Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is some debate as to should the government mandate everyone get the vaccine.
Is it worth taking a vaccine that has been developed at warp speed and side effects unknown.
Thoughts? Who should be made to take vaccine? Side effects worth risk?
Scared people should do what they have to do feel safe, but that does not mean they can force another person with lack of services or violence. That is oppressive tyranny and the things that start wars.
The gov fought for years against admitting anything regarding agent orange. And even when they finally accepted it was harmful, veterans had to fight to prove their issues were caused by it.
The list of compensate medical conditions? Oh yea, now just prove they were caused by active duty service. I receive a VA disability, it took years to get, had to appeal decisions, and they literally stated just because my injury occurred during active duty does not mean it is service connected.
Yea, you know zero about the VA to even comment on it. They do all they can to minimize the gov's liability.
That’s how the vaccine court works. They have a short list of things that they might compensate for but if your injury is not their list, forget it. They also won’t admit fault even if you win your case. It’s corrupt.
Then why the statements about holding the vaccine makers responsible?
Should not makers of any product which while proclaimed to be absolutely safe to all users under all circumstances be held responsible for that product's performance in the real world?
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
Statement of fact. Masks do reduce exchange of the virus from one person to another and high vaccine uptake protects unvaccinated people through herd immunity.
Sure. And I put up a chain link fence around my yard to keep out mosquitos and wasps. I'm sure it'll work just as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
It is not a cold for those who do not survive or for those who are surviving but facing ongoing symptoms or permanent disabilities.
Then those who are at risk or believe that they are should take whatever precautions they feel necessary. That does not mean they get to dictate my actions or behavior. And we're all going to die eventually. The older one is, the closer to death one is for any number of causes. My mother died a short time ago. In a nursing home. She was 84 and had a number of health issues. While I am saddened, it was not unexpected.
How many have died FROM the Covids? Not died while they had it, but died directly FROM it with no other underlying health conditions including old age? I saw a story about a family lamenting the passing of their 96 year old great grandmother and blaming Covid. She could have sneezed or farted and dropped dead - and probably did - and they'd still blame the Chinese Flu as the cause. After all, that got them into a newspaper story and probably a lot of sympathy as well.
Wash your hands, use common sense. We'll all be ok without being part of the government's chemistry experiment or control program.
Last edited by Workin_Hard; 12-04-2020 at 09:13 AM..
Nope, using it as an example of the gov and the manufacturer claiming something is safe, then finding out it was not, then fighting the whole time for years to deny responsibility and compensation to victims.
"However, for presumptive service connection, veterans do not need to provide a medical nexus to prove their claim to VA. Veterans looking for presumptive service connection for a condition due to Agent Orange exposure need to show two things:
A diagnosis for a condition associated with Agent Orange exposure (see above list); and
That they served in a qualifying time period and place to receive presumptive service connection due to exposure"
The compensation program for adverse reactions to vaccines works very similarly:
Incorrect, nexus for most VA claims needs to be proven, not all though. I have a disability payment for one condition that is presumptive, and I have another that I had to jump through hoops to prove the nexus, even though there was ample documentation in my medical records proving such injury during active service.
Presumptive lists are narrow and can change, and are only for a few things, and only came after years and years of fighting; this is soemthing you seem to not get through your head, the Agent Orange compensation was a years long fight, the gov claimed for years Agent Orange was safe, depsite the mountain of evidence stating otherwise.
"By April 1993, the Department of Veterans Affairs had compensated only 486 victims, although it had received disability claims from 39,419 soldiers who had been exposed to Agent Orange while serving in Vietnam."
The gov's game is to wait for these people to die. And this is who you trust to compensate for any vaccine issue? lol
Or the Madigan Scandal? Yea, intent to deny and reverse PTSD diagnosis because "it saves the gov money". Nice, these are the exact people I want in charge of any compensation.
It is clear you have zero knowledge and experience obtaining compensation for injury from the US gov, and I have no idea why you keep at this making yourself look more and more ridiculous with each post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
The reaction must be known to occur after the vaccine and happen within a time frame consistent with the vaccine being the cause.
There is no reason to suspect that this vaccine will have serious long term effects because of the long history of safety of vaccines in general and the safety profiles developed during the current ongoing studies.
