|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jun 13, 2021 6:30:42 GMT -6
In other words, if you don't like the message, attack the messenger. No. Your claim of "updated" figures was a questionable interpretation of the source. That the source lacks some credibility due to bias and repeated reporting of conspiracy theories should have made you be more cautious in using it. Reputable sources are reporting the myocarditis figures are higher than inspected and CDC is investigating. Right now not a great concern though. For reasons given above. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jun 13, 2021 6:48:56 GMT -6
An anti communist Chinese media outlet is probably a high threat to socialists such as yourself. The Epoch Times certainly isn't trying to cover for the CCP like the MSM. Here's what they have to say about recent Wuhan lab developments. 1. U.S. Taxpayer Money Did Go to Controversial ‘Gain of Function’ That money went to the research means what? There is no sinister cover up here. Your citing mainstream journalism would seem to show that. Money going to research out of a large budget for research is not a scandal anyway. That is regardless of any link, or not, between the lab and the source of the Covid virus. Let's investigate it for sure! If the lab was badly run, and/or the Trump administration failed in oversight of the money's use, and, probably cut funding on pandemic public health observers in China, there is a lesson there. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jun 13, 2021 6:56:41 GMT -6
In other words, if you don't like the message, attack the messenger. No. Your claim of "updated" figures was a questionable interpretation of the source. That the source lacks some credibility due to bias and repeated reporting of conspiracy theories should have made you be more cautious in using it. Reputable sources are reporting the myocarditis figures are higher than inspected and CDC is investigating. Right now not a great concern though. For reasons given above. Oh please, you are the idiot who compared Covid deaths among young adults, who overwhelmingly had serious prior medical conditions, with inoculation issues among PREVIOUSLY HEALTHY teens. The two aren't even relatable and shouldn't be used in some sort of goofy data matching probability narrative. I don't have issues with the vaccine, but there are legitimate reasons some people should be concerned, now STFU. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jun 13, 2021 7:04:24 GMT -6
No. Your claim of "updated" figures was a questionable interpretation of the source. That the source lacks some credibility... Oh please, you are the idiot who compared Covid deaths among young adults, who overwhelmingly had serious prior medical conditions, with inoculation issues among PREVIOUSLY HEALTHY teens. The two aren't even relatable and shouldn't be used... I believe concern is being shown in a CDC investigation. On the contrary, the deaths due to Covid among young people would be reduced by vaccination. The spread of disease to others old and young by young people would also be reduced. My use of the death statistics certainly relevant. The idiotic thing here is ignoring the role of vaccination in preventing spread and reducing hosts for development of variants. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jun 13, 2021 7:19:06 GMT -6
So in your dumbass world a healthy young male who already has Covid antibodies should get vaccinated ? How stupid are you ?
Here is another thing since you brought politics into this, if the myocarditis was afflicting young women instead of young men your party would be in complete meltdown mode on this issue and the vaccine would have been pulled by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jun 13, 2021 8:53:42 GMT -6
So in your dumbass world a healthy young male who already has Covid antibodies should get vaccinated ? How stupid are you ? The only stupid here is a false belief about how vaccination works.
In the real world the purpose of vaccination is not only to protect the currently healthy population but to contain disease by preventing asymptomatic individuals or those with mild symptoms being able to spread it as well.
In the real world CDC does recommend those who have had Covid to be vaccinated. The risks are VERY low. And the vaccination has been shown to enhance protection even in previously infected individuals.
Let's suppose we exempted those with antibodies? Are you seriously suggesting people know when they have been infected with asymptomatic disease or only they instead of vaccination they be required to be tested? Or do you have some other plan to insure vaccination takes place when it is needed to protect public health?
|
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jun 13, 2021 9:00:54 GMT -6
So in your dumbass world a healthy young male who already has Covid antibodies should get vaccinated ? How stupid are you ?
Are you seriously suggesting people know when they have been infected with asymptomatic disease or only they instead of vaccination they be required to be tested?
