 
     |
| What is everyone's thoughts on the "vaccine" mandate? (Page 14/18) |
|
TheDigitalAlchemist
|
DEC 23, 04:46 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 2.5:
If it works, the booster or vaccine wouldn't keep you from getting it, it would only make the virus nasty effects weaker for you, and you alone. What I dont like is the idea being spread around that being vaccinated somehow reduces the spread or makes you somehow safer to be near to other people. If someone thinks that is indeed the case please explain how.
|
|
One thing that sucks is that those who have recently been "boosted" have been having a worse time because their body was still weakened, fighting against the "boost". Maybe if they had a few weeks to recover from the shot before catching it...
It's like "hey, If I kick you in the balls, it will make the NEXT time someone kicks you in the balls less severe, because you now will hold your hand in front of them...", but then ya kick the fella twice within a short period of time.
"Just Think of how much WORSE you'd feel if I didn't kick you that other time justnow!"
It's all a big fat headache is what it is.
Time for me to mask up and play the Covid roulette during my commute home.
yay.
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
DEC 23, 05:39 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 2.5:
If it works, the booster or vaccine wouldn't keep you from getting it, it would only make the virus nasty effects weaker for you, and you alone. |
|
This, is not true.
| quote | Originally posted by 2.5:What I dont like is the idea being spread around that being vaccinated somehow reduces the spread or makes you
somehow safer to be near to other people. If someone thinks that is indeed the case please explain how.
|
|
This, is true.
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
DEC 29, 12:43 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
This, is not true.
This, is true.
|
|
Please explain.
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
DEC 29, 02:27 PM
|
|
| quote | People who are vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 but get breakthrough infections may be less likely to spread the virus because they shed it for a shorter period than unvaccinated people who are infected, according a new study led by Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
The researchers also determined that the Delta variant’s infectiousness is likely not due to high virus production in people who are infected, because it appears that virus production is similar across different SARS-CoV-2 variants.
The study was published online December 1, 2021 in the New England Journal of Medicine. |
|
The article, which isn't "real long", continues from there.
I don't think that the omicron variant was relevant to this study, because the data was collected before omicron went viral (pun intended.)
The word "omicron" does not appear in this article, or in the research report that was just published in the New England Journal of Medicine. That's the research report on which this article is based.
"Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 cases clear more quickly, less likely to spread infection over time"
Nicole Rura for the T.H. Chan School of Public Health at Harvard University; December 1, 2021.
https://www.hsph.harvard.ed...to-spread-infection/[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-29-2021).]
|
|
|
blackrams
|
DEC 29, 03:35 PM
|
|
Who in this group is a qualified Virologist? How about a Medical Professional of any kind?
There are those who "think" they have all kinds of answers based on their internet research. 
I'm thinking I'll keep taking my advice from my docs. My plumber offered his opinion the other day, once he was done, I flushed the toilet. 
Rams
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
DEC 29, 03:44 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Who in this group is a qualified Virologist? How about a Medical Professional of any kind?
There are those who "think" they have all kinds of answers based on their internet research.
I'm thinking I'll keep taking my advice from my docs. My plumber offered his opinion the other day, once he was done, I flushed the toilet.
Rams |
|
This is why, except for the very occasional question, I stay out of these discussions. It is somewhere between amusing and disturbing to watch a bunch of truck drivers and network admin argue about biochemistry.
My plan for disease prevention has always been pretty simple: Stay away from the hookers.
|
|
|
|
MidEngineManiac
|
DEC 29, 03:49 PM
|
|
Yeh, when it comes to docs, I like 2nd, 3rd and 200th opinions
https://www.spinalcord.com/...ading-cause-of-death
We are pursuing the claim, but it will take time. The cancer problem around here was a case of malpractice. She had all the symptoms 3 years ago and it could have been caught very early, and a minor procedure instead of a life-altering battle that isnt over yet (possible hysterectomy in march). Instead her doc at the time couldn't be bothered investigating and kept prescribing her different meds.
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
DEC 29, 05:03 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Who in this group is a qualified Virologist? How about a Medical Professional of any kind?
There are those who "think" they have all kinds of answers based on their internet research.
I'm thinking I'll keep taking my advice from my docs. My plumber offered his opinion the other day, once he was done, I flushed the toilet.
Rams |
|
My idea in posting about that research from the T.H. Chan School of Public Health was not to offer a definitive answer as to whether unvaccinated people are a threat to vaccinated people.
My purpose was to invite forum members at large to engage in more than just momentary introspection about their own ideas and the confidence that they have invested (or vested) in their own ideas.
If properly read and understood, that message would have been perceived as--well, let me queue it up for you:
https://youtu.be/mPPGMNOLaMw?t=159
"Namaste"[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-29-2021).]
|
|
|
blackrams
|
DEC 29, 05:35 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
My idea in posting about that research from the T.H. Chan School of Public Health was not to offer a definitive answer as to whether unvaccinated people are a threat to vaccinated people.
My purpose was to invite forum members at large to engage in more than just momentary introspection about their own ideas and the confidence that they have invested (or vested) in their own ideas.
If properly read and understood, that message would have been perceived as--well, let me queue it up for you:
https://youtu.be/mPPGMNOLaMw?t=159
"Namaste"
|
|
That specific posting was not pointed directly at you although, it did include you. Exaggerations and outright lies have and continue to be told by various people without anything to back them up or using some crackpot "expert". Don't take it personally, wasn't meant as an insult, as least not one directed personally at you.
Rams
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
DEC 29, 09:53 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
That specific posting was not pointed directly at you although, it did include you. Exaggerations and outright lies have and continue to be told by various people without anything to back them up or using some crackpot "expert". Don't take it personally, wasn't meant as an insult, as least not one directed personally at you.
Rams |
|
I didn't take what "Rams" said very personally. I understood it just as he has describes it here. But I'm glad (in a small way) that it prompted me to explain myself, in so far as to why I posted that article. An invitation to "forum members at large . . ."
At home test panel display
 Covid negative
 Covid positive[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-29-2021).]
|
|
|
|