Mandatory Vaccinations?

[Unveiled Artist]

The C.O.V.I.D. infection fatality death rate among very young adults is only somewhere around 1 in a 100,000. Also, with the older population being vaccinated and having no chance of death by contracting the SARS-CoV2 virus, I would not consider an unvaccinated youth being a significant overall public health risk. If very young adult men were to have a 1 in 10,000 chance of being hospitalized due to heart inflammation by being mRNA vaccinated against C.O.V.I.D.-19 in exchange for having near certain immunity against this disease that would otherwise be non-fatal to them contracting in 99,999 out of 100,000 cases, then I seriously doubt they should be obliged to get mRNA vaccinated against C.O.V.I.D.-19.

I think it would be wise to get the vaccine (if available) that has the least known side affects and wait for more testing before children are even involved.

 

[Martin]

Jab 'em all, and let God sort them out.

 

[Kooky]

Only you can control what you take in and how. Unless they are facts, take a break. Emotions aren't needed in an OP that doesn't concern anti/provaxxers.

Doctor, heal thyself.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Doctor, heal thyself.

What does that mean?

If it's sarcasm I can't see the relationship. Be direct. I get points better.

 

[Kooky]

What does that mean?

If it's sarcasm I can't see the relationship. Be direct. I get points better.

It's not sarcasm.

I am convinced that you could figure it out quickly if you would only apply reason and logic to the problem.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It's not sarcasm.

I am convinced that you could figure it out quickly if you would only apply reason and logic to the problem.

I don't see the relationship between "doctor heal yourself" and your other posts. What's the connection?

Was that the point you wanted me to address?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It's not sarcasm.

I am convinced that you could figure it out quickly if you would only apply reason and logic to the problem.

I was reading back. You cut the discussion short. It would be easier to talk with you without the "you" accusations.

 

[Deeje]

I try and I try and I try, but for so many people, once they've got an idée fixe, you aren't going to get them to give it up. Facts are not what they want -- validation is all they crave.

There is an echo in here that rebounds onto the opposition just as much as it bounces off us. Funny that.....you don't see that you are exactly the same but in reverse.

What's the best way to dismiss even a medical expert who is trying to be heard above the current misleading propaganda? Discredit him.....make out that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

Robert Malone is more qualified than you or I on this topic and if he is sounding an alarm, I think we should all take note......so I will reserve my judgment based on his medical expertise and wait for the long term testing.

 

[Kooky]

I was reading back. You cut the discussion short. It would be easier to talk with you without the "you" accusations.

Well, in that case, you should stop your accusations if you wanted to talk to me, shouldn't you?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Well, in that case, you should stop your accusations if you wanted to talk to me, shouldn't you?

This is what I'm talking about. Can we drop this. I'm just pointing out the you-statements are accusative.

(For those who may find this benefitial)

If talking about vaccines bother you, drop it and move on. It's not worth this emotionalism. I'm all for civil conversation despite disagreement.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

There is an echo in here that rebounds onto the opposition just as much as it bounces off us. Funny that.....you don't see that you are exactly the same but in reverse.

What's the best way to dismiss even a medical expert who is trying to be heard above the current misleading propaganda? Discredit him.....make out that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

Robert Malone is more qualified than you or I on this topic and if he is sounding an alarm, I think we should all take note......so I will reserve my judgment based on his medical expertise and wait for the long term testing.

I pointed out in detail WHAT he contributed to the vaccine -- and when -- and how long he's been out of that business. Then there's the other consideration: he and how many other doctors (and what are their current qualificationis) are on one side, and how many, and with what current qualifications, are on the other?

For example, Johns Hopkins hospital (the teaching hospital and biomedical research facility of Johns Hopkins University) administers all three vaccines, maintains that they are safe, and strongly recommends their use. Which well-known hospital doesn't? I mean, just out of curiosity.

Easy-peasy.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

There is an echo in here that rebounds onto the opposition just as much as it bounces off us. Funny that.....you don't see that you are exactly the same but in reverse.

What's the best way to dismiss even a medical expert who is trying to be heard above the current misleading propaganda? Discredit him.....make out that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

Robert Malone is more qualified than you or I on this topic and if he is sounding an alarm, I think we should all take note......so I will reserve my judgment based on his medical expertise and wait for the long term testing.

There's also the question of why you have chosen this particular doctor as your personal guide and go-to for advice about the vaccine. I think it is this: that he is one who can still call himself doctor, and he provides you with the answer that YOU want. So it isn't really about his opinion at all -- it's about yours, and you've just had found somebody to "peer review" your opinion, when the vast majority of qualified others will not.

 

[Kooky]

I'm just pointing out the you-statements are accusative.

Do you consider your own statements an exception to that?

 

[Kooky]

I'm all for civil conversation despite disagreement.

I know you antivaxxers can get emotional about this, but I'm not angry at you, and I really don't think it's your fault.
You were only a victim of circumstances.

If you are for civil conversation, then I recommend you start going through the many questions I asked you in this thread and start to adress them in a civil manner. What do you say to that offer? Are you going to take me up on it?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Do you consider your own statements an exception to that?

If that's an assumption, no. My point still stands.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I know you antivaxxers can get emotional about this, but I'm not angry at you, and I really don't think it's your fault.
You were only a victim of circumstances.

Anti-vaxxers are those "against" COVID vaccines
Pro-vaxxers are those "for" COVID vaccines

Whether one takes the vaccine or not does not mean one needs to be for/against.

I was never against COVID vaccines.

If you are for civil conversation, then I recommend you start going through the many questions I asked you in this thread and start to adress them in a civil manner. What do you say to that offer? Are you going to take me up on it?

Can we stop this already?

 

[Kooky]

Anti-vaxxers are those "against" COVID vaccines
Pro-vaxxers are those "for" COVID vaccines

Whether one takes the vaccine or not does not mean one needs to be for/against.

I was never against COVID vaccines.

You provided your own definition by which you are an anti-vaxxer.
If that upsets you emotionally, then I won't bring it up any more.

I just want you to know that I'm not angry, and that I don't consider emotional attempts at sabotaging this discussion to be your fault.

Can we stop this already?

Nobody forces you to adress my arguments, but let me just say that in light of certain you-accusations in your posts, I found it important to let you know that I would have considered it good form on your part to actually talk to me as an equal and to fairly consider my points and try to address them.

Since you seem clearly offended by my arguments, you are of course free to refuse any further communication.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You provided your own definition by which you are an anti-vaxxer.
If that upsets you emotionally, then I won't bring it up any more.

I just want you to know that I'm not angry, and that I don't consider emotional attempts at sabotaging this discussion to be your fault.


Nobody forces you to adress my arguments, but let me just say that in light of certain you-accusations in your posts, I found it important to let you know that I would have considered it good form on your part to actually talk to me as an equal and to fairly consider my points and try to address them.

Since you seem clearly offended by my arguments, you are of course free to refuse any further communication.

It was fine at the start. Don't know what happened. Shrugs.

 

[Deeje]

I pointed out in detail WHAT he contributed to the vaccine -- and when -- and how long he's been out of that business. Then there's the other consideration: he and how many other doctors (and what are their current qualificationis) are on one side, and how many, and with what current qualifications, are on the other?

For example, Johns Hopkins hospital (the teaching hospital and biomedical research facility of Johns Hopkins University) administers all three vaccines, maintains that they are safe, and strongly recommends their use. Which well-known hospital doesn't? I mean, just out of curiosity.

Easy-peasy.

That requires faith and trust in the current medical system.....I do not have that kind of trust in anyone but God. He has never let me down, but the medical system certainly has, more times than I can count. IMO, it is nothing more than a profit-driven global juggernaut, more interested in perpetuating ill health than in promoting good health......more interested in ongoing “treatments” (that simply control symptoms, and make them millions) than in facilitating “cures” for anything. There is no money in cures.

Humans are flawed creatures and the lobby in this instance, is very powerful both financially and politically. Power as we know corrupts all whom it touches, with few exceptions. When profit is the driver, I do not trust the science. It’s too easy to manipulate the findings and then people can be ‘scared’ into doing something that cannot be reversed. I hope you understand what that means, when the world’s population have been persuaded to take a vaccine that has had no long term testing, and people are already presenting with some very serious after effects. My own next door neighbor is still in hospital with heart problems, which presented just three weeks after the jab. No previous history.

