half of GOP men won't get vaccinated- why the stupidity?

Author: n8nrgmi

Posts

Total: 212
Topic's author
#61
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@RationalMadman
so your idea is people want to be able to choose which vaccine they get, so that's why they choose not to get one at all? the thing is, why would a rational person turn down a vaccine that leaves you with a tenth of a one percent chance of dying, just to get one that gives you a zero percent chance of dying? you still stand a significant chance of dying if you opt out of vaccines altogether. so the doctors like fauci are right, just take whichever you can get the soonest. 
#62
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,993
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
Why do you feel the need to question what the government says is an imminent risk? 

The government has told us over and over what your personal risk for Covid is. And they say it is a lot higher than what the banned scientists claim.
#63
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
As a flu pandemic spread in 1918, Friedrich Trump came home from a stroll feeling sick. He died almost immediately. I bet he wished that the government had developed a vaccine.
#64
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@n8nrgmi
how does the risk benefit analysis tend towards not gettin the vaccine? if you get the vaccine, you have next to no chance of dying. the worst that i see is maybe you might feel bad for some side effects. if you dont get the vaccine, you stand the risk of dying, even if you take precautions you still stand a significant chance of dying. 

isn't this a no brainer decision that the vaccine makes the most sense?
No, it isn't a no-brainer. The presumed benefits of this vaccine do not outweigh the risks especially with steroid-pumped concoctions. The vaccine prevents neither the contraction nor the spread of the virus. So can the vaccine prevent one from dying from the virus? No. At best, the vaccine can fortify one's response to the virus once contracted; it is meaningless if one's immune system can't fight off virus (like giving a sword and shield to an eight year old.) This virus, much like influenza which spread just 100 years prior, isn't going away. And the more practical response--much like that to influenza--rather than a biannually administered intravenous pharmacological solution which risks heart disease, stroke, bone damage, etc., is to just simply practice good hygiene (and nutrition.) That's the no-brainer.

#65
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@zedvictor4
The side effect of life is death.'
What?

Today we can reasonably expect to live for 75 years......All largely, down to vaccination and other medical advances.

A couple of hundred years ago, you were lucky if you made it to adulthood.

Vaccinations? I thought it was cleaner water, better sanitation methods, and the use of more effective antibiotics that increased life expectancy--not to mention, better hygiene.



#66
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Greyparrot
How do you know Athias is elderly with co-morbidities?
Well, to be fair, he may have read my profile.


#67
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Athias
What about smallpox? During the 20th century, it is estimated that smallpox was responsible for 300–500 million deaths. In the early 1950s an estimated 50 million cases of smallpox occurred in the world each year. As recently as 1967, the World Health Organization estimated that 15 million people contracted the disease and that two million died in that year.  After successful vaccination campaigns throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the WHO certified the global erdication of smallpox in December 1979.
#68
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
What's to say the two-thirds are not one-half progressives? That pointed finger can easily point to mirror, you know. If you dare.
#69
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,993
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
Smallpox isn't the same virus as the multi-strain Flu. There isn't a vaccine that can eradicate all strains of the flu.
#70
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@FLRW
I was one of those 50 million, in 1950, to survive smallpox. I don't remember it at all, occurring in my first year, but Mom said I was one miserable little bundle who should not have survived. I did, and bare no mark at all from it. Others who survived were not so lucky. Even though I survived it, I'm still vaccinated occasionally against it, now. I insist. Just had my second Covid last week.
#71
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@FLRW
What about smallpox? During the 20th century, it is estimated that smallpox was responsible for 300–500 million deaths. In the early 1950s an estimated 50 million cases of smallpox occurred in the world each year. As recently as 1967, the World Health Organization estimated that 15 million people contracted the disease and that two million died in that year.  After successful vaccination campaigns throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the WHO certified the global erdication of smallpox in December 1979.
Then why is the vaccine still being administered?
#72
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Athias
Since smallpox was eradicated, the vaccine is not recommended in routine immunization. It is used to protect researchers who work on the variola virus that causes smallpox and other viruses in the same virus family (known as orthopox viruses).
#73
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Greyparrot
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is on a quest to develop a vaccine that could provide long-term immunity to all types of the flu.
The first-ever universal influenza vaccine is currently being tested in people at the NIH Clinical Center in Bethesda, Maryland, the NIH announced in April, 2019.
“The hope is that [the vaccine] will target more strains, and if we’re really lucky, most or all strains. This is important because the current vaccine is a best-guess version in anticipation of the coming flu season, which often leads to a vaccine that does not cover all strains that actually materialize,” Dr. David Mushatt, an infectious disease specialist and section chief of infectious diseases at Tulane University, told Healthline.
#74
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,993
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
The vaccine makes sense for people who have fucked up lifestyle choices doing things like eating fast food and not exercising. The vaccine makes sense for people who choose a hyper-sanitation lifestyle, which also lowers the immune system.
#75
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@FLRW
ince smallpox was eradicated, the vaccine is not recommended in routine immunization. It is used to protect researchers who work on the variola virus that causes smallpox and other viruses in the same virus family (known as orthopox viruses).
Yes, I'm aware that it is not recommended in routine immunization. But that's not what I asked. You stated that smallpox has been eradicated according to the WHO. So why is the vaccine still administered, albeit not routinely? Isn't "eradicated" an exaggeration?