What long term safety profile is there of the mRNA vaccine? Please tell me since this is the first time ever this type of vaccine is being used.
Anthrax vaccine, remember that one? Here is the officiali statement:
"The Health and Medicine Division (formally known as the Institute of Medicine) of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concluded in its report Gulf War and Health: Depleted Uranium, Sarin, Pyridostigmine Bromide, and Vaccines (2000) that there is inadequate or insufficient evidence to determine whether an association does or does not exist between multiple vaccinations and long-term adverse health problems."
Pretty similar to the gov's position on Agent Orange for many years. Of course the gov is just waiting for many people to die, or to get so old it is difficult to prove a nexus, then the gov will admit the Anthrax vaccine in fact is creating all these side effects people have been complaining about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
If you have COVID-19 you have symptoms. Infection with the virus without symptoms is not COVID-19. It is similar to the relationship between HIV and AIDS. SARS-CoV-2 is the virus. COVID-19 is the disease caused by the virus.
"CDC and others estimate that more than 50% of all infections are transmitted from people who are not exhibiting symptoms,"
"According to the CDC, 24% of people who transmit the virus to others never develop symptoms and another 35% were pre-symptomatic. It also said 41% infected others while experiencing symptoms."
I don't think it should be mandatory for anything that includes boarding planes or at the very least there should be enough exemptions to people who feel they can't take it. That'd be almost like saying if you have depression we're going to require you to take antidepressants to come to work. As far as things that significantly affect another person they haven't banned cancer sticks yet (you may not be able to smoke inside certain buildings anymore but you can outside) so why make vaccines mandatory?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer
Should the COVID Vaccine be mandatory?
Of course not. People who refuse to take it, are no danger to anyone except themselves.
There's no law against stupidity in this country. Although if we wind up with a far-left liberal government like some are proposing, that could change.
(All that said, I'm going to be first in line as soon as it's available. Whether the govt thinks it's a good idea or not.)
What's stupid? Is it just stupid for some people who refuse to take it or does this apply to literally every soul on the planet?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist
There is no way to know the long term effects of this vaccine. Just think about other things approved. Thalidomide, great for morning sickness, it only led to a few thousand deformed children. Celebrex (Vioxx), great pain reliever, too bad it made users have heart attacks. Zantac, good for acid reflux, but after several years, turned out it causes cancer. And there have been many more.
Yeah I don't trust Big Pharma. Although I haven't had a problem with vaccines yet that I know of most of them were taken when I was a kid and I have had problems with Big Pharma. I take nothing regularly of that nature.
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger
There's a difference? I'm not seeing it.
In the first scenario, if you refuse the shot, you'll be taken to jail and denied the ability to participate in society.
In the second scenario, if you refuse the shot, you're still denied the ability to participate in society.
I guess jail time is the difference?
I totally agree. It's already difficult enough to get a decent job as it is (for some of us at least) now you want to add vaccine status as a condition.
Travel is more optional but I see a problem with even that because travel is good for the soul. Some people don't like to travel and that's fine for them but for some travel is an important activity in life. Also what about those people who need to travel for an emergency with a loved one unless it's just international travel?
No. They're pushing it through too fast. Why? Money. Way back when there was a Polio vaccine. There was a mistake at first, and some actually developed Polio, not just the side effects of the vaccine.
I was going to get it when it comes out, but might be changing my mind. I see that about 40 percent of health care providers don’t want it because they think it was rushed. I think I’ll let other people get it first to see how they do and at the same time reduced my chances of getting it.
You're right. I'm an ophthalmic technician and I'm not excited about getting it. It was released too fast. Of course I will if my boss makes me, but I would rather wait until it's been out a while. Of course the drug manufacturers will say it's safe; they stand to make billions of dollars off its success. That's the problem with our for-profit healthcare "system."
You’re so worried about the tiny percentage of people who die from covid but seem to have zero sympathy for the small percentage of people who are injured or killed from vaccines.
Methinks someone is in way over her head on this thread. Hehe.
You’re so worried about the tiny percentage of people who die from covid but seem to have zero sympathy for the small percentage of people who are injured or killed from vaccines.
The number "killed" by vaccines is essentially zero.
