Covid vaccine after having covid

[boatman61]

Seems Monty Pythons 'Always look at the Bright Side of Life is out of fashion and two sides of an issue have now been Cancelled...
There is only One Version permitted..

Disgrace!' BBC deletes GCSE revision guide on climate change 'benefits' after backlash

Among a list of "positive impacts" of climate change, the under-fire BBC sparked outrage by sharing its Bitesize guide online that detailed the creation of shipping routes because of melting ice. It also highlighted lower heating bills as a result of warmer weather conditions in the winter. "Positive impacts of a warmer global climate" included "warmer temperatures and increased CO2 levels leading to more vigorous plant growth", "animals and plants could benefit and flourish in a changing climate", and resources such as "oil becoming available in places such as Alaska and Siberia when the ice melts".

Others included claims that warmer temperatures lead to "healthier outdoor lifestyles", there would be "new tourist destinations".

But the page sparked a furious reaction, with lifelong environmental activist and Guardian journalist George Monbiot highlighting it to his 425,000 Twitter followers after he was tipped off by a teacher.

He raged: "This is what BBC Bitesize is teaching our children about climate breakdown.

"I'm sorry, but it's an absolute disgrace."

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Greg K

These vaccines could not have been approved for emergency use if there were other effective medications available.

Absolute BS. You can have the most effective medication available, lots of it and for cheap... but you can't end or restrict the spread of a pandemic with treatments. And two shots in everyone's arm will always be more efficient, safer and more effective than finding and treating every COVID infection as it runs unchecked except by restrictions on movement and assembly. You won't end travel and tourism bans with treatment.

AIDS has gone from a death sentence to a serious but manageable condition thanks to treatment, but a vaccine is still the Grail. Same with just about every contagious ailment.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Greg K View Post
These vaccines could not have been approved for emergency use if there were other effective medications available.

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Absolute BS. You can have the most effective medication available, lots of it and for cheap... but you can't end or restrict the spread of a pandemic with treatments. And two shots in everyone's arm will always be more efficient, safer and more effective than finding and treating every COVID infection as it runs unchecked except by restrictions on movement and assembly. You won't end travel and tourism bans with treatment.
....

Not BS. It is our FDA requirement for the EUA. You can make all the proclamations that you want here but your opinion means squat. If there is anyone here with an agenda it would be you. You accuse others of spreading misinformation. Leave the medical proclamations to the experts. Fear mongering and gas lighting is your domain.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Greg K

Your arguments and that of others here regarding the scientific process are both naïve and disingenuous.

Double-blind studies are incredibly expensive to set up and run. Most are undertaken only by big pharma, and generally only to prove the efficacy and safety of some new treatment on which they can make a handsome profit.

Once again you simply demonstrate that you have no idea what you are talking about, and seem to be taking your talking points from your favourite narrow-cast news silo.

Double-blind experiments or trials describe a study design. Anyone can run one. And the vast, vast majority are small-scale, low cost experiments. Scale is required for statistical validity.

Research investigations typically transition from small scale (low cost) to larger experiments or trials. It certainly costs significant dollars to conduct large-scale trials like the ones demanded by most nation's regulatory bodies when dealing with things like mass vaccinations. But the process always starts small. So there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of alternative treatment proponents from running quality studies.

I am in no way suggesting challenges should not be considered towards our current vaccine approaches. And we should definitely look at other clinical and pharmacological approaches, but this doesn't mean we should abandon best-practices that are the foundation of scientific inquiry.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Once again you simply demonstrate that you have no idea what you are talking about, and seem to be taking your talking points from your favourite narrow-cast news silo. (priceless Mike. What is this narrow-cast news silo? Greg K's posts are coming through as well researched. When asked to dive deeper on these topics you either don't respond or post some fact check article. You are the one taking your talking points from your news cast echo chamber. You seem to have very little to contribute to the conversation of addressing the science.)

Double-blind experiments or trials describe a study design. Anyone can run one. And the vast, vast majority are small-scale, low cost experiments. Scale is required for statistical validity. (The Pharma cartels have a very exclusive inside line on getting their studies published. The public health agencies are extremely reluctant to fund anything considered alternative. There is no money allocated to fund research on existing cheap generic medications. Regulatory capture is rampant. Any research scientist knows this and it is well documented. The entire system is rigged.)