#76
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Athias
Eradication is the reduction of an infectious disease's prevalence in the global host population to zero. It is sometimes confused with elimination, which describes either the reduction of an infectious disease's prevalence in a regional population to zero or the reduction of the global prevalence to a negligible amount. Further confusion arises from the use of the term eradication to refer to the total removal of a given pathogen from an individual (also known as clearance of an infection), particularly in the context of HIV and certain other viruses where such cures are sought.
#77
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@FLRW
Suppose we operate on your description of "eradication," how has the smallpox vaccine as an example informed the change in life-expectancy of which zedvictor spoke/stated?
Topic's author
#78
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@Athias
your point is that a person's immune system might not work properly to stop the disease. but the thing is, unless a person has reason to think otherwise, they should act as if their immune system works properly. that's the reasonable thing to do.
and does a vaccine save lives? yes, they do. the very large majority of folks who take a vaccine won't die which can't be said if they dont take the vaccines. 
#79
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,993
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
your point is that a person's immune system might not work properly to stop the disease. but the thing is, unless a person has reason to think otherwise, they should act as if their immune system works properly. that's the reasonable thing to do.
Should the government be the only one to decide the state of your immune system? How authoritarian are you willing to go on this one?
Topic's author
#80
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@Greyparrot
you've stretched being anti government beyond reason. the government helped us to get a safe and effective vaccine. so the government isn't inherently incompetent in everything that it does. greyparrot? more like anti government parrot 
#81
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,993
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
you've stretched being anti government beyond reason. the government helped us to get a safe and effective vaccine. so the government isn't inherently incompetent in everything that it does. greyparrot? more like anti government parrot 

I guess I can take that as a yes answer on your part.

#82
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
All helps.

But if someone offered you antibiotics for a tooth abscess or medication for hypertension etc etc....Would you refuse?

Why the downer on a vaccination to protect against a possibly fatal viral infection.


And death is the side effect of life.

If you weren't alive you wouldn't die....Simple.


And life is what we strive to prolong, and death is what we strive to put off.


And statistics prove that medical intervention increases life expectancy.


#83
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@n8nrgmi
your point is that a person's immune system might not work properly to stop the disease. but the thing is, unless a person has reason to think otherwise, they should act as if their immune system works properly. that's the reasonable thing to do.
and does a vaccine save lives? yes, they do. the very large majority of folks who take a vaccine won't die which can't be said if they dont take the vaccines. 
My point is that vaccination is futile if one's immune system cannot fight off the virus. One's injecting oneself with a vaccine provides little more than a placebo effect, except unlike a placebo, vaccines can harm. The reasonable thing to do is to exhaust every measure at one's disposal to keep oneself healthy before ever considering risking vaccination.

And the majority of those who haven't been vaccinated aren't dead, so your reasoning needs reconsideration.
#84
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@zedvictor4
All helps.
Really? How have vaccinations especially for the viruses that are addressed with vaccinations help increase life expectancy from 30 to 75?

