General

Again: we’re doomed.

metsfan718 wrote:

Can you point me to ANY mainstream news outlet or official source that said the vaccine prevents you from spreading the disease?

I recall hearing you are less likely (because with the vaccine you are less likely to have it/have a strong case of it so there would be less of the virus reproducing in your body) but never that you couldn't spread it.

I recall people being babies over mask mandates and ignoring them or angrily defying them and then businesses just stopped trying to enforce them for the safety of their employees. Then when news comes out saying the mask mandates didn't do much, they all cheered and said "SEE? MASKS DO NOTHING" but they forgot to add "because we did our best to completely sabotage any chance they had."

metsfan718 wrote:


Respectfully, this is really misleading. The underlying science behind the vaccine has been in the works for decades: https://covid19.nih.gov/nih-strategic-response-cov....

I had one glaring example of Rachel Maddow's monologue about how Covid will stop transmitting.

It is nowhere to be found on YouTube.

I had to venture over to rumble to find it. I'm not a big fan of that platform but it seems to be the only one that you can at least find stuff like this after the fact

https://rumble.com/vrkgip-flashback-rachel-maddow-...

The fact that this was well used during the pandemic and is now very difficult to find should not make anyone feel good about getting information without pure agenda getting in the way.

This is why you ask your doctor and stop acting as if you’re just making the lesser of two bad choices by listening to political talking heads. This is the problem. Almost everything you hear or read with a political bias is misinformation. We need to teach better critical reasoning skills- starting with who you should trust with your issues- it’s professionals and not Rachel Maddow or others with a political motivation.

The vaccine technology has been in development for decades. We’ve been working with coronaviruses in domestic animals stringently trying to discover an effective vaccine. The vaccine only ever conferred non sterile immunity. This means you can get sick and you may spread disease when you do. If you ever thought otherwise then you chose to be misinformed. I say you chose because the actual facts are out there to find- from the people you should be asking. You aren’t a victim.

rayzor6 wrote:

Thanks. Never watched msnbc so I missed this.


Or maybe it's the result of trying to clamp down on disinformation? Once something turns out to be wrong you don't want to keep propagating it unless the agenda is to promote wrong information...

Feeb wrote:

Except when your doctor is clearly wrong because famous people told me different and they wouldn't lie.

(Or when your doctor actually is wrong, which can happen too.)

The very small portion of actual professionals who are anti vaccine are cherry picked and promoted for their brave anti establishment “opinion.” A vocal minority- very small group. You can find this in every single field where there is monetary or political motivation to divide. There are unethical people- usually to get this opinion from a doctor you have to actively seek it out - confirmation bias. You will find it. This is again on you for your inability to critically think and willingness to be misinformed

This threads been brought to you by Pfizer!

benstylus wrote:

That is one way to look at it. I look at it as not helping the agenda anymore and can only be used on the other side: so get rid of it.

Feeb, you act like once you put on a lab coat or a stethoscope : you are exempt from the need to carry on with agendas or the temptation to say the right things to get your work recognized. Science had PLENTY of opportunity here to demonstrate that it is, by and large, immune to such temptations. It did not bring that to the forefront.

When the nonsense about masks (especially cloth masks) was being put out there, there was NO unified voice that said "Uh...actually...that isn't going to do a lot". The science and medicine communities were either silent, censored or compliant.

When the Maddow show came out and said that above...which was a reflection of what was being said in many places...there wasn't a unified front of doctors and scientists saying otherwise. At the same time that the CDC *KNEW* this wasn't the case and it's documented they did now

There was a desperate need for information to be had there for the public. But unless you went along with the govt narrative: you were censored and labeled as 'misinformation'. The science and medicine community along with the CDC could really have done the right thing here by even saying things like "we don't know" or giving details as they unfolded.

But they didn't. They didn't because they got swept up in the very human desire to get the carrot or avoid the stick. And we had to find out AFTER the fact about how much BS was spun in this whole thing...ironically while being told for 2 years to 'follow the science' yet ignoring every basic scientific general principal along the way. It wasn't the pursuit of truth...it was an agenda that wasn't based in science at all and instead of becoming informed...the part of the public that questioned these inconsistencies were labeled and treated like evil people for not just going along with something that didn't make sense or was contradictory in nature.

Statistics such as 'covid deaths' being misrepresented or at best: not expounded upon until after the fact by the CDC. There is a big difference between "X% of people had these types of morbidities and got covid and died" and "these people died of covid itself". But to lump them all as covid deaths with no explanation can definitely be look at as an instrument to instill fear rather than to inform. I don't consider that 'science'.

These things resulted in one certainty: that the science and medicine community lost a LOT of trust by all these measures. I don't know if the coronavirus vaccine information you are generally citing is accurate or not. All I can tell you is that myself and many others have no faith in what they proclaim. That community can't stay silent and/or condone flat out untrue things...then say something that is true and have people believe them.

Then there is the whole thing about myocarditis, stroke, heart attacks and this basic principle I mentioned above gets repeated again. The mere idea of questioning whether those matters are a direct result of the vaccine is considered completely unfounded. Again...not a real scientific way to approach a hypothesis. I understand this bias. If you took the vaccine, you don't want to think about the notion that you have to deal with this, so deny, deny, deny for your own sanity's sake. And my heart goes out to anyone who has this concern and I would LOVE for it to be completely false and NO ONE has any negative repercussions from it. But when society doesn't even want to spin the wheels on that idea and disprove it...to me, that is a good indicator that they don't want to find out the answer (possibly because they know what it is).

The scientific community isn't ignoring the potential link between COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis. See, for example: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/clinical-con.... It's just that cases of myocarditis and pericarditis following receipt of the vaccine are relatively rare, and there is a higher risk of myocarditis associated with having a severe case of COVID-19 than myocarditis associated with the vaccine.

rayzor6 wrote:

rayzor6 wrote:

Aside from the fact I clearly stated that professionals can be unethical- most of the small sample size deniers like to cite mostly- You’re ignoring the fact that science did not say any of the drivel you’re espousing. Maddow does not equal science. Most “scientists” are completely oblivious to the whims of the media and politicians. Until they get bought. If you have any understanding of how science works at all- then you realize this is how science works. Collecting information takes years after a pandemic. Everything you’re copy / pasting here you are repeating from some politically motivated source. If you need to be right that’s fine, your mind is set on that. Just know that you are not above falling victim to misinformation. Your citing sources from published information does not make you an expert. If I could give you a stethoscope and a white lab coat and negate the Dunning–Kruger internet degree- I would.

If wearing a mask has hurt folks this much- it says more about their maturity and patience then it does about science.

I cannot fathom this idea of demonizing media whilst completely buying it hook line and sinker at the same time. I guess you get to pick what you deem media these days?

@bill feel free to close this one down. I sincerely did not mean to create a forum for another political conversation.