Coronavirus - Doomsday

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,365]

18 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

No, not denying it at all.  I don't care what definition you want to use, it's still a vaccine.

I've said this over and over, no vaccine is 100% effective.  We've had the influenza vaccine, the pneumococcal vaccine, chickenpox vaccine, none of which are near 100% effective at preventing disease, and they are all vaccines.  It's been a stupid hill for all you to die on, but here you are.

Yes it's a vaccine, it was, it is, it was originally effective, now it doesn't really do much, but it's still a vaccine.  Arguing against that just makes you look retarded.

this is false, every vaccine (old school) will create immunities that will give your body the opportunity to fight off said disease.  The rare chance that it doesnt work is because your own body didnt create the antibodies

example :  I take the measles vaccine, I create antibodies.  I will never get measles, whether I am around 1 person with measles or 1 million, my immunity works exactly the same

example : I take the covid "vaccine" I do not create antibodies, therefore exposure to covid puts me at risk every single time, same with the flu "vaccine" that wasn't a vaccine either til definitions changed, it never once prevented the spread or protected people from getting the flu.

so here I will concede if you will admit there are two types of vaccines and how they should be classified

1) This one works

2) This one might work, but enjoy your illness regardless

[nobody 2,694]

14 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Well the old vaccine still helps with severity, and the new vaccine targets the new strains.  It's turning into a flu vaccine, but you still don't consider it a vaccine.  That's retarded.

So, again, the old definition of vaccine was that it prevents you from getting COVID, not that it lessened the severity.  That's the change in definition.  And it may or may not lessen the severity for young healthy people since it will already be quite mild, so back to the original point of the whole discussion... Young healthy people shouldn't take the vax.  Or are there more semantic arguments we need to go over before we can all agree on that?

[Shooter McGavin 618]

1 minute ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

this is false, every vaccine (old school) will create immunities that will give your body the opportunity to fight off said disease.  The rare chance that it doesnt work is because your own body didnt create the antibodies

example :  I take the measles vaccine, I create antibodies.  I will never get measles, whether I am around 1 person with measles or 1 million, my immunity works exactly the same

example : I take the covid "vaccine" I do not create antibodies, therefore exposure to covid puts me at risk every single time, same with the flu "vaccine" that wasn't a vaccine either til definitions changed, it never once prevented the spread or protected people from getting the flu.

so here I will concede if you will admit there are two types of vaccines and how they should be classified

1) This one works

2) This one might work, but enjoy your illness regardless

Can't fix stupid.

[nobody 2,694]

Just now, Shooter McGavin said:

Can't fix stupid.

Clearly, he wouldn't call the flu shot a vaccine.  He's going by the earliest definition of the word.  Why is this so hard to understand.  Perhaps communicating would be easier if we weren't arbitrarily changing the meaning of words.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

2 minutes ago, nobody said:

So, again, the old definition of vaccine was that it prevents you from getting COVID, not that it lessened the severity.  That's the change in definition.  And it may or may not lessen the severity for young healthy people since it will already be quite mild, so back to the original point of the whole discussion... Young healthy people shouldn't take the vax.  Or are there more semantic arguments we need to go over before we can all agree on that?

You're using semantics with the definition of the vaccine, yet you're accusing me of using semantics?

The change in definition was explained by the CDC, it was an attempt to try and prevent anti vax idiots of claiming that it's not a vaccine since it's not 100% effective, but what you did now is claim conspiracy theory on the definition change, so it's a lose lose.

Smart people know how vaccines work, and this vaccine was no different (sans the MRNA angle which is a whole other discussion).  You're a smart person, which is why I don't understand why you buy into this BS.

I don't care who gets the vax and who doesn't, you shouldn't either.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

3 minutes ago, nobody said:

Clearly, he wouldn't call the flu shot a vaccine.  He's going by the earliest definition of the word.  Why is this so hard to understand.  Perhaps communicating would be easier if we weren't arbitrarily changing the meaning of words.

Well you got nothing to worry about since you're a clean blood.  The rest of us will be dead soon.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

Just now, Shooter McGavin said:

Smart people know how vaccines work, and this vaccine was no different (sans the MRNA angle which is a whole other discussion).  You're a smart person, which is why I don't understand why you buy into this BS.