No dumbass, I am suggesting young males who have adequate antibodies are taking an unneeded risk with the vaccine. Oh and your sentence above is a mess and I can't make heads or tails of it. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jun 13, 2021 9:01:49 GMT -6
Here is another thing since you brought politics into this, if the myocarditis was afflicting young women instead of young men your party would be in complete meltdown mode on this issue and the vaccine would have been pulled by now. I am not clear what politics are relevant here about the health debate, other than that biased media reports may be misleading. But, I may have been wrong above about the only stupid thing being said.
There is no reason at all to think CDC or any other public health expert would say gender was an issue in preventing disease or preventing spread of the disease by vaccination.
The emergency approval of the vaccine, which has now been widely tested in effect was justifiable and remains justifiable. The investigation by CDC may in fact change the protocol for vaccination for young men(or women) if there is evidence that is useful. For example, by recommending different timing or forgoing a second dose, or recommending one vaccine over another.
This how it is supposed to be done. The argument that we should have delayed the vaccine or should now do so is not supported by an awful lot of data including the Israeli study of their experience with very widespread vaccination which you can examine.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jun 13, 2021 9:22:34 GMT -6
Are you seriously suggesting people know when they have been infected with asymptomatic disease or only they instead of vaccination they be required to be tested?
..I am suggesting young males who have adequate antibodies are taking an unneeded risk with the vaccine. Oh and your sentence above is a mess and I can't make heads or tails of it. The sentence is clear. Let me help you understand it.
If we are to follow your prescription and exempt young makes who have antibodies, we would have to know which young males actually do have antibodies and that they are safe. We would have to know what level of antibodies and that those antibodies will persist and are effective in preventing spread. Studies now show that those with antibodies get significantly greater protection when vaccinated, probably for a longer period.
How would you suggest we determine those factors? We have to weigh how small or large the risk to the individual vs risk to the public.
Testing seem part of the way to tell their vaccination is unneeded. Further research on effect of vaccination is part of the way.
The risk seems on best current evidence to be VERY small to the individual. And the risk to the public of spreading the disease and providing hosts for development of variants is larger than any harm. By a rather large margin. In the real world as we know it based on the evidence...
|
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jun 13, 2021 9:36:09 GMT -6
Here is another thing since you brought politics into this, if the myocarditis was afflicting young women instead of young men your party would be in complete meltdown mode on this issue and the vaccine would have been pulled by now. I am not clear what politics are relevant here about the health debate, other than that biased media reports may be misleading. "Although the right seems to spurn the idea we should be vaccinated to protect others" "CDC says as much for those vaccinated. Unfortunately it's a problem for some to do that. Mostly politics." You don't even remember your own posts, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT UP POLITICS. Good Lord.......................... I am done. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jun 13, 2021 12:55:34 GMT -6
I am not clear what politics are relevant here about the health debate, other than that biased media reports may be misleading. "Although the right seems to spurn the idea we should be vaccinated to protect others" "CDC says as much for those vaccinated. Unfortunately it's a problem for some to do that. Mostly politics." You don't even remember your own posts, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT UP POLITICS. For the record, I agree you should be done.
That record would include that the entire quote would be:
"Although the right seems to spurn the idea we should be vaccinated to protect others, vaccination has the added advantage of preventing infection of the older vulnerable population by the millions of vaccinated young people."
Look at the facts about my claim and the politics do become relevant to public health practice since fringe politics about vaccine seem to have captured the mainstream right which is now impeding vaccination use.
We see the right opposing means being developed and used to verify vaccination and we see laws passed in red states forbidding private companies from requiring employees to be vaccinated where that private company wants to avoid endangering their employees and customers. In doing that the right calls pseudo scientist experts who claim Covid vaccination makes you magnetic, causes infertility, actually infects you with Covid, among other false claims.
