Sorry, busy watching the video...
Are all of you guys retired? lol
So much free time on your hands.
(08-26-2021, 06:54 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-26-2021, 12:47 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I really think you understand the concepts of actuarial science better than this, insurance costs are based on a risk calculation and the premium reflects your risk. If you choose not to get a vaccine to protect you from a serious health event then you choose to accept a larger health insurance premium. It's a preventative measure not different from that mammogram you mentioned. But you are missing the biggest issue here though, since you don't pay for it you don't get a say. The simple fact is that as long as the employer has a financial interest in your health they they are within their rights to act in that interest and you have the option to get the shot, pay the higher premium, or just get your own policy.
Then my choice is to get my own policy. I am not anti-vaxx. My decision is a personal one based on my medical history. That's it. I don't care what other people decide for themselves but I do care when those decisions, very personal decisions, are taken away.
It's a personal choice but it's not ALL about personal choice. The choice you make has the potential to impact others and this is what seems to get missed most of the time. With choice comes responsibility.
(08-27-2021, 09:12 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]Are all of you guys retired? lol
So much free time on your hands.
I work in healthcare, this is germane to my business. I sit in multiple meetings weekly where this data is reviewed, considered, and used to implement organizational responses.
Edit: I also spend time on it because I'm writing a case study on the implementation of the use of telemedicine as the primary mechanism of healthcare delivery during the 2020 Covid surge in Northeast Florida as part of my doctoral dissertation/project.
(08-27-2021, 09:12 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]Are all of you guys retired? lol
So much free time on your hands.
I’m counting down the days.
I’m 31 so there are a lot of days but still…
(08-27-2021, 09:45 AM)JagsorDie Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2021, 09:12 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]Are all of you guys retired? lol
So much free time on your hands.
I’m counting down the days.
I’m 31 so there are a lot of days but still…
36 over here so still a ways to go.
Good for you retired dudes! Have a drink at noon for me.
I'm independently wealthy from a few wise choices I made when I was younger. Jk. I'm a stay at home dad, but I married a doctor, so I'm not completely wrong. I have a lot of free time, especially now that the kids are back in school. I'm going to write a book this year, I think.
(08-27-2021, 08:07 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (08-26-2021, 11:51 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]Where do you get the shot that is FDA approved? The approved one doesn't exist and isn't manufactured yet.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
Oh for diety's sake, they put a brand name on it. The chemical composition is the same, quit listening to stupid people.
Fact Sheet: https://www.fda.gov/media/144414/download
Relevant text: The FDA-approved COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) and the FDA-authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) have the same formulation and can be used interchangeably to provide the COVID-19 vaccination series.
They say they are the same but legally they are distinct. The approved vaccine is not in production yet. Pfizer is still under EUA. If the FDA approves it and it is available, all the other EUA have to end and be pulled. Why haven't they pulled all the vaccines if it is approved? They also are supposed to pull all the doses produced under the EUA.
None of that has happened because they are playing games with the "approval" and relying on people to just trust the MSM telling them it is fine.
(08-27-2021, 09:03 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]So, let me break down my biggest problems with the study, because no one is probably going to watch the video. The study looked at people who were infected in 2020 up until December. Then it tried to find people who were reinfected between May and June. They found 50 people who were vaccinated, and 179 who were not, and used those numbers to get your 2.34X more likely to get the virus.
- None of these patients were likely to have the Delta variant at this time, but we don't know, because they didn't test for variants.
- They didn't give us a breakdown of age range or risk group.
- The study was entirely voluntary, meaning the people had to get the PCR test of their own accord. It did not consider whether people or their health care providers might not have been as quick to test those who were vaccinated.
- It doesn't take into account that the vaccine temporarily increased antibodies in patients. When you consider the close proximity to when they would have had access to the vaccine vs when they did the study, it makes sense that the vaccinated would have a temporarily boosted immune system. Key word: temporary
- It doesn't consider those who were vaccinated out of state
- It was unable to confirm if these people were actually the same patients, since it just used first and last name.
These are big deals, dude. The CDC has SO much access to data, and they use this small handful of people to make the case for vaccinations for everyone? That doesn't make any sense.
It's just all made up. It doesn't use the same level for the PCR tests, same risks, same environment, etc. There hasn't been a real study using proper accepted testing standards where all variables are the same except for the vaccinated status. Everything is just using data that they collect and then using it to backup a viewpoint.
