COVID-19

[drayer54]

For pharma profits, sure.

Getting a Vax delivered was a turning point in the Covid era. Trump and co did it. Everything after was stupid theater.

 

[GATTACA!]

The Fauci release did change some people’s minds-
But when you have Gattaca:

And the rest of the board dancing to shit like this-


You can’t expect facts and new releases to change their minds from the cult of Fauci. We knew he wanted power and fame, not anything good for the general public. We knew that when it was safe to riot but not go to church, teachers unions controlled school openings, Elites could wine and dine, and the rest of were told by Biden’s liars when it was safe to go outside. Thank god for people like DeSantis who told Fauci to fuck off when they saw a charlatan. More facts are available, but stupid is and stupid does.

You would have thought I would have learned my lesson after everyone I knew and loved died from the vaccine.

 

[oddz313]

When it comes to elites didn't old Herman Cain get it and die after a Trump rally? I was considered a necessary worker for some GM truck part and would go to the engineering lab here and there. Summer 2021 the engineering director all wanted engineering there to collaborate until sometime in August the lab manager died from it. Same lab manager called it a hoax and allegedly had a wife working in the health care field

 

[greyhammer90]

The funniest part of reading this thread is that it's like 90% everyone agreeing with each other but also acting really pissed off while doing it.

 

[TorontoGold]

You would have thought I would have learned my lesson after everyone I knew and loved died from the vacine.

Same.

It's going to be wild to see how Drayer spins how consequential it was that Trump delivered the vaccine, but also walking the tightrope of keeping the antivax folks happy.

 

[GATTACA!]

The funniest part of reading this thread is that it's like 90% everyone agreeing with each other but also acting really pissed off while doing it.

Hey, fuck you bud.

 

[oddz313]

Same.

It's going to be wild to see how Drayer spins how consequential it was that Trump delivered the vaccine, but also walking the tightrope of keeping the antivax folks happy.

Also it took a significant amount of time after the vax was available for people to get it, lots of people waited awhile to get one. Personally don't blame them but we can't act like oh the vax is here so its over

 

[T-Boone]

Can it play running back?

March 9 2020. Me.
How did this not get a lot of laughs?
Covid was the John the Baptist to Jeremiah Love.

 

[Jiggafini19Deux]

Can you find me any mention from CDC / Fauci / Walensky stating that yearly COVID boosters were inevitable to adapt to the mutations?
Robert Malone said it, and he was treated as a conspiracy theorist and de-platformed. Toronto made fun of Malone when I mentioned his statements about the virus mutating back in 2022 (that aged poorly, Toronto).

If you believe that the experts knew that the virus would mutate, do you believe that they properly informed the public of the need for yearly COVID boosters to maintain immunity/protection prior to the vax mandates that started in Spring 2021 and forced people out of jobs and military members out of service?

If you want nuance, you won't find it with CDC, FDA, or any of the "experts."
"Safe and effective." No asterisk, no disclosure of side effects or waning immunity. Just safe and effective. And that over simplistic messaging encouraged the boldness to enact vax mandates.



Valuable is not the same as mandatory. The narrative is completely different if the COVID shots were optional.



So, you believe that CDC's decision to change the definition of vaccine in September 2021 was completely unrelated to the fact that Delta had been spreading across vaccinated cohorts all summer? What are the odds...



Let's add nuance to that statement. I've provided ample evidence using raw, properly stratified, country-wide data that shows vax efficacy vs. hospitalization and death is negligible in cohorts under 60 years of age. Public, Government-level, raw data - the golden standard for statisticians. Why didn't the US ever publish raw data, if the UK did?

Do me a favor and tell me what the Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) of hospitalization and death is for working-age individuals who took the shot. Then tell me the Number Needed to Treat (NNT) for those age groups. I've posted them here in this thread. Then provide me with a logical explanation for vaccine mandates for working age citizens given these numbers.

The virus mutating wasn't a fringe prediction because public health officials discussed that possibility from early on. The bigger question is whether they thought that it would require regular, annual boosters. As far as I'm aware, I haven't seen CDC, Fauci, or Walensky saying in early 2021 that yearly COVID boosters were inevitable before vaccine mandates were implemented.

