Covid-19

[xu82]

Thanks, D-West.

I’m getting the vaccine the second I can. A 95%+ effective vaccine against this bullshit? I’m in.

I don’t care if morons decide they don’t want it because it probably means I can get it sooner. We can worry about them once the people to believe in science get vaccinated.

I will also get it as soon as I can, which probably won’t be any time too soon. We’ve read my 93 year old mother can name two people as caregivers which would move us up on the list. We take her groceries and to her doctors appointments, etc. Nothing “fun”, but stuff that needs doing.

We have a bunch of family that has gotten the first, and sometimes the second shot already. My wife’s family is full of doctors and they get to the head of the line. No significant side affects to date. I’m not afraid of the shot, but I also don’t believe any info as to how long it helps. Too many unknowns at this point, but a balanced view to me is it’s better to get it when you can and hope for our understanding to grow.

[waggy]

Do you mask wearers use tongue condoms?

[drudy23]

Can you give me an example of what you expect we might learn negatively about the vaccine that we wouldn't already know 10 months in? What more do you need to wait for? This aspect is so confusing to me. One idiot anti-vaxxer says something about infertility that is total BS and now you hear so many people who aren't taking it because they are afraid it will make them infertile, which has no basis in reality. That is how strong the anti-vaxx movement is, one made up statement causes thousands to second guess and say no.

I have 2 pregnant colleagues who got theirs. Their pediatricians and OB/GYNs all strongly encouraged it. They also know the risks to the mother and baby are much greater from COVID than any side effect from the vaccine.

I can make the same argument for the virus. Do you not believe the stats that this virus is relatively harmless and rarely deadly for certain age groups? Or is that part of "what they don't know yet". You'd have to agree that common sense says that the least at risk aren't going to pay much attention to the rules. There's a reason 15 year olds don't get colonoscopies unless something calls for it.

Again, I don't disagree with your decisions, I'm questioning your consistency. You literally argue a point in one response, and then refuse to acknowledge a point like the one I just made.

I have no clue why you're lumping this common sense approach into an anti-vaxx argument.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I can make the same argument for the virus. Do you not believe the stats that this virus is relatively harmless and rarely deadly for certain age groups? Or is that part of "what they don't know yet". You'd have to agree that common sense says that the least at risk aren't going to pay much attention to the rules. There's a reason 15 year olds don't get colonoscopies unless something calls for it.

Again, I don't disagree with your decisions, I'm questioning your consistency. You literally argue a point in one response, and then refuse to acknowledge a point like the one I just made.

1. A common misconception by those who try and downplay COVID is that the only two results are perfectly fine or dead. Even younger people who didn't have a bad course are having some other issues pop up after recovery. Or pulmonary issues that persist. I have seen this from some of our therapists who have got it and recovered.

2. I'm not sure what I am being inconsistent with or what point I ignored of yours.

[drudy23]

1. A common misconception by those who try and downplay COVID is that the only two results are perfectly fine or dead. Even younger people who didn't have a bad course are having some other issues pop up after recovery. Or pulmonary issues that persist. I have seen this from some of our therapists who have got it and recovered.

2. I'm not sure what I am being inconsistent with or what point I ignored of yours.

So a 95% effective vaccine is good enough - yet the stats that show literally this virus is 99.95% non-deadly in younger populations is a "common misconception".

And then you ask where you're being inconsistent LOL

You're not very good at this.

[D-West & PO-Z]

So a 95% effective vaccine is good enough - yet the stats that show literally this virus is 99.95% non-deadly in younger populations is a "common misconception".

And then you ask where you're being inconsistent LOL

You're not very good at this.

For the n'teenth time you completely ignored my point and twisted it into something you wanted to argue instead of addressing my point.

This is pointless.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I just realized this is my 10,000th post

You get to join Go's club!

[xu82]

You get to join Go's club!

I think it’s just proof that I have WAY too much time on my hands!

[waggy]

So, you have a problem with people who wear masks?

No, not at all.

But you obviously have a problem with people who don't.

[Lloyd Braun]

I can make the same argument for the virus. Do you not believe the stats that this virus is relatively harmless and rarely deadly for certain age groups? Or is that part of "what they don't know yet". You'd have to agree that common sense says that the least at risk aren't going to pay much attention to the rules. There's a reason 15 year olds don't get colonoscopies unless something calls for it.

Again, I don't disagree with your decisions, I'm questioning your consistency. You literally argue a point in one response, and then refuse to acknowledge a point like the one I just made.

I have no clue why you're lumping this common sense approach into an anti-vaxx argument.

You are equating the disease with the vaccine, and they are two separate entities. There are several viral infections that cause all sorts of problems including death. There is a reason we don’t want to catch or spread this disease. On the other hand there aren’t any current vaccines that cause death or really any long term issues. That’s why it seems as if it is turning into an anti-vaccine issue, it’s apples and oranges. The disease is not that much older than the vaccine, and the technology for the vaccine has been around way longer.

The quicker we have widespread vaccination, the quicker this goes away. IMO the result of the vaccine development could not have been better. We have a safe and effective vaccine less than a year of the first confirmed case in our nation. The distribution has been less than ideal but the development is unprecedented and the refusal to accept this as safe is going to draw out the disease into next year when it can be gone in half that time.