Coronavirus Thread v.2

[Grappler]

The one thing I've noticed as the pandemic has gone on is the lack of compassion and empathy in some.  That's all.  It's become a fever pitch of individualism, of choice, even though one's choice can affect others.

I don't know how the schools plan on handling it.  My thing is that some parents are losing patience when the schools have directly asked for it.  I don't mind being patient - the mask thing will either work itself out in court one way or the other, or the school will move forward with a plan to officially make it optional in the coming weeks if the court allows.

They can't cater to everyone, nor can they cater to a specific group of families alone.  I was just glad to see that they're not rushing a decision and are taking at-risk children into consideration.  I sent a short email to the district superintendent this morning thanking her for that, as it has become a fever pitch of selfishness from some in the district. 

There have been enough emails sent to her in the last week browbeating her for not making a quick change, so I thought a short note of thanks would be nice for her to read.  It also allowed me to include a personal note about her therapy dog, which comes into the schools with her for the kids to pet and talk to and whom my daughter absolutely loves.

[Stadler]

The one thing I've noticed as the pandemic has gone on is the lack of compassion and empathy in some.  That's all.  It's become a fever pitch of individualism, of choice, even though one's choice can affect others.

I don't know how the schools plan on handling it.  My thing is that some parents are losing patience when the schools have directly asked for it.  I don't mind being patient - the mask thing will either work itself out in court one way or the other, or the school will move forward with a plan to officially make it optional in the coming weeks if the court allows.

They can't cater to everyone, nor can they cater to a specific group of families alone.  I was just glad to see that they're not rushing a decision and are taking at-risk children into consideration.  I sent a short email to the district superintendent this morning thanking her for that, as it has become a fever pitch of selfishness from some in the district. 

There have been enough emails sent to her in the last week browbeating her for not making a quick change, so I thought a short note of thanks would be nice for her to read.  It also allowed me to include a personal note about her therapy dog, which comes into the schools with her for the kids to pet and talk to and whom my daughter absolutely loves.

I'm sorry to keep harping about this, but "individualism" and "compassion" or "empathy" are not mutually exclusive; or rather, a position of "individualism" doesn't necessarily signal a lack of compassion or empathy.  it just might not be YOUR version of "compassion" or "empathy".  It's pretty similar to the argument that many of the agnostics/atheists here have made in the past:  "I may not believe in a God, but that doesn't make me immoral.  My standards are just not based on the scripture of any religion".  We are, of course, talking about what we can DEMAND of others, not what we can ask, and that's really where the interface is.  I often go well beyond what my individualist core might in theory say, but I reconcile that with "that was my CHOICE to abdicate my right (for lack of a better word) in that matter". 

And there wouldn't be a P/R section at all if not for the case that "people's choices affect others". 

[Ben_Jamin]

I remember when my High School went full on healthy foods and no junk food. It was hilarious because we all laughed and said, it won't matter because the students can still go off campus and will go to the McDonald's right next door. I personally went to Quiznos because that was good food, and my teacher didn't mind if we ate in his class, so I would eat it there.

What this really had an effect on was the clubs that used food sales to generate club funds. The German Store would sell Pizza from Dion's, and the Golf Club coach sold breakfast burritos which were a hit with the students and also teachers. This also got rid of the the Student Store where the student council could raise funds by selling nachos, hot dogs and burgers.

All that went away when they implemented their healthy agenda.

This was also when the school told us we weren't allowed to go to our football fields for lunch and had to stay within the plaza in view of teachers and security guard staff, yet our security guards were a bit plump as well and we would always see the biggest one on a golf cart. Which we laughed at and said, "It's because your security is too fat and can't get their lazy asses off their golf cart to walk around the football fields or baseball fields to enforce their job of making sure the kids there are not smoking, doing drugs, or having sex."



A schools purpose is to indoctrinate and this utilizes obedience of authority. Yet, it's funny when that authority makes questionable decisions in which the students and teachers agree are worthless or not going to work. Some of my teachers knew this and some would talk about it with me, while others didn't care and did what they were told anyways. One of them would stand in front of his classroom and once the bell rang would slam the door, look at you and say "Go to the office and get a tardy slip." Some would go and some would take their time going, which was funny to see. He would also yell outside if the loudspeaker came on to inform us about some achievement from the sports teams or clubs and he didn't like that taking up valuable teaching time.