Our board centrists. 

[nobody 2,694]

2 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

You're using semantics with the definition of the vaccine, yet you're accusing me of using semantics?

The change in definition was explained by the CDC, it was an attempt to try and prevent anti vax idiots of claiming that it's not a vaccine since it's not 100% effective, but what you did now is claim conspiracy theory on the definition change, so it's a lose lose.

Smart people know how vaccines work, and this vaccine was no different (sans the MRNA angle which is a whole other discussion).  You're a smart person, which is why I don't understand why you buy into this BS.

I don't care who gets the vax and who doesn't, you shouldn't either.

You're the one that's hung up on calling it a vaccine when the vast majority of people prior to COVID considered a vaccine something that prevents people from getting a disease (discounting the small percentage they don't work on you semantic douche). 

The sh¡t won't keep you from getting COVID.  That's the point.  We allllll seem to agree on that, but for someone reason, you're butthurt because people don't want to call it a vaccine.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

1 minute ago, nobody said:

You're the one that's hung up on calling it a vaccine when the vast majority of people prior to COVID considered a vaccine something that prevents people from getting a disease (discounting the small percentage they don't work on you semantic douche). 

The sh¡t won't keep you from getting COVID.  That's the point.  We allllll seem to agree on that, but for someone reason, you're butthurt because people don't want to call it a vaccine.

Well it is vaccine, so I'll call it a vaccine.  Saying it's not a vaccine is retarded, but go ahead and be retarded.  Just be prepared if you say stuff like this in public, people will laugh at you.

And yes, the original clinical trials showed that it did prevent people from getting covid.

[nobody 2,694]

3 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Well it is vaccine, so I'll call it a vaccine.  Saying it's not a vaccine is retarded, but go ahead and be retarded.  Just be prepared if you say stuff like this in public, people will laugh at you.

And yes, the original clinical trials showed that it did prevent people from getting covid.

OK let's be super accurate since that's so important to you.

It's a vaccine against an extinct strain of COVID that isn't around anymore, and it won't prevent anyone from getting COVID.

Maybe we can call it the Alpha COVID Vaccine.  

Hopefully this will prevent further confusion.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

2 minutes ago, nobody said:

OK let's be super accurate since that's so important to you.

It's a vaccine against an extinct strain of COVID that isn't around anymore, and it won't prevent anyone from getting COVID.

Without seeing the data, I would assume you are correct.  But you are aware that they made a new vaccine for the new strain, right?  Would you call that a vaccine or is that still only a shot?  Trying to get the right words so you don't get offended.

[lickin_starfish 1,942]

My sister has been having seizures since getting injected, and she still caught the coof twice.

My wife got fired from Cornell University for not getting the injections.

Real nice "vaccine" you've got there, Shooter.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

6 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

And yes, the original clinical trials showed that it did prevent people from getting covid.

  We're laughing at you.  Absolutely false. 

[nobody 2,694]

Just now, Shooter McGavin said:

Without seeing the data, I would assume you are correct.  But you are aware that they made a new vaccine for the new strain, right?  Would you call that a vaccine or is that still only a shot?

A new vaccine?  So now we're making distinctions between vaccines for the same disease, huh?  What's this one called?  Same as the last one?  Covid vaccine by any chance?

The "new vaccine" is also obsolete, so yeah, it won't prevent anyone from getting COVID, so most people prior to COVID wouldn't call that a vaccine.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

1 minute ago, lickin_starfish said:

My sister has been having seizures since getting injected, and she still caught the coof twice.

My wife got fired from Cornell University for not getting the injections.

Real nice "vaccine" you've got there, Shooter.

well since your sister now gets seizures and your wife was fired, I'll start calling it a shot, out of respect for your family.

[nobody 2,694]

Just now, Shooter McGavin said:

well since your sister now gets seizures and your wife was fired, I'll start calling it a shot, out of respect for your family.

That's all anyone asks.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

3 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

  We're laughing at you.  Absolutely false. 

• Vaccine candidate was found to be more than 90% effective in preventing COVID-19 in participants without evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first interim efficacy analysis

sorry bud.

[craftsman 1,045]

 

 

[nobody 2,694]

What's really kind of fūcked up about this whole vaccine vs not a vaccine thing is the vax-truthers 100% understand that most people are going to hear the word vaccine and assume it means if they take it, they won't get covid.  That's exactly why they were and are so keen on making sure everyone calls it a vaccine.

[TimHauck 2,931]

23 minutes ago, nobody said:

You're overzealous about defending the vax.  Young healthy people shouldn't take it.  Older people and those with pre-existing conditions should.

The dominant message right now is everyone 5 and up should take it (or whatever the age ranges people are advocating for these days), and if you listen to some people, you're a jerk if you don't get it.  That's the prevailing sentiment.  That needs to be fixed, so you coming in here and nitpicking arguments about why people shouldn't take the vax aren't helping anything.  Who cares if the reasoning isn't 100% sound?  It wasn't 100% sound when they were pushing it down our throats either.  We need the pendulum to swing back the other way, so we land somewhere near common sense.

I’m pretty sure I haven’t talked much if at all about telling people to actually go get the vax in the last year or so.  I’ve mostly been focused on showing how effective it was for the people that did get it.  But if an adult hasn’t gotten it by now then they’re likely not going to.  I did take offense to Jerry’s comment saying “it doesn’t do anything but cause heart problems” though.  With natural immunity and Omicron, it’s definitely not as needed as it was before, but I wouldn’t go as far as saying anyone definitely “shouldn’t” take it.

But yes, it’s not necessary for the the CDC to be pushing it on kids.   So add that to the list of things I’ve disagreed with the CDC on. 

[Shooter McGavin 618]

22 minutes ago, nobody said:

That's all anyone asks.

Sorry, I forgot how fragile you guys are.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,365]

Nobody nailing it!

[TimHauck 2,931]

15 minutes ago, nobody said:

What's really kind of fūcked up about this whole vaccine vs not a vaccine thing is the vax-truthers 100% understand that most people are going to hear the word vaccine and assume it means if they take it, they won't get covid.  That's exactly why they were and are so keen on making sure everyone calls it a vaccine.

That’s not true.  Even the trials only said it was 95% effective.  Yes, people like Biden, Harris and others made some misinformed comments, but why do you think the CDC was still recommending people wear masks after getting vaccinated?  There was always a chance you’d get it.

[Shooter McGavin 618]

20 minutes ago, nobody said:

What's really kind of fūcked up about this whole vaccine vs not a vaccine thing is the vax-truthers 100% understand that most people are going to hear the word vaccine and assume it means if they take it, they won't get covid.  That's exactly why they were and are so keen on making sure everyone calls it a vaccine.

Not sure if I'm a vax-truther or not, but I don't give a fock who gets the vaccine.  The reason I call it a vaccine is because it is a vaccine.  Has nothing to do with me wanting people to get it.

The funny part is the reason they changed the definition is because they didn't want to listen to the simpleton's crying about it not being 100% effective, but here we are.

But I don't want to hurt your guys feelings, so I'll call it shot to make you guys feel better.

[TimHauck 2,931]

1 hour ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

this is false, every vaccine (old school) will create immunities that will give your body the opportunity to fight off said disease.  The rare chance that it doesnt work is because your own body didnt create the antibodies

example :  I take the measles vaccine, I create antibodies.  I will never get measles, whether I am around 1 person with measles or 1 million, my immunity works exactly the same

example : I take the covid "vaccine" I do not create antibodies, therefore exposure to covid puts me at risk every single time, same with the flu "vaccine" that wasn't a vaccine either til definitions changed, it never once prevented the spread or protected people from getting the flu.

so here I will concede if you will admit there are two types of vaccines and how they should be classified

1) This one works

2) This one might work, but enjoy your illness regardless

Measles vaccine is 100% effective except when it’s not!

lol

[jerryskids 6,853]

28 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I’m pretty sure I haven’t talked much if at all about telling people to actually go get the vax in the last year or so.  I’ve mostly been focused on showing how effective it was for the people that did get it.  But if an adult hasn’t gotten it by now then they’re likely not going to.  I did take offense to Jerry’s comment saying “it doesn’t do anything but cause heart problems” though.  With natural immunity and Omicron, it’s definitely not as needed as it was before, but I wouldn’t go as far as saying anyone definitely “shouldn’t” take it.

