We should sue Afghanistan and bankrupt them.

HockeyDad wrote:

Tell me again, Brewha... why is it imperative that we all get vaccinated?

"Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease. Immunization: A process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination. This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation."

If this is a vaccine... why doesn't it work like one? If you're worried about spreading it to vulnerable people... you still can after the shot. Sooooo... uhhhhhh... what's the point?

MACS wrote:

^I would like to see that data, because I don't believe it.

The CDC's website says you can still get it and still spread it, even after the vaccine. Just "lower incidents" of that.

Not sure about you, but when I got the measles, mumps and rubella vaccines... they actually prevented me from getting MM or R. All the vaccinations I got in the military prevented infection.

MACS wrote:

Anyone ever get a routine tetanus vaccine as a kid? Guess what? Its protection was not permanent. You could need another. Yet, it's still called a vaccine... Arguing whether it should be called a vaccine is idiotic in the scheme of things. Nomenclature is irrelevant.

If your argument against the vaccine solely boils down to: it doesn't provide A) total protection; and/or 😎 permanent protection and is therefore not effective, please cite medical authority as to your belief.

Here is how I see it:

1. The vaccine is known to overwhelmingly decrease the risk of infection;

2. If you are fully vaccinated and still get infected, then your condition isn't likely to be nearly as severe as someone who has not been fully vaccinated and gets infected;

3. If you are fully vaccinated and still get infected then you still may be contagious to others, but to a markedly lesser degree than someone who is not fully vaccinated and gets infected; and.

4. If you are fully vaccinated and still get infected so badly that you need to be hospitalized, your chance of a temporary, bad outcome or bad permanent outcome and/or death, is markedly decreased.

rfenst wrote:

Anyone ever get a routine tetanus vaccine as a kid? Guess what? Its protection was not permanent. You could need another. Yet, it's still called a vaccine... Arguing whether it should be called a vaccine is idiotic in the scheme of things. Nomenclature is irrelevant.

rfenst wrote:

Anyone ever get a routine tetanus vaccine as a kid? Guess what? Its protection was not permanent. You could need another. Yet, it's still called a vaccine... Arguing whether it should be called a vaccine is idiotic in the scheme of things. Nomenclature is irrelevant.

If your argument against the vaccine solely boils down to: it doesn't provide A) total protection; and/or 😎 permanent protection and is therefore not effective, please cite medical authority as to your belief.

Here is how I see it:

1. The vaccine is known to overwhelmingly decrease the risk of infection;

2. If you are fully vaccinated and still get infected, then your condition isn't likely to be nearly as severe as someone who has not been fully vaccinated and gets infected;

3. If you are fully vaccinated and still get infected then you still may be contagious to others, but to a markedly lesser degree than someone who is not fully vaccinated and gets infected; and.

4. If you are fully vaccinated and still get infected so badly that you need to be hospitalized, your chance of a temporary, bad outcome or bad permanent outcome and/or death, is markedly decreased.

rfenst wrote:

Tell me again, Brewha... why is it imperative that we all get vaccinated?

"Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease. Immunization: A process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination. This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation."

If this is a vaccine... why doesn't it work like one? If you're worried about spreading it to vulnerable people... you still can after the shot. Sooooo... uhhhhhh... what's the point?

MACS wrote:

Tetanus boosters every 10 years not 10 months - so it's a bad analogy. Name one other "vaccine" that needs to be "boostered" on a 6 month schedule. None that I know of for normally healthy individuals. But arguing over what to call it is useless.

2, 3, 4 this was not what was advertised when the COVID shot came out. True. The science has, IMO, adapted to the current/changing scenario.
Too simplify the requirements for a formal FDA approval it needs to be safe and effective. True.
Safe: TDB. I choose to rely on what's known already when comparing the risk vs. benefit.
Effective: I'd say no based on what we are finding today. You can still get it after the shot, you can still transmit it after the shot, and it's looking like you need biannually boosters. Depends on how one defines "effective." So what, if it helps provide adequate protection.

BuckyB93 wrote:

By mandating vaccination we have eliminated or practically controlled a great number of deadly diseases. COVID is no different in this than polio.

Getting vaccinated IS the socially responsible thing to do.

But because so many put their own “personal freedom” above their responsibilities, we have hospitals overwhelmed with children dying from the disease.




Say - should the “my body, my choice” thing be extended to women?

Brewha wrote:

By mandating vaccination we have eliminated or practically controlled a great number of deadly diseases. COVID is no different in this than polio.

Getting vaccinated IS the socially responsible thing to do.

But because so many put their own “personal freedom” above their responsibilities, we have hospitals overwhelmed with children dying from the disease.

Say - should the “my body, my choice” thing be extended to women?

Brewha wrote:

Getting vaccinated IS the socially responsible thing to do.

But because so many put their own “personal freedom” above their responsibilities, we have hospitals overwhelmed with children dying from the disease.

Brewha wrote: