All Things COVID-19
- Thread starter Sotally Tober
- Start date
- Status
wishiniwasfishin1
Well-Known Member
Anyone have any concerns with getting their young teenage kids vaxedd?
I am old and have never been too concerned with what I put in my body so not that concerned for me.
Should we be worried that we are going to jab all these kids with something that hasn’t been tested on their age group? The way this is headed is there will be a two tier system with those vaccinated and not vaccinated. The social pressures that are developing between the vaxxed and not vaccinated are a lot and will become pretty gross here shortly especially at that age group. What a world.
I am old and have never been too concerned with what I put in my body so not that concerned for me.
Should we be worried that we are going to jab all these kids with something that hasn’t been tested on their age group? The way this is headed is there will be a two tier system with those vaccinated and not vaccinated. The social pressures that are developing between the vaxxed and not vaccinated are a lot and will become pretty gross here shortly especially at that age group. What a world.
Last edited:
Do you really think you have a choice ?
Even if deep down you know that it MAY be a chance that you are doing an irreversible bad thing to your kid you will have to do it. Just wait and see the replies at this reply and you will understand what I mean.
Regards
D
wishiniwasfishin1
Well-Known Member
And this is just the 12 and up category.
Wait a couple months and the six year olds will be getting it yearly like everyone else.
The only option is to not get it and then what? Become the scourge of society. I can see a world in which unvaccinated kids will not be allowed to attend in person classes in September, camp, sports, etc.
Based on what I have read, learned there is a good chance that the vax is fine, but I still have this 'are we sure about jabbing all our children?' voice in my head.
cracked_ribs
Well-Known Member
My kid is much younger than that, and yes, I do have some concerns and there is currently no data on anything I'm concerned about, so it's impossible to know the relative risks. I think they're pretty remote, but we don't know.
I can live with that, but I agree, there will be intense social pressure to comply.
I'm frustrated that I'm supposed to take, on faith, the word of people who initially claimed masks wouldn't help so they could secure a supply for themselves, and that the idea covid came out of a chinese lab was an alt-right conspiracy theory, which, like the mask thing, was obviously false from day one.
I also think there's a very sharp conflict of interest with a lot of the people who head up the organizations we're taking our advice from; lots of these people are directly involved in gain of function research and the decision to do it in China.
That doesn't mean they're lying or anything but it's a factor I think people should be weighing.
Finally it's also true that the only way to get emergency approval of a treatment in the US, is to state that no current treatment works.
So the financial motive to claim that no existing antiviral would help is pretty powerful. That said, it's also true that my doctor friends in the US are pretty unified around the opinion that none of the AZT/HCQ/ivermectin treatments work and they should know.
But I think the pressure not to discuss any of this stuff is ultimately bad for everyone.
It would be nice to have rational discussions, but sadly social media and our sad state of public discourse somehow goes straight to Bill Gates is injecting us with 5G and all rational talk just downgrades so quickly.
Really hoping we can dial back the misinformation and get back to just rational discussions based on facts.
I am confused now: I thought we were told few days ago that the studies show that 4 months between shots is beneficial ( increasing the number and strength of antibodies if I’m not mistaken)
ryanb
Well-Known Member
It's only beneficial, politically, when you have insufficient vaccine supply. Providing the proper dose with the proper spacing is much more protective than exposing you to infection with only 1 dose for an extended period of time.
Are you saying that our health officials made up those studies to cover up the insufficient vaccine supply? Why would they do that? Why just not say: there is not sufficient vaccine at the moment to assure the proper administration?
islandboy
Well-Known Member
Perhaps they see new storm clouds on the horizon:
Australia’s Victoria state to enter COVID-19 lockdown after ‘highly-infectious’ outbreak
Australia's second most populous state of Victoria will enter a one-week COVID-19 lockdown forcing its near seven million residents to remain home except for essential business as authorities struggle to contain a highly-infectious outbreak.
IMO that screws up any chance of breaking chains of infection using contact tracers due to the speed of infection.
Edit: UK studies suggesting India variant can be fended off if fully vaccinated.
Side note: I just finished reading Dr. Henry's second book. Great insight as to the reasoning.
Last edited:
ILHG
Crew Member
It's like the mask. Early on they said they dont work because they didn't have enough of them.
Next will be mixed vaccines.
Last edited:
I’m wondering how we were able to breathe until now without the abundance of “ UK studies “.Perhaps they see new storm clouds on the horizon:
"The current strain can take one day to infect another person compared with earlier strains which can take about five or six days, Merlino said."Australia’s Victoria state to enter COVID-19 lockdown after ‘highly-infectious’ outbreak
Australia's second most populous state of Victoria will enter a one-week COVID-19 lockdown forcing its near seven million residents to remain home except for essential business as authorities struggle to contain a highly-infectious outbreak.www.reuters.com
IMO that screws up any chance of breaking chains of infection using contact tracers due to the speed of infection.
