EPTCoronavirus and You - Page 453
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control. It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you. Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly. This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here. Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11528 Posts
On September 04 2021 03:33 ThePhan2m wrote: What do you mean its very safe? It got a urgent approval because of COVID. It has not had proper longterm testing like any other vaccines require. And there is no other vaccine that has this many reported side effects in the past 30 years of vaccination. These numbers can be found in any official governments health databases. Not to mention the creator of the mrna vaccine said it should never be used on humans. Anyone who need to be safe, can take the vaccine to be safe if that is what it does. I do not need you guys to guiltrip me into putting poisoned chemicals (however small doses) into my body to try save me from something 99.99 % cases my body does perfectly well itself. In no other time in history has this been amount of pressure to take something so untested to permanently alter my own defensemechanism. The fact that you guys think its perfectly safe considering cirmumstances is alarming. Do yourself a service and input more information about all this other than trough "accepted" biased mainstream media and "fact approved" facebook posts. Plenty of medical experts and vaccine experts which strongly disagree with this whole process that does not have their voices heard because it does not fit this mass vaccination "only solution" narrative. And herd immunity? What kind of utopia is that on this type of disease? It cant be compared. There is no proof it lasts more than max 1 year. And there is no stopping the spread even in the most vaccinated countris like Israel. We might see a scenario where we have to take a shot each year, and what this new type of vaccine does with yearly injection to the body is uknown. The vaccines are very well tested. At this point, tens or hundreds of millions of people have taken each of the available vaccines over a period of half a year or more. The long-term effects of vaccines are generally effects that last a long time, but which usually show within a few months at most, not effects which just randomly turn up after multiple years. At this point, claiming that the vaccines are either not-safe or not-effective is beyond lacking information and within the realm of willful ignorance. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
Get a couple PCR kits that you can send in for testing whether you're safe to be around again. No vaccine needed. Easy solution. If you're afraid of mrna, get Sputnik or AZ. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
On September 03 2021 22:49 BlackJack wrote: Facebook was censoring posts about coronavirus coming from the Wuhan lab until the Biden administration announced they were going to investigate that further. We now live in a world where a small group of people can determine what "the truth" is and they have the power to basically silence any dissenting opinions from the public forum that is social media. I think this is one of the most important events that has unfolded in my lifetime but it is hardly talked about. Fighting covid misinformation for public safety is the justification for this. Anyone more worried about covid than this is just naive, imo. That is definitely a big issue but more concerning than hundreds of thousands of people dying of COVID every year in the US? As vital as free speech is, there are many things that people consider free speech here that many societies do not allow cigarette ads, hate speech, campaign finance laws, etc, without there being an apparent threat to democracy. Now I don't support hate speech laws but what I'm saying is that as long as political free speech is robust enough such that political dissent can be widely disseminated, it can withstand some limitations without considerable threat to democracy. Again, I'm not supporting tech censorship but I'm saying that it is not catastrophic. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ThePhan2m
Norway2750 Posts
On September 04 2021 04:51 Artisreal wrote: Just get the virus and stay isolated for 3 weeks. Get a couple PCR kits that you can send in for testing whether you're safe to be around again. No vaccine needed. Easy solution. If you're afraid of mrna, get Sputnik or AZ. Thank you. This is my current solutions. By getting a vaccine tho I would not if I had to take it every year to sustain it. I'm happy atleast there is a choise still  to a certain degree | ||
|
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