(08-27-2021, 09:03 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]So, let me break down my biggest problems with the study, because no one is probably going to watch the video. The study looked at people who were infected in 2020 up until December. Then it tried to find people who were reinfected between May and June. They found 50 people who were vaccinated, and 179 who were not, and used those numbers to get your 2.34X more likely to get the virus.
- None of these patients were likely to have the Delta variant at this time, but we don't know, because they didn't test for variants.
- They didn't give us a breakdown of age range or risk group.
- The study was entirely voluntary, meaning the people had to get the PCR test of their own accord. It did not consider whether people or their health care providers might not have been as quick to test those who were vaccinated.
- It doesn't take into account that the vaccine temporarily increased antibodies in patients. When you consider the close proximity to when they would have had access to the vaccine vs when they did the study, it makes sense that the vaccinated would have a temporarily boosted immune system. Key word: temporary
- It doesn't consider those who were vaccinated out of state
- It was unable to confirm if these people were actually the same patients, since it just used first and last name.
These are big deals, dude. The CDC has SO much access to data, and they use this small handful of people to make the case for vaccinations for everyone? That doesn't make any sense.
Cliff's Notes version: it wasn't a control group with everything that entails which makes the study and its findings useless and baseless.
I'm not smart when it comes to math and science but common sense dictates that in cases where there are so many unknowns you can't use it as a baseline for anything other than
you don't know.
(08-27-2021, 09:27 AM)MarleyJag Wrote: [ -> ] (08-26-2021, 06:54 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]Then my choice is to get my own policy. I am not anti-vaxx. My decision is a personal one based on my medical history. That's it. I don't care what other people decide for themselves but I do care when those decisions, very personal decisions, are taken away.
It's a personal choice but it's not ALL about personal choice. The choice you make has the potential to impact others and this is what seems to get missed most of the time. With choice comes responsibility.
So why do I have to risk my health for someone else? If my medical history and doctor tells me a vaccine is
not in the best interest of my health THAT is what I'm listening to.
WHY IS THIS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?!
(08-27-2021, 10:01 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]I'm independently wealthy from a few wise choices I made when I was younger. Jk. I'm a stay at home dad, but I married a doctor, so I'm not completely wrong. I have a lot of free time, especially now that the kids are back in school. I'm going to write a book this year, I think.
Is the book about how to marry a doctor and become a stay at home dad? It’s too late for me but young men everywhere need this info!
(08-27-2021, 12:45 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2021, 09:27 AM)MarleyJag Wrote: [ -> ]It's a personal choice but it's not ALL about personal choice. The choice you make has the potential to impact others and this is what seems to get missed most of the time. With choice comes responsibility.
So why do I have to risk my health for someone else? If my medical history and doctor tells me a vaccine is not in the best interest of my health THAT is what I'm listening to.
WHY IS THIS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?!
My barber has an autoimmune disease and has been advised by his doctor to stop his medication and to not get vaccinated. Apparently the medication lowers his ability to fight the virus. The poor guy is walking a tightrope between a painful gut, because his body attacks his small intestine, and getting COVID.
(08-27-2021, 12:10 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2021, 08:07 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Oh for deity's sake, they put a brand name on it. The chemical composition is the same, quit listening to stupid people.
Fact Sheet: https://www.fda.gov/media/144414/download
Relevant text: The FDA-approved COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) and the FDA-authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) have the same formulation and can be used interchangeably to provide the COVID-19 vaccination series.
They say they are the same but legally they are distinct. The approved vaccine is not in production yet. Pfizer is still under EUA. If the FDA approves it and it is available, all the other EUA have to end and be pulled. Why haven't they pulled all the vaccines if it is approved? They also are supposed to pull all the doses produced under the EUA.
None of that has happened because they are playing games with the "approval" and relying on people to just trust the MSM telling them it is fine.
Yes it is, they are not different; they are just changing the packaging to reflect the commercial name. It's the same vaccine using the same formulation from the same factories. I can't believe that you actually think the vaccine they've been monitoring for 6 months isn't the same one they approved. You've just lost all sense of perspective with these delusions, and you need to quit reading Natural News, Mike Adams is gonna rot your brain. You're also incorrect about the EUA, if the PHE were to end
that would force the end of the EUA, not having one vaccine approved. The PHE must be renewed every 90 days and will most likely continue for at least another 12 months, and the EUA most likely along with it even as the other vaccines also gain approval.
