Will you take the Covid Vaccine?

[BigRed]

Hillary Clinton: 'Get Your Life Back' with a Vaccine

Hillary Clinton said Monday that Americans should get vaccinated against the coronavirus if they want to "get your life back."

www.breitbart.com

This ***** can go straight to **** with CCP Joe

 

[melensdad]

You are incorrect.

Studies, anecdotal evidence, meta-analyses, and logical reasoning indicate that they are effective in reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 amongst other things.

NOPE, you may confusing surgical masks with N95 masks.

We know N95 masks are effective. We know that surgical masks are NOT particularly effective based on all the evidence.

Meta analysis shows that all masks had, at most, a 1.3% reduction in spread as per the CDC

 

[jamil]

Interesting then that in places where there is a severe shortage of vaccines and a real need (if you believe in that kind of thing) that they haven’t prioritized people who haven’t had it yet vs those that have.
Speaks to more tomfoolery, in my mind.

A couple of things come to mind that might drive that. First, demand. There is no virtue available just for being immune to covid without the great intentional sacrifice of getting the shot. Second, simplicity. It's easier to just give everyone the shot and hand them their certificate of virtue when they're done.

Oh. And there's the other thing. Sales. According to Worldometer, just under 34M people have tested positive for COVID. That's potentially a lot of money left on the table if manufacturers don't go after it. Related to that is Joe's push to have 70% vaccination rate (at least first dose) by 7/4.

So lots of incentives to try to get people vaccinated even if they've already had the disease.

 

[rooster]

Hold up...are we mad that a private employer can require things of their choosing as a condition of employment???

Nope not mad at all. I’m very happy that any that require an employee or potential employee to take part in an experimental medical treatment will be liable for said treatments effects.

authorization under emergency use is supposed to allow it to be distributed with informed consent. Get it or else violates this principle. Even if you are pro vaccine you should be very concerned about the precedent this could set.

 

[HoughMade]

Nope not mad at all. I’m very happy that any that require an employee or potential employee to take part in an experimental medical treatment will be liable for said treatments effects.

authorization under emergency use is supposed to allow it to be distributed with informed consent. Get it or else violates this principle. Even if you are pro vaccine you should be very concerned about the precedent this could set.

What, in your view, would informed consent require? What do you base this upon?

 

[mbills2223]

Employers can mandate some things as a condition of employment but then they're on the hook for that thing causing damages. Do you disagree with that?

Nope, on the same page here. Just wanted to be clear.

 

[mbills2223]

NOPE, you may confusing surgical masks with N95 masks.

We know N95 masks are effective. We know that surgical masks are NOT particularly effective based on all the evidence.

Meta analysis shows that all masks had, at most, a 1.3% reduction in spread as per the CDC

Rest assured I'm not confusing surgical masks with N95.

So you have meta-analysis/analyses showing they don't work...I have meta-analyses showing they do...?

That would lead me to believe there are variables that are unaccounted for. My gut would say proper vs improper mask wearing is that variable, but perhaps we can agree to an impasse on that.

You acknowledge N95 masks work. Would a study showing no statistically significant difference in particle "filtration" (the word I'm looking for is lost to me at the moment) between N95 and a surgical mask change your outlook at all?

 

[mbills2223]

Nope not mad at all. I’m very happy that any that require an employee or potential employee to take part in an experimental medical treatment will be liable for said treatments effects.

authorization under emergency use is supposed to allow it to be distributed with informed consent. Get it or else violates this principle. Even if you are pro vaccine you should be very concerned about the precedent this could set.

Do you refer to them as experimental because of their legal status (EUA) or because you think they weren't studied?

 

[HoughMade]

I'm getting shot with an experimental vaccine tomorrow...or saline.. No "" needed for experimental in this case.

All medications have potential side effects and complications....and every vaccine that has come before, as well. There is no indications that the COVID vaccines are any different from any other vaccine in this regard.

 

[jamil]

Do you refer to them as experimental because of their legal status (EUA) or because you think they weren't studied?

I call them experimental because they're not approved for general use, and in the case of the mRna vaccines, the technology has never been approved for general use in humans. I wouldn't say they haven't been studied. But it's fair to call them experimental. That just seems to set some people off whenever I say that.

 

[mbills2223]

I call them experimental because they're not approved for general use, and in the case of the mRna vaccines, the technology has never been approved for general use in humans. I wouldn't say they haven't been studied. But it's fair to call them experimental. That just seems to set some people off whenever I say that.

It depends on the context for me. People claiming they haven't been studied and calling them experimental for that reason, yes, that annoys me because it's factually incorrect.

 

[Ingomike]

It depends on the context for me. People claiming they haven't been studied and calling them experimental for that reason, yes, that annoys me because it's factually incorrect.

Why do you care what others call them? Why do you so vociferously want to defend them? Like they have never done any wrong, like they are not mega corporations with the same goals as other mega corporations.

 

[rooster]

Do you refer to them as experimental because of their legal status (EUA) or because you think they weren't studied?

I’m calling them experimental because they were authorized under emergency use so as to remove the liability from the manufacturer.

if they are deemed safe enough that the manufacturer or government is liable should I have a serious adverse reaction then I will take it and stop referring to them as experimental.

 

[mbills2223]

Why do you care what others call them? Why do you so vociferously want to defend them? Like they have never done any wrong, like they are not mega corporations with the same goals as other mega corporations.

I'm not defending anyone. I'm saying as a pharmacist it annoys me personally when people spout information that is verifiably incorrect. It makes my job harder when false claims spread around the internet about pharmaceuticals. I couldn't care less about Pfizer or Moderna or any of the others...they don't need me defending them.

 

[mbills2223]

I’m calling them experimental because they were authorized under emergency use so as to remove the liability from the manufacturer.

if they are deemed safe enough that the manufacturer or government is liable should I have a serious adverse reaction then I will take it and stop referring to them as experimental.

So when Pfizer gets full approval, which is imminent, you'll take the vaccine?

If so, I'm glad to hear that.

 

[HoughMade]

It is possible to think that everyone should make their own decision, but SHOCKER it would be nice if people used real information to inform their decision, not speculation built on a preconceived position...on either side.

 

[jamil]

I'm not defending anyone. I'm saying as a pharmacist it annoys me personally when people spout information that is verifiably incorrect. It makes my job harder when false claims spread around the internet about pharmaceuticals. I couldn't care less about Pfizer or Moderna or any of the others...they don't need me defending them.

Not that I'm saying it shouldn't be annoying. It it's annoying on its own. But how does that make the job harder? Do people actually argue with you about the drugs when you're filling a prescription? Just curious. I mean. People don't really make use of your role until they have a prescription to fill. Even if I had some delusional belief about some med I was prescribed, I hope I'd just not get it filled rather than harass the pharmacist about it. Seems like a dispute about it would occur between the Dr and patient long before.

 

[jamil]

It is possible to think that everyone should make their own decision, but SHOCKER it would be nice if people used real information to inform their decision, not speculation built on a preconceived position...on either side.

Thank you.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Biden said yesterday "If you don't get the vaccine you will pay" Pay for what?

Taxes. He’s a democrat. It’s always taxes.

 

[bwframe]

Only Half CDC Employees Have Been Vaccinated, But Still Want YOU Vaccinated

During a Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing Senator Richard Burr (R-Va.) asked the nation’s pandemic health leaders how many of their employees were vaccinated. Dr. Anthony Faucci said he was not certain when asked how many employees had been vaccinated, he estimated...

www.wibc.com