No one really knows what will result in the weeks months and years to come.....but if this turns out to be a disaster of global proportions, as some of the medical fraternity are warning, what can anyone do about it. The pharmaceutical companies have indemnified themselves against any adverse outcomes. No one can touch them......Red flag right there. If these vaccines are so safe, why would they need to do that?
In Australia, doctors are even indemnified against legal action for any bad outcomes for the vaccines they are encouraged to administer......another red flag for me.

Perception management is a science practised on all of us.....my perceptions are not as manageable as yours may be. I am so sick of hearing about it.

I want the long term studies, not just by the vaccine manufacturers, but by independent bodies who have not been ‘bought’. If there are real dangers, I want them identified before I volunteer for something that cannot be undone.
If there are safer medications that will tackle the virus effectively and help with symptom control and lower transmission risks, then I want the option to choose them. I see people being herded like a flock of frightened sheep. No dogs are going to herd me into that pen. I am way more concerned about the vaccines than I am about the virus TBH.

Your choice is your choice.....mine is mine. I am not telling anyone that they cannot make their own decisions, but no one is going to decide for me....but me. No guilt tripping and no shaming will alter my decision.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

That requires faith and trust in the current medical system.....I do not have that kind of trust in anyone but God. He has never let me down, but the medical system certainly has, more times than I can count. IMO, it is nothing more than a profit-driven global juggernaut, more interested in perpetuating ill health than in promoting good health......more interested in ongoing “treatments” (that simply control symptoms, and make them millions) than in facilitating “cures” for anything. There is no money in cures.

Humans are flawed creatures and the lobby in this instance, is very powerful both financially and politically. Power as we know corrupts all whom it touches, with few exceptions. When profit is the driver, I do not trust the science. It’s too easy to manipulate the findings and then people can be ‘scared’ into doing something that cannot be reversed. I hope you understand what that means, when the world’s population have been persuaded to take a vaccine that has had no long term testing, and people are already presenting with some very serious after effects. My own next door neighbor is still in hospital with heart problems, which presented just three weeks after the jab. No previous history.

No one really knows what will result in the weeks months and years to come.....but if this turns out to be a disaster of global proportions, as some of the medical fraternity are warning, what can anyone do about it. The pharmaceutical companies have indemnified themselves against any adverse outcomes. No one can touch them......Red flag right there. If these vaccines are so safe, why would they need to do that?
In Australia, doctors are even indemnified against legal action for any bad outcomes for the vaccines they are encouraged to administer......another red flag for me.

Perception management is a science practised on all of us.....my perceptions are not as manageable as yours may be. I am so sick of hearing about it.

I want the long term studies, not just by the vaccine manufacturers, but by independent bodies who have not been ‘bought’. If there are real dangers, I want them identified before I volunteer for something that cannot be undone.
If there are safer medications that will tackle the virus effectively and help with symptom control and lower transmission risks, then I want the option to choose them. I see people being herded like a flock of frightened sheep. No dogs are going to herd me into that pen. I am way more concerned about the vaccines than I am about the virus TBH.

Your choice is your choice.....mine is mine. I am not telling anyone that they cannot make their own decisions, but no one is going to decide for me....but me. No guilt tripping and no shaming will alter my decision.

You are totally inscrutable to me. Although I was a badly battered, nearly murdered (twice) child, I have never had even close to what appear to me to be your levels of fear and mistrust. Fascinating, but totally inscrutable.

I am way more concerned about the vaccines than I am about the virus TBH.

Again, totally fascinating but beyond my ken.

Over 3 billion people have had the vaccine, and there have been remarkably few bad outcomes.

Yet, only 184,209,877 people have caught the virus, and 3,986,601 (this is certainly a low-ball count) have died from it. And many more have had serious, serious outcomes, like double lung transplants, long-Covid, and a whole host of other life-changing events.

Further, it is abundantly clear in the first world that the more people are being vaccinated, the faster the rates of infection, deaths and serious other consequences fall. This is just a matter of looking up the statistics.

But you are correct: we make our own choices, and nothing in the world compels you to use the information available to you properly.