So let me say, when I was in school I had more compassion and empathy for my teachers more so than my classmates. I could see how the teachers were being affected by the administrations decisions and it wasn't beneficial at all to the teachers, it actually made it harder for them to teach how they want to teach students.

In others words, I have no compassion for the School Administration, but I do have compassion and empathy for the teachers that have to endure these regulations because they love teaching the students.


Edit: I forgot, the school also got rid of the soda vending machines in the cafeteria and replaced them with Milk Vending machines. Yet, we still had soda vending machines in the gym, where I would go get mine. No one touched those milk machines, until one day my friend decided to buy one and it was spoiled. We all laughed and said, "drink it" then sue the school for getting you sick because they didn't bother changing out the milk machines and making sure they're not expired. 

[jingle.boy]

This is going to come off way more uncaring and unsympathetic than I really mean it, but...   

You're right it did.   

Look, society has done this forever - the masses have to make accommodations for small legions of idiots, vulnerable, at-risk, yada yada.  Why is it law to wear a seat-belt, or not get behind a wheel after a couple of bevy's?  It's not quite as simple / black-and-white as "my body my choice".

The whole pregnancy argument is weak and lazy - you don't get pregnant being in the presence of a pregnant person.  But to extend this analogy a little further, if one COULD get pregnant just by sharing space with a pregnant person, for 7/9ths of the time, you can visibly identify when a person is pregnant, and thus avoid them.

[Stadler]

This is going to come off way more uncaring and unsympathetic than I really mean it, but...   

You're right it did.   

Look, society has done this forever - the masses have to make accommodations for small legions of idiots, vulnerable, at-risk, yada yada.  Why is it law to wear a seat-belt, or not get behind a wheel after a couple of bevy's?  It's not quite as simple / black-and-white as "my body my choice".

The whole pregnancy argument is weak and lazy - you don't get pregnant being in the presence of a pregnant person.  But to extend this analogy a little further, if one COULD get pregnant just by sharing space with a pregnant person, for 7/9ths of the time, you can visibly identify when a person is pregnant, and thus avoid them.

But here's the thing.  Everything you said is right...  in your frame (of reference). Everything I said is right...  in my frame (of reference).  I'm over simplifying to a degree here, but:  You went to communicability when talking about pregnancy, and ignored autonomous bodily rights.  I went to autonomous bodily right and ignored communicability.  To your point, I can avoid those with COVID if I want.  If I REALLY want.

The fact of the matter is, beyond ANYTHING else, you DO NOT get to set my frame of reference for me and vice versa, and that applies across the board.  So we have to figure out a way to build that wall so all 330 million frames get to fit. 

[Ben_Jamin]

This is going to come off way more uncaring and unsympathetic than I really mean it, but...   

You're right it did.   

Look, society has done this forever - the masses have to make accommodations for small legions of idiots, vulnerable, at-risk, yada yada.  Why is it law to wear a seat-belt, or not get behind a wheel after a couple of bevy's?  It's not quite as simple / black-and-white as "my body my choice".

The whole pregnancy argument is weak and lazy - you don't get pregnant being in the presence of a pregnant person.  But to extend this analogy a little further, if one COULD get pregnant just by sharing space with a pregnant person, for 7/9ths of the time, you can visibly identify when a person is pregnant, and thus avoid them.

But here's the thing.  Everything you said is right...  in your frame (of reference). Everything I said is right...  in my frame (of reference).  I'm over simplifying to a degree here, but:  You went to communicability when talking about pregnancy, and ignored autonomous bodily rights.  I went to autonomous bodily right and ignored communicability.  To your point, I can avoid those with COVID if I want.  If I REALLY want.

The fact of the matter is, beyond ANYTHING else, you DO NOT get to set my frame of reference for me and vice versa, and that applies across the board.  So we have to figure out a way to build that wall so all 330 million frames get to fit.

And it gets even more difficult when those 330 million come from different cultural backgrounds.

We are a nation that is unique in how much diversity we do have by allowing all the cultures to practice their ways and customs. Which took time and until very, very recently allowed some to continue to practice their customs, which was not allowed at all.

