DeAndre Hopkins voiced his concerns on NFL's push to force players to get vaccinated.
- Thread starter 92TigerME
- Start date
No they are metaphorical to reveal a Slippery Slope argument.
Maybe 1 every 4 years. Last time I did it for a $10 publix giftcard
That's because it's not strictly about them. This is a highly communicable disease so the decision to take it needs to consider everyone else as well.
I have no idea what you’re trying to say but I’ve been around the block long enough to know you can’t have a rational discussion with an irrational person. Bigot.
I assume so. My blood gets tested when I donate and I get the results in 3-4 days
Do you not know how this vaccine works.....it is totally different that other vaccines....so no there is no proof there will not be long term effects
You don't know that. It's still an experimental drug.
Any side effects from vaccines are seen relatively close to when first received. That is no different for this vaccine. We are also 18 months into when first shots were given as well. There is alot of data on how we react to the vaccine.
May I ask why you don’t get it every year? If there is absolutely zero risk from it, I would imagine you’d get it based off the logic herein. Genuinely curious.
Don't know about him. I've had them all. Anthrax, Yellow Fever Vaccine, Plague Vaccine, Covid, Hep A, Hep B, and all the usual. Too old to have gotten MMR and Chicken Pox vaccines. I got oral and injection polio. Got Smallpox early and then again when deployed.
There is no vaccine I wouldn't take. I would get the third Moderna today if allowed.
There is no other way out of this mess unless all unvaccinated folks just die quickly. That won't happen. Covid is not quite that bad.
If the vaccination rate stays low, and it will, then eventually we will just have to live with Covid and accept the deaths that happen. And a procession of variants. I guess that is OK.
If this was Ebola would we take the currently developing new vaccines? That would be a different ballgame. End times type.
I am very conservative politically, but I am not taking the vaccine at the moment because (1) the long-term side effects are unknown (anyone saying differently is clueless or lying), (2) you have a greater than 99.9% of surviving if you get the virus, and (3) I am not elderly or have an existing condition which increases my risk of being really sick or dying if I get it. I am not scared of the vaccine.
It’s his body it’s his choice. Period! This is becoming less about healthcare and more about totalitarianism and control.
Had Trump won, 90% of Republicans would be vaccinated. This is ALL about politics.
Thanks for your honesty and for the discussion!
1) Theoretically, then, would you jab yourself, with a Vaccine, every single day if that’s what was recommended? I’m genuinely trying to understand where the line would be drawn.
2. What percentage need to be Vaxxed for the rate to “not be low”? Does that include children? Does it include infants? Does it include pregnant women? Etc.
3. Ebola is a whole other issue altogether. The R0 and the CFR are so different from COVID and it’s able to be regionally contained more easily.
That said, yes if the CFR, for example, was substantially higher for my health profile, I would 100% Vax. I’m not anti-Vax.
It’s a risk/reward continuum.
Take it or not I only have 1 question for the people saying take it because we know it is safe. Why did Trump have to pass a "Right to Try" law that would allow patients to try meds that were not approved if their were in a terminal state? I ask because this proves, in my eyes, that we do have meds that are have not been proven to lack long term issues.
Saying that this vaccine is safe because all vaccines are safe is really not a statement based in facts. Those approved vaccines went through the testing and approval phases. This vaccine was approved via Emergency Use and we have no long term data on possible long term issues.
Take it if you choose but saying everyone should take it because it is safe is simply not true based on lacking data.
No I have no medical degree. I also do not believe everything I hear.
Saying that this vaccine is safe because all vaccines are safe is really not a statement based in facts. Those approved vaccines went through the testing and approval phases. This vaccine was approved via Emergency Use and we have no long term data on possible long term issues.
Take it if you choose but saying everyone should take it because it is safe is simply not true based on lacking data.
No I have no medical degree. I also do not believe everything I hear.
Last edited:
Sometimes I just forget or doesn't work out schedule wise or whatever
When the vaccine first came out the Left was against it. Harris said she would not trust anything that came out under Trump. You are right. It is political.
