Has anything ever worked for everyone?
Vacine Shot
- Thread starter chords
- Start date
Has anything ever worked for everyone?
L
lenny
Guest
I knew someone would say such a thing. A fact of life is that virus can kill people. Healthy people handle a virus better than a person with problems. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a God given right that is articulated to Americans in the US constitution. When we prevent an individual’s liberty to move about freely, it can only happen within reason and in an emergency. It is no longer reasonable to continue to do the wrong thing continuously. Typically when we make a mistake, we would make a correction. We have not made the correction but yet we embrace the mistake. This is not only unconstitutional but it’s ignorant. I knew this thing was a set up from the very beginning when I heard the first statistic that said 80% of the people who get coronavirus will have mild to no symptoms. The truth was verified with more statistics that say those of 70 years old and younger have a 99.7% survivability rate. That’s all we need to know and the corrections should’ve been made. The problem is that were being governed by the worldview of globalists who do not like a constitutional republic government so we are in a transition phase. Unless we do something about it, the transition will continue. BMA!!!!!!
Last edited:
L
lenny
Guest
<br>
<br>bingo! The best success ratio for other CV’s at best has been 60% and somehow with minimal testing this c19 vaccine is 95%! NOT!!!!!!
#Lenny2024!
heckler56
Active member
<br>
<br>Here is the beauty and pitfall of statistics: maybe it is 95% of the 60%...
goofy600
Well-known member
Lenny I can agree with you that this has caused a lot of damage to this country and herd immunity will work for the masses, but not for all, so maybe herd immunity plus the vaccine can possibly be a better answer. Could we have gotten to herd status sooner it definitely would have help our economy and now add in the vaccine for the vulnerable and all it will. So hopefully with the combination of the two more things will start returning to some form of normal, governments are starting to open thing up more yes to late for some but at least with vaccine they are willing to try.
L
lenny
Guest
Thanks for your response. Heard immunity is reached when a significant portion of the population has developed antibodies, whether they’re derived from getting the virus or developing antibodies through a vaccination. Slowing the spread also slows the potential for heard immunity. if over 81% of the population has a 99.7% survivability rate if they contract the virus, the best solution would be to allow the majority to take the risk and develop natural antibodies so they are not a risk to the vulnerable. This is simple science yet for this particular event, we have not practiced that. What we have done is encouraged the vulnerable to walk around with masks thinking they have some form of protection yet they’re still dying unnecessarily. Everything about this is completely backwards just like men and women not knowing what gender they are or the endless pronouns to describe their mental condition. We come to a different place in this era of rational thinking while nothing is off-limits anymore. We must look at the bigger picture and understand that the United States of America is not well received in the world anymore because we represent freedom and a capitalist economic worldview. Globalism is gaining momentum and has a been a huge influence and how we deal with this so-called pandemic.
AMEN TO THAT!!!! X100,000,000 well said!!!!