For that very reason, it's not impossible, but it is very very complicated and difficult to achieve. And until each one of those customs and cultural differences can live amongst one another, there's going to be times where they'll butt heads. And even within those cultural backgrounds, there are still those whom will disagree with the status quo of that custom or cultural practice.

What the tribes of America chose to do was reject all outsiders from entering the reservations. No outsider can visit, this also means relatives of that tribe that are from another Tribe. This means closing the borders and also it meant shutting down the roads, such as in South Dakota, which that governor was crying about and it led to the further hurdle of Tribal Sovereignty Vs. State decisions.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/south-dakota-governor-continues-target-161742891.html

The mask mandates are lifted but the Tribes in those states are still requiring masks.

https://nativenewsonline.net/health/as-new-york-governor-lifts-mask-mandate-saint-regis-mohawk-tribe-still-requires-masks

[jingle.boy]

This is going to come off way more uncaring and unsympathetic than I really mean it, but...   

You're right it did.   

Look, society has done this forever - the masses have to make accommodations for small legions of idiots, vulnerable, at-risk, yada yada.  Why is it law to wear a seat-belt, or not get behind a wheel after a couple of bevy's?  It's not quite as simple / black-and-white as "my body my choice".

The whole pregnancy argument is weak and lazy - you don't get pregnant being in the presence of a pregnant person.  But to extend this analogy a little further, if one COULD get pregnant just by sharing space with a pregnant person, for 7/9ths of the time, you can visibly identify when a person is pregnant, and thus avoid them.

But here's the thing.  Everything you said is right...  in your frame (of reference). Everything I said is right...  in my frame (of reference).  I'm over simplifying to a degree here, but:  You went to communicability when talking about pregnancy, and ignored autonomous bodily rights.  I went to autonomous bodily right and ignored communicability.  To your point, I can avoid those with COVID if I want.  If I REALLY want.

The fact of the matter is, beyond ANYTHING else, you DO NOT get to set my frame of reference for me and vice versa, and that applies across the board.  So we have to figure out a way to build that wall so all 330 million frames get to fit.

Surely you're not naive enough to think there's a societal wall that allows all frames to hang harmoniously.

You make valid points.  I guess my frame comes from the perspective that physical health trumps pretty much all else.  What's the first thing (many) people say when they have a child - something to the effect of "I just want a healthy baby".  Can't remember the last time I heard someone say "I just want a baby that will be allowed to have autonomy over their body".  I cannot be convinced that there isn't a larger swath of society that puts their physical health behind their choices about their body.  Got cancer??... 'no chemo for me thanks - too invasive'.  3 clogged heart valves?  "I don't want no scar".  Leukemia??  "But my bone marrow!!"*

I'm baffled at the circumstances that people seem to want to play the 'my body my rights' card - when it's convenient for them as an individual.

* - and yes, I get that some people will respond in these ways - but it isn't 30% of people.

[Stadler]

This is going to come off way more uncaring and unsympathetic than I really mean it, but...   

You're right it did.   

Look, society has done this forever - the masses have to make accommodations for small legions of idiots, vulnerable, at-risk, yada yada.  Why is it law to wear a seat-belt, or not get behind a wheel after a couple of bevy's?  It's not quite as simple / black-and-white as "my body my choice".

The whole pregnancy argument is weak and lazy - you don't get pregnant being in the presence of a pregnant person.  But to extend this analogy a little further, if one COULD get pregnant just by sharing space with a pregnant person, for 7/9ths of the time, you can visibly identify when a person is pregnant, and thus avoid them.

But here's the thing.  Everything you said is right...  in your frame (of reference). Everything I said is right...  in my frame (of reference).  I'm over simplifying to a degree here, but:  You went to communicability when talking about pregnancy, and ignored autonomous bodily rights.  I went to autonomous bodily right and ignored communicability.  To your point, I can avoid those with COVID if I want.  If I REALLY want.

The fact of the matter is, beyond ANYTHING else, you DO NOT get to set my frame of reference for me and vice versa, and that applies across the board.  So we have to figure out a way to build that wall so all 330 million frames get to fit.

Surely you're not naive enough to think there's a societal wall that allows all frames to hang harmoniously.

