The government has learned lots as have they scientists and medical community since all of this happened. It’s kind of like a living document. Selecting a snapshot in time and using that as gospel for the duration of the event makes those that do it look stupid. Anybody can cherry pick data.
It's fluid and either you understand that or you don't. Some do understand it, but they need to pretend to be confused on the matter....I think you know who I'm alluding to. Just like cancer research continues to find things out, but apparently we should stop learning or stop publishing what we learn just so idiots can create their talking points.
Hey man, we have had between the two counties I mentioned numerous 40 year olds boot swirl and leave behind children. Sure, 34,000 may not seem all that large until you start to consider all the misery and devastation it caused when it could have been prevented.
Unless you are an MD/PhD you are not "doing your own research". You are reading about research others have done.
If so, you've just given them the opportunity to be wrong with no accountability. OK, the fact still is that few are dying under the age of 49 and almost none under the age of 18. That the CDC and NIH actively moved to quell voices that have since been proven correct. And that more people have died in the USA since the release of the vaccine than before. These are all facts.
I do appreciate the fact that some of them are as callous as I am toward their dead unvaxxed brethren. It’s only 34,000. LOL.
Of course...but you don't plan public policy on anecdotal evidence. You craft public policy on facts based on the overall good or bad. I can post stories of people that died or had major health problems after being vaxxed as well. All are anecdotal.
I know a guy that died in an airplane accident. Should we ban airplanes? Use your head, man.
So if an airbag prevents 50% of deaths in a head on collision (hypothetical stat) your argument would be that airbags don't work so we shouldn't have them on our cars?
The risks from getting the vaccine are incredibly small. Like if you drive to the clinic that is much riskier than actually getting the shot.
www.latimes.com
Age doesn't matter in terms of risk from the vaccine. You can argue that they are getting fewer benefits (maybe) but the risks are not greater.
again...simply isn't true. lots of older people have been instructed to NOT get vaxxed because they were frail enough that they might not survive the side effects. For younger people, while the risk may not have gone up, the risk of COVID is so low, the risk of the vax may be higher than the risk of COVID.
So by lots you mean 60-70% of the population above 65? Or about .002%? Just looking for some right numbers. Can you link these numbers and studies?
This is not age effects, this is other existing conditions (which could co-vary with age but not necessarily). The number of people this effects is relatively small compared to the total population. Obviously if your licensed personal physician (MD) advises you not to get the vaccine, please listen to them.
Now you are talking about cost-benefit, which is different than only talking about risk (which is what I was doing). If they risk is extremely low and you *might* be getting a benefit (either for yourself or for others), wouldn't the cost benefit calculation push you towards getting the vaccine?
I'm assuming you mean mRNA vaccines (mRNA has always existed in our bodies and is obviously perfectly safe). We have no idea of the long term effects of any new treatment. But there is no science to suggest that there is any danger from mRNA based vaccines, nor is there any proposed mechanism by which they would be unsafe.
all of that is to say "we don't know". I am OK with that. Why introduce a risk when you are a healthy 35 year old or younger and have statistically none with COVID? I am not taking aspirin every day because I might get a headache someday.
Umm, the documented failure and corruption of nearly all of our public institutions may have been a factor as well.
Because statistically the risk from covid (even when young when the risk is smaller) is still larger than the risk from the vaccine.
if you've got those stats, let me know. Both are statistically zero, as far as we are now led to believe. But we do not know what the effects of the Vax may be in the future.
It's just so odd how the actual Doctors in this country and around the entire globe disagree with you almost wholesale. Silly Doctors.
We do actually. For Pfizer, the chance of a serious reaction in young people is 0.00126%
You don't know what the effect of 5G networks will be in the future either (but there is no mechanistic hypothesis that there will be a problem -- same as mRNA).
Yeah. I believe Pfizer. But that is just about the same mortality rate as a healthy person under the age of 49
That is still high than the mortality rate of healthy young people and we haven’t even started with long term affects
The last 5 years exposed how terrible our institutions have become.
Ha! There are lots of posts from many top institutions throughout the thread, especially the thread on research that I bumped up just for you.
There is no reason to expect long term effect.
Please cite a few. I'm not sifting through dozens of pages of nonsense to find any hidden gems.
‘No reason’? You mean no known reason, today. Just like there is no reason to get the jab if you are young and healthy.
There absolutely is a reason to get a jab if you are young and healthy. It increases your immune system response and could mean the difference between being asymptomatic (or feeling like you have a slight cold) versus being in bed for two weeks.
Minds (open or closed) generally don't have teeth, so that would be an interesting thing to have occur.
no, it doesn't. non of the studies show that. they say it does but it does not, if you look at the statistics. I don't believe a word they say and you shouldn't either. The stats simply do NOT support your position for young healthy people. There are zero stats or reasons why a young healthy person should be vaccinated.
I'd be interested if you would describe the mechanism by which mRNA could cause long term issues; or provide a link which describes it. Thanks.
Can you please link me to the studies that you think disprove what I said?
