principles, and discussing your situation with your doctor and coming up with a treatment plan together.
(Most doctors and scientists truly care about the truth of the medicine and doing what's best for the patients (the two are intertwined) - you don't last very long in the profession if you don't. Of course, as anywhere, there are exceptions. Psychopaths, frauds, etc. I'm trained as a scientist, although not currently working in the field, and I've met both kinds.)
In addition to that, I feel rather disgruntled with the current trend of religiously politicizing everything and constantly arguing in bad faith.
"Vaccines and scientists and doctors are the next coming of Jesus! Praise the lord Fauci! If you ask any questions, you're against science itself! Clap for the heroes of the NHS!" Barf.
"Vaccines and doctors and scientists are literally evil! They're hiding the truth from you and only want your money! Don't believe anything you're told!" Barf.
If that's what you mean when you say
then I will say, yes, there are people who act like that.
There are also people who act like that on the anti-covid side. (Aren't we all anti-covid? LOL. I'll just assume you mean pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine.
Confirmation bias is human psychology, it has little to do with the ideas themselves.
@Anomaly -
Sorry @larry806q, but it kind of appears you saw liberal deaths as a net positive. I am sure you were just kidding, but I am also sure this is what @Lady Jolanda was referring to.
Looking at the statistics from the CDC, it is not a pandemic, any more than having pneumonia is a pandemic. The trends for 'Covid related deaths' are on par with those for pneumonia (and similar to the ones related to pneumonia for a long time now). Interestingly, the caveat to Covid related deaths, is that you can die of a car accident, and if the patient has Covid, the examiner must note them as having a Covid related death with the code in the [1] footnote, even if the death had nothing whatsoever to do with Covid. Of the deaths listed for Covid, the CDC has even admitted that only 6% were listed as Covid being the sole cause of death on their death certificate. So, why they aren't delineating between an actual Covid death, and a death only tangentially related to Covid, is beyond me, and is a serious abuse of documentation and reporting of the actual numbers. One must do the math to even come up with actual statistics, yet very few are willing to do it, and trust others to tell them.
I don't need to focus on the harm or conjecture involved in this other than what I've already mentioned; focusing on the data presented demonstrates that it is not enough to justify a lack of freedom, in my opinion. I'd rather focus on the statistics than a he said/she said narrative. I'd just not like to get into personal testimonies, as it differs from individual to individual and it's difficult to discern objective data from that in order to make a logical decision. Though, I can appreciate your stance to bring awareness to the supposed harm.
