You mean I'm not longer immune to Mumps, Measles and Rubella? OH NO!

Possibly. The good news is the anti-vaxxers are creating enclaves of high risk areas for outbreaks of those diseases, so if you're anxious to go blind, sterile, or help cause miscarriages or CRS then you're in luck! It's weird that we've become so blind to our good medical fortune that we act like these diseases that were the scourge of our forbearers are just not dangerous now.

What else is weird is the people who use illegal drugs but won't get vaccinated because they don't know or trust what's in it.

---

Being a "vaxxed" person myself I'm not in a big hurry to get another shot... yet I've seen 2 people in my personal life succumb to this virus.  One was a man near my age (late 50's early 60's) and a mother of three young children only 40 years of age.

This virus is no joke and is not "just the flu" as I and many others thought.

I also know of one person in their 20's that is having serious problems supposedly due to the vaccine.  It's not clear if he had other health problems prior to the vaccine, but he is experiencing serious heart problems right now.

I'm just not so sure that I want to get a booster right now.

Good on ya JIB. One of the only people I've seen on this board (or anywhere) willing to admit this.

Thank you.

My thoughts regarding this disease and the vaccine have changed over the past year-and-a-half.  One's perspective might change once they see what can happen in their personal life.

Some very good and close friends of mine both caught the China virus a few months ago.  They are both in their late 50's/early 60's, smokers and let's just say "recreational" drinkers.  One is also diabetic.  They were basically miserable for a few days each, spent a couple of weeks with basically "no energy" and lost the sense of taste and smell for a few weeks.  They got through it just fine.  However, their 40 year old daughter who was the mother of 3 young children got it and ended up in the hospital in ICU for a few weeks.  Sadly she succumbed to the disease.  Granted she had some underlying issues (overweight) and got some kind of "infection" when they inserted the respirator tube which caused pneumonia which probably (in my mind) aided in causing her death.  I don't know if she was vaccinated or not and I will not ask.

My point is, it doesn't really matter what the "survival rate" is.  Some people can combat it and some can't and it doesn't seem to be linked to personal health.

I would NEVER advocate for someone to get a vaccine or not and I certainly am against any kind of mandates.  It should be a personal choice.  When a person makes the choice they need to live (or not) with the consequences of that choice.  I chose to get vaccinated for a variety of reasons.  It was my choice and I'll live with that choice.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Good on ya JIB. One of the only people I've seen on this board (or anywhere) willing to admit this.

Thank you.

My thoughts regarding this disease and the vaccine have changed over the past year-and-a-half.  One's perspective might change once they see what can happen in their personal life.

Some very good and close friends of mine both caught the China virus a few months ago.  They are both in their late 50's/early 60's, smokers and let's just say "recreational" drinkers.  One is also diabetic.  They were basically miserable for a few days each, spent a couple of weeks with basically "no energy" and lost the sense of taste and smell for a few weeks.  They got through it just fine.  However, their 40 year old daughter who was the mother of 3 young children got it and ended up in the hospital in ICU for a few weeks.  Sadly she succumbed to the disease.  Granted she had some underlying issues (overweight) and got some kind of "infection" when they inserted the respirator tube which caused pneumonia which probably (in my mind) aided in causing her death.  I don't know if she was vaccinated or not and I will not ask.

My point is, it doesn't really matter what the "survival rate" is.  Some people can combat it and some can't and it doesn't seem to be linked to personal health.

I would NEVER advocate for someone to get a vaccine or not and I certainly am against any kind of mandates.  It should be a personal choice.  When a person makes the choice they need to live (or not) with the consequences of that choice.  I chose to get vaccinated for a variety of reasons.  It was my choice and I'll live with that choice.

That's true for almost every illness. The novelty of Covid is causing us to lose our rational minds. Though I guess that's not common to begin with. Lawrence had one game and the whole forum just forgot about the two duds he laid. People are weird.

---

We're gonna need a bigger vaccine....

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...Nuxrtc6Pwo

---

I feel like some of you need to read this article and really let it sink in:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/...jy8mWqn3No

---

I feel like some of you need to read this article and really let it sink in:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/...jy8mWqn3No

I knew it. Big sugar is pitted against big pharma...or something.

---

C'mon, HB. You're better than that.

---

That article shows how powerful companies manipulate data, government officials, and policies to make themselves rich. It even uses modern examples.

---

C'mon, HB. You're better than that.

Are you attempting to link this article with vaccinations? If so, does "really let it sink in" mean jump to conclusions?

---

How are we looking here? Are we on the downward trend yet?

---

C'mon, HB. You're better than that.

---

That article shows how powerful companies manipulate data, government officials, and policies to make themselves rich. It even uses modern examples.

Stop the presses!

---

How are we looking here? Are we on the downward trend yet?

Not yet, we're still over capacity although the number of new admissions has slowed some since last Monday.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

It's looking like we are on the downward trend. I'm curious how the numbers will look with all the kids returning to school. I don't suspect we'll see a huge uptick, but delta is a different animal.

---

C'mon, HB. You're better than that.

---

That article shows how powerful companies manipulate data, government officials, and policies to make themselves rich. It even uses modern examples.

Stop the presses!

Don't be daft. This is my whole argument about the over emphasis of the vaccine. The policy does not fit the data.

---

I feel like some of you need to read this article and really let it sink in:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/...jy8mWqn3No

What those morons did to the American people was so wrong. Low fat "diet" is one of the worst things to happen to the health of this country. Guess what your brain needs to function? Fat. Guess what's added to low fat food to make up for the lack of taste when fat is reduced/removed? Sugar under one of its many nasty names. 

My in-laws are convinced they should eat low fat meals and snacks but will eat the [BLEEP] end out of a sugar filled cake or pie. And they wonder why they feel like crap all the time. I'm pretty sure they're insulin resistant at this point.

---

I feel like some of you need to read this article and really let it sink in:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/...jy8mWqn3No

The gist seems to be that "Policymaking committees should consider giving less weight to food industry-funded studies". Seems reasonable. Are you trying to say we should give less weight to studies funded by big pharma? Won't get a disagreement from me there.

So what do you think about studies funded by hospitals, universities, government agencies and health organizations like the WHO?

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you.

It's looking like we are on the downward trend. I'm curious how the numbers will look with all the kids returning to school. I don't suspect we'll see a huge uptick, but delta is a different animal.

---

Stop the presses!

Don't be daft. This is my whole argument about the over emphasis of the vaccine. The policy does not fit the data.

I’m not being daft, you just seem to be on a mission to solve a some nebulous mystery without any clues. It’s as if you’re attempting to prove some dark sinister plot that no one else sees.

---

Personally, I think it's more than just asking policy makers to give less weight to studies produced by these massive corporations. This is because many of the people who work for these companies end up becoming the policy makers. For example, Michael R. Thomas worked for the government for a while, then became the VP of Public Policy for Monsanto. Then he gets a gig under the Obama administration as Deputy Commissioner of the FDA. This isn't a political comment either. There are plenty of people like this who worked for Bush or Trump, too. Bush appointed a guy that had to resign 2 months later for failing to disclose the stocks he had in various health and medical companies. Why do you think he didn't do that? The people that are willing to bend the rules often end up at the top.

There is carousel that happens at the top echelons of our government. I think this big corporations have figured out a backdoor way to profit. That said, it's hard to solve this problem, because these people know the system better than anyone else. I think you want people who have worked in the industry helping shape the policies, but there has to be a way to hold them accountable. When's the last time we've seen ANYONE at the top get punished. Bernie Madoff is the last high-profile guy that comes to mind for me. Most of the punishment these days seems to be directed at whistleblowers, which is a good sign the criminals are running things. I just want this cleaned up, and I think, until it does, we need to be extremely suspicious of data produced by these companies.

As to your question, most of what I post here are studies funded by hospitals, clinics, and, to a lesser degree, universities. I like clinician and hospital studies because they often seem to have the least bias. Well, that's not entirely true. They often make mistakes in methodology, but they seem to get called out pretty quickly for it. I don't trust the government agencies for the reasons mentioned above. I can almost always find flaws in their methodology that end up favoring Big X. When you look at who funds research, it's entirely motivated by profit, which is a good thing if you can keep it from being corrupted. Either the government is subsidizing it or corporations want to profit from it. These people spend billions of dollars lobbying the government and manipulating data. This ultimately impacts the quality of our science. You can probably find posts from me over 5 years ago complaining about the brokenness of our scientific institutions, and, imo, we are seeing it manifest via Covid.