Research investigations typically transition from small scale (low cost) to larger experiments or trials. It certainly costs significant dollars to conduct large-scale trials like the ones demanded by most nation's regulatory bodies when dealing with things like mass vaccinations. But the process always starts small. So there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of alternative treatment proponents from running quality studies.(nothing standing in the way except for the FDA, NIH, WHO, Big Pharma, Big bio tech, the WEF, the CFR, all their neoliberal politicians and their entire propaganda machine.

I am in no way suggesting challenges should not be considered towards our current vaccine approaches. And we should definitely look at other clinical and pharmacological approaches, but this doesn't mean we should abandon best-practices that are the foundation of scientific inquiry.

"best-practices that are the foundation of scientific inquiry" Are you kidding? Those went out the window a long time ago.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

Not BS. It is our FDA requirement for the EUA. You can make all the proclamations that you want here but your opinion means squat. If there is anyone here with an agenda it would be you. You accuse others of spreading misinformation. Leave the medical proclamations to the experts. Fear mongering and gas lighting is your domain.

... said Plandemic Boy, Mr 5G, The Great Reset, antivax-to-the-max...

Also... the FDA requirement is for an effective treatment... what has proven to be an effective treatment?


Hey Mike - I'm loving how the antivaxxers are moaning about the expedited "emergency" approval for COVID vaccines, but balking at doing proper testing of their claimed miracle treatments.

[donradcliffe]

I vote to shut this thread down. Nothing new is coming from either side, except for more and more real news that the vaccines are effective and safe.

[Group9]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

I vote to shut this thread down. Nothing new is coming from either side, except for more and more real news that the vaccines are effective and safe.

So you have decided to declare this discussion should be closed?

What other discussions have you decided should be closed, just so we know?

FLA batteries versus AGM versus Lithium?

Rocna versus Ultra versus Mantus?

Fin keel versus full keel? Cat versus mono?

Where else have you decided the science is settled, you have the right answer, and all discussion needs be stopped?

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Absolute BS. You can have the most effective medication available, lots of it and for cheap... but you can't end or restrict the spread of a pandemic with treatments. And two shots in everyone's arm will always be more efficient, safer and more effective than finding and treating every COVID infection as it runs unchecked except by restrictions on movement and assembly. You won't end travel and tourism bans with treatment.

AIDS has gone from a death sentence to a serious but manageable condition thanks to treatment, but a vaccine is still the Grail. Same with just about every contagious ailment.

This is BS, the common cold is as contagios as C19, there are treatments and nobody needs experimental risky injections for a manageable disease.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

This is BS, the common cold is as contagios as C19, there are treatments and nobody needs experimental risky injections for a manageable disease.

Actually both influenza and the common cold are more contagious then COVID.

The differences is COVID can generate much severe illness and has potential for long term damage. The common cold does not.

I fail to see the evidence that the vaccine is “ risky “ increasingly the evidence is its safe

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

This is BS, the common cold is as contagios as C19, there are treatments and nobody needs experimental risky injections for a manageable disease.

Bullroar!
Nothing can prevent or cure a cold.
There are no specific treatments for the virus that is causes the common cold, but some remedies might help ease your symptoms [drink plenty of liquids, humidify the air, use saline nasal rinses, and get adequate rest, etc].
Most cases of the common cold get better without treatment, usually within a week to 10 days.
The scientific jury is still out on some popular cold remedies, such as vitamin C and echinacea.

[Shanachie]

Sorry. No apologies to people who say unintelligent things. Think before you type or accept that people may call you out.


All of you really need to take a step back and understand what has been happening in this thread.


When it started several months ago, the moderator Dockhead, a covid survivor, laid out an accurate description of the virus: This pandemic is dangerous, the disease is miserable and vaccines are the only way available for the human race to blunt the tragedy. Get yours.


Others added to the facts. Sure, vaccines may have some side effects, just as all medications do. That's why you consult with your doctor and alert him/her if you suffer from them.


And sure, you can still contract covid if you are vaccinated and don't develop a strong immune response. But, unless you have a severely damaged immune system, your side effects or covid case will most likely be mild.


If you don't get vaccinated and contract covid, you have very roughly a 2 percent chance of dying and a much greater chance of suffering a debilitating illness as well as chronic health problems. Unvaccinated people also cause covid to spread quickly and mutate.