You make valid points.  I guess my frame comes from the perspective that physical health trumps pretty much all else.  What's the first thing (many) people say when they have a child - something to the effect of "I just want a healthy baby".  Can't remember the last time I heard someone say "I just want a baby that will be allowed to have autonomy over their body".  I cannot be convinced that there isn't a larger swath of society that puts their physical health behind their choices about their body.  Got cancer??... 'no chemo for me thanks - too invasive'.  3 clogged heart valves?  "I don't want no scar".  Leukemia??  "But my bone marrow!!"*

I'm baffled at the circumstances that people seem to want to play the 'my body my rights' card - when it's convenient for them as an individual.

* - and yes, I get that some people will respond in these ways - but it isn't 30% of people.

There's a fine line between "naive" and "idealistic".  Are we "naive" enough to think that racism - judgement, the same type of judgement we're talking about here and in the Spotify thread - will go away?  Some are (though we all know some are profiting off the concept, and so it's not going to go away, it will always be a sword to be weilded).   Are we "naive" enough to think that we are all on a "journey" and our "stories matter"?  Of course; entire websites and corporate media monoliths are built on that premise.    Why not make REAL tolerance (not the forced acceptance that passes for tolerance in identity politics circles these days) a priority?   

As an individualist, I would argue that "autonomy over my body" is the first, required step for physical health.  You're talking one isolated area, vaccines and/or masks, in the context of one pandemic.  There are 100's of other angles where sublimating your care for the "greater good" (in quotes because it's an ephemeral concept also subject to frames) is predicated on abdicating your individual responsibility.   You know what?  It IS my choice to say "no" to chemo.   And you've got nothing to say about it.   Because if we give that sliver of autonomy up because, what, society is better with my weakened productivity?  There aren't health care burdens for society to take care of me as my bodily functions fail?  Then why aren't we sterilizing everyone with ANY genetic imperfection?  Why aren't we sterilizing those with an IQ under the speed limit?  Why aren't we telling every single mom with an income less than $40k to abort immediately (controversial, to be sure, but there IS data that the crime rate dropped generally in America following Roe in 1973)?  Why aren't we telling anyone that smokes, drinks, eats McDonalds, or doesn't run 3k a day to fuck off when it comes to healthcare?  Why should my tax dollars fund YOUR Big Mac/Marlboro addictions?

I'm not saying you're wrong, Chad, I'm not saying you should change your mind or your way of thinking, I'm just saying that the issue is bigger and more complicated than perhaps you're making it out to be.   If I give you my autonomy on this vaccine based on PUBLIC HEALTH - which, if I give it, IS predicated on me having given up my autonomy in a previous situation based on PUBLIC HEALTH, so the 'slippery slope' in action - then what's next?  It's not a subjective game, here.  We're either in or we're out.

One last thing:  this is hard.  When you push ideas, concepts, decisions out to the individual, with it HAS to come some suspension of judgement, some TOLERANCE.  People ARE going to make decisions that you (generally) don't like or in fact, impact you.  Maybe even HARM you in some intangible way.  Life in the fast lane. We live in a society with almost ten percent of the people that have ever walked the Earth.  We all have to make concessions on some level, and understand that those concessions have to be made.  "Some level" is going to mean something different to everyone though.  For me, it's some concession that I am not TRULY autonomous; for you, I guess, it's some concession that maybe there will be circumstances for which "optimal public health" is not the ONLY variable in play.

[MetalJunkie]

I've only glossed over this discussion, so forgive me if this point was brought up earlier, but I think in this case, "autonomy over my body" is a horse of a different color because it's dismissive of the consequences. The fact that unvaccinated human bodies are basically petri dishes for mutations and are more likely to lead to vaccine-evading mutations puts everyone else at risk. It's the difference between choosing not to wear my seatbelt and choosing not to drink and drive.

[ReaPsTA]

The fact that unvaccinated human bodies are basically petri dishes for mutations and are more likely to lead to vaccine-evading mutations puts everyone else at risk.

Think about what happens in history when a certain group of people is labelled as disease ridden. This is not a road you want to go down.

[lonestar]

That didn't take long lol

[DTFan0789]

I've only glossed over this discussion, so forgive me if this point was brought up earlier, but I think in this case, "autonomy over my body" is a horse of a different color because it's dismissive of the consequences. The fact that unvaccinated human bodies are basically petri dishes for mutations and are more likely to lead to vaccine-evading mutations puts everyone else at risk. It's the difference between choosing not to wear my seatbelt and choosing not to drink and drive.