But yes, it’s not necessary for the the CDC to be pushing it on kids.   So add that to the list of things I’ve disagreed with the CDC on. 

Wut?

If I said that it was about the wuhan/original portion of the current bivalent booster.  If that offended you, you are easily offended.  HTH  

ETA:  Or maybe about the value of the original vaccine at this point?  I'd have to go back and look.  If so I stated that it was an honest question, so stop giving misinformation on my position.  

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,365]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Measles vaccine is 100% effective except when it’s not!

lol

yes, my measles vaccine is 100% effective, so is everyone elses, as long as their body created antibodies, why is that so hard for you to grasp

covid provides nothing of what I said

 

[nobody 2,694]

14 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

That’s not true.  Even the trials only said it was 95% effective.  Yes, people like Biden, Harris and others made some misinformed comments, but why do you think the CDC was still recommending people wear masks after getting vaccinated?  There was always a chance you’d get it.

Again... disregarding the small percentage of people for whom it will be ineffective.

[TimHauck 2,931]

Just now, nobody said:

Again... disregarding the small percentage of people for whom it will be ineffective.

Huh?  

[craftsman 1,045]

Just now, TimHauck said:

Huh?  

Link?

[nobody 2,694]

12 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Not sure if I'm a vax-truther or not, but I don't give a fock who gets the vaccine.  The reason I call it a vaccine is because it is a vaccine.  Has nothing to do with me wanting people to get it.

The funny part is the reason they changed the definition is because they didn't want to listen to the simpleton's crying about it not being 100% effective, but here we are.

But I don't want to hurt your guys feelings, so I'll call it shot to make you guys feel better.

I agree you are just being a semantic douche, but the campaign to get people to take it actively wanted the thing to be called a vaccine because they knew people would assume they wouldn't get COVID, and that was part of the selling process to make sure everyone takes it.

[TimHauck 2,931]

7 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

yes, my measles vaccine is 100% effective, so is everyone elses, as long as their body created antibodies, why is that so hard for you to grasp

covid provides nothing of what I said

 

Well first of all if the measles vaccine isn’t effective for everyone then it’s not 100% effective.

We don’t know how a measles vaccine would have performed if there was actually a worldwide outbreak of it like Covid.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,365]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Well first of all if the measles vaccine isn’t effective for everyone then it’s not 100% effective.

We don’t know how a measles vaccine would have performed if there was actually a worldwide outbreak of it like Covid.

God damn you’re dense. All I’ve said all along is that is 100% effective for those who produce antibodies.  I cannot and will not ever get measles. End of story.  Can you say that about anyone with the Covid jab. That’s why there is such a difference 

[TimHauck 2,931]

1 minute ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

 I cannot and will not ever get measles. 

You don’t know that. 

[Shooter McGavin 618]

2 hours ago, nobody said:

I agree you are just being a semantic douche, but the campaign to get people to take it actively wanted the thing to be called a vaccine because they knew people would assume they wouldn't get COVID, and that was part of the selling process to make sure everyone takes it.

Holy sh1t you're focking lost.  You think this was some giant scam don't you?  You think pharma made snake oil that they knew didn't work but wanted everyone to take anyway.  You're lost down the rabbit hole.

Not everything is a conspiracy.

[OldMaid 2,133]

It’s a focking vaccine. The only reason it isn’t as effective as say a measles vaccine is because the measles doesn’t mutate at nearly the same rate. Covid has mutated so many times, it’s practically a new virus at this point. 

[Shooter McGavin 618]

10 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

It’s a focking vaccine. The only reason it isn’t as effective as say a measles vaccine is because the measles doesn’t mutate at nearly the same rate. Covid has mutated so many times, it’s practically a new virus at this point. 

You're just being a semantic douche

[OldMaid 2,133]

7 minutes ago, Shooter McGavin said:

You're just being a semantic douche

 Science is hard.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,517]

Biden said if we took the shots we wouldn’t get Covid. 

[OldMaid 2,133]

4 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Biden said if we took the shots we wouldn’t get Covid. 

 

4 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

 Science is hard.