Mutate enough, and covid will find a variant that outwits the vaccines. Then we're back to where we were a year and a half ago, with shutdowns and quarantines.


This is a reasonable summary of the covid pandemic amply supported by the best minds in medicine. But, right after Dockhead posted, Thumbs Up and other anti-vaxxers started in on him.


In law school, there is an axiom: Argue your case on the facts if they are true. If you have a losing case and the facts are against you, make outlandish statements in support of your arguments and then nitpick the other side when it responds so you can obscure the facts.


Judges and jurors are taught to detect and reject these types of arguments. Not so on the freewheeling Internet and talk radio,


Right-wing talk show guy Rush Limbaugh borrowed and perfected this strategy before he drugged, drank, ate and smoked himself to death. He called it “owning the libs.” The idea wasn't to get at the truth. It was to aggravate well-intentioned, informed people by tying their arguments up in knots.


To him and his listeners, this was fun.


From Limbaugh, it became a popular way to troll people on the Internet. Apparently, trolls feel a sense of power from persuading other people to believe stupid things and frustrating reasonable people who don't have debate skills.


(Cue the heavily armed dope now in prison because he attacked a D.C. pizza parlor. Someone on the Internet had persuaded him that it was the headquarters for a pedophile ring operated by Democratic politicians.)


So that's how this thread has devolved into 50 pages of arguments. People such as Dockhead and Mike O'Reilly make reasonable, fact-based statements, then anti-vaxxers like Thumbs Up and CatNewBee respond with outlandish retorts and nitpicks to obscure the facts.


If the trolls are intelligent, it's a game to them, evoking outrage as a way to amuse themselves while sitting in their dock condos.


If they are not intelligent, they have been taken in by the trolls and end up saying truly dumb things about 9-11 being a false flag operation, the moon landing being faked and vaccines having a 5G chip that is meant to control everyone's minds.


Unfortunately, trolling causes unintended casualties; Some people who aren't informed don't understand that it is a game. They believe what they read and maybe don't get a vaccine or wear a mask in enclosed spaces because of that.


So people fall ill and die because of how they've been manipulated on the Internet by trolls. It ceases to be funny or clever or cute. It's plain cruel to lead people into dangerous situations so you can amuse yourself on the web.


Now watch how the anti-vaxxers respond and see whether I'm correct.

[goboatingnow]

Great great post

[Thumbs Up]

I am just going to annotate your post if you don't mind.

Originally Posted by Shanachie

Sorry. No apologies to people who say unintelligent things. Think before you type or accept that people may call you out.
You have been very rude on this thread. Attempts to censor inconvenient topics might work for the thought control police on facebook and reddit but that is not open discourse. Your hissy fit tactics speak for themselves

All of you really need to take a step back and understand what has been happening in this thread. Yes please do


When it started several months ago, the moderator Dockhead, a covid survivor, laid out an accurate description of the virus: This pandemic is dangerous, the disease is miserable and vaccines are the only way available for the human race to blunt the tragedy. Get yours.
This is the culmination of many threads that have been closed due to profanities and bullying tactics. The moderators have allowed us to discuss these topics as long as the conversation is kept civil. We are allowed to talk about risks. Censoring entire topics from the discourse is anti-science.


Others added to the facts. Sure, vaccines may have some side effects, just as all medications do. That's why you consult with your doctor and alert him/her if you suffer from them. (These vaccines are proving to have more harmful side effects than any vaccines in recent history. It is a very worthy topic especially now that we are giving them to children and they are already talking about babies)


And sure, you can still contract covid if you are vaccinated and don't develop a strong immune response. But, unless you have a severely damaged immune system, your side effects or covid case will most likely be mild.
Many do have damaged immune systems. We don't know the full extent of the side effects but is not looking like good news. We have many top doctors and scientists speaking out. Whistle blowers are a good thing not a bad thing. They are putting their careers on the line. They have taken their Hippocratic oaths seriously.

If you don't get vaccinated and contract covid, you have very roughly a 2 percent chance of dying and a much greater chance of suffering a debilitating illness as well as chronic health problems. Unvaccinated people also cause covid to spread quickly and mutate. There are now early treatment protocols proving 85% or greater success yet they continue the suppression of them and the use of repurposed cheap drugs. These vaccines are also predicted to cause chronic health problems. The public health agencies have been inundated with adverse events reports and there is supposedly a backlog of unpublished reactions. The science that supports the safety of these agents is very weak. The concerns are many. You want to cancel these concerns from the conversation. Once again, very anti-science.