Not only do the fringe groups deny the science but unfortunately force the right to totally avoid the point of the public health purpose of vaccination, as they do. You yourself and others here continually focus almost entirely on the role of vaccination to protect the individual who is vaccinated.
In contrast the completely unsupported and hypothetical claim you make about gender and politics is fair to criticize as simply politics without relevance to the debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Jun 13, 2021 16:01:05 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Jun 13, 2021 16:23:47 GMT -6
An anti communist Chinese media outlet is probably a high threat to socialists such as yourself. The Epoch Times certainly isn't trying to cover for the CCP like the MSM. Here's what they have to say about recent Wuhan lab developments. 1. U.S. Taxpayer Money Did Go to Controversial ‘Gain of Function’ That money went to the research means what? There is no sinister cover up here. Your citing mainstream journalism would seem to show that. Money going to research out of a large budget for research is not a scandal anyway. That is regardless of any link, or not, between the lab and the source of the Covid virus. Let's investigate it for sure! If the lab was badly run, and/or the Trump administration failed in oversight of the money's use, and, probably cut funding on pandemic public health observers in China, there is a lesson there. The problem is gain of function research was recognized by even the previous Obama Administration as being extremely dangerous and banned from being conducted in the US. Fauci got around this ban by funding the research at the Wuhan lab by sending funds first to EcoHealth (Peter Daszak) who passed it along to Wuhan. There also appears to be some evidence Fauci also got some funding sent directly as outlined in the grants quoted in my previous quote. Fauci would have a better legal defense if the funds actually came directly from the US. This circuitous route of avoiding the gain of function research ban could open-up Fauci to wrongful death lawsuits. Why did Fauci do this? He's an arrogant stubborn man who thought he knew best. As for blaming Trump on this one, you're out of your mind. It's clear Trump controlled little of the long term Bureaucrats (also referred to as the "swamp") who actually run our government. Presidents come and go, but the Bureaucrats remain. Fauci is the prime example of this. When did he start, in the 1980's? Trump certainly didn't know or control the DOJ who was conducting a spying operation (code name Project Crossfire Hurricane) of his administration. To ask US officials to control safety in a Wuhan lab shared with the CCP military, that's not going to happen. That would be like allowing the CCP to control safety at some US military installation. On second thought, send enough funds to Hunter Biden and anything is possible. Sure, the CCP could have, and most likely would have conducted this research without American taxpayer funds. It's just extremely galling that funds from Americans went via Fauci to kill Americans. Even you should see the irony there. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jun 13, 2021 17:13:57 GMT -6
C'mon, the sources I criticize are hardly similar to CNN. They rarely have any contact with first hand sources, and do very little actual factual news gathering, reporting relying on second hand, unverified statements of others, often misinterpreting and spinning those reports.
I note you give no evidence about any other media outlets. Or, very much that suggests that very much if any of the 1000's of hours of reporting on CNN was actually false in any way.
Much of that harmful reporting was based quotation of what Trump or his high officials stated, and much was based on leaks from the WH. Other than independent factual direct opinion from actual experts in public health and academics.
As to intent, nobody really had to report as a scoop what CNN thought about Trump and that their news appealed to an audience that opposed him.
This Chester has no editorial responsibility or influence, and managed equipment.
He is boasting about his part in something historic inflating his role. This is on the 5th date arranged with the Veritas reporter using a fake Tinder account. The opinion of this staffer taken out of context of the entire conversation or previous conversations or other exchanges, and is based on his limited opportunity to observe a fraction of the CNN reporting during the campaign. He bases his statements of opinion mostly on observations of reporting, not on documentation or any confirmed evidence. It might as well be a matter of opinion of a viewer in many of those cases.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jun 13, 2021 19:52:27 GMT -6
So in your dumbass world a healthy young male who already has Covid antibodies should get vaccinated ? Lets ask Dr. Kevin Hall at the Yale School of Medicine and Dr. Stuart Berger at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, who is also chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics section on cardiology and cardiac surgery.
|
|