The FDA from back in May:
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-an...rgency-use
The relevant text: The EUA will be effective until the declaration that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of the emergency use of drugs and biologics for prevention and treatment of COVID-19 is terminated, and may be revised or revoked if it is determined the EUA no longer meets the statutory criteria for issuance or to protect public health or safety.
(08-27-2021, 09:57 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2021, 09:45 AM)JagsorDie Wrote: [ -> ]I’m counting down the days.
I’m 31 so there are a lot of days but still…
36 over here so still a ways to go.
Good for you retired dudes! Have a drink at noon for me.
Why do we have to wait so late?
(08-27-2021, 12:57 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2021, 10:01 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]I'm independently wealthy from a few wise choices I made when I was younger. Jk. I'm a stay at home dad, but I married a doctor, so I'm not completely wrong. I have a lot of free time, especially now that the kids are back in school. I'm going to write a book this year, I think.
Is the book about how to marry a doctor and become a stay at home dad? It’s too late for me but young men everywhere need this info!
Cliff notes:
1. Go in the Marines before going into college. Be a man amongst boys.
2. Find a woman that's pretty, naïve, reasonable, and ambitious.
3. Woo her and encourage her dreams.
4. Profit.
(08-27-2021, 02:35 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2021, 12:57 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]Is the book about how to marry a doctor and become a stay at home dad? It’s too late for me but young men everywhere need this info!
Cliff notes:
1. Go in the Marines before going into college. Be a man amongst boys.
2. Find a woman that's pretty, naïve, reasonable, and ambitious.
3. Woo her and encourage her dreams.
4. Profit.
A good plan if you can accomplish number 2. Pick the wrong one though, and it ends up #2.
(08-27-2021, 01:34 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2021, 12:10 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]They say they are the same but legally they are distinct. The approved vaccine is not in production yet. Pfizer is still under EUA. If the FDA approves it and it is available, all the other EUA have to end and be pulled. Why haven't they pulled all the vaccines if it is approved? They also are supposed to pull all the doses produced under the EUA.
None of that has happened because they are playing games with the "approval" and relying on people to just trust the MSM telling them it is fine.
Yes it is, they are not different; they are just changing the packaging to reflect the commercial name. It's the same vaccine using the same formulation from the same factories. I can't believe that you actually think the vaccine they've been monitoring for 6 months isn't the same one they approved. You've just lost all sense of perspective with these delusions, and you need to quit reading Natural News, Mike Adams is gonna rot your brain. You're also incorrect about the EUA, if the PHE were to end that would force the end of the EUA, not having one vaccine approved. The PHE must be renewed every 90 days and will most likely continue for at least another 12 months, and the EUA most likely along with it even as the other vaccines also gain approval.
The FDA from back in May: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-an...rgency-use
The relevant text: The EUA will be effective until the declaration that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of the emergency use of drugs and biologics for prevention and treatment of COVID-19 is terminated, and may be revised or revoked if it is determined the EUA no longer meets the statutory criteria for issuance or to protect public health or safety.
I don't read natural news, so no clue what they are saying.
You are splitting hairs trying to justify the opinion. The approved drug is not in production. I don't care if it is the same drug formula, the Pfizer existing drug was not approved. It was way to game the system. They approved a drug with 0 supply. If they approved the Pfizer drug, per all rules and regulations they have to pull the EUA, stop using the doses produced under the EUA, and pull all other company EUAs. None of that happened, why is that? It was because the only way the government and companies have any hope of enforcing mandates.
They will lose in court because the approved vaccine does not exist. You cannot get the approved vaccine anywhere.
Per your trusted and believable FDA's own website
Quote:https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coro...9-pandemic
During a public health emergency, the FDA can use its Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) authority to allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products, to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases when certain criteria are met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.
Oops they approved a drug, now the EUAs have to be removed for all other treatments as there is now an approved treatment. Well, the drug that we "approved" doesn't exist really, so we will just extend the existing EUAs. Who knows when the approved vaccine will actually be available but we will let everyone believe they are getting an approved drug and give companies the ability to fire people.
It's all a game and they know exactly what they are doing.