On September 04 2021 05:19 JimmiC wrote: Freedom of speech is a rule, freedom of reach is not. The NY Times has never been expected to post any crackpot statement and infact they have historically been held accountable for what they printed (though some of those laws that required news to be balanced and factual have gone away in the US). Facebook can choose what is allowed on there platform, and should be held accountable for it. tbh I don't have a very strong opinion on whether facebook should censor COVID-19 misinformation. I am totally fine with a website like teamliquid censoring or youtube demonetizing misinformation but I do think there should be some avenue where political dissent (as misled as it may be) can be widely disseminated. If we only allowed far right people to write letters or use telegram, I suppose they would still have some degree of free speech, but freedom of expression is important too. Unfortunately, erroneous right wing ideas will often rise to the top of searches as a result of this. The idea that "we can destroy these right wing conspiracies by making good arguments that will rise to the top in the marketplace of ideas" was and probably will always be fantasy. And I definitely think there are massive benefits to preventing COVID-19 misinformation and it might be an "ends justify the means" situation in this case (which is nothing new, considering the often necessary restrictions on human rights during WW2). | ||
|
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
On September 04 2021 05:26 ThePhan2m wrote: Thank you. This is my current solutions. By getting a vaccine tho I would not if I had to take it every year to sustain it. I'm happy atleast there is a choise still to a certain degreewhy would you get a virus in order to prevent it? Are you actually serious? | ||
|
ThePhan2m
Norway2750 Posts
On September 04 2021 05:15 JimmiC wrote: Despite thephan2m claims the vaccine is proven substantially more effective then getting it. There is a Israeli study released the past week that showed that natural immunity was 10 times more effective than vaccine. Even my local doctor could confirm this. I'm only on my phone so takes longer to find all the info for answering other arguments and finding sources. | ||
|
ThePhan2m
Norway2750 Posts
On September 04 2021 05:38 Anc13nt wrote: why would you get a virus in order to prevent it? Are you actually serious? This is what our parents did with diseases back in the 60s. Sent kids to a person that got infecteds home, so that all of them could get infected and gain natural immunity. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
On September 04 2021 05:44 ThePhan2m wrote: This is what our parents did with diseases back in the 60s. Sent kids to a person that got infecteds home, so that all of them could get infected and gain natural immunity. let's look at the tradeoffs. Please explain to me how: cost of getting vaccinated + cost of getting covid while vaccinated > cost of getting covid without any immunity + cost of getting covid after being infected already admittedly the comparison is not perfect because I don't know how long natural immunity lasts compared to vaccine immunity but even setting aside cost of getting covid after being infected, I am pretty sure the right side is far worse than the left side. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
On September 04 2021 04:51 Artisreal wrote: Just get the virus and stay isolated for 3 weeks. Get a couple PCR kits that you can send in for testing whether you're safe to be around again. No vaccine needed. Easy solution. If you're afraid of mrna, get Sputnik or AZ. As a chemical manufacturing engineer, I will say that anyone with half a brain should be significantly more comfortable with an mRNA vaccine than other more traditional ones. mRNA use your body's natural machinery to generate proteins. Traditional vaccines use reactors to do it. No one should ever prefer traditional methods. Also, natural immunity from contracting covid protects much worse than available mRNA vaccines. My cousin has already had covid twice because she's an idiot. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10568 Posts
On September 04 2021 02:06 ThePhan2m wrote: I am a healty guy in my thrites. Tell me why I should get vaccinated? There is a higher chance of me getting bad side effects of the vaccine, rather than covid. Even if I get covid, I accept the consequences (in most cases in my age group nothing worse than a flue), and the immunity I gain from Covid itself is 10 times better tham from any vaccine. If the only thing vaccine does is keep people from getting seriously ill. It does not prevent people from getting covid neither spreading it. Why should I not trust my own immunesystem if it is working? Why should I get vaccinated when there is unknown longtime effects with no liabilty for the vaccine producers. The problem I have with people like you is that "Even if I get covid, I accept the consequences" usually means "If I get COVID and feel bad I'm going to go to the hospital and put others at risk and be a strain on resources." If all the "I accept the consequences..." people actually walked the walk then there would be no unvaccinated people in hospitals because they would be at home letting their body fight this virus that they are "not afraid of." The healthcare system doesn't have the resources or patience for people like you. Of course maybe I am wrong and if you get COVID you will really live up to your word and accept the consequences and quarantine at home while your immune system is engaged in glorious battle, however I suspect that as soon as you start gasping for air you will be just as cowardly as the next guy that "accepts the consequences" and be checking yourself in to the ER. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10568 Posts