Actually, the science tells us that just the opposite is true. One of the worst things you can do during a pandemic is push universal vaccination because you run the risk of actively generating more highly pathogenic viruses. You are aware that these gene based shots do not stop you from contracting or spreading Covid (per the CDC's own admission), correct?

[MoraWintersoul]

I've only glossed over this discussion, so forgive me if this point was brought up earlier, but I think in this case, "autonomy over my body" is a horse of a different color because it's dismissive of the consequences. The fact that unvaccinated human bodies are basically petri dishes for mutations and are more likely to lead to vaccine-evading mutations puts everyone else at risk. It's the difference between choosing not to wear my seatbelt and choosing not to drink and drive.

Actually, the science tells us that just the opposite is true. One of the worst things you can do during a pandemic is push universal vaccination because you run the risk of actively generating more highly pathogenic viruses. You are aware that these gene based shots do not stop you from contracting or spreading Covid (per the CDC's own admission), correct?

Which is why measles and polio are totally not eradicated in all countries with high vaccine uptake and in fact ever since we mass-vaccinated against them, it got worse? Yes, transmission mitigation has been halved ever since delta took over, but since an extreeeeeeme majority of vaccinated people will not end up on a ventilator, vaccination is still our only way out of this mess and anyone not pushing for maximum vaccine uptake is irresponsible towards people's lives and public health as a whole.

Sorry, but just saying "gene based shots" is what happened to calling vaccines, vaccines? Is saying "gene based shots" supposed to be more precise and truthful? Because it's not and it betrays where you get this supposedly scientific information from. If you want to reach across the ideological aisle to the majority of people who support vaccination, maybe you should start by using normal human words for normal things.

[bosk1]

I've only glossed over this discussion, so forgive me if this point was brought up earlier, but I think in this case, "autonomy over my body" is a horse of a different color because it's dismissive of the consequences. The fact that unvaccinated human bodies are basically petri dishes for mutations and are more likely to lead to vaccine-evading mutations puts everyone else at risk. It's the difference between choosing not to wear my seatbelt and choosing not to drink and drive.

Actually, the science tells us that just the opposite is true. One of the worst things you can do during a pandemic is push universal vaccination because you run the risk of actively generating more highly pathogenic viruses. You are aware that these gene based shots do not stop you from contracting or spreading Covid (per the CDC's own admission), correct?

I also am personally against universal vaccine mandates.  But that said, virtually everything you typed is wrong.  And using "gene based shots" is not only incorrect and unscientific, but is very misleading. 

[ReaPsTA]

I've only glossed over this discussion, so forgive me if this point was brought up earlier, but I think in this case, "autonomy over my body" is a horse of a different color because it's dismissive of the consequences. The fact that unvaccinated human bodies are basically petri dishes for mutations and are more likely to lead to vaccine-evading mutations puts everyone else at risk. It's the difference between choosing not to wear my seatbelt and choosing not to drink and drive.

Actually, the science tells us that just the opposite is true. One of the worst things you can do during a pandemic is push universal vaccination because you run the risk of actively generating more highly pathogenic viruses. You are aware that these gene based shots do not stop you from contracting or spreading Covid (per the CDC's own admission), correct?

I also am personally against universal vaccine mandates.  But that said, virtually everything you typed is wrong.  And using "gene based shots" is not only incorrect and unscientific, but is very misleading. 

DTFFan is half right. Vaccines create a risk of a worse virus if they are leaky... which is what the current COVID shots are.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2116597 < This article captures what I think is the most logical conclusion regarding the COVID shots and preventing transmission - They have some effect, but that effect diminishes over time.

You also have to factor in how the COVID shots only make the body create a certain aspect of the COVID virus, rather than being a dead version of the same thing.

You can find tons of articles (written before 2020) on how a leaky Marek's disease vaccine in chickens caused that virus to become much more severe. It's not unreasonable to see the same risk present with COVID given that the current shots are also leaky.

But to get back to the broader issue - This is all still speculative. I can imagine a future where DTFFan's narrative becomes the popular consensus (I'd guess a third of the US is already there, and popular opinion is trending a certain way). Would result in the exact demonization I've been railing against here, just in the opposite direction.