Edit: UK studies suggesting India variant can be fended off if fully vaccinated.
Side note: I just finished reading Dr. Henry's second book. Great insight as to the reasoning.
I personally have read this morning that UK studies are suggesting that keeping one hatchery Chinook salmon in Area 28 is beneficial in the fight against the Brazilian variant.
I am not saying that because it serves my own interest , once it’s said the “ UK studies suggest “ nobody should doubt is legitimacy
islandboy
Well-Known Member
It's been standard practice to watch Australia's flu season to decide the vaccine for us. Their C19 vaccinations are not near our rates. This will be interesting to follow.
ryanb
Well-Known Member
No, I'm not saying they made up the data, but the vaccines are 95 percent effective with the 3 week interval as recommended. With proper vaccine supply it's much better to vaccinate everyone quickly than to stretch it out 4 months for slightly better effect. The suggestion that it was somehow better to expose everyone including the vulnerable older population for 4 months is a bit non-sensical.
But when have politicians and their appointees every let facts get in the way of a narrative?
That wasn't what was suggested. The concern was that people would be way worse off stretching, the studies show they were not other than being less protected between doses 1 and 2. Ideally, everyone was dosed in the proper intervals, we didn't have the doses and they made a call, and it appears to have panned out.
ryanb
Well-Known Member
Not for all the people who have died after being only half vaccinated though. I'd like to see statistics on that, but it's missing in the government's data.
cracked_ribs
Well-Known Member
The conspiracy theories of a handful of wing nuts don't concern me at all, compared to the actual real conspiracy to prevent discussion of the topic that's "off-narrative."
Facebook had an actual policy of not permitting articles which suggested that the virus could have come from a lab, and they just removed that policy this week.
THAT is the real danger, not a tiny lunatic fringe who think Bill Gates is a lizard.
Consider how different the response would have been if we knew exactly what the virus was by day three, say. If it turns out to be a lab leak, and obviously that's almost certainly what it is, there's a whole pile of research on this virus. Research that the Chinese had access to, in planning their response.
We could have known exactly what we were dealing with, and had a much more effective response. How many lives would have been spared if we knew in December of 2019 exactly what we were up against? Thousands? Millions?
But people who talked about this possibility were treated like nutcases, and a complete fabrication - that a lab leak was impossible - was crammed down everyone's throats.
Everyone is upset because a handful of idiots won't wear masks...those idiots are putting a handful of lives at risk.
If the lab leak hypothesis is true then a lot of public health institutions, and a lot of media organizations, are complicit in millions of deaths, because the refusal to allow discussion of that possibility prevented people from generating political pressure to have an actual investigation into the Wuhan lab - the investigation that happened was carried out without a mandate to determine whether the virus had been man made. It was just done to put an official gloss on the denials, and governments, major media, and tech companies ran with it uncritically because that was the narrative they conspired(!) to push.
Remember a million pages back when I was arguing about how important it is to not just blindly follow rules and assume that the people in charge are actually working in your best interest? This is why! Again and again, I think we're seeing the real threat is not that some wackos will spout nonsense.
It's that you HAVE to have open discussion and ideas HAVE to be subject to scrutiny. That's what following science would actually look like. Instead we got "Follow the Science™" which was code for "stop asking questions" which is inherently unscientific, and I think we can now begin to reasonably conclude, got a lot of people killed.
So personally, I don't care about the 5g wackos. I care about the incredibly dangerous suppression of discussion by powerful media, tech, and government forces. THAT'S what people should be worried about.
The sad thing is that is not a handful of wingnuts. The Q movement or whatever they are currently calling it has taken pretty strong roots in the United States and those crazy stories get lapped up pretty hard. The crazy thing with conspiracy theorists is that every once and awhile they get it right, but because they are always coming up with crazy **** it gets ignored.
Big tech and the media are absolutely shameful and society definitely needs to do something. Facebook clearly has too much power in all directions and is ripe for mass manipulations with the ability to buy content, censor, etc, etc. I really think these sites are ruining people's ability to critically think as people are just fed articles that confirm their biases. Personally, I have quit all these sites years ago to try and get out of my own echo chamber. It still happens and you have to pause and think when viewing articles online or discussing with friends(we all have our inherent biases)
I really think the US media and US politicians deserve a lot of blame for the insanity. Trump had been so bombastic the 4 years leading up to the onset of the virus that many could not take him seriously. The Fox News/CNN is just a shitshow of opinion people yelling at each other with no real journalism going on. Not going to lie would wake up a few mornings, read a couple of headlines and wonder if I woke up in the wrong timeline.
I think we really need to teach critical thinking/logic in high school, elect better politicians, have the media do journalism and not the constant editorials/opinion, and somehow reign big tech/social media in(This is pandora's box sadly). Also, we really need to hold China accountable if this came from a lab and they squashed the information.
- Status