So often, studies with the best interest of the people in mind get ignored because nobody wants to fund it. That's a problem. We get bad data because nobody wants to do peer review. That's a problem. We have activism in journalism that elevates ideology over science. That's a problem. We need peer review. We need studies that isolate variables. We need double blind studies. There should be just as much incentive for peer review as there is for new research. I don't think researchers should get credit for a study until it goes through peer review, the methodology is sound, and the conclusion of study should be repeatable.

---

It's looking like we are on the downward trend. I'm curious how the numbers will look with all the kids returning to school. I don't suspect we'll see a huge uptick, but delta is a different animal.

---

Don't be daft. This is my whole argument about the over emphasis of the vaccine. The policy does not fit the data.

I’m not being daft, you just seem to be on a mission to solve a some nebulous mystery without any clues. It’s as if you’re attempting to prove some dark sinister plot that no one else sees.

Have you bothered to read A study I have posted?

---

Look dude, this is how I am reasoning. We know corporations want to profit. We know there is a history of companies manipulating data for profit at the expense of the people. I have posted many studies that show why I believe a portion of these policies are not scientifically sound, which leads me to believe that some of the policy is being driven by corporate greed and not facts. Those are all perfectly reasonable premises that fit within the context of our system. Is asinine of you to try to discredit me by making me out to be a conspiracy theorist.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v5VrpgXPm4

---

Not a bombshell, but you know... headlines.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v5VrpgXPm4

---

Not a bombshell, but you know... headlines.

Ill take my natural immunity over the poison.

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

Personally, I think it's more than just asking policy makers to give less weight to studies produced by these massive corporations. This is because many of the people who work for these companies end up becoming the policy makers. For example, Michael R. Thomas worked for the government for a while, then became the VP of Public Policy for Monsanto. Then he gets a gig under the Obama administration as Deputy Commissioner of the FDA. This isn't a political comment either. There are plenty of people like this who worked for Bush or Trump, too. Bush appointed a guy that had to resign 2 months later for failing to disclose the stocks he had in various health and medical companies. Why do you think he didn't do that? The people that are willing to bend the rules often end up at the top.

There is carousel that happens at the top echelons of our government. I think this big corporations have figured out a backdoor way to profit. That said, it's hard to solve this problem, because these people know the system better than anyone else. I think you want people who have worked in the industry helping shape the policies, but there has to be a way to hold them accountable. When's the last time we've seen ANYONE at the top get punished. Bernie Madoff is the last high-profile guy that comes to mind for me. Most of the punishment these days seems to be directed at whistleblowers, which is a good sign the criminals are running things. I just want this cleaned up, and I think, until it does, we need to be extremely suspicious of data produced by these companies.

As to your question, most of what I post here are studies funded by hospitals, clinics, and, to a lesser degree, universities. I like clinician and hospital studies because they often seem to have the least bias. Well, that's not entirely true. They often make mistakes in methodology, but they seem to get called out pretty quickly for it. I don't trust the government agencies for the reasons mentioned above. I can almost always find flaws in their methodology that end up favoring Big X. When you look at who funds research, it's entirely motivated by profit, which is a good thing if you can keep it from being corrupted. Either the government is subsidizing it or corporations want to profit from it. These people spend billions of dollars lobbying the government and manipulating data. This ultimately impacts the quality of our science. You can probably find posts from me over 5 years ago complaining about the brokenness of our scientific institutions, and, imo, we are seeing it manifest via Covid.

So often, studies with the best interest of the people in mind get ignored because nobody wants to fund it. That's a problem. We get bad data because nobody wants to do peer review. That's a problem. We have activism in journalism that elevates ideology over science. That's a problem. We need peer review. We need studies that isolate variables. We need double blind studies. There should be just as much incentive for peer review as there is for new research. I don't think researchers should get credit for a study until it goes through peer review, the methodology is sound, and the conclusion of study should be repeatable.

---

I’m not being daft, you just seem to be on a mission to solve a some nebulous mystery without any clues. It’s as if you’re attempting to prove some dark sinister plot that no one else sees.

Have you bothered to read A study I have posted?

---

Look dude, this is how I am reasoning. We know corporations want to profit. We know there is a history of companies manipulating data for profit at the expense of the people. I have posted many studies that show why I believe a portion of these policies are not scientifically sound, which leads me to believe that some of the policy is being driven by corporate greed and not facts. Those are all perfectly reasonable premises that fit within the context of our system. Is asinine of you to try to discredit me by making me out to be a conspiracy theorist.

I'm not trying to discredit you, L2L. I appreciate ya.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgEafZWsqg8

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQYHx7drUWE

---