Duck Hunting Forum banner
61 - 80 of 1519 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,607 Posts
Discussion Starter · #62 ·
Boatman said:
SpinnerMan said:
I read the thread in the Honey Hole on Experimental Vaccince https://www.duckhuntingchat.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=911562

Three things jumped out at me, but didn't really want to get into a controversial topic in there so I moved my comments to new threads here.

Rat Creek said:
So the vaccine is worse than covid? :umm:
Not even close.

Maybe for young healthy people. For some of them it may be safer to get the virus than the vaccine. However, nobody ends up giving it to other people that die because you got vaccinated. My sister-in-law gave it to her parents. Thankfully they didn't die, but they were a lot closer than they would have liked to have been. If she had got vaccinated, she wouldn't have nearly killed her parents.

Even if we are talking about 100 deaths per 1,000,000 vaccinations. If we vaccinated all 330,000,000 Americans, that would be 33,000 deaths and the reality is that it is probably 1/10th of that or less. After all we are vaccinating the weakest and probably most effected first. The virus has killed a minimum of 10 times that already and given that probably no more than 1 out of 3 have gotten it so far, we are looking at doubling that number before we reach herd immunity without the vaccines. So 33,000 deaths compared to another 300,000 to 500,000 deaths would be a massive amount of lives saved. And it's not just death that the virus causes. A lot of people have other serious health consequences, not just the suffering through the virus, my father-in-law was extremely sick for a month and when you are almost 80 you don't just bounce back from that, but also many have probably permanent damage that will impacts on their life.

Hundreds of thousands of more will die without the vaccine.

At most thousands will die with the vaccine. The only problem is we can't vaccinate quickly enough. As a result we will probably lose another 100,000 more at least and millions more will suffer badly and often permanently.

Obviously you start vaccinating the highest risk people first, but you keep going down the list until this :censored: thing is sent to the ash heap of history like polio and other disease we have vaccinated into irrelevance. Maybe we don't have to vaccinate anyone under 25 to do that, but when your risk group comes up and this thing is still around, I think it's immoral to not get vaccinated.
Wrong you can still get it and spread it after the MRNA is shot in your arm. It only helps you get through it.
With every vaccine you still CAN get it. Nothing is 100%, but this one seems pretty close. And for most people I would think it is close enough.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/Moderna.html
Based on evidence from clinical trials, the Moderna vaccine was 94.1% effective at preventing laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 illness in people who received two doses who had no evidence of being previously infected.
That means that without the vaccine, for every 1,000 people that would have been symptomatic and test positive , only 59 will test positive and 941 will not test positive. That's a lot more than just getting through it. There are 941 people that had no symptoms.

But they did not really test for asymptotic cases meaning they didn't continuously test the recipients to see if at any point they were asymptomatic. It would be quite a prohibitive experiment. But I suppose you can theorize that all the people who would have been asymptomatic got it even with the vaccine as well as an additional 941 people per 1000 symptomatic cases without the vaccine all got asymptomatic cases. That the ONLY effect of the vaccine is on symptoms and consequences with 100% still getting infected and being just as infectious. Have we ever seen that or anything close to that in any other vaccine? :huh: Again, we have used mRNA in animals and if it had no benefit in stopping transmission I think we'd know that by now.

We cannot be paralyzed with uncertainty. It's pretty safe to say that if you take the vaccine, your risk is reduced by about a factor of 20 at least. And it would be beyond shocking to think the chances of getting and spreading the disease are not also dramatically reduced, but obviously not 100% eliminated.

Now if you are in the highest risk group, is that enough to return to normal before the virus fades away? I would but it's a judgment call just like what precautions you choose to take today. It just tips the risk/reward relationship strongly towards the reward but not necessarily enough to change any particular decision.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
43,505 Posts
Question...since I have a real job too. :lol3: Have they (anyone) conclusively determined the origin of the Corona Virus i.e. random bat poop on street market rotten fish on sale, whatever etc. versus engineered?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,788 Posts
Interesting timing because now that the WHO is back in the good graces with Creepy Joe at the helm, and will get their $230 MILLION again, they have concluded it is highly unlikely that it came from a Wuhan lab. :rolleyes:

Experts believe the virus is likely to have originated in animals before spreading to humans, but they are not sure how.
How is that for an "expert" statement. :rolleyes: :no:

Allow me to paraphrase- "It came from unnamed and unidentified animals, but we have no idea how, where or why, so just trust the crap we are spewing."