mezz
Well-known member
And now, we will return you to our regular scheduled program, already in progress.....<img src="images/smilies/cower.png" border="0" alt="" title="Cower" smilieid="55" class="inlineimg"><img src="images/smilies/eek.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Eek" smilieid="78" class="inlineimg"><img src="images/smilies/disturbed.png" border="0" alt="" title="Disturbed" smilieid="72" class="inlineimg"> -Mezz
L
lenny
Guest
<br><br>Hey, I know these topics can be a little disheartening to talk about because we all hold different opinions on these things but everybody’s been respectful even though we may disagree. My hopes are that somebody would seriously challenge me in my position so that I would be forced to rethink it so that if I’m wrong, I would be corrected. I’ll be the first to admit that I’m wrong if the logic that is being presented cannot stand on its own merit. I like Frank’s post because it does challenge us to the fundamentals of some of these principles. Please don’t let my persistence be discouraging because I don’t intend it to be an argument that is uncomfortable. Let’s just throw out all the ideas and sift through them, seeing where logic stands!<br><br>
<br>
So I've had the first shot and am really looking forward to getting the second shot. Its easy to say that 99.7% of the people will survive. Those are very good odds but that's still 990,000 (330,000,000 x .003) deaths. Almost twice as many who have died so far so maybe the measures taken have helped. Do I like the restrictions?? No, I think they suck. I've been wearing a mask at work for a year now, I want to be able to go out and do things, I want to go to football, basketball games, etc... Maybe if we'd opened everything up and not put any preventive measures in place we'd be at herd immunity right now but at what cost? Another 450,000 deaths? Just take Minneapolis and wipe it out? (not really a bad idea but I digress)<br>I get it, it sucks. My kids have been robbed of some of their best yrs of school. My daughter basically lost most of her freshman and all of her sophmore yr of college. My son lost a big chunk of his senior yr of high school and actually delayed college for a yr because of this. Its been mishandled from the beginning but we are dealing with something basically unknown without a good plan and people/countries making decisions on the fly with the information changing daily. But we can see the light. Vaccinations are happening, treatments have gotten better, and hopefully this summer will be close to normal.<br><br>So I'll get off my soap box. I agree with both sides here. I'm choosing to get vaccinated because its the right choice for me and my family.<br><br>
L
lenny
Guest
Elf, you make some good points so let’s examine them and see if the stand to the scrutiny. Looking at the 99.7% survivability rate, slowing the spread prevents the healthy population from developing natural immunity. Keep in mind that we would do like we have in the past which is strongly encourage/emphasize to the vulnerable the risks so they can take preventative measures. So basically those with the most to loose would need to take responsibility for their lives while a much smaller stimulus would provide fir the needs of the vulnerable. Again, if the majority of the independent vulnerable folks took the same precautions, their risk is deeply diminished. The majority of the population who is very low risk would deal with the virus favorable therefor presenting themselves to the vulnerable as low/no risk.<br><br>you’re looking at a death rate over an extensive period of time. With our current approach, the healthy population would have easily transmitted this within 3 to 4 months and developed heard immunity quickly. One thing that you’re saying that I think does not fly at all is that there’s so much that we don’t know about this. We’ve dealt with coronavirus’s for a very long time and this one isn’t all that much different so the fundamentals are all there but by saying that we don’t know much about it, we kind of indict ourselves into playing it up for whatever reason. There is something very strange about this entire ordeal that is highly suspect from start to finish. Also, are you taking into account the billions and billions of dollars of collateral damage, loss a business, suicides, alcoholism, drug abuse, child abuse etc.?
So we are both making lots of assumptions here and as I said, I see both sides of it and agree with both sides of it. I wasn't the one who threw out the 99.7% survivability rate. But when you put it in actual deaths its a big #. We assume the vulnerable would do extra measures to protect themselves but who knows? And yes, we've been dealing with coronaviruses forever and will continue to but the differences between them is where the differences are. The flu is a coronavirus, much less lethal, but still a coronavirus. Slowing the spread may slow the natural immunity but 99.7% is still the same, it doesn't get better if natural immunity gets here faster. There are still people with underlying conditions that make up that .003% and will die regardless from it. <br>And you're correct, I'm not taking in the cost to world economy, the trillions of dollars lost, the large and small businesses that have had to close, the people who've lost their jobs. But every time you/I try to put a dollar figure on a life lost we look like blood suckers. But knowing right now for the company I work for just the supply chain issues we've had its a tremendous challenge. And its due to all of this. Whether government put restrictions in place, whether facilities are running at 60% capacity because of people being out sick, all of these are causing problems. The worldwide chip problem, ports backed up for weeks, are just a few of the issues. But the pandemic has disrupted business across the globe and cost trillions.<br>So I'm not arguing your position because I see it. And I agree with a lot of it.
L
lenny
Guest
The 99.7% is from the CDC. This 99.7% represents the survivors of those 70 years old and younger, which is about 81% of the population. So with that in mind, think about what I’m saying here. Those 70 and under in age would not be subject to lock down, social distances etc so therefore the lack of mitigation would result in an epidemic. So what I’m saying is keep business as usual, protect and provide for the vulnerable, the healthy have moderate, mild or no symptoms and the virus makes its rounds. There is no assumption in saying the virus would indeed spread quickly if we do not prohibit its spread.
