Covid Booster

Status
Not open for further replies.

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,205
Location
Colorado Springs
But that isn't reason to discount the risk vs reward that the vaccines offer to the majority of the population.
I think you meant to say "risk/reward to a very small percentage of the population" to make that statement scientifically and mathematically accurate. (y)

For a lot of us, we work off of logic, reason, science, and probabilities.....and then we do our own risk assessment based on those to make our decisions. From what we've seen in the last two years, we have about a 98% chance of avoiding death and severe illness from this virus even if we're unvaccinated. Yet we have no information on what the risks will be from these shots 2 years, 5 years, or 10+ years down the road.

Now......if 50% of the unvaccinated were dying or falling severely ill from this thing......then maybe some people's risk tolerance might change their decision on the shots. But if 50% of the vaccinated start having all kinds of complications from those shots down the road, will the vaccinated be able to change their decisions based on that risk assessment?
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,205
Location
Colorado Springs
On the other hand, those who FEAR the vaccine can enjoy sitting at home on their keyboards and missing out at life while I enjoy hunting the Himilayas in March as I did the Caprivi and the Carpathians over the past six months.
The only reason some won't be able to enjoy hunting the Himilaya's in March will have nothing to do with the virus, and everything to do with government's reactions to the virus......not the virus itself.
 

alaska_bou

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Aug 9, 2020
Messages
240
I think you meant to say "risk/reward to a very small percentage of the population" to make that statement scientifically and mathematically accurate. (y)

For a lot of us, we work off of logic, reason, science, and probabilities.....and then we do our own risk assessment based on those to make our decisions. From what we've seen in the last two years, we have about a 98% chance of avoiding death and severe illness from this virus even if we're unvaccinated. Yet we have no information on what the risks will be from these shots 2 years, 5 years, or 10+ years down the road.

Now......if 50% of the unvaccinated were dying or falling severely ill from this thing......then maybe some people's risk tolerance might change their decision on the shots. But if 50% of the vaccinated start having all kinds of complications from those shots down the road, will the vaccinated be able to change their decisions based on that risk assessment?
The risk of myocarditis from a number of studies that are all available online are 1 in 6,000 to about 1 in 40,000, and you reference a 2% chance (1 in 50) of severe illness or death with covid if you are unvaxed. If you work off of logic, reason and probabilities it isn't hard to weigh those two options.

Do you want to roll the dice with a 1 in 50 chance with severe covid or take a 1 in 6,000 chance with the vaccine? This is my entire point.

If you are worried about possible unknown side effects, I have to ask; do take any other medication that has possible side effects? Are you vaccinated for anything else? Do you smoke, chew, drink alcohol, consume artificial sweetners, and are aware of the long-term effects those pose?

Some of you are also forgetting the long-term damage including permanent organ damange many people have to live with after having covid.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,205
Location
Colorado Springs
The risk of myocarditis from a number of studies that are all available online are 1 in 6,000 to about 1 in 40,000, and you reference a 2% chance (1 in 50) of severe illness or death with covid if you are unvaxed. If you work off of logic, reason and probabilities it isn't hard to weigh those two options.

Do you want to roll the dice with a 1 in 50 chance with severe covid or take a 1 in 6,000 chance with the vaccine? This is my entire point.

If you are worried about possible unknown side effects, I have to ask; do take any other medication that has possible side effects? Are you vaccinated for anything else? Do you smoke, chew, drink alcohol, consume artificial sweetners, and are aware of the long-term effects those pose?

Some of you are also forgetting the long-term damage including permanent organ damange many people have to live with after having covid.
For some odd reason you're only considering one possible adverse option with the vaccine. Like I mentioned earlier, my mom died 11 days after getting her 2nd Pfizer shot.......myocarditis was the least of her worries. Myocarditis isn't even on the spectrum of my personal risk assessment decision making process.

And I don't look at it as a 2% chance of death/severe illness........I see it as 98% not a problem for me, and I've had it at least twice if not three times. So 98% not a problem.......versus......?????? % of the possibility of problems down the road with the shots. That's a pretty large unknown given that this so-called vaccine has only been out for barely a year. If you had a 2% chance of dying in a car wreck, would you quit driving because of that. Personally, these days I see that % rising every day on the roads. All of us are possibly one drive away from dying on the roads......yet most of us continue to drive. Why is that? It's because everyone has done their own risk assessment and have chosen to risk those odds.......that's why. It's not difficult to see the unvaccinated's reasons for not getting the shots.......in fact it's quite simple to see (for most of us).

And given the FACT that these shots are not preventing people from getting the virus and also spreading the virus, that makes this decision a very very personal one that no one else can or should make for them. Although it is strange that so many vaccinated people think it's their business to dictate to everyone else what other's personal decisions HAVE TO BE. And yet the unvaccinated could care less what the vaccinated choose to do with that option. That's very telling in all this as well.
 

RyanT26

WKR
Joined
Apr 8, 2020
Messages
1,312
Some of you are also forgetting the long-term damage including permanent organ damange many people have to live with after having covid.

