Who will never vaccinate except if forced to for visa reasons ? and do you think that they will force us ?

[Atlantis]

44 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

Another hypothetical, how many very certain, one might say cocksure, anti-vaxxers would voluntarily (voluntarily means you do it willingly, nobody forces you) forgo medical treatment?

If you are so confident about all the things you say about your natural immunity, the low rate of death from COVID, the horrible dangers of vaccination, would you be willing to say "Given all the reasons I have stated in the past, I will never go to the hospital for COVID for any reason?"

 

This is a rhetorical question, don't poop yourself that someone might deny you medical treatment.

Again, would you be willing to say "I will never go to the hospital for COVID for any reason?"

@cdemundo

May I gently remind you that the original topic of this thread - unlike many others - is about mandatory vaccinations, not about the efficacy and/or risk of the vaccine itself. To me the difference isn't nuanced at all; they're almost completely different questions.

I'm only saying this because you are making your response personal in the sense that you think it has to be about him being "cocksure" about future risk and current health.

He doesn't have to any of that to be against mandates. I don't have to naturally immune, young, fit and healthy to say that. It's about the fact that there are millions and millions of people who are in those lucky categories (especially those with natural immunity already) and/or who are in low-risk environments (location, population density, nature of work).

I'm not sure what that is so difficult for so many people on here to understand? It comes second-nature to some of us.
 

Edited October 3, 2021 by Atlantis
Misleading mistype

[Atlantis]

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Whether he will avai himself of medical services is unimportant. In the USA, where vaccination rates in lag much of the developed world, most of the patients with serious symptoms including those who end up dying are clogging up the hospital ICU units. So the unvaccinated don't seem to be willing to die for their beliefs. And even if someone claims they forego medical treatment, that sort of declaration is only meaningful when actually put to the test.

@placeholder

Ah there you are. I was just about to say something positive about your general posting in another thread, but I think its more pertinent to push back on this point above.

With respect specifically to the US and how deserving people are of medical treatment, why now the sudden myopic focus on vaccination status + ICU capacity in hospitals? (the vast majority of which are way below max capacity).

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/never-ending-nightmare-hospitals-where-icu-hospitalizations-stayed-high-n1280318
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/09/15/viru-s15.html

Shall we just nonchalantly pretend that everyone who entered an ICU has neither a BMI or age attached to their earthly forms? Or that underlying conditions of this morbidly unhealthy nation suddenly counts for zero whenever anyone whips out the fact that "vaccination rates lag much of the developed world".

+ the consideration that the virus doesn't give a damn whether it's going to cause a "break-through infection" [simply a.k.a an infection] or a first-time victim
+ the consideration that the virus doesn't give a damn whether the victim was unwilling to take a vaccine or simply unable to or had already done so.

IMO, you grasping at thin air.

*Also, "clogging up" lol. Never change please. I would expect nothing less though I'd only ever use that language when talking about morbidly obese smokers.

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

@placeholder

Ah there you are. I was just about to say something positive about your general posting in another thread, but I think its more pertinent to push back on this point above.

With respect specifically to the US and how deserving people are of medical treatment, why now the sudden myopic focus on vaccination status + ICU capacity in hospitals? (the vast majority of which are way below max capacity).

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/never-ending-nightmare-hospitals-where-icu-hospitalizations-stayed-high-n1280318
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/09/15/viru-s15.html

Shall we just nonchalantly pretend that everyone who entered an ICU has neither a BMI or age attached to their earthly forms? Or that underlying conditions of this morbidly unhealthy nation suddenly counts for zero whenever anyone whips out the fact that "vaccination rates lag much of the developed world".

+ the consideration that the virus doesn't give a damn whether it's going to cause a "break-through infection" [simply a.k.a an infection] or a first-time victim
+ the consideration that the virus doesn't give a damn whether the victim was unwilling to take a vaccine or simply unable to or had already done so.

IMO, you grasping at thin air.

*Also, "clogging up" lol. Never change please. I would expect nothing less though I'd only ever use that language when talking about morbidly obese smokers.

The fact is that before the covid epidemics there was no widespread shortage of ICUs in American hospitals despite an high average BMI or other levels of comorbidities. So what's your point? The only way your objection would make sense is if there had been a sudden and abrupt increase in average BMI and/or other comorbidities.