Lastly, as I said multiple times now, the method in which Covid deaths are recorded is severely skewed. If I were pressed to make the assumption of how skewed the number actually is, I would be willing to put a wager on 35%. Will there be a day when some of these facts will be known, I would say so. What assumptions do you see me making that create as issue?
dj2muchjunk
New member
So far a nice lively discussion. It's great we can debate freely about something intensely important. I agree a lot of "information is bull" but I will still get the shot for a comfort mind set. As for the unknown cause of who, what, why , follow the money!
L
lenny
Guest
<br>
<br>100% agreed! I’ve spent a great deal of time in rigorous debate on the topic of religious doctrine, specifically on the topic of Arminianism, calvinism and traditionalism. Without any types of debate, we understand each other to a lesser degree. Communication is key while civility and respect keep the debate alive. Thanks for your input!
L
lenny
Guest
Elf, one more aspect to consider; the 99.7% figure is for those who are 70 and under who get the virus. Keep in mind need 60-70 % of the population to be able to have antibodies to reach heard immunity. So your figure included 100% of the 70 years old and younger. With that in mind, consider the inflated number of actual COVID deaths to deaths with covid. Between those to aspects, the numbers drop significantly. <br>
heckler56
Active member
I always try to boil down problems into simplified information to then see where the logic can take me. You can walk the various paths and each starts to validate itself or begins to present further hurdles which in as much itself narrows the likelihood of probability.<br><br>We know Sweden took the approach of keeping open with warnings to the vulnerable population. Michigan was on the opposite side of that approach. Sweden has a population of roughly 10MM, has 732k confirmed cases and 13k deaths. Michigan has a population of roughly 10MM, has 618k confirmed cases and 16k deaths.<br><br>When I was last working out of a office 2006-2015, I observed the population between 30-40 being what I would describe as germaphobes. Used paper towels opening doors and hand sanitizer. This was done as they told me because they had young children and were trying to avoid getting them sick. FYI, that population spent the most time out of the office nursing their children or themselves from illnesses. <br><br>During my period of life where my children were that similar age I was commuting by train into Chicago (17 yrs period). During that 17 years I was not sick (other than calling in saying I was). My children had perfect attendance in school without a day missed through high school. I will note that 2 years after I started on the train the following occurred. I tested positive for the TB germ (inactive) as we became certified to run a daycare in our home. The doctors suspected it was acquired on the train by being next to someone infected and coughing day after day. Had to be, people coughed and sneezed all the time and we were all creatures of habit in the train cars where we rode daily. <br><br>When one of the children my wife was watching in daycare developed measles a warning flag went out. We were surprised when the neighbor across the street called to say she wanted to bring her children over. See Janet came from a family of 8 siblings and she said whenever anyone got sick it was the family's practice to rub faces. Get the cold, flu whatever through the family all at once so it didn't drag out. Her children and ours all ended up with mild cases of the measles. Interesting approach that worked.<br><br>Last year I attended several auto races (August & October). None of the people I friended knew of a employee, neighbor, family member that had covid. These people came from all around the country and generally resided in the major cities. The most profound was a friend I have camped by for the last 15 years. He had recently returned last June from living in Italy for 2 years. His wife is a head HR associate and their family was moved there for this 2 year stint. We conversed regularly while they were in lockdown. Other interesting facts are they never knew anyone that developed covid in Italy nor did her company have any employees with it....<br><br>Lets remember that the media and politicians wether in one camp or the other are out for your attention. Media for the proverbial corporate greed of revenue and politicians for greed and power.<br><br>Based on the above as well as arguments made by some of the folks on here, this is why it all remains mirky.<br><br>
dfattack
Well-known member
Does anyone actually Believe the reported COVID death toll? I don’t. It’s been said here and many other places so I’m not the first but it’s a huge difference between dying from COVID vs with COVID. Much of the discussion below assumes the death toll is real and that that number is actual deaths due to COVID. IMO If you narrow that number down to actual deaths FROM COVID that drastically changes the dynamics of the conversation.