[bosk1]

You are using "leaky" in one context and assuming the same "leakiness" applies in a completely different context, which there is NO data supporting, as far as I am aware.  In other words, you are using the same word to apply broadly to two entirely different things.  That's bad logic and bad analysis.

[ReaPsTA]

Why's the context different? Because it's chickens? I can't imagine the mechanisms of vaccination are that different.

Also not sure there's a total lack of data supporting. From what I understand, one of the reasons Omicron spread so rapidly (and, in some data sets, did so more rapidly among people with the shots), is because its structure was different from Alpha and Delta in significant ways. If Omicron spread more rapidly among people with the shots (again, data inconclusive, but does exist), then you have a case of the vaccine allowing something to spread more rapidly than it would have if nature ran its course.

Again I could be wrong but I'm not sure it's a ridiculous argument either.

[DTFan0789]

I've only glossed over this discussion, so forgive me if this point was brought up earlier, but I think in this case, "autonomy over my body" is a horse of a different color because it's dismissive of the consequences. The fact that unvaccinated human bodies are basically petri dishes for mutations and are more likely to lead to vaccine-evading mutations puts everyone else at risk. It's the difference between choosing not to wear my seatbelt and choosing not to drink and drive.

Actually, the science tells us that just the opposite is true. One of the worst things you can do during a pandemic is push universal vaccination because you run the risk of actively generating more highly pathogenic viruses. You are aware that these gene based shots do not stop you from contracting or spreading Covid (per the CDC's own admission), correct?

I also am personally against universal vaccine mandates.  But that said, virtually everything you typed is wrong.  And using "gene based shots" is not only incorrect and unscientific, but is very misleading. 

DTFFan is half right. Vaccines create a risk of a worse virus if they are leaky... which is what the current COVID shots are.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2116597 < This article captures what I think is the most logical conclusion regarding the COVID shots and preventing transmission - They have some effect, but that effect diminishes over time.

You also have to factor in how the COVID shots only make the body create a certain aspect of the COVID virus, rather than being a dead version of the same thing.

You can find tons of articles (written before 2020) on how a leaky Marek's disease vaccine in chickens caused that virus to become much more severe. It's not unreasonable to see the same risk present with COVID given that the current shots are also leaky.

But to get back to the broader issue - This is all still speculative. I can imagine a future where DTFFan's narrative becomes the popular consensus (I'd guess a third of the US is already there, and popular opinion is trending a certain way). Would result in the exact demonization I've been railing against here, just in the oppositdirection.

Thank you for bringing that up. The person who first introduced me to this concept was virologist and immunologist Dr. Robert Malone. He is the inventor of the nine original mRNA vaccine patents and undoubtedly (at the bare minimum) one of the founding fathers of the platform that these vaccines (gene therapies) are built on. In anyone is qualified to speak on these vaccines and how we should or shouldn't be implementing them, it is him.

It shouldn't be a controversial thing to say that this vaccination program hasn't been a success (to put it mildly) and that thousands of people have been experiencing adverse effects ranging in severity. I don't understand how stating that would make one "anti-vaccine", which is the lazy, anti-intellectual label so often thrust upon those of us who question the official narrative.

[ReaPsTA]

I would caution that just because Malone says something doesn't necessarily make it true either. I'm not deeply familiar with his arguments, but from what I've seen him say it feels like he's going with a lot of worst case scenarios as a gut reaction. He might be right. But one of the biggest problems with a lot of "the science" around COVID has been over-reliance on credentialism. Just going with what Malone says results in the same issue.

It shouldn't be a controversial thing to say that this vaccination program hasn't been a success (to put it mildly) and that thousands of people have been experiencing adverse effects ranging in severity. I don't understand how stating that would make one "anti-vaccine"

This I do agree with entirely. The conflating of being suspicious of COVID shots and being "anti-Vax" has been one of the most intellectually dishonest parts of the whole conversation around COVID.

[XeRocks81]

the vaccination has absolutely been successful,  what the hell are you guys basing this on?   (I'm going to regret this aren't I)

[ReaPsTA]

the vaccination has absolutely been successful,  what the hell are you guys basing this on?   (I'm going to regret this aren't I)

During Omicron, Israel had one of the highest cases per million in the world (the highest, depending on the graph) spite of being one of (if not the most) vaccinated countries on Earth (can see this in The Guardian's Corona Graphs).

