Instead of banning certain members...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Notice that Tom gives no expert reference for his statement of "extremely unlikely" Tom is full of untruths, so this is suspect.
However, even doctors in favor of additional precautions say inadvertent injection in a vein is extremely unlikely.
 
I read many of you writing about your disbelief and flippant distain of some familiar religious community perhaps because abortion is murder.
I know, however, you all follow the ten commandments and avoid your mortal sin because deep down you know God within and throughout you.
You behave well and can't forget God is Love and yet we have faith in the resurection and judgement of life.
Don't 'cha just know it?
I find the idea of abortion abhorrent. I also find it's use in politics to divide people abhorrent. I do not care for any politician who brings the bible on the campaign trail.
 
Digging into this whole covid mess has made me profoundly sad. Almost everyone i love and care about has been jabbed and many of them have fallen ill. There is no satisfaction in being proven right with this hideous mess......
I think huge numbers of people who have generally supported vaccinations have seen close associates be affected by particular problems and syndromes that were unusual, especially in relatively young people in good shape. Many of them, however, are in denial due to the mind-numbing all-encompassing propaganda by the firm which paid the highest criminal fraud fine in medical history. Pfizer brought every news channel to you since this began. And they wanted 75 years to disclose.
 
Digging into this whole covid mess has made me profoundly sad. Almost everyone i love and care about has been jabbed and many of them have fallen ill. There is no satisfaction in being proven right with this hideous mess......
right sure if you say so. I mean people that have been vaxed are dropping like flies. anything else???
 
I think huge numbers of people who have generally supported vaccinations have seen close associates be affected by particular problems and syndromes that were unusual, especially in relatively young people in good shape.
sorry but this is not happening. just because you want to see it does not make it so.
 
I read many of you writing about your disbelief and flippant distain of some familiar religious community perhaps because abortion is murder.
I know, however, you all follow the ten commandments and avoid your mortal sin because deep down you know God within and throughout you.
You behave well and can't forget God is Love and yet we have faith in the resurection and judgement of life.
Don't 'cha just know it?
Not really. I have no need of some mythical deity to tell me what is right and what is wrong.
 
I read many of you writing about your disbelief and flippant distain of some familiar religious community perhaps because abortion is murder.
I know, however, you all follow the ten commandments and avoid your mortal sin because deep down you know God within and throughout you.
You behave well and can't forget God is Love and yet we have faith in the resurection and judgement of life.
Don't 'cha just know it?
No.
I am merely a moral animal.
 
That is why thoughtful statistical analysis is applied to the data. Then it becomes meaningful and significant.
No it doesn't. Its a 'voluntary reporting system'. That throws all possibility of statistical analysis being useful out the window. It is the quintessential example of 'anecdotal data' which translates to 'not statistically useful'.

There's a reason you have to spend a lot of time in class to be gainfully employed in medical research. One of the many things that occur in such training is having the taking of shortcuts beaten out of your head so you don't make tragically wrong decisions based on poorly honed analytical skills.
 
Mortal sin? That's the one that turns the whole bottle of milk black? (Baltimore catechism for the terminally inane.)

Screen Shot 2022-06-17 at 10.45.36 AM.png
 
No it doesn't. Its a 'voluntary reporting system'. That throws all possibility of statistical analysis being useful out the window. It is the quintessential example of 'anecdotal data' which translates to 'not statistically useful'.

There's a reason you have to spend a lot of time in class to be gainfully employed in medical research. One of the many things that occur in such training is having the taking of shortcuts beaten out of your head so you don't make tragically wrong decisions based on poorly honed analytical skills.
Lol.....The CDC has taken vaccines off the market in the past for far fewer reports than the covid "vaccines" have generated. But you know,  Emergency and all that.
 
Last edited:
Anecdotally, from a HCP: What I have personally seen is that many triple-vaxed young adults have gotten the virus as many as three times in six months. It was clear to me that neither previous infection with Omicron (rev. 1, at least) nor vaccination provided much protection against BA1, BA3, etc. And yeah, that absolutely got my attention. It's not weird to be suspicious about that.

At the same time, I'm following these folks personally very closely-- some of them REALLY closely. I see them more often, and for longer sometimes, than their GPs, who rotate through Student Health or HMOs. None of them are 'dropping like flies.' Some 3x or 4x vaxed older friends who had breakthroughs have longer recoveries than others-- one friend of mine in his late 50s is only hiking 70% as far as he did 5 years ago on the same trail, but it's only been a couple of months, and he keeps seeing steady improvement. But the young people are doing pretty well. I've only heard of one triple-vaxed young athlete who wasn't able to return to competition last semester after infection.