The number claiming to be injured by vaccines is far larger than the number who actually have adverse reactions, with the biggest problem being the inability of many, many, many, many lay persons to understand that just because a condition develops after a vaccination does not mean that the vaccine caused the condition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
That’s how the vaccine court works. They have a short list of things that they might compensate for but if your injury is not their list, forget it. They also won’t admit fault even if you win your case. It’s corrupt.
No, it is not corrupt. There has to be some evidence that the adverse reaction is related to the vaccine. Otherwise anyone could claim anything is due to being vaccinated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Workin_Hard
Should not makers of any product which while proclaimed to be absolutely safe to all users under all circumstances be held responsible for that product's performance in the real world?
No one claims there are no adverse reactions to vaccines. They are, however, very rare. Why should the maker be held responsible for an adverse reaction that only happens for one in a million doses? That is not a problem with the vaccine, it is a problem with the way a rare person reacts to the vaccine.
Quote:
Sure. And I put up a chain link fence around my yard to keep out mosquitos and wasps. I'm sure it'll work just as well.
Still a bad analogy. Masks are not stopping individual viral particles, they are trapping droplets containing the virus. That markedly reduces the amount of virus that reaches the air.
Quote:
Then those who are at risk or believe that they are should take whatever precautions they feel necessary. That does not mean they get to dictate my actions or behavior. And we're all going to die eventually. The older one is, the closer to death one is for any number of causes. My mother died a short time ago. In a nursing home. She was 84 and had a number of health issues. While I am saddened, it was not unexpected.
I am sorry for your loss.
The fact is that even if you are old and have other health problems if you get COVID-19 and die from it that is your cause of death, just as if you get pneumococcal pneumonia and die from it or flu and die from it.
Quote:
How many have died FROM the Covids? Not died while they had it, but died directly FROM it with no other underlying health conditions including old age? I saw a story about a family lamenting the passing of their 96 year old great grandmother and blaming Covid. She could have sneezed or farted and dropped dead - and probably did - and they'd still blame the Chinese Flu as the cause. After all, that got them into a newspaper story and probably a lot of sympathy as well.
The underlying conditions are contributory factors. The COVID-19 is the direct cause of death.
Quote:
Wash your hands, use common sense. We'll all be ok without being part of the government's chemistry experiment or control program.
Using the vaccine is a common sense thing to do, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by k350
Nope, using it as an example of the gov and the manufacturer claiming something is safe, then finding out it was not, then fighting the whole time for years to deny responsibility and compensation to victims.
Incorrect, nexus for most VA claims needs to be proven, not all though. I have a disability payment for one condition that is presumptive, and I have another that I had to jump through hoops to prove the nexus, even though there was ample documentation in my medical records proving such injury during active service.
Presumptive lists are narrow and can change, and are only for a few things, and only came after years and years of fighting; this is soemthing you seem to not get through your head, the Agent Orange compensation was a years long fight, the gov claimed for years Agent Orange was safe, depsite the mountain of evidence stating otherwise.
"By April 1993, the Department of Veterans Affairs had compensated only 486 victims, although it had received disability claims from 39,419 soldiers who had been exposed to Agent Orange while serving in Vietnam."
The gov's game is to wait for these people to die. And this is who you trust to compensate for any vaccine issue? lol
Or the Madigan Scandal? Yea, intent to deny and reverse PTSD diagnosis because "it saves the gov money". Nice, these are the exact people I want in charge of any compensation.
It is clear you have zero knowledge and experience obtaining compensation for injury from the US gov, and I have no idea why you keep at this making yourself look more and more ridiculous with each post.
However, there is now a presumptive list for Agent Orange. I am not addressing other causes of disability. There is also a presumptive list for adverse reactions to vaccines.
Quote:
What long term safety profile is there of the mRNA vaccine? Please tell me since this is the first time ever this type of vaccine is being used.
Obviously we have to wait for "long term". However, there is reason to expect mRNA vaccines will be very safe.