On September 04 2021 01:37 maybenexttime wrote: No, as far as I know, Facebook was censoring posts claiming that the virus is a biological, man-made weapon created by the Wuhan lab. Subtle difference, I know. All viruses are "biological," and coming from the Wuhan lab already implies that it is "man-made." You're adding meaningless adjectives to make Facebook's censorship appear as narrow as possible. The only meaningful word you used here was "weapon." Here's facebook's official statement when they decided to reverse their decision In a statement to CNN Business, a Facebook spokesperson said late Wednesday that, "In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of Covid-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that Covid-19 is man-made from our apps." The statement sure does make it sound like implying that it was "man-made," aka originating in the Wuhan lab, was being censored, not just posts that it was a weaponized virus. I don't need to prove that Facebook was wrong to censor posts about the origins of COVID. The simple fact that they changed their policy to no longer censor certain posts is all the evidence you need. Barring the existence of a time machine, the origin of COVID-19 is unchanged from 2 years ago so "the truth" has not changed, the only thing that has changed is what you're allowed to theorize about "the truth." | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25507 Posts
On September 04 2021 00:15 Mohdoo wrote: Once upon a time, we had monarchies and they were shitty. A king could collect taxes for his own wealth and just generally be a shit head. Humanity justifiably ended up deciding monarchies and that kinda thing sucked ass. After some unsavory stuff with communism and Hitler and stuff like that, we were like "maybe authoritarianism is just straight up ass lol". It is totally understandable to look at past examples of extreme authoritarianism and say "ok huge yikes, stayyyy away!", but I think we have also looked at murder and said a similar thing. But we have chosen to carve out a little pocket of "ethical murder" and then slapped a sticker that says "MILITARY" on it. We take a couple steps back, inspect it a bit and say "Alright sounds good", then we move on. I wonder if we could find ways/places where authoritarianism makes sense and is helpful, in very specific instances, without completely eroding our society and outlawing free thinking. I think we can. I think humanity is ambitious and creative enough to find a way to do it, some day. We started from hitting animals with sticks, eventually made fire, eventually electricity, eventually space travel, the internet. I think we have a good track record of being able to improve our society and just improve as a whole. Personally, I think we can look at the state of the world and wonder if we are witnessing the unsavory side effects of democracy run amuck. What if we over reacted to bad instances of authoritarianism? What if we shiver at the thought of it the same way old folks shiver at the thought of socialism? Perhaps we can carve out a little slice of authoritarianism and use it for managing infection? Makes sense to me. Good Lord you really are morphing into Chairman Maodoo! But no, ribbing aside it seems an intractable problem. Sociocultural changes haven’t gone at the same pace as mass communication. Or perhaps they have and other traditional political tenets have not. We seem to have the worst of both an uninformed electorate with a lack of faith in institutions. An informed electorate that knows their shit, but distrusts current figures of authority can, at least in theory push for better replacements. An uninformed electorate that is relatively deferent to figures of authority, well if those in authority are competent and well-intentioned, they can formulate good policy that people will feel some confidence in. I mean as authoritarianism goes, we’ve basically done it, in various forms in the past. War economies, rationing, curfews and all that craic. Strangely oft-wistfully lauded as times where freedom and democracy were saved for the coming generations, but wearing masks or god forbid getting a vaccine is a slippery slope into tyranny. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
On September 04 2021 05:44 ThePhan2m wrote: This is what our parents did with diseases back in the 60s. Sent kids to a person that got infecteds home, so that all of them could get infected and gain natural immunity. Here's a question: Will you vow to not go to the hospital, even if you think you will die from covid? If you are willing to die for this misguided shout out to the 60s (when we had no other option), and you are willing to isolate once you know you have covid, I have no issue with this perspective. But keep in mind that people who work in hospitals are asking you to get vaccinated. If you end up making their life worse because of your weird bravado, I'd say that is wildly unethical. So I will ask: If you think you're on the brink of death, are you willing to remain committed? Or will you go to the hospital? | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4335 Posts
| ||
| ||
