Ummmm, previously you and I have had at least one exchange where I said vaccinating your kids is between you, your child and pediatrician. I respect that and had made that clear to you previously.
I strongly disagree. Experts should be free to talk (in an official capacity) about the areas that they are experts in. A lawyer should not post medical advice on his law firms website. To clarify, government scientists ARE free to discuss policy as a private citizen, just not with their federal "hat" on.
I didn't have any first hand knowledge of the operations of the federal government during the middle part of the 20th century, but I can tell you that the science arms of the US government are operating at a higher level today than they were back then.
I didn't "let" them do anything. My science has nothing to with covid.
See above.
Ahhh, you are one of those people. Well, you can try to elect congressional representatives that will do that and see how that works out for you.
No Kids without underlying conditions SHOULD EVER BE VACCINATED FOR COVID--PERIOD. And definately not now since we know they do nothing for the IMACOLD variant, If you give your kid a mRNA vax now you are a MORON.
Hiding out in his mansion, hoping the 50,000+ truckers and half a million (minimum) protestors go away, that were surrounding the Parliment building in the city of Ottawa, the Capital of Canada yesterday.
Why don’t you elaborate a little bit on your qualifications as a doctor who dispenses advice routinely to patients.
Yeah, it’s actually happening and it’s kind of sad since it’s preventable. But what ever.
Its not happening, the same people are dying of covid that always died of covid-old or with underlying condtions.
Yep its called CHILD ABUSE. Plain and simple--there is NO SCIENCE that says kids need vaccinated NONE. Lots of opinions in the pocket of Pfizer but no science.
Or you understand science and aren't a fear monger. But you do you...I don't have kids so it's not an issue for me personally. But people who are anti-science are an issue for me personally.
I don't have any kids of that age so I'm glad I don't have to make that decision, but the science in Sweden at least is apparently at odds with science over here.
Pay no attention to the ‘mad-scientist’ PSU2UNC, or his 2 amigos tgar & LaJollaLion. They’ve got radical, pro-mRNA jab agendas and will stop at nothing to peddle their ‘vaccine the entire’ country propaganda, including children with no shame or concerns whatsoever. Likely paid to push the message wherever and whenever possible like many others.I don't have any kids of that age so I'm glad I don't have to make that decision, but the science in Sweden at lease is apparently at odds with science over here.
Sweden decides against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11
Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks.www.reuters.com
The policy/recommendations in Sweden are different from here. That does not mean the science is different. Sorry, just a pet peeve of mine when policy is conflated with science.I don't have any kids of that age so I'm glad I don't have to make that decision, but the science in Sweden at least is apparently at odds with science over here.
Sweden decides against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11
Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks.
OK, I hear you but the policy is that in their scientific opinion, the risk of getting 5-11 year old kids vaccinated outweighs the benefits. Surely you're not suggesting they haven't taken science into account to make their policy.
I assume they have and all it shows is that there are 2 opinions as to the application of science to public policy. To take dogmatic approaches to those with whom one disagrees ( as in you are a MORON ) is totally out of place.
Agreed..and the vax policies in the USA have failed to adjust to Omicron's much more infections but much less lethal footprint. I look at it as a sliding scale as to what age/situation people need to get vaccinated. for previous strains, where the risk of long-term health and death at risk, the slide moves to the left (0 on the left 100 on the right).
I'm not suggesting that, but there are inherent value judgements that exist in policy decisions that do not exist in the science.
I don't know. Utah data is very self-conflicting.
Here's what I was looking at:
Great points. But I'd add a few things....
I agree with your three bullet points (for the most part) but I take issue with your final statement (although I think this is just a question of semantics):
Fair statements. But check the research of multiple sources and compare them. It is clear that the CDC has FUBARed this up. Mistake or on purpose, it doesn't really matter. After being three years into this, we are STILL going back and forth on "With or From" on COVID deaths and what, if any, difference masks make. I could have made, in 15 minutes, an on-line spreadsheet to determine your risk levels and if you should get the vaccine. And it could be updated to take into account the virus variables. If you haven't read the Fauci/Collins emails, the Vanity Fair article on the origins of the Wuhan virus and the Dr. Malone Joe Rogan blog post you should.
I am neither defending nor criticizing the CDC. I will however point out that constructing useful policy for a novel virus for which our scientific understanding is rapidly evolving AND is mutating at a significant rate is challenging to say the least.
There are almost no one that says vaccines don’t work. Most everyone acknowledges they have some impact but not full. The debate is how effective, for who, and the balance of plus vs minus.
I do not listen to Joe Rogan. I primarily remember him from the sitcom News Radio, in which he was quite funny. I remember being surprised he got into MMA and am aware he has a podcast but that's about it.
www.forbes.com
Unfortunately, I think there are lot of people who are literally saying "vaccines don't work" (even on this thread).
Sorry....that is where I get off. Cloth masks, for example, didn't work in 1918 yet here we are. And, if the CDC told us the truth about natural immunity and vaccines as it evolved with the different variants, I'd be OK. And, I am not mentioning the shaming and deplatforming (which Fauce seeded and supported) of opinions on these and other matters that proved correct are a bridge too far. Lastly, the collusion to shame people who had evidence that the virus was lab made tells me that there are nefarious issues behind the scenes.
No the science was the same, our people decided to do it anyway.I don't have any kids of that age so I'm glad I don't have to make that decision, but the science in Sweden at least is apparently at odds with science over here.
Sweden decides against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11
Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks.
Not sure how you transitioned from what I wrote to your reply (maybe you replied to the wrong person?)
Right because of different policy decisions. Same science + different value judgments = different policies. And that's OK.
no problem...I was only stating that is where we begin to disagree. You wronte
So you are actually 100% uncertain.
Really?
I think it will very interesting what happens here this month of February, do we see hospitalizations (what do cases mean right now with so many at home tests) go below their historical low points as the amount of natural immunity out there is so much higher. It is also going to take until end of February until we start to see marked decrease in daily fatality so even though cases and hospitalizations will be way down, we will still hear the talking heads just pivot to 'But we still have thousands of people dying every day' as a way to continue to push the narrative.