 

As for the nonsense that covid isn't causing widespread care shortages in American hospitals is utterly nuts. 

Covid Hospitalizations Hit Crisis Levels in Southern I.C.U.s

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/09/14/us/covid-hospital-icu-south.html

 

COVID-19 Is Forcing Us to Talk About Rationing Health Care in the U.S. Again. Could We Have Avoided This?

 In the U.S., as of Sept. 9, 80% of ICU beds are occupied, with 31% of them filled by patients with COVID-19, according to data collected by the Department of Health and Human Services. Those data also show that 100% of ICU beds in Alabama are occupied, but Dr. Karen Landers, assistant state health officer at the Alabama Department of Public Health, said to TIME in an email that the situation is actually worse. The state “reports that Alabama hospitals are in the negative zone in terms of ICU beds,” she writes. “Alabama hospitals have more ICU patients than ICU beds.

https://time.com/6096517/covid-19-health-care-rationing/

 

Another Alaskan hospital announces rationed care amid delta surge

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/574800-another-alaskan-hospital-announces-rationed-care-amid-delta-surge

 

Crisis standards of care are now in place across all of Idaho. What does that mean?

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/coronavirus/article254285123.html

 

COVID-19 Surge Forces Health Care Rationing in Parts of West

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2021-09-16/idaho-rations-health-care-statewide-as-covid-surge-continues

 

 

 

[Jeffr2]

35 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

@placeholder

Ah there you are. I was just about to say something positive about your general posting in another thread, but I think its more pertinent to push back on this point above.

With respect specifically to the US and how deserving people are of medical treatment, why now the sudden myopic focus on vaccination status + ICU capacity in hospitals? (the vast majority of which are way below max capacity).

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/never-ending-nightmare-hospitals-where-icu-hospitalizations-stayed-high-n1280318
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/09/15/viru-s15.html

Shall we just nonchalantly pretend that everyone who entered an ICU has neither a BMI or age attached to their earthly forms? Or that underlying conditions of this morbidly unhealthy nation suddenly counts for zero whenever anyone whips out the fact that "vaccination rates lag much of the developed world".

+ the consideration that the virus doesn't give a damn whether it's going to cause a "break-through infection" [simply a.k.a an infection] or a first-time victim
+ the consideration that the virus doesn't give a damn whether the victim was unwilling to take a vaccine or simply unable to or had already done so.

IMO, you grasping at thin air.

*Also, "clogging up" lol. Never change please. I would expect nothing less though I'd only ever use that language when talking about morbidly obese smokers.

Easy solution. You refuse to get vaccinated, you have to get insurance to cover medical costs. Done!

[Atlantis]

First of all, love the info-graphic and links in your content. Above, and in general.
 

 

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

As for the nonsense that covid isn't causing widespread care shortages in American hospitals is utterly nuts. 

Did you even look at the infographics in my links in conjunction with what I wrote "the vast majority of which are way below max capacity". Serious question. I take the time to read what you post, in good faith. Do you mind doing the same? If the data's wrong, say so. If you think my interpretation of the data is off, please explain. Only two links, and the headlines are actually very "pro-vax" for a lack of a better term.

 

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

The fact is that before the covid epidemics there was no widespread shortage of ICUs in American hospitals despite an high average BMI or other levels of comorbidities. So what's your point? The only way your objection would make sense is if there had been a sudden and abrupt increase in average BMI and/or other comorbidities.

Not at all. Let me put my point more explicitly then, if it's not already obvious from the title of this thread and earlier posts (including your own).  My own words:

With respect specifically to the US and how deserving people are of medical treatment, why now the sudden myopic focus on vaccination status + ICU capacity in hospitals?

I am questioning why so many people suddenly feel okay with the notion that it's acceptable to reduce / take away urgent medical healthcare due to their previous medical decisions. If your son overdosed despite knowing the harms of illicit substances, no decent person would say let him die irrespective of ICU capacity in some hospitals. If your fat chain-smoking uncle has a heart attack despite years of warnings from his doctor ends up in an ER without a medical insurance, US hospitals are obligated by law to save him. If your alcoholic friend decides to take a swig despite being on certain anti-biotics, he is nevertheless treated like any other patient. These are all life choices made against all medical advice. Furthermore not engaging in them carries literally zero risk vs. a very small age-dependent risk. All of the behaviour above, IMO, is much crazier and condemn-able than not giving informed consent with vaccine (either yet, or never).