Like Dr Fauci. Whatever he says because he is a doctor.
Yea I had my yearly physical last week and just asked the Dr to test for antibodies. Both my wife and I came back positive. We both had covid in October.
Because he was pressuring the FDA to rush it and make it available BEFORE the election. He didn't care if they hadn't finished their trials, he just thought it would help him win. Safety be damned.
As of now Ebola strangely has always contained itself, gradually losing potency as it goes through a small cluster.
I'm good with injecting myself daily if recommended, but I will have to do it anyway when my type II worsens. I am trained to give shots.
The given rate is 70%. I think we have missed that boat because it won't ever happen and I am not sure the vaccines are very protective against Delta. We would have had to hit 70% before Delta and Lambda evolved.
Exactly why I do not think people should be forced to take it. Also that same vaccine miraculously was then praised by the new Admin.
You're right - AFTER the FDA finished their trials and gave it EUA. I think Trump should get credit for Operation Warp Speed and I even took the vaccine he funded - Moderna. And I would have taken it immediately after EUA, even if he won. Not taking it doesn't own anybody.
Hindsight, luck, or whatever. They are safe. Safer than flu shots. That may be just luck. But there was actually more testing numerically than for other more well known vaccines. And now with over 300,000,000 doses in the US alone no directly attributable deaths in the US to the MRNA vaccines. Maybe 2 or 3 with J&J.
This isn't the only highly communicable disease to ever hit the U.S., where was the outcry then for everyone to be vaccinated. Taking the vaccine doesn't prevent the person or anyone else from catching it still. I imagine PGA Professional John Rahm is asking that question now.
It's still Nuk's choice and no one should ever be forced to take a vaccine, regardless of the outcome for him.
Would you say it is a person's right then to at least wait until that type of data is available? That has been my beef. Can a person have the right to say "I am not opposed to taking it but I do want to wait until more data is out".
I know you are/were a doctor. If I remember correctly I asked you about my Mom when having her Gall Bladder removed. How much could we fight this virus naturally? If people took their diet and health more serious? Would that also help fight it along with meds/vaccines?
Do you feel that Ivermectin should be readily available to infected patients? I keep reading that it has been around for a long time and many people beat Covid using this drug.
Again I’m appreciative of non-combative interaction on this subject, thanks!
1) Ebola’s CFR is so high that it doesn’t have the quantity of hosts (bc they die) to spread outside of a specific area considering the quarantine strategies implemented by disease control. Furthermore, the mode of transmission is so substantially different than Rona.
2) I was more referring to Inoculations but thanks for the perspective there.
3) So if 70%, in this context, is absolutely necessary prior to androgenic shift (new variants) that aren’t covered by the 70% vaccine, then mass vaccination seems to be a terrible strategy. Meaning, it’s not really possible unless you essentially force everyone to do it immediately. Then you would have to have policing structures in place to facilitate that.
You can likely get 70% in pockets, but not in mass. That’s just never going to happen.
What might COULD happen, however, is for those with antibodies/natural immunity to be removed from the 70% calculations. Which would make way more sense.
CNN would have discouraged you from taking it and convinced you to wear two masks instead.
I don’t think we could fight it naturally. Honestly don’t know about that drug, but I’m a surgeon. Retired at that. If nothing had ever been done it is certainly possible that this virus would run its course after taking a terrible toll.
That sounds reasonable. It seems to be a good bit of evidence that if you get the disease you were only protected against the variant you got. But I would like to see true data on that not just the new snips that I have heard.
How is this any different? Just proves my point. Biden played politics with it. Now he's for it. Did the science suddenly change? No
Could you all keep it down? Not me but there are two people in this thread trying to have a non combative discussion.
Not sure what your point is but no one said it was 100% effective, but it is 95% effective against severe disease, hospitalization and death. If everyone took it, John Rahm wouldn't have had to forfeit but it did protect him from getting sick, so not sure why he would question it. And NO ONE is being forced to take it. Nuk has the choice not to but that doesn't mean there won't be consequences.