There is a difference between "the virus will mutate" and "we know people will need annual boosters." In 2021, there was still uncertainty about how long vaccine protection would last, how quickly variants would emerge, and whether boosters would be needed regularly. Guidance evolved as more data became available.

I think it's fair to criticize the public messaging. "Safe and effective" accurately reflected that the vaccines reduced severe illness and death, but it didn't communicate much about uncertainty, protection against infection, or the possibility that recommendations would change over time. More transparent communication about what was known, what wasn't, and how guidance might evolve could have helped maintain public trust.

It's reasonable to debate whether mandates were justified given the information available at the time, but that debate is stronger when it's based on what officials actually said and knew at the time, rather than assuming either that they knew annual boosters were inevitable or that they believed the vaccines would permanently stop transmission.

A medical intervention can be valuable without being appropriate to mandate for everyone.

Whether someone supports or opposes the mandates, making vaccination optional is a fundamentally different policy than making it a condition of employment, military service, or being in public life. Once it's mandatory, the burden to be transparent about benefits, risks, limitations, and the evolving evidence becomes much higher.

Reasonable people can disagree about whether mandates were justified during different phases of the pandemic, but it's hard to argue that "recommended" and "required" are the same thing. They involve very different ethical and legal considerations.

I think it's fair to question the timing, but timing alone doesn't establish the reason for the change.

The CDC said it updated the definition to better reflect how vaccines work in general, that they reduce the risk of disease rather than provide immunity. Some argue the change coincided with growing evidence that Delta could infect vaccinated people and therefore looked like a response to shifting public perception.

Whether you agree with the CDC's explanation or not, it's more productive to ask for evidence than to assume motives. If someone believes the definition was changed specifically because of Delta breakthrough infections, there should be documentation or internal communications supporting that. Otherwise, it's an assumption rather than a fact.

I do think the Delta wave exposed that early public messaging about vaccination and transmission was more confident than the evidence ultimately supported.

Raw data is certainly valuable, and I agree that transparency is important. If you've shared government data, those should be evaluated rather than dismissed.

Where I'm careful is jumping from one country's data to broad conclusions. Hospitalization and death risk vary by age, prior infection, underlying health conditions, time since vaccination, circulating variants, and healthcare practices. Those factors all matter when talking about effectiveness.

With the U.S., it's fair to ask why data wasn't released in a format that allowed easier independent analysis. More accessible, patient level or consistent data would likely have improved transparency and public confidence. That's a legit criticism regardless of where someone stands on vaccination policy.

A stronger case is to advocate for greater data transparency, not to assume that the absence of a particular dataset necessarily proves a specific conclusion.

Before I "do you a favor", I'd want to verify the ARR and NNT values you're referring to rather than assume they're correct. Those numbers depend on the population, age range, time period, circulating variant, prior immunity, and the outcome being measured, so there's no single ARR or NNT that applies to all working-age adults.

So even if the ARR for hospitalization or death is small in younger, healthier adults, which is expected because their risk is already low, it doesn't automatically answer the policy question. A low benefit can still justify a vaccine, but it raises a question about whether it should be mandated.

Reasonable people can disagree on where the line should be. If the direct individual benefit is modest and the vaccine has limited impact on preventing transmission, the case for broad mandates becomes harder to defend than if it provided large personal protection and reliably blocked spread. That's a legit debate, but it should be based on accurately calculated ARR and NNT values for the relevant population, not on a single figure applied across all contexts.

I have a massive migraine in my left eyeball.

 

[sixstar]

give my thanks to AI for that response lol

 

[RDU Irish]

"we didn't know" - maybe because the global "expert" was lying to you about the stats? Those of us that aren't comfortable relying on big daddy gubmint to tell us how to run every aspect our lives, smelled the BS and called it out were (and still are) lambasted for it.

I know y'all want to forget VAX OR DIE 100% applied to the previously infected - "we didn't know" crowd loves to feign ignorance and deny science when it comes to wetting themselves at the behest of a mass hysteria. Natural immunity was inferior to the holy jab - keep lying to yourself all you folks that DEMANDED prior infected people get jabbed and boosted or else.