Yet the view that you and others espouse w.r.t. pressurizing them to forgo healthcare never seemed to be socially acceptable until very recently.

You also chose not to address my other points, maybe because it's almost impossible to blame those who medically can't take a vaccine due to current health or prior history and it's embarrassing to blame un-vaccinated Covid survivors with robust natural immunity).

There is another fairly obvious statistical concept why my objection should make sense. BMI among other things are variables that interact with immunity - either via vaccination or naturally acquired. If you're going to make a time-series argument, go ahead, no one's actually pushing back against you. But then you have to qualify your (IMO fairly immoral) assertions with modifiers i.e. 'the fat unvaccinated' - those gluttnous scumbags, the 'elderly unvaccinated' - those foolish old codgers.

You're not doing that though, are you. You're attempting to demonize all un-vaccinated people, including the young and healthy who have survived the disease, those living in rural Oklahoma, and by unfortunate omission, those who cannot take a vaccine or those who have had nasty prior reactions to vaccines.

I hope that helps.



 

Edited October 3, 2021 by Atlantis
Bunch of typos

[cdemundo]

3 hours ago, Atlantis said:

@cdemundo

May I gently remind you that the original topic of this thread - unlike many others - is about mandatory vaccinations, not about the efficacy and/or risk of the vaccine itself. To me the difference isn't nuanced at all; they're almost completely different questions.

I'm only saying this because you are making your response personal in the sense that you think it has to be about him being "cocksure" about future risk and current health.

He doesn't have to any of that to be against mandates. I don't have to naturally immune, young, fit and healthy to say that. It's about the fact that there are millions and millions of people who are in those lucky categories (especially those with natural immunity already) and/or who are in low-risk environments (location, population density, nature of work).

I'm not sure what that is so difficult for so many people on here to understand? It comes second-nature to some of us.
 

So "no" then.

[Atlantis]

4 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

So "no" then.

Why should he? It's your reasoning of A therefore B that's the problem, not his hypothetical answer to A. You'd have to ask him. I'm not his spokesman. I generally mind my own business when it comes to other people's medical decisions.

And then you need to stop think about the glaringly obvious fact that you don't have to be something yourself to advocate for other people's rights.
 

[cdemundo]

2 hours ago, Atlantis said:

Why should he? It's your reasoning of A therefore B that's the problem, not his hypothetical answer to A. You'd have to ask him. I'm not his spokesman. I generally mind my own business when it comes to other people's medical decisions.

And then you need to stop think about the glaringly obvious fact that you don't have to be something yourself to advocate for other people's rights.
 

Who do you think I directed the question at?

I don't think you even understood the question.

Your answer certainly doesn't indicate that you understood.

 

[cdemundo]

6 hours ago, placeholder said:

Whether he will avai himself of medical services is unimportant. In the USA, where vaccination rates in lag much of the developed world, most of the patients with serious symptoms including those who end up dying are clogging up the hospital ICU units. So the unvaccinated don't seem to be willing to die for their beliefs. And even if someone claims they forego medical treatment, that sort of declaration is only meaningful when actually put to the test.

Point is they can't even imagine saying they would put their money where their mouth is so to speak.

Of course such a declaration isn't binding, but all these who are so confident that they are in no danger can't even say they would forgo medical treatment

They are not as sure of what they say as they try to act.

[cdemundo]

6 hours ago, Atlantis said:

@cdemundo

May I gently remind you that the original topic of this thread - unlike many others - is about mandatory vaccinations, not about the efficacy and/or risk of the vaccine itself. To me the difference isn't nuanced at all; they're almost completely different questions.

I'm only saying this because you are making your response personal in the sense that you think it has to be about him being "cocksure" about future risk and current health.

He doesn't have to any of that to be against mandates. I don't have to naturally immune, young, fit and healthy to say that. It's about the fact that there are millions and millions of people who are in those lucky categories (especially those with natural immunity already) and/or who are in low-risk environments (location, population density, nature of work).