Vaccinated also have that same concern since they can still develop Covid and spread Covid so…… there’s that.

Try to keep up with the latest. The vaccine does not prevent you from catching/developing the Rona.

What is your age bracket 5miles? I’m in the 40 to 45 age bracket and last I checked unless the science has changed again my chance at severe illness or death was quite a bit lower than 2%.
 

FLATHEAD

WKR
Joined
Jun 27, 2021
Messages
2,297
After having the Covid twice it's a moot point for me.
I'll take my unvaccinated chances.
55 Y/O , BTW.
 
Last edited:

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,205
Location
Colorado Springs
Do you smoke, chew, drink alcohol, consume artificial sweetners, and are aware of the long-term effects those pose?
Again.......those are all personal choices that people choose or do not choose to engage in based on their own personal risk assessments. Those are all choices that people make ON THEIR OWN. I don't smoke, I don't drink, I don't chew, and I use the same artificial cancer causing sweetener that my grandma used for most of her life (and lived to four days short of 100), and that my dad used for his whole adult life without any adverse effects. Maybe mice are just different, or maybe it was the ridiculous amounts they gave them in their "scientific" studies, that gave them cancer. Who knows. All we can do is make our own risk assessments for everything in life and make our own decisions based on those.

I would think that most people would find the risk of a Himalayan hunt to greatly outweigh the risks of Covid complications, yet you've made the choice to accept those risks obviously......when there's a 100% risk free option of choosing not to go. Why is that? Who cares........it's your choice......LOL.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,205
Location
Colorado Springs
What is your age bracket 5miles?
I'm going on 57, with asthma. I threw out the 2% not as an absolute.......but as a possible estimation given all the other unknowns of long haulers etc. Regardless.......what we've seen so far is that the risks are low for most people, and even lower for Omicron.
 

ODB

WKR
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
4,038
Location
N.F.D.
I just read some science out of Isreal. Looks like a 4th booster is less effective against omicron. Interesting. I'll never take the vaccine. Good luck to those that have got the injections. Maybe the 5th and 6th ones will do something.

It’s not effective because the virus is mutating away from the original spike protein that, as far as I can tell, they are still using in the jabs.

Will a two-year-old flu vax keep you safe against this years’s strain?

Then why would a booster…?

As I said before, omicron is bitch-slapping the vax, and outpacing our ability to keep up.

Queue the therapeutics.
 

cod007

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Feb 1, 2017
Messages
259
You seem to think that in order for the system to be wrong, every individual must be conspiring in some elaborate plan to destroy everyone's health. That's not how it works.

Doctors and nurses and other medical professionals go to school. Schools teach methodologies based off of research and traditional knowledge. Unfortunately, research and traditional knowledge are not always benevolent.

Here is one simple example for you. Below are two images of time magazine, with two completely different positions on the same issue (30 years apart). The public was mislead for many decades on animal fats being terrible for them, while low fat but sugar loaded trash was supposed to be healthy. Maybe because the sugar industry lobbied and funded research shifting the blame of health problems to fat?

TIMEFatFeatured-1.jpg


That's how big league research works. Where do you think the money comes from? Benevolent institutions that only care about the health of the people? No, the research money comes from institutions and governments with agendas. It doesn't matter if your doctor is the most caring person on the planet. If they were indoctrinated for decades into thinking that a healthy diet included eating a bunch of artificially processed grains and oils, that is what they are going to recommend. Ask an honest doctor today about the fat vs sugar debate. You'll find that many have finally come around. The mainstream finally admitted they were full of shit for 30 years, and it caused countless suffering and lives ended prematurely.
Another great example of this is “global warming”. When I was in grade school I specifically remember reading out of our ‘Weakly Reader’ about global cooling and the coming ice age.
Science,eh?
 

307

WKR
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
1,952
Location
Cheyenne
That should be a great benefit to help understand how the medical industry works.

Take a moment sometime and ask your family member doctors and nurses a few things. Ask them, if 90+% of hospital or clinic patients’ illnesses are diet related then why is the large majority of their practice to prescribe a chemical tablet instead of tell them a precise diet related fix for their illness?? Why manage their curable illness with pills rather than totally cure their illness with proper food.

Ask them why do they reckon they were only taught in med school which pill to prescribe a patient based on the diagnosis of ailment? Why only taught pills and not food?

And ask them based on the above questions…why are hospitals, clinics and urgent care facilities always full of sick people (those humans included in the world wide disease pandemic due to poor dietary intake) if their current medical knowledge and practices were doing such a good job for everyone.

Get back with us on their answers and teach us a few things. This may give us a better understanding on why it is good practice to continue to not trust the medical industry, healthcare, big pharma, food manufactures and our government to look out for our awesome well being.
Are you a Healthcare provider?
 

zalia

FNG
Joined
Jan 14, 2022
Messages
14
The thing about science is that it is always progressing and learning, it isn't always malevolent like your implying. There is a big difference between what was once understood as a bad fat and what is now known to be an essential, good cholesterlol, critical for functions with cardiac health, brain cognition, memory formation, the prevention of dementia and alzheimerz, etc.

