Biden admin barred from firing unvaccinated employees DC judge issues injunction
foxnews.com
foxnews.com
If the vaccines work, give vulnerable populations the choice to get vaccinated. If vaccinated individuals are still so vulnerable that a general mandate is required, then these vaccines are not effective enough to mandate.
If you're the right kind of person, you have >>90% chance of not needing hospital treatment at all. But that still leaves a few per cent, and if you need hospital treatment and can't get it, your survivability is far from 99.99%.
Which implies that the hospitals must have free resources (even after they take care of random things like eye operations instead of delaying treatment), which in turn restricts the number of people who can go unvaccinated. It's simple really.
the end.
No, I can't. Because if you think that a vaccine that has passed numerous trials, been formally approved by the FDA, and has been used literally billions of times, is "experimental", then I don't think anything can be explained to you. No one will reason you out of a position you didn't reason yourself into.
The fact that it has been "approved" by the FDA is irrelevant when there has been such an immense political pressure to do so. Not to mention there are now thousands of careers on the line and billions of dollars in pressure to keep up the appearance of a working vaccine.
Meanwhile we're just expected to ignore the explosion in VAERS reports, ignore the fact that despite ≈70% vaccination rates in countries like Israel and UK cases are at record highs, ignore that this is indeed a novel technology which induces your cells to manufacture an inflammatory protein which is expressed on cell surfaces (autoimmune disorder potential). Oh and there is also statistical evidence of ADE for strains like delta once the vaccine effectiveness wanes after a pitiful 3-6 months.
Suddenly we've also forgotten all about regulatory capture (the pfizer CEO, for example, is the former commissioner from the FDA), perverse incentives (and political pressure) in academia...and on top of that the bulk of safety data came from the vaccine manufacturers themselves...who are also not legally liable for adverse effects. Conflict of interest maybe?
>No one will reason you out of a position you didn't reason yourself into
I would say the same thing to you, as it seems that so many people have mistaken media propaganda (how often does "safe and effective" appear in reports?) for certainty regarding the effects of a very uncertain novel technology. The fact is that without the emergency of the pandemic, these vaccines would NEVER have been approved.
Now mention pharmaceutical companies are trying to push vaccination onto children - when it is pretty much certain that covid is and will be endemic, and that children are not at any kind of risk from the virus. A vaccine which requires others to be vaccinated to protect recipients of a vaccine is clearly not an effective vaccine.
So I repeat my question: if the vaccines are effective, and the virus is endemic, why does a mandate for healthy individuals make any kind of sense, for a virus with an IFR and epidemiology comparable to the flu? We've been at this for 2 years. Clearly hospitals are no longer being overwhelmed. Stop and think for yourself for just a moment - our institutions are far from infallible; after all, they are ultimately staffed by humans just like you and me. I assure you all of my conclusions are based on reason unlike your (ironic) appeal to groupthink.
The only real question is from what place you sourced your accusation of groupthink. That's the real irony.
An accusation of gish gallop is not a substitute for an argument, though it is an awfully convenient dismissal. We can keep it simple if you'd like: if these vaccines are so effective, why are cases at record highs in the UK [0] and Israel (and other highly vaccinated countries)? If these vaccines are so safe, why did VAERS reports skyrocket months after vaccine administration began?
0. https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/. Straight from the horses mouth. Though, conveniently, you probably won't find any mention of this curious development by CNN et al.
That's what motivated me to post for the first time here.
For a technology that was supposedly developed over twenty years, we don't know the mechanism that produces these outcomes. We don't even know if it's an auto-immune mechanism, or if the spike protein is being expressed in other body parts than the injection site (seriously! the only data I found comes from a rat study in the Japanese approval documentation, and this data is being expressly discredited in the media). The FDA just started a study of the long term effects.
The cardiologist I saw advised me, unsolicited, to get the second dose as we don't have evidence of repeated harm. Given the public health advisory for people in my case, we're supposed to defer the second dose. Then, how are we even supposed to know about 2nd dose effects? How was this doctor's advice serious?
At the same time, we're dealing with an emergency, and in emergencies, corners get cut as we're administering a prompt response. We need to acknowledge that.