I'm not sure what that is so difficult for so many people on here to understand? It comes second-nature to some of us.
 

The original topic was "Who will never get vaccinated except for visa reasons".

Who is the "he" you are referring to?

I am addressing in general all the anti-vaxxers who make the kind of arguments I describe.

You seem a little disoriented.

I am not saying anything about mandates. 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

7 hours ago, Atlantis said:

@placeholder

Ah there you are. I was just about to say something positive about your general posting in another thread, but I think its more pertinent to push back on this point above.

With respect specifically to the US and how deserving people are of medical treatment, why now the sudden myopic focus on vaccination status + ICU capacity in hospitals? (the vast majority of which are way below max capacity).

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/never-ending-nightmare-hospitals-where-icu-hospitalizations-stayed-high-n1280318
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/09/15/viru-s15.html

Shall we just nonchalantly pretend that everyone who entered an ICU has neither a BMI or age attached to their earthly forms? Or that underlying conditions of this morbidly unhealthy nation suddenly counts for zero whenever anyone whips out the fact that "vaccination rates lag much of the developed world".

+ the consideration that the virus doesn't give a damn whether it's going to cause a "break-through infection" [simply a.k.a an infection] or a first-time victim
+ the consideration that the virus doesn't give a damn whether the victim was unwilling to take a vaccine or simply unable to or had already done so.

IMO, you grasping at thin air.

*Also, "clogging up" lol. Never change please. I would expect nothing less though I'd only ever use that language when talking about morbidly obese smokers.

The vaccine doesn’t care about any of these things either, It dramatically reduces the chance of infection, serious illness, hospitalization and death no matter any other consideration.

 

Hence the evidence from the US that States with a low vaccine uptake are suffering higher per capita rates of serious illness, hospitalization and deaths from COVID.

 

In some States the low vaccination uptake has driven the incidence of hospitalization to the point where those States have had to enact crisis health care standards (triage).

 

It’s this that drives ‘myopic focus on vaccination status + ICU capacity in hospitals’.

 

The choice of some not to vaccinate is having society wide implications for others.

 

ICU units filled with the unvaccinated and triage (medics rationing treatment on the basis of likelihood to survive) is an alarming outcome of vaccine refusal.

 

You accuse others of grasping at thin air while you engage in sophistry and ignore the real tragedy facing hundreds of thousands if not millions of people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[redwood1]

15 hours ago, cdemundo said:

Yes, the answers to the question "Why are you against the vaccine?" are simply recycling the same debunked answers seen before.

But past the Q&A with anti-vaxxers is some very good information about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines.

Why cant the vaxed just simply be satisfied they are vaxed.....And call it a day...

Edited October 4, 2021 by redwood1

[Atlantis]

18 hours ago, cdemundo said: On 10/1/2021 at 10:11 AM, redwood1 said: I think anyone what wants a vax should be forced against their will not to get one...   It would not bother me the least if this happened... Another hypothetical, how many very certain, one might say cocksure, anti-vaxxers would voluntarily (voluntarily means you do it willingly, nobody forces you) forgo medical treatment? If you are so confident about all the things you say about your natural immunity, the low rate of death from COVID, the horrible dangers of vaccination, would you be willing to say "Given all the reasons I have stated in the past, I will never go to the hospital for COVID for any reason?"   This is a rhetorical question, don't poop yourself that someone might deny you medical treatment. Again, would you be willing to say "I will never go to the hospital for COVID for any reason?"   11 hours ago, cdemundo said: Who is the "he" you are referring to? I thought "he" was redwood1 because you'd quoted him in your response instead of replying directly to your thread. *And I'm not sure why your second quote above has turned into small caps. Long time lurker, recent poster - still feeling my way about on here.

[Atlantis]

16 hours ago, Atlantis said:

17 hours ago, placeholder said:

As for the nonsense that covid isn't causing widespread care shortages in American hospitals is utterly nuts. 