"Once understood to be a bad fat"? I just explained to you that the sugar and carb industries funded research with an agenda to shift the blame of health problems to animal fat and cholesterol. That is not a "misunderstanding", that is malice for profit.

We have an insane obesity and serious disease epidemic in this country, because several industries wanted to make profits, and they found a way to manipulate the scientific community.

You think it's good science and caring about the health of the people, when they told our parents and grandparents to avoid butter and eat trans fats for decades? To eat "low carb" meals that included loads of sugar and heavily processed canola oil? You seriously think they didn't even know it was unhealthy?

There are gray areas in life. Yes there have been amazing, life saving medical advances that we all depend on. You can both say that, and that in certain other areas the medical community has failed us. That does not mean "everyone is out to get you". It also does not mean that "everyone wants to help you".
 

AKBC

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
236
That should be a great benefit to help understand how the medical industry works.

Take a moment sometime and ask your family member doctors and nurses a few things. Ask them, if 90+% of hospital or clinic patients’ illnesses are diet related then why is the large majority of their practice to prescribe a chemical tablet instead of tell them a precise diet related fix for their illness?? Why manage their curable illness with pills rather than totally cure their illness with proper food.

Ask them why do they reckon they were only taught in med school which pill to prescribe a patient based on the diagnosis of ailment? Why only taught pills and not food?

And ask them based on the above questions…why are hospitals, clinics and urgent care facilities always full of sick people (those humans included in the world wide disease pandemic due to poor dietary intake) if their current medical knowledge and practices were doing such a good job for everyone.

Get back with us on their answers and teach us a few things. This may give us a better understanding on why it is good practice to continue to not trust the medical industry, healthcare, big pharma, food manufactures and our government to look out for our awesome well being.
This is simple - people don't change. They would rather take a pill for the high blood pressure and prediabetes than change their diet and exercise.
 

sneaky

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
10,119
Location
ID
The risk of myocarditis from a number of studies that are all available online are 1 in 6,000 to about 1 in 40,000, and you reference a 2% chance (1 in 50) of severe illness or death with covid if you are unvaxed. If you work off of logic, reason and probabilities it isn't hard to weigh those two options.

Do you want to roll the dice with a 1 in 50 chance with severe covid or take a 1 in 6,000 chance with the vaccine? This is my entire point.

If you are worried about possible unknown side effects, I have to ask; do take any other medication that has possible side effects? Are you vaccinated for anything else? Do you smoke, chew, drink alcohol, consume artificial sweetners, and are aware of the long-term effects those pose?

Some of you are also forgetting the long-term damage including permanent organ damange many people have to live with after having covid.
I'm guessing you are completely glossing over Maddie de Garay who "just wanted to do her part to end the pandemic". There are more adverse reactions than myocarditis, and for some reason they think it's ok to take 50+ years to release safety data from their trials. If that doesn't throw a red flag then nothing will at this point.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Jan 16, 2020
Messages
32
Take a listen to the man who was instrumental in the invention mRNA and look at the experience he has to back it up. I truly believe the Dr. Robert Malone is one of the only voices of reason in this whole COVID-19 debacle. Follow the science..... He's not anti-vax he's just pro-science and pro-unbiased research to deem whether or not there are risks involved with the vaccines and if so let the world know these risks and make their own decisions on whether or not the risk outweighs the reward for THEM and their FAMILY. Easy enough!

It's simple to me:
-Vaccines are made by for-profit companies.
-These companies need truly un-biased/independent vetting of their research.
-This information needs to be made public and readily available for all to see.
-Americans should be able to read this info @ FDA/CDC/etc. and there should be NO mandates one way or the other for ANYONE!
-This is America where we are free to choose what's best for ourselves and our families and anyone that says otherwise should pack their bags for China, Russia, Iran, etc.

My 2 cents.....


 

Sapcut

WKR
Joined
Jul 28, 2012
Messages
961
Location
Mobile, AL
This is simple - people don't change. They would rather take a pill for the high blood pressure and prediabetes than change their diet and exercise.
True for some. My point is that MDs do not know what to tell a patient about diet other than…. Lose weight and exercise. They were not taught nutrition. And terrible nutrition is by far the reason they have patients to begin with. Then the hospital continues to feed said patients the vegetable oil buttery spread poison. Facts.
 

zalia

FNG
Joined
Jan 14, 2022
Messages
14
True for some. My point is that MDs do not know what to tell a patient about diet other than…. Lose weight and exercise. They were not taught nutrition. And terrible nutrition is by far the reason they have patients to begin with. Then the hospital continues to feed said patients the vegetable oil buttery spread poison. Facts.

Haha I was just thinking about that. Some of the worst quality food you can find is at hospitals. I worked in a cardiac unit here in my city hospital for a year, and even the doctors routinely went to the cafeteria and ate vegetable oil drenched, artificially produced trash.

The same food they feed the patients by the way. Yes I think the last person made a good point that people would rather take a pill than fix their life? At the same time, society and the medical industry have misled people regarding diets, and it's very hard for people to completely change their diet after being lied to for their entire life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top