"The use of mRNA has several beneficial features over subunit, killed and live attenuated virus, as well as DNA-based vaccines. First, safety: as mRNA is a non-infectious, non-integrating platform, there is no potential risk of infection or insertional mutagenesis. Additionally, mRNA is degraded by normal cellular processes, and its in vivo half-life can be regulated through the use of various modifications and delivery methods9,10,11,12. The inherent immunogenicity of the mRNA can be down-modulated to further increase the safety profile9,12,13. Second, efficacy: various modifications make mRNA more stable and highly translatable9,12,13. Efficient in vivo delivery can be achieved by formulating mRNA into carrier molecules, allowing rapid uptake and expression in the cytoplasm (reviewed in Refs 10,11). mRNA is the minimal genetic vector; therefore, anti-vector immunity is avoided, and mRNA vaccines can be administered repeatedly. Third, production: mRNA vaccines have the potential for rapid, inexpensive and scalable manufacturing, mainly owing to the high yields of in vitro transcription reactions."
Quote:
Anthrax vaccine, remember that one? Here is the officiali statement:
"The Health and Medicine Division (formally known as the Institute of Medicine) of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concluded in its report Gulf War and Health: Depleted Uranium, Sarin, Pyridostigmine Bromide, and Vaccines (2000) that there is inadequate or insufficient evidence to determine whether an association does or does not exist between multiple vaccinations and long-term adverse health problems."
Pretty similar to the gov's position on Agent Orange for many years. Of course the gov is just waiting for many people to die, or to get so old it is difficult to prove a nexus, then the gov will admit the Anthrax vaccine in fact is creating all these side effects people have been complaining about.
Just as likely that the vaccines are not causing the claimed side effects.
"CDC and others estimate that more than 50% of all infections are transmitted from people who are not exhibiting symptoms,"
"According to the CDC, 24% of people who transmit the virus to others never develop symptoms and another 35% were pre-symptomatic. It also said 41% infected others while experiencing symptoms."
Your link does not contradict what I said at all. It is talking about infections. The majority of infections do not result in the disease, which is COVID-19.
the number "killed" by vaccines is essentially zero.
The number claiming to be injured by vaccines is far larger than the number who actually have adverse reactions, with the biggest problem being the inability of many, many, many, many lay persons to understand that just because a condition develops after a vaccination does not mean that the vaccine caused the condition.
No, it is not corrupt. There has to be some evidence that the adverse reaction is related to the vaccine. Otherwise anyone could claim anything is due to being vaccinated.
No one claims there are no adverse reactions to vaccines. They are, however, very rare. Why should the maker be held responsible for an adverse reaction that only happens for one in a million doses? That is not a problem with the vaccine, it is a problem with the way a rare person reacts to the vaccine.
Still a bad analogy. Masks are not stopping individual viral particles, they are trapping droplets containing the virus. That markedly reduces the amount of virus that reaches the air.
I am sorry for your loss.
The fact is that even if you are old and have other health problems if you get covid-19 and die from it that is your cause of death, just as if you get pneumococcal pneumonia and die from it or flu and die from it.
The underlying conditions are contributory factors. The covid-19 is the direct cause of death.
Using the vaccine is a common sense thing to do, too.
However, there is now a presumptive list for agent orange. I am not addressing other causes of disability. There is also a presumptive list for adverse reactions to vaccines.
Obviously we have to wait for "long term". However, there is reason to expect mrna vaccines will be very safe.
"the use of mrna has several beneficial features over subunit, killed and live attenuated virus, as well as dna-based vaccines. First, safety: As mrna is a non-infectious, non-integrating platform, there is no potential risk of infection or insertional mutagenesis. Additionally, mrna is degraded by normal cellular processes, and its in vivo half-life can be regulated through the use of various modifications and delivery methods9,10,11,12. The inherent immunogenicity of the mrna can be down-modulated to further increase the safety profile9,12,13. Second, efficacy: Various modifications make mrna more stable and highly translatable9,12,13. Efficient in vivo delivery can be achieved by formulating mrna into carrier molecules, allowing rapid uptake and expression in the cytoplasm (reviewed in refs 10,11). Mrna is the minimal genetic vector; therefore, anti-vector immunity is avoided, and mrna vaccines can be administered repeatedly. Third, production: Mrna vaccines have the potential for rapid, inexpensive and scalable manufacturing, mainly owing to the high yields of in vitro transcription reactions."
just as likely that the vaccines are not causing the claimed side effects.
Your link does not contradict what i said at all. It is talking about infections. The majority of infections do not result in the disease, which is covid-19.
bs
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