Did you even look at the infographics in my links in conjunction with what I wrote "the vast majority of which are way below max capacity". Serious question. I take the time to read what you post, in good faith. Do you mind doing the same? If the data's wrong, say so. If you think my interpretation of the data is off, please explain. Only two links, and the headlines are actually very "pro-vax" for a lack of a better term.

 

17 hours ago, placeholder said:

The fact is that before the covid epidemics there was no widespread shortage of ICUs in American hospitals despite an high average BMI or other levels of comorbidities. So what's your point? The only way your objection would make sense is if there had been a sudden and abrupt increase in average BMI and/or other comorbidities.

Not at all. Let me put my point more explicitly then, if it's not already obvious from the title of this thread and earlier posts (including your own).  My own words:

With respect specifically to the US and how deserving people are of medical treatment, why now the sudden myopic focus on vaccination status + ICU capacity in hospitals?

I am questioning why so many people suddenly feel okay with the notion that it's acceptable to reduce / take away urgent medical healthcare due to their previous medical decisions. If your son overdosed despite knowing the harms of illicit substances, no decent person would say let him die irrespective of ICU capacity in some hospitals. If your fat chain-smoking uncle has a heart attack despite years of warnings from his doctor ends up in an ER without a medical insurance, US hospitals are obligated by law to save him. If your alcoholic friend decides to take a swig despite being on certain anti-biotics, he is nevertheless treated like any other patient. These are all life choices made against all medical advice. Furthermore not engaging in them carries literally zero risk vs. a very small age-dependent risk. All of the behaviour above, IMO, is much crazier and condemn-able than not giving informed consent with vaccine (either yet, or never).

Yet the view that you and others espouse w.r.t. pressurizing them to forgo healthcare never seemed to be socially acceptable until very recently.

You also chose not to address my other points, maybe because it's almost impossible to blame those who medically can't take a vaccine due to current health or prior history and it's embarrassing to blame un-vaccinated Covid survivors with robust natural immunity).

There is another fairly obvious statistical concept why my objection should make sense. BMI among other things are variables that interact with immunity - either via vaccination or naturally acquired. If you're going to make a time-series argument, go ahead, no one's actually pushing back against you. But then you have to qualify your (IMO fairly immoral) assertions with modifiers i.e. 'the fat unvaccinated' - those gluttnous scumbags, the 'elderly unvaccinated' - those foolish old codgers.

You're not doing that though, are you. You're attempting to demonize all un-vaccinated people, including the young and healthy who have survived the disease, those living in rural Oklahoma, and by unfortunate omission, those who cannot take a vaccine or those who have had nasty prior reactions to vaccines.

I hope that helps.

Pasted again, for those who are used to posting a lot but not so used to reading other people's posts (apparently).

[Atlantis]

12 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The vaccine doesn’t care about any of these things either, It dramatically reduces the chance of infection, serious illness, hospitalization and death no matter any other consideration.

 

Hence the evidence from the US that States with a low vaccine uptake are suffering higher per capita rates of serious illness, hospitalization and deaths from COVID.

 

In some States the low vaccination uptake has driven the incidence of hospitalization to the point where those States have had to enact crisis health care standards (triage).

 

It’s this that drives ‘myopic focus on vaccination status + ICU capacity in hospitals’.

 

The choice of some not to vaccinate is having society wide implications for others.

 

ICU units filled with the unvaccinated and triage (medics rationing treatment on the basis of likelihood to survive) is an alarming outcome of vaccine refusal.

 

You accuse others of grasping at thin air while you engage in sophistry and ignore the real tragedy facing hundreds of thousands if not millions of people.

Sophistry LOL (at your post, not the people without a bed). I'll assume you're not accusing me of practicing the ancient Greek philosophy then!!

[Had I realized earlier that I can do one edit on each post, I would have qualified my praise for you on another thread r.e. detailed posts and links with "but you do get a bit flustered sometimes." Case in point: your epic exchange with another user T-something on this very thread]

Now, back to your charge of sophistry = fallacious reasoning: yes I do apologize for assuming that frequent and confident posters on here have a basic grasp of what multiple regression analysis entails. And if not, then at least a working grasp of confounding variables.  You only have to scroll down two posts to see my detailed response to him.