Pay no attention to all the red arrows pointing at the lab in Wuhan, CHINA. :fingerpt:
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
77,753 Posts
HNTFSH said:
Question...since I have a real job too. :lol3: Have they (anyone) conclusively determined the origin of the Corona Virus i.e. random bat poop on street market rotten fish on sale, whatever etc. versus engineered?
China destroying documents, shuttering the biomedical University, muzzling or disappering doctors that spoke out about research being done on gain of function for viral contagion, among many other clues......tells me all I need to know about where the virus originated. It most certainly is not where the Communist Chinese government 'officially' says it came from.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
43,505 Posts
Indaswamp said:
HNTFSH said:
Question...since I have a real job too. :lol3: Have they (anyone) conclusively determined the origin of the Corona Virus i.e. random bat poop on street market rotten fish on sale, whatever etc. versus engineered?
China destroying documents, shuttering the biomedical University, muzzling or disappering doctors that spoke out about research being done on gain of function for viral contagion, among many other clues......tells me all I need to know about where the virus originated. It most certainly is not where the Communist Chinese government 'officially' says it came from.
I don't disagree with your speculation however if that is true, how do we successfully and safely develop a vaccine for which no one can reverse engineer the evidence to prove it? :huh:
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
43,505 Posts
Rat Creek said:
Interesting timing because now that the WHO is back in the good graces with Creepy Joe at the helm, and will get their $230 MILLION again, they have concluded it is highly unlikely that it came from a Wuhan lab. :rolleyes:

Experts believe the virus is likely to have originated in animals before spreading to humans, but they are not sure how.
How is that for an "expert" statement. :rolleyes: :no:

Allow me to paraphrase- "It came from unnamed and unidentified animals, but we have no idea how, where or why, so just trust the crap we are spewing."

Pay no attention to all the red arrows pointing at the lab in Wuhan, CHINA. :fingerpt:
Exactly where I was headed. :thumbsup:
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
77,753 Posts
HNTFSH said:
Indaswamp said:
HNTFSH said:
Question...since I have a real job too. :lol3: Have they (anyone) conclusively determined the origin of the Corona Virus i.e. random bat poop on street market rotten fish on sale, whatever etc. versus engineered?
China destroying documents, shuttering the biomedical University, muzzling or disappering doctors that spoke out about research being done on gain of function for viral contagion, among many other clues......tells me all I need to know about where the virus originated. It most certainly is not where the Communist Chinese government 'officially' says it came from.
I don't disagree with your speculation however if that is true, how do we successfully and safely develop a vaccine for which no one can reverse engineer the evidence to prove it? :huh:
What are you trying to say?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
77,753 Posts
HNTFSH,

The vaccine is the spike protein...that is the MRNA. The hope is that the body will develop antibodies to fight it. That spike protein is functionally the same as the spike protein on HIV, and we have been doing research on HIV for a long time.

What no one will attempt to explain is how did that spike protein-a complex protein at that-suddenly morph in a mutation on a SARS virus? Answer-it didn't.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
43,505 Posts
Indaswamp said:
HNTFSH,

What no one will attempt to explain is how did that spike protein-a complex protein at that-suddenly morph in a mutation on a SARS virus? Answer-it didn't.
I think it's interesting (and not particularly comforting) that those who developed the vaccine can't identify it's origin.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Historically, a lot of diseases are mutated forms of animal diseases that can infect humans. Plasmid transferal and other vector transferral can move genetic material from one bug to another. I am sure that there is a lot of research done in biological warfare in how to introduce and make new super bugs , and also how to develop antibiotics or treatments for the superbugs. Re-introduction of old favourites like Smallpox could be devastating to a population of UN-vaccinated millennials. This virus is only one of a series of different virii which we have been exposed to in the last 40 years. Certainly a super bug historically has peaked its head out about once every 100 years or so, but that is no guarantee that another superbug can't ravage the population this year. What do you think would happen if the Marburg virus suddenly became airborne and stable against heat. How about moving the genetic blueprint for botulinum toxin into an otherwise innocuous coliform bacteria.