Mutate enough, and covid will find a variant that outwits the vaccines. Then we're back to where we were a year and a half ago, with shutdowns and quarantines. It has been framed that way (you must blame the evil covid vaccine skeptics). If the vaccines are driving the mutations, how is that our fault?


This is a reasonable summary of the covid pandemic amply supported by the best minds in medicine. But, right after Dockhead posted, Thumbs Up and other anti-vaxxers started in on him. I have just asked this very question and no one responded. Who are these best minds in medicine? Name them. I named some, but they are being mostly censored from public view.


In law school, there is an axiom: Argue your case on the facts if they are true. If you have a losing case and the facts are against you, make outlandish statements in support of your arguments and then nitpick the other side when it responds so you can obscure the facts. Yes that is happening here but is the other way around from what you are implying. We post the science and you have hissy fits and try to support your views with nit picky media fact check narratives that don't hold water. I will hold off on the dead lawyer jokes.


Judges and jurors are taught to detect and reject these types of arguments. Not so on the freewheeling Internet and talk radio, These arguments are your domain, I backed all of my arguments with credible evidence.


Right-wing talk show guy Rush Limbaugh borrowed and perfected this strategy before he drugged, drank, ate and smoked himself to death. He called it “owning the libs.” The idea wasn't to get at the truth. It was to aggravate well-intentioned, informed people by tying their arguments up in knots. I never listened to his show so I wouldn't know


To him and his listeners, this was fun.


From Limbaugh, it became a popular way to troll people on the Internet. Apparently, trolls feel a sense of power from persuading other people to believe stupid things and frustrating reasonable people who don't have debate skills. I never had debate skills. I try to let the whistleblowers have a say. I don't let the media tell me what to think. I draw my own conclusions. With some reading comprehension and an internet connection, you could too but you need to learn first how to wade through the rampant propaganda.


(Cue the heavily armed dope now in prison because he attacked a D.C. pizza parlor. Someone on the Internet had persuaded him that it was the headquarters for a pedophile ring operated by Democratic politicians.)
Probably a false flag. Is that a good enough excuse to censor science on the internet?


So that's how this thread has devolved into 50 pages of arguments. People such as Dockhead and Mike O'Reilly make reasonable, fact-based statements, then anti-vaxxers like Thumbs Up and CatNewBee respond with outlandish retorts and nitpicks to obscure the facts. There are definitely some inconvenient truths going along with what are being reported as facts. It is very hard to deny.


If the trolls are intelligent, it's a game to them, evoking outrage as a way to amuse themselves while sitting in their dock condos. We just want to have the conversation that is being forbidden by whoever is pulling the strings. It is painfully obvious who the trolls are here.


If they are not intelligent, they have been taken in by the trolls and end up saying truly dumb things about 9-11 being a false flag operation, the moon landing being faked and vaccines having a 5G chip that is meant to control everyone's minds. No one here has said those things except for 9-11. How many people here actually believe that a plane knocked those towers down?


Unfortunately, trolling causes unintended casualties; Some people who aren't informed don't understand that it is a game. They believe what they read and maybe don't get a vaccine or wear a mask in enclosed spaces because of that. One person here declined a mRNA shot because I informed him that it had amines (which he is deathly allergic to but were listed by another term). He also had a history of anaphylaxis. He instead took the Janssen vaccine (I warned him not to). Was his heart attack caused by that vaccine? (he would say no but it might have been). How many heart problems after shots are left unreported? People are being coerced to take a drug that has not yet passed clinical trials. They have the right to be informed of risks. Instead we are brainwashed into accepting whatever narrative that is shoved down their throats.


So people fall ill and die because of how they've been manipulated on the Internet by trolls. It ceases to be funny or clever or cute. It's plain cruel to lead people into dangerous situations so you can amuse yourself on the web.
The only trolls here are propping up the mainstream propaganda. To have this conversation and raise these issues on our boating forum is a good thing.

Now watch how the anti-vaxxers respond and see whether I'm correct.

[Mike OReilly]

Excellent summary Shanachie. Now, brace yourself for the tsunami.