Vaccine Mandates: Biden & Dems Hypocrites?

[Arturo Bandini]

(01-23-2022, 01:50 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I have to say, this thread, and some PM's I've received because of it, have been very eye opening.  You can't even make a demonstrably true statement without being attacked.    In the last five to six weeks I've had five of my officers, all vaccinated, test positive for symptomatic Covid.  I've had two who tested positive and were asymptomatic, both fully vaccinated as well.  Yes, if you are vaccinated you are far less likely to spread Covid or display the worst symptoms of it if you do catch it.  But it is objectively true to point out that the Covid vaccine is much more akin to a flu shot than the Polio vaccine.


Pointing any of this out does not make someone anti-vax, a QAnon person or a religious nut.  Seriously, some of you guys are just as bad as the rabid anti-vaxers.

Pollio vaccine is many years old, this one is brand new, it's like adapting in real time to a life form who adapts itself in real time too.

It might last 40 years to reach a world immunity, nobody knows.

[Belsnickel]

(01-23-2022, 01:50 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I have to say, this thread, and some PM's I've received because of it, have been very eye opening. You can't even make a demonstrably true statement without being attacked. In the last five to six weeks I've had five of my officers, all vaccinated, test positive for symptomatic Covid. I've had two who tested positive and were asymptomatic, both fully vaccinated as well. Yes, if you are vaccinated you are far less likely to spread Covid or display the worst symptoms of it if you do catch it. But it is objectively true to point out that the Covid vaccine is much more akin to a flu shot than the Polio vaccine.


Pointing any of this out does not make someone anti-vax, a QAnon person or a religious nut. Seriously, some of you guys are just as bad as the rabid anti-vaxers.

For my part, I still disagree with your position, I just didn't feel like arguing it further. But were you really getting people that riled up?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-23-2022, 04:41 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Pollio vaccine is many years old, this one is brand new, it's like adapting in real time to a life form who adapts itself in real time too.

It might last 40 years to reach a world immunity, nobody knows.

Your point is true, but it really doesn't address mine.  The Polio vaccine is close to 100% effective.  If you get vaccinated, and you're not one of the statistically insignificant people who get the disease from the vaccine (which btw, happened to one of my best friend's father, he got polio from the vaccine), then you are immunized from ever getting polio.  While getting the Covid vaccine is important it has nowhere near the level of efficacy as the polio, and other, vaccines.

(01-23-2022, 04:59 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: For my part, I still disagree with your position, I just didn't feel like arguing it further. But were you really getting people that riled up?

I honestly don't think you disagree with it as much as you think.  We both agree getting the vaccine is important.  We both agree that it will minimize your symptoms if you are infected post vaccine.  We both agree that being vaccinated means you are far less likely to transmit the virus if you are infected.  All of these things are important.  None of these things detract from my point.  I think you're conflating my, fact based, statements with those who claim the vaccine is worthless or even dangerous.  We can all admit the shortcomings of the vaccine without throwing our lot in with the anti-vax crowd.  That's the type of black and white view of this subject that is significantly fueling the resistance to the vaccine in the first place.  You can acknowledge the vaccine's efficacy at the same time you admit to its shortcomings.  Failure to do so really only gives the other side ammunition.

As to your second part, yes.  It's someone I like, and I don't have an issue with their position.  But their misinterpretation of mine has been disconcerting.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(01-20-2022, 08:40 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: What you don't understand is that the Democrats' pro abortion stance has nothing to do with my body my choice. It's all about harvesting those yummy, baby carcasses for use in satanic rituals and blood oaths.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Scientology rituals. How else do you explain Tom Cruise?

[Belsnickel]

(01-23-2022, 06:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I honestly don't think you disagree with it as much as you think.  We both agree getting the vaccine is important.  We both agree that it will minimize your symptoms if you are infected post vaccine.  We both agree that being vaccinated means you are far less likely to transmit the virus if you are infected.  All of these things are important.  None of these things detract from my point.  I think you're conflating my, fact based, statements with those who claim the vaccine is worthless or even dangerous.  We can all admit the shortcomings of the vaccine without throwing our lot in with the anti-vax crowd.  That's the type of black and white view of this subject that is significantly fueling the resistance to the vaccine in the first place.  You can acknowledge the vaccine's efficacy at the same time you admit to its shortcomings.  Failure to do so really only gives the other side ammunition.

As to your second part, yes.  It's someone I like, and I don't have an issue with their position.  But their misinterpretation of mine has been disconcerting.

I think my issue is that you can admit the shortcomings of the vaccine, but there is a lot of misinformation about what those shortcomings are. Your statement that it "not not stop you from either getting or transmitting the virus" struck me as misinformation given the data we have showing that it does do that in many cases. Because each person's system is a little different it will act in different ways it won't perform the same for everyone or every strain of the virus. So you saying that it does not do that when the evidence shows otherwise struck me as misinformed.

There are a lot of things said about the vaccines by both the pro- and anti-vax crowds that just aren't rooted in the evidence either from misunderstandings or just blatant lies. By spreading this misinformation, whether intentionally or not, we also give ammunition to the anti-vax crowd.

This is one of those times where what I like to focus my efforts on comes in handy. Interdisciplinary approaches to public policy efforts. What this means is that you can still have the epidemiologists looking at what we need to do and all that, but we need social scientists to be a part of the conversation to help spread the message. Most people don't understand the biology of things. They aren't going to read a NEMJ article about the efficacy of the vaccine. We need policy crafted that people will actually understand and follow. Granted, that is made even more difficult in the current climate where the default position of any politician is to be against whatever the people in the other party are saying, but we can try, dammit!