With overuse of antibiotics, and the lack of antiviral treatments (not vaccines), there certainly should be concern about the next superbug. Think of the plague or Spanish Flu moving around the world as fast as this covid SARS virus did. With the right conditions, the world could lose the majority of its population within a very short period of time.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
77,753 Posts
HNTFSH said:
Indaswamp said:
HNTFSH,

What no one will attempt to explain is how did that spike protein-a complex protein at that-suddenly morph in a mutation on a SARS virus? Answer-it didn't.
I think it's interesting (and not particularly comforting) that those who developed the vaccine can't identify it's origin.
Because they are dead. Courtesy of the CCP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
724 Posts
Indaswamp said:
The Pas Swamp Donkey said:
Wrong. Please go to any of the following REPUTABLE sources and investigate. CDC (Centre for Disease Control) WHO (World Health Organization) FDA (Food and Drug Administration) , MAYO clinic, Harvard Health, JAMA , and you can do a medline search under the NIH (National Institute of Health) and look for meta-analaysis, which is a review of current articles dealing with the subject. I'll take the conclustion from the one meta analysis here , which was a review of 19 controlled data studies (placebo controlled). Conclusion :

"The study suggests that community mask use by well people could be beneficial, particularly for COVID-19, where transmission may be pre-symptomatic. The studies of masks as source control also suggest a benefit, and may be important during the COVID-19 pandemic in universal community face mask use as well as in health care settings. Trials in healthcare workers support the use of respirators continuously during a shift. This may prevent health worker infections and deaths from COVID-19, as aerosolisation in the hospital setting has been documented."

Similar results may be found at The Lancet and the European Respiratory Journal.

None of my results were published at Facebook University or the College of YOUTUBE or Trump University.

Don't tell people to take hydroxychloroquine. Double blind scientific studies and meta analysis have found it to be totally ineffective.
None of what you posted refutes the science that viruses pass thru masks. the N-95 allows pass through of virus particulate size larger than the thresh hold for infection. Please post something that refutes this fact.
He gets all his facts from orgs that all have the same left political agenda.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
[quote
lil dinamo said:
Indaswamp said:
The Pas Swamp Donkey said:
Wrong. Please go to any of the following REPUTABLE sources and investigate. CDC (Centre for Disease Control) WHO (World Health Organization) FDA (Food and Drug Administration) , MAYO clinic, Harvard Health, JAMA , and you can do a medline search under the NIH (National Institute of Health) and look for meta-analaysis, which is a review of current articles dealing with the subject. I'll take the conclustion from the one meta analysis here , which was a review of 19 controlled data studies (placebo controlled). Conclusion :

"The study suggests that community mask use by well people could be beneficial, particularly for COVID-19, where transmission may be pre-symptomatic. The studies of masks as source control also suggest a benefit, and may be important during the COVID-19 pandemic in universal community face mask use as well as in health care settings. Trials in healthcare workers support the use of respirators continuously during a shift. This may prevent health worker infections and deaths from COVID-19, as aerosolisation in the hospital setting has been documented."

Similar results may be found at The Lancet and the European Respiratory Journal.

None of my results were published at Facebook University or the College of YOUTUBE or Trump University.

Don't tell people to take hydroxychloroquine. Double blind scientific studies and meta analysis have found it to be totally ineffective.
None of what you posted refutes the science that viruses pass thru masks. the N-95 allows pass through of virus particulate size larger than the thresh hold for infection. Please post something that refutes this fact.
He gets all his facts from orgs that all have the same left political agenda.
] [/quote]

Yeah, all those leftist organizations like The Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine. Total left wing propoganda. All those left wing science based journals. Why can't they be more like the respected right wing medical journals. That lancet has to be fake, after all, it has only been publishing for 198 years. Total junk.

I have no idea why or how published scientific literature has a "left political agenda". Are you stating that if you follow scientific method and publish factual articles that this is somehow "leftist". If so, then what , pray tell, is involved in a publication that you would consider a "right political agenda" and could you please give me some examples. Curious minds would like to know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
724 Posts
I would but everything showing facts and truth has been censored and purged from the internets...