Just look at your first and last two lines of your post: you're talking to thin air. The focus of this thread is about the mandatory part of mandatory vaccinations. My response, quite clearly, was a push back against the idea coercive vaccination through threat of withheld medical support. All you have to do is to scroll up a little.

I guess if I were interested in sophistry, I wouldn't have deliberately chosen to make things harder for myself by using the links that I did. The links also make it very clear I am not "ignoring" anything. How disingenuous of you. Please get off your high horse and give some basic time and respect to other people's posts,  especially when they are made in good faith.

Sophistry indeed!

[cdemundo]

6 hours ago, redwood1 said:

Why cant the vaxed just simply be satisfied they are vaxed.....And call it a day...

And the unvaxed? 

[Tony125]

On 9/26/2021 at 2:11 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

Have you considered that they are as fearful of the potential side effects of the vaccine which have apparently included death, as you are of not being vaccinated? Far as I know, death was not a ( likely ) potential complication of any other vaccine commonly used by humans prior to corona, with apparently some exceptions that were corrected to make safe to use.

IMO it's up to those that want everyone to take it to convince everyone that a/ it's safe, or b/ that they will be taken care of/ compensated in the event of serious complications. So far I'm not aware of anything other than fear being used to convince people to take it against their will.

I'm against anything that smacks of coercion, rather than persuasion.

 

New Zealand abandons its COVID elimination strategy

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/zealand-abandons-covid-elimination-strategy-122754906.html

[Jeffr2]

8 hours ago, redwood1 said:

Why cant the vaxed just simply be satisfied they are vaxed.....And call it a day...

Because we live in a global society where the actions by some have an Impact on many. Figures that you don't understand this.

[Jeffr2]

1 hour ago, Tony125 said:

 

New Zealand abandons its COVID elimination strategy

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/zealand-abandons-covid-elimination-strategy-122754906.html

Covid will be with us for the rest of our lives.

[placeholder]

21 hours ago, Atlantis said:

First of all, love the info-graphic and links in your content. Above, and in general.
 

 

Did you even look at the infographics in my links in conjunction with what I wrote "the vast majority of which are way below max capacity". Serious question. I take the time to read what you post, in good faith. Do you mind doing the same? If the data's wrong, say so. If you think my interpretation of the data is off, please explain. Only two links, and the headlines are actually very "pro-vax" for a lack of a better term.

 

 

What don't you understand about the fact that in some states rationed care is now the order of the day or has been in the past thanks to covid? ANd 85% capacity and above is not a situation which makes for good medical care.

 

COVID-19: What it means for a hospital ICU to be at capacity

Capacity refers to the percent of ICU beds currently occupied. Generally, an ICU is considered functionally full when it reaches 85 percent capacity. Right now, many ICUs in the state are running at over 90 percent full, and based on what we know about positive test rates, they’re about to get busier.

https://intermountainhealthcare.org/blogs/topics/covid-19/2020/11/covid-19-what-it-means-for-a-hospital-icu-to-be-at-capacity/

 

"In Alabama, all I.C.U. beds are currently occupied. In recent days, dozens of patients in the state have needed beds that were not available, according to data published by the Department of Health and Human Services."

"Hospitals in Houston constructed overflow tents last month to handle the influx of patients, and the rate of hospitalizations in the state is now 40 percent higher than when the tents were built."

"During past surges, hospitals have been forced to improvise by having staff care for more patients than usual or by setting up temporary intensive care beds in other wings of the hospital."

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/09/14/us/covid-hospital-icu-south.html

 

As for your links to ICU capacity. Do you understand that it's only in some parts of the country at any one time that hospitals are overwhelmed with covid patients? So, naturally, a majority of hospitals won't be overwhelmed. And the fact is that in those parts of the country where vaccination levels are highest, hospital ICUs are a lot less likely to be overwhelmed. A lot. As the map I provided shows, the south is particularly afflicted thanks to low levels of vaccination. 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/09/14/us/covid-hospital-icu-south.html

[placeholder]

22 hours ago, Atlantis said:

With respect specifically to the US and how deserving people are of medical treatment, why now the sudden myopic focus on vaccination status + ICU capacity in hospitals?

