So, at a glance, it looks like you're now trying to argue the vaccines are effective, which I wasn't contesting... at least not for people over 50 (never have). I was specifically arguing that they aren't effective for 6 months against new strains. Are those papers going to prove me wrong?

---

Let's make sure we're on the same page. I said vaccines have a short duration.

You said vaccine efficacy isn't reduced for 6 months. Which implies that this will be true in perpetuity. That's not true.

People cannot get a shot twice a year and be largely protected from COVID for the next 6 months without waning efficacy.

---

Let's make sure we're on the same page. I said vaccines have a short duration. No disagreement, they aren't lifetime.

You said vaccine efficacy isn't reduced for 6 months. Which implies that this will be true in perpetuity. That's not true. It does not imply that, that is your own personal interpretation.

People cannot get a shot twice a year and be largely protected from COVID for the next 6 months without waning efficacy. Less effective and ineffective are not the same thing. If people get the shot twice a year they will not fall below the efficacy threshold for either of the big 2 vaccines.

---

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

It absolutely implies that. Remember, my beef with your statement is that people who do not follow the data will not be able to properly make decisions based on a statement that definitive. Which is why I said you have a responsibility to qualify and quantify your statements.

Is the cutoff for vaccine efficacy still 50%?

---

It absolutely implies that. Remember, my beef with your statement is that people who do not follow the data will not be able to properly make decisions based on a statement that definitive. Which is why I said you have a responsibility to qualify and quantify your statements.

Is the cutoff for vaccine efficacy still 50%?

As far as I know. And again you're wrong, I have no responsibility whatsoever to quantify or qualify anything. This is a conversation, I'm not paid to do this nor are there any rules to which I must conform. We can talk about it but I draw the line when someone thinks they get to determine what I have to do.

---

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

Look, dude. You can do whatever you want. It's a free country. However, I am assuming we are in the pursuit of truth, which is the only reason I bother engaging in this debate.

If you don't care about the truth, then I don't really care what you think, because you're a believer, not a thinker. If you do care about truth, you do have a responsibility to others and yourself to qualify and quantify your information to enough to properly represent your position... not because you are FORCED to do so, but because that's the only way we can separate fact from fictions, allowing our positions to be fairly scrutinized and clarified.

We are not casually conversing about COVID. We have points of disagreement. When your statement is fundamentally flawed (because it leaves important data out or it's open to being misinterpreted), I should call you out on it. That is my responsibility to the TRUTH, not to you. The opposite is also true, is it not? Do you not feel a responsibility to point out where you feel I might be misleading others? If you have a responsibility to point out the truth, then you also have a responsibility to convey the truth.

---

“Host natural immunity is the first line of defense against pathogen invasion, and heart muscle cells have their own natural immune machinery. Activation of the body’s immune response is essential for fighting against virus infection; however, this may also impair heart muscle cell function and even lead to cell death and heart failure,” Lin said.

The researchers studied whether the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein activates the natural immune response in heart muscle cells”

https://newsroom.heart.org/news/coronavi...scle-cells

---

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

“Host natural immunity is the first line of defense against pathogen invasion, and heart muscle cells have their own natural immune machinery. Activation of the body’s immune response is essential for fighting against virus infection; however, this may also impair heart muscle cell function and even lead to cell death and heart failure,” Lin said.

The researchers studied whether the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein activates the natural immune response in heart muscle cells”

https://newsroom.heart.org/news/coronavi...scle-cells

So you've finally caught up to the rest of us that know that the COVID virus does more damage to the heart than the vaccine.

---

CCL Stroudcrowd1

“Host natural immunity is the first line of defense against pathogen invasion, and heart muscle cells have their own natural immune machinery. Activation of the body’s immune response is essential for fighting against virus infection; however, this may also impair heart muscle cell function and even lead to cell death and heart failure,” Lin said.

The researchers studied whether the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein activates the natural immune response in heart muscle cells”

https://newsroom.heart.org/news/coronavi...scle-cells

So you've finally caught up to the rest of us that know that the COVID virus does more damage to the heart than the vaccine.

Like a worm on a hook… that was fast… I’ll be back, muuuhhhhaaaaa

---

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

So you've finally caught up to the rest of us that know that the COVID virus does more damage to the heart than the vaccine.

Like a worm on a hook… that was fast… I’ll be back, muuuhhhhaaaaa

You'll be back as you've realized you mistakenly posted something that doesn't support your looney assertions.  You're now scrambling to find something to refute it, or, like you have already, pretending to post it as a "gotcha".

Looking forward to your next installment.

---

CCL Stroudcrowd1

The view from Britain:  

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

---

The view from Britain:  

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

That’s funny.

---

The view from Britain:  

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

Love her, her interviews she does r hilarious

---

Doctors refuse to listen to patients with vaccine injuries: Dr. Michael Huang

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6320743167112

---

The view from Britain:  

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

I need to watch more of these.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

https://twitter.com/MichaelPSenger/statu...idgPQ&s=19

---

https://twitter.com/MichaelPSenger/statu...idgPQ&s=19

Poor framing of the issue since it pretends that the risks associated with acquiring natural immunity are equal to those of the vaccine when in fact actually getting COVID is significantly more dangerous.

---

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

Sure would be nice to have age data associated with both of those. Bet it'd make things clearer.

---

Sure would be nice to have age data associated with both of those. Bet it'd make things clearer.

Yes, I agree.

---

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

https://twitter.com/MichaelPSenger/statu...idgPQ&s=19

Poor framing of the issue since it pretends that the risks associated with acquiring natural immunity are equal to those of the vaccine when in fact actually getting COVID is significantly more dangerous.

I think you missed the point that people that had covid should NEVER have been forced to choose between their job and getting the jab.  Natural immunity was completely ignored.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.