Apparently, logic is the enemy and truth is a menace.

The Pas Swamp Donkey said:
[quote
lil dinamo said:
Indaswamp said:
The Pas Swamp Donkey said:
Wrong. Please go to any of the following REPUTABLE sources and investigate. CDC (Centre for Disease Control) WHO (World Health Organization) FDA (Food and Drug Administration) , MAYO clinic, Harvard Health, JAMA , and you can do a medline search under the NIH (National Institute of Health) and look for meta-analaysis, which is a review of current articles dealing with the subject. I'll take the conclustion from the one meta analysis here , which was a review of 19 controlled data studies (placebo controlled). Conclusion :

"The study suggests that community mask use by well people could be beneficial, particularly for COVID-19, where transmission may be pre-symptomatic. The studies of masks as source control also suggest a benefit, and may be important during the COVID-19 pandemic in universal community face mask use as well as in health care settings. Trials in healthcare workers support the use of respirators continuously during a shift. This may prevent health worker infections and deaths from COVID-19, as aerosolisation in the hospital setting has been documented."

Similar results may be found at The Lancet and the European Respiratory Journal.

None of my results were published at Facebook University or the College of YOUTUBE or Trump University.

Don't tell people to take hydroxychloroquine. Double blind scientific studies and meta analysis have found it to be totally ineffective.
None of what you posted refutes the science that viruses pass thru masks. the N-95 allows pass through of virus particulate size larger than the thresh hold for infection. Please post something that refutes this fact.
He gets all his facts from orgs that all have the same left political agenda.
]

Yeah, all those leftist organizations like The Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine. Total left wing propoganda. All those left wing science based journals. Why can't they be more like the respected right wing medical journals. That lancet has to be fake, after all, it has only been publishing for 198 years. Total junk.

I have no idea why or how published scientific literature has a "left political agenda". Are you stating that if you follow scientific method and publish factual articles that this is somehow "leftist". If so, then what , pray tell, is involved in a publication that you would consider a "right political agenda" and could you please give me some examples. Curious minds would like to know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,607 Posts
Discussion Starter · #79 ·
The Pas Swamp Donkey said:
I have no idea why or how published scientific literature has a "left political agenda".
That's not hard to imagine. Why are double blind studies required? Because if they're not the results will reflect the biases and desires of the scientists.

Have you ever been a peer reviewer? Doesn't make any of this the Gospel. Which papers are accepted, who does the peer review, ... All that is subject to bias.

For example, in my field saying the best solution is to minimize wind and solar, it would never get published in a credible journals no matter how well the research is done. Our "job" is to do research that proves we can use a ton of wind and solar effectively without issues. It's the accepted fact and a terrible idea most places without incredible technology innovations. Good to research those innovations. Horrible to assume they will magically appear.

Funny story on peer reviewing, when I was a grad student, my advisor gave me a transcript and told me to review it. I was probably the only person in the world that would have saw the error in the study. Used my equations that I had just developed and published and used them incorrectly :lol3: Unlikely anyone else would have saw that. Different reviewer that paper is published as is. With me as a reviewer, never published.

While I generally agree with you on the facts of this, there is definitely bias and it is left of center bias reflected by the research communities. It's really nothing but the traditional view of classes which inderpins all left policy and thinking.

The researchers are in one class and everyone else is in a lower class. The stereotype of that lower class is not a good one. Just like any insidious stereotype, there will always be some morons within the group that support that stereotype. You don't like black people as a group, the high crime seen in the black community. There you go just dismissed the whole group because you're an idiot even if you're a well educated idiot. That's why they dismissed the Trump people as violent while the groups burning down American cities this summer in spring are mostly good people. That's a stereotype that they adopted and their "research" will show it.

It's just the common sense of why we need double blind studies. Without it the research and everything reflects the biases of the scientists. And little can do to be done with double blind studies. Also you quickly cross over into policy and not just points of scientific fact. And in that clouds the facts and the policy. And that is why so many people don't believe the scientists these days even when is a pure point of fact. They have lost their credibility by their actions. Just look at Fauci, he admits he lied. So when do we believe in when is he lying?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
77,753 Posts
61 - 80 of 1519 Posts
Top