I am questioning why so many people suddenly feel okay with the notion that it's acceptable to reduce / take away urgent medical healthcare due to their previous medical decisions. If your son overdosed despite knowing the harms of illicit substances, no decent person would say let him die irrespective of ICU capacity in some hospitals. If your fat chain-smoking uncle has a heart attack despite years of warnings from his doctor ends up in an ER without a medical insurance, US hospitals are obligated by law to save him. If your alcoholic friend decides to take a swig despite being on certain anti-biotics, he is nevertheless treated like any other patient. These are all life choices made against all medical advice. Furthermore not engaging in them carries literally zero risk vs. a very small age-dependent risk. All of the behaviour above, IMO, is much crazier and condemn-able than not giving informed consent with vaccine (either yet, or never).

There's an obvious and huge difference between asking people to give up bad habits of a lifetime, such as smoking, drinking, drug abuse,or unhealthy eating and submitting to a few jabs of a hypodermic needle. If that werent' the case, there wouldn't be so much effort and so little success in getting people to give up habits which they acknowledge are unhealthy.  Unless, of course, there are people who are addicted to not being inoculated. Haven't heard or read  anything about treatment programs for such an affliction.

[placeholder]

22 hours ago, Atlantis said:

You're not doing that though, are you. You're attempting to demonize all un-vaccinated people, including the young and healthy who have survived the disease, those living in rural Oklahoma, and by unfortunate omission, those who cannot take a vaccine or those who have had nasty prior reactions to vaccines.

No one is demonizing anyone who has a sound medical reason for not being vaccinated. If those were the only people refusing to be vaccinated, the problem would already be solved.

[Jeffr2]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If you were posting in “good faith” you would quote my whole post and reply to

my comments with the context I made them.

 

What you’ve chosen to do is select a sentence from my full post.

 

There's a reason why this forum has a rule requiring ‘full posting’ of comments made by others.

 

Your ‘good faith’ post demonstrates why that rule is needed.

Report this. Please. It's against forum rules.

[placeholder]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If you were posting in “good faith” you would quote my whole post and reply to

my comments with the context I made them.

 

What you’ve chosen to do is select a sentence from my full post.

 

There's a reason why this forum has a rule requiring ‘full posting’ of comments made by others.

 

Your ‘good faith’ post demonstrates why that rule is needed.

Actually, to be precise, it is allowed to not quote in full. But what is prohibited is selectively quoting in such a way as to alter the meaning of what was written.

[thaibeachlovers]

13 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Report this. Please. It's against forum rules.

Only if it changes the meaning.

 

16) You will not make changes to quoted material from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. This cannot be done in such a manner that it alters the context of the original post.

[placnx]

On 10/4/2021 at 1:35 AM, placeholder said:

Whether he will avai himself of medical services is unimportant. In the USA, where vaccination rates in lag much of the developed world, most of the patients with serious symptoms including those who end up dying are clogging up the hospital ICU units. So the unvaccinated don't seem to be willing to die for their beliefs. And even if someone claims they forego medical treatment, that sort of declaration is only meaningful when actually put to the test.

In Alaska, triage has had to be implemented since there are not enough ICU beds.

[Jeffr2]

36 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Only if it changes the meaning.

 

16) You will not make changes to quoted material from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. This cannot be done in such a manner that it alters the context of the original post.

I've been warned for doing this. And in this case, it changed the meaning.

[placeholder]

21 minutes ago, placnx said:

In Alaska, triage has had to be implemented since there are not enough ICU beds.

"rationing care" is a euphemism for triage

[WhiteBuffaloATM]

   On 10/1/2021 at 10:11 AM,  redwood1 said: 

I think anyone what wants a vax should be forced against their will not to get one...

 

It would not bother me the least if this happened

 

right, so this post has come from a mirror / reverse fascist universe where evil is the norm and good is something to be resisted. would means millions systematically left to die, despite prevention being available. in fact THIS is where the anti- vax idelogy ultimately leads. thanks for showing us your hidden agenda. if they were in charge THIS is what they would (like to)do. like leaving people to randomly drown or burn or bleed out…murderous criminal statement. unless actual “humour” of course…. bad taste if so…..psychiatric treatment otherwise required. 

cant imagine how that statement has got past the Moderators.

 

 

[CharlieH]

Troll comment and responses to it removed.