For specific high risk individuals, the COVID shots have been effective at reducing the rate of severe outcomes. For keeping COVID under control on a societal level, they have failed completely.

[TAC]

My understanding was that the vaccine would help keep me from becoming sick. Not that it would stop the pandemic in its tracks.

[XeRocks81]

the vaccines were never supposed to prevent infection, why are you using that bar?  They prevented being hospitalized, winding up on a ventilator and possibly dying. 

[Kingly Gizz & Liz Wiz Bizzy]

What's wrong of lessening the affects of the virus? 

[ReaPsTA]

My understanding was that the vaccine would help keep me from becoming sick. Not that it would stop the pandemic in its tracks.

the vaccines were never supposed to prevent infection, why are you using that bar?  They prevented being hospitalized, winding up on a ventilator and possibly dying. 

Was absolutely marketed as such in America. You still see people say that getting more COVID shots out there is an important part of getting COVID under control.

[Kingly Gizz & Liz Wiz Bizzy]

Let's use common sense. How many times have we all heard that the flu shot wasn't as affective as it was in other years because of variants?

It's no surprise at all but it still does lesson it for most.

[ReaPsTA]

Let's use common sense. How many times have we all heard that the flu shot wasn't as affective as it was in other years because of variants?

It's no surprise at all but it still does lesson it for most.

Completely fine. But I've never had to take a flu shot to do anything in my life.

[TAC]

Let's use common sense. How many times have we all heard that the flu shot wasn't as affective as it was in other years because of variants?

It's no surprise at all but it still does lesson it for most.

Completely fine. But I've never had to take a flu shot to do anything in my life.

Well, you did to not catch the flu.


Actually, I can't believe I have to show my vax card to see Dream Theater.

[Kingly Gizz & Liz Wiz Bizzy]

Let's use common sense. How many times have we all heard that the flu shot wasn't as affective as it was in other years because of variants?

It's no surprise at all but it still does lesson it for most.

Completely fine. But I've never had to take a flu shot to do anything in my life.

I have no spleen so I need to get it. The 1 time I didn't get my flu shot I missed the AFC Championship game in N.E. vs. Indy in 2004. Got the flu. 104 temperature.

[ReaPsTA]

Well, you did to not catch the flu.

Never got a flu shot basically never got sick.

I have no spleen so I need to get it. The 1 time I didn't get my flu shot I missed the AFC Championship game in N.E. vs. Indy in 2004. Got the flu. 104 temperature.

Damn that sucks.

[Kingly Gizz & Liz Wiz Bizzy]

My buddies were there while I suffered on my couch. Lol. Never missed a game before.  Even when I battled lymphoma. 

[jammindude]

My understanding was that the vaccine would help keep me from becoming sick. Not that it would stop the pandemic in its tracks.

the vaccines were never supposed to prevent infection, why are you using that bar?  They prevented being hospitalized, winding up on a ventilator and possibly dying. 

Was absolutely marketed as such in America. You still see people say that getting more COVID shots out there is an important part of getting COVID under control.

I’ve been following this from the beginning, got vaccinated early, and I’ve NEVER heard this from anyone ever except those who are claiming that it has been said.

From day 1 that I got my first shot…early on…it was made clear to me that it did not prevent infection or spread. It just made it so I had a far lesser chance of being hospitalized or dying.

EDIT - but I do consider that being a part of “getting it under control”

[ProfessorPeart]

I have to get the flu shot to remain employed. Have had to for years now. Never got it before that and, you know what, I didn't complain. I went and got my shot and remain employed.

[bosk1]

the vaccines were never supposed to prevent infection, why are you using that bar?  They prevented being hospitalized, winding up on a ventilator and possibly dying. 

I don't think this has ever happened before in the entire history of this forum, but I agree 100% with XeRocks.  Anyone trying to argue it has not been a success is either not paying attention or too deep in their own bias to be anything close to objective. 

[Cool Chris]

I haven't been following this thread closely for a bit, but ReaPsTA is someone I always try and read here. But after a quick scan to catch up on the last page or two, I have no idea what is being debated.