At the same time, I want to know more about the unvaccinated people who are supposedly not getting infected. Are they testing as frequently as the vaccinated cohort? Because here's the other confounding factor: You often have to test three, four, five times to test positive for Omicron. It would make sense to me that unvaccinated folks are more likely to only test when they have to-- say, as part of a study, or for work, or entering the hospital for something else, etc.-- while vaccinated folks are more like to test more frequently. Though I do not know that, it's just an educated guess.

I also feel like we shouldn't ignore the EU's position: They're not so sure about a fourth shot, they wonder about 'tiring out' the immune system. If you're someone like me, with a weird-ass immune system, I'd take that seriously.

I did feel pretty wiped out late this winter and spring, after my third shot, and I had laryngitis for three months! Vaccine reaction? Breakthrough infection? I'll never know. But I've been feeling really strong the last few weeks, and my times are looking real good for my long, steep climbs!

I'd consider a fourth shot, just not anytime soon, and I hope there's a different vaccine available, something more broad spectrum. What seems logical to me: It's probably not a good idea to continue hammering your immune system, either with vaccines or infections, in exactly the same place. Don't let yourself get worn down into a weakened state-- and I think that also means avoiding heavy exercise if you aren't feeling well, either from vax side effects or the infection. (I did hear one news spot that said you SHOULD exercise right after getting vaccinated, which seemed really weird to me -- wish I had better intel on that!) But the cases I see that relapse are generally athletes who went right back out on the field or partiers who returned to near-blackout drinking immediately.

Most people I know are completely healthy after four shots. No one besides me, that I know, felt weaker after the third. I also don't know of a single serious case in anyone who had four shots. Maybe it's happening somewhere, but I've never seen or heard of it. That still doesn't mean that we should all get four shots no matter what. One-size-fits-all medicine has almost killed me on several occasions.
 
No it doesn't. Its a 'voluntary reporting system'. That throws all possibility of statistical analysis being useful out the window.
It is the quintessential example of 'anecdotal data' which translates to 'not statistically useful'.
Wrong. It would depend on what type of information you wished to extract.
 
Anecdotally, from a HCP: What I have personally seen is that many triple-vaxed young adults have gotten the virus as many as three times in six months. It was clear to me that neither previous infection with Omicron (rev. 1, at least) nor vaccination provided much protection against BA1, BA3, etc. And yeah, that absolutely got my attention. It's not weird to be suspicious about that.

At the same time, I'm following these folks personally very closely-- some of them REALLY closely. I see them more often, and for longer sometimes, than their GPs, who rotate through Student Health or HMOs. None of them are 'dropping like flies.' Some 3x or 4x vaxed older friends who had breakthroughs have longer recoveries than others-- one friend of mine in his late 50s is only hiking 70% as far as he did 5 years ago on the same trail, but it's only been a couple of months, and he keeps seeing steady improvement. But the young people are doing pretty well. I've only heard of one triple-vaxed young athlete who wasn't able to return to competition last semester after infection.

At the same time, I want to know more about the unvaccinated people who are supposedly not getting infected. Are they testing as frequently as the vaccinated cohort? Because here's the other confounding factor: You often have to test three, four, five times to test positive for Omicron. It would make sense to me that unvaccinated folks are more likely to only test when they have to-- say, as part of a study, or for work, or entering the hospital for something else, etc.-- while vaccinated folks are more like to test more frequently. Though I do not know that, it's just an educated guess.

I also feel like we shouldn't ignore the EU's position: They're not so sure about a fourth shot, they wonder about 'tiring out' the immune system. If you're someone like me, with a weird-ass immune system, I'd take that seriously.

I did feel pretty wiped out late this winter and spring, after my third shot, and I had laryngitis for three months! Vaccine reaction? Breakthrough infection? I'll never know. But I've been feeling really strong the last few weeks, and my times are looking real good for my long, steep climbs!

I'd consider a fourth shot, just not anytime soon, and I hope there's a different vaccine available, something more broad spectrum. What seems logical to me: It's probably not a good idea to continue hammering your immune system, either with vaccines or infections, in exactly the same place. Don't let yourself get worn down into a weakened state-- and I think that also means avoiding heavy exercise if you aren't feeling well, either from vax side effects or the infection. (I did hear one news spot that said you SHOULD exercise right after getting vaccinated, which seemed really weird to me -- wish I had better intel on that!) But the cases I see that relapse are generally athletes who went right back out on the field or partiers who returned to near-blackout drinking immediately.

Most people I know are completely healthy after four shots. No one besides me, that I know, felt weaker after the third. I also don't know of a single serious case in anyone who had four shots. Maybe it's happening somewhere, but I've never seen or heard of it. That still doesn't mean that we should all get four shots no matter what. One-size-fits-all medicine has almost killed me on several occasions.
Perhaps the only intelligent post I've seen from "the other side".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back