But if someone offered you antibiotics for a tooth abscess or medication for hypertension etc etc....Would you refuse?
Yes. There are alternatives to pharmacological antibiotics, which I'm presuming you were referencing, that don't involve damaging internal organs, and hypertension can be addressed by refining one's diet and exercise habits.

Why the downer on a vaccination to protect against a possibly fatal viral infection.
Because it isn't the vaccine that protects against a possibly fatal viral infection. It's one's immune system that protects. The vaccine isn't an antiviral or antibiotic. It's a solution containing a weakened virus and a steroid. This "intends" to boost one's antibody count in response to the virus. The risks with this though is that it--the vaccine--can cause medical problems like heart disease, stroke, and bone damage (potentially osteoporosis) just to name a few. If one were already exposed to the virus, which the epidemicity of the virus would suggest, then one's immune system should've already developed a response--heart disease, stroke, and osteoporosis free--should one not have succumbed to it.  And if one is immunodeficient, then fighting off the virus is going to be difficult, vaccinated or not. (The same is true for those with co-morbidities.)

And death is the side effect of life.

If you weren't alive you wouldn't die....Simple.
Still makes no sense.

And life is what we strive to prolong, and death is what we strive to put off.
Death is inevitable; we can add more years, but nothing ever prevents it. Not even increasing life expectancy.

And statistics prove that medical intervention increases life expectancy.
Non sequitur. I'm not scrutinizing medical intervention in general.
#85
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Athias
The vaccine isn't an antiviral or antibiotic. It's a solution containing a weakened virus and a steroid
This is not true for the Covid-19 vaccine, mRNA vaccines are a new type of vaccine to protect against infectious diseases. To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, they teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies.
#86
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@FLRW
This is not true for the Covid-19 vaccine, mRNA vaccines are a new type of vaccine to protect against infectious diseases. To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, they teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies.
And this is not concerning? Tell me: how does an mRNA vaccine "teach" a cell?
#87
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Athias
mRNA vaccines have strands of genetic material called mRNA inside a special coating. That coating protects the mRNA from enzymes in the body that would otherwise break it down. It also helps the mRNA enter the dendritic cells and macrophages in the lymph node near the vaccination site.
mRNA can most easily be described as instructions for the cell on how to make a piece of the “spike protein” that is unique to SARS-CoV-2. Since only part of the protein is made, it does not do any harm to the person vaccinated but it is antigenic.
After the piece of the spike protein is made, the cell breaks down the mRNA strand and disposes of them using enzymes in the cell. It is important to note that the mRNA strand never enters the cell’s nucleus or affects genetic material. This information helps counter misinformation about how mRNA vaccines alter or modify someone’s genetic makeup.
Once displayed on the cell surface, the protein or antigen causes the immune system to begin producing antibodies and activating T-cells to fight off what it thinks is an infection. These antibodies are specific to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which means the immune system is primed to protect against future infection.
#88
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@FLRW
mRNA vaccines have strands of genetic material called mRNA inside a special coating. That coating protects the mRNA from enzymes in the body that would otherwise break it down. It also helps the mRNA enter the dendritic cells and macrophages in the lymph node near the vaccination site.
mRNA can most easily be described as instructions for the cell on how to make a piece of the “spike protein” that is unique to SARS-CoV-2. Since only part of the protein is made, it does not do any harm to the person vaccinated but it is antigenic.
After the piece of the spike protein is made, the cell breaks down the mRNA strand and disposes of them using enzymes in the cell. It is important to note that the mRNA strand never enters the cell’s nucleus or affects genetic material. This information helps counter misinformation about how mRNA vaccines alter or modify someone’s genetic makeup.
Once displayed on the cell surface, the protein or antigen causes the immune system to begin producing antibodies and activating T-cells to fight off what it thinks is an infection. These antibodies are specific to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which means the immune system is primed to protect against future infection.
And what was the scope and rigor of these mRNA vaccine trials that led to these conclusions?


#89
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Athias
#90
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Athias
Specifically this bit - 

"mRNA from the vaccine never enters the nucleus of the cell and does not affect or interact with a person’s DNA."