COVID-19

[I-90 W]

6 minutes ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

Question, can they force the vaccination on everyone? You know law, so that's why I ask. Private employers such as mine have the right to make me get one, just like the flu vaccine. I'm by no means an anti-vaxxer, quite the opposite, but I fear that this could get ugly soon if there is vaccination by force looming? 

I'm a lover, not a fighter 

In this brave new world of executive orders, answer is that’s up to the courts to decide. What they could do now, as is, could make it very, very inconvenient to not do so. That alone will compel many to do so who would otherwise not. 
 

If they can force people to quarantine against their will, I imagine they could force vaccines.

[That Aud Smell]

I doubt very much that there will be government-compelled vaccination programs.

OTOH, we can be assured that the network of normal, ordinary services on which citizens rely -- from public to private to in-between -- will all be conditioned on a proof of vaccination. So those who choose not to get vaccinated will be making a very difficult choice.

[I-90 W]

3 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I doubt very much that there will be government-compelled vaccination programs.

OTOH, we can be assured that the network of normal, ordinary services on which citizens rely -- from public to private to in-between -- will all be conditioned on a proof of vaccination. So those who choose not to get vaccinated will be making a very difficult choice.

My concern is primarily whether or not there will be a mandated vaccine for all students in NYS public schools. From a pragmatic standpoint, I think that’s the most realistic and immediate concern. 

[SwampD]

5 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I doubt very much that there will be government-compelled vaccination programs.

OTOH, we can be assured that the network of normal, ordinary services on which citizens rely -- from public to private to in-between -- will all be conditioned on a proof of vaccination. So those who choose not to get vaccinated will be making a very difficult choice.

From what I've heard, we're not going to have to worry about any of that until at least next fall,.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

Idk if I'd call it distinct, I've chatted with many colleges around the globe and it's pretty evenly split 50/50 in my social circle. I've been getting backlash since March 8th, I don't mind really. My thoughts on this are well documented and I've previously put up some numbers in the past supporting my stance, obviously taken with a grain of salt, much like the other numbers we're seeing. Fact is at the end of the day, I save upwards of what, 50 lives a week, Covid or noncovid, I haven't knowingly got anyone sick, I stayed home when I had pneumonia last week,I follow guidelines even if I believe they're more fluff than substance. So my words are simply that, thoughts and opinion that are relatively harmless. It wouldn't hurt to think about this thing from both sides for a second.

With all due respect I prefer to follow the advice of Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx over your fringe view. If more people followed the basic public health protocols advocated by an overwhelming percentage of the medical professionals in the public health sector instead of following the rogue views of a small minority in the field this pernicious contagion would be better controlled. The intermingling of politics with science has proven to be damaging. It is killing more people than is necessary. 

I strongly disagree that your words, thoughts and opinions are relatively harmless. The advice you are advocating for is a contributing factor as to why our country has an abysmal record in handling this pandemic compared to a country like Canada. I'm not in the medical field like you. But I have enough judgment to look at the preponderance of evidence from the best medical minds in the world to come to an easy conclusion that your views are very aberrant. 

[Curt]

 

1 hour ago, I-90 W said:

My concern is primarily whether or not there will be a mandated vaccine for all students in NYS public schools. From a pragmatic standpoint, I think that’s the most realistic and immediate concern. 

I would imagine that the answer will be definitely yes.

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, I-90 W said:

Anyone else think that the vaccine timing looks really, really bad? I mean, I’m not even trying to imply anything political or whatever. But seriously. 

The implication of what you're saying is that Biden would somehow be in cahoots with big pharma. I don't believe that is true. 

[miles]

i would be for getting the vaccine as quickly as i can. i would get it today if i could

[That Aud Smell]

4 hours ago, I-90 W said:

My concern is primarily whether or not there will be a mandated vaccine for all students in NYS public schools. From a pragmatic standpoint, I think that’s the most realistic and immediate concern. 

My point there being: The State won’t mandate the vaccination, but you won’t be allowed to send your kid to school without it.

[Andrew Amerk]

2 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

My point there being: The State won’t mandate the vaccination, but you won’t be allowed to send your kid to school without it.

I’d like to know what the side effects and long term effects, of the vaccine are, if any. 

[Eleven]

5 hours ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

Question, can they force the vaccination on everyone?

It depends heavily on who is "they" in certain circumstances, and I doubt it can be forced upon everyone.  On students?  Maybe.  Even institutions of higher learning in NYS require certain innoculation records.  But again, who is "they"?

[Wyldnwoody44]

Just now, Andrew Amerk said:

I’d like to know what the side effects and long term effects, of the vaccine are, if any. 

Most vaccines are "usually" pretty decent, save for some allergic reactions and some local irritation, the occasional case of Guillane Barre/Transverse Myelitis. 

This isn't going to be like most vaccines, a coronavirus vaccine that is rushed, I'm sure it will have some drawbacks initially, it's a mRNA(messenger RNA) vaccine which can be manufactured a bit quicker in a lab, but I need to look into it more. It probably won't be crazy unsafe, but it may not actually work as well as many would hope. Time will tell. 

[Wyldnwoody44]

3 minutes ago, Eleven said:

It depends heavily on who is "they" in certain circumstances, and I doubt it can be forced upon everyone.  On students?  Maybe.  Even institutions of higher learning in NYS require certain innoculation records.  But again, who is "they"?

I suppose "they" would end up being owners of businesses, those in charge of schools/hospitals/public sector jobs. Legally every year I Must have a flu shot, the only way around is a declination form signed off, if I don't get it, I can easily lose my position and privileges at said hospital. As noted upthread, schools can add that to the required immunizations and bam, it's done. A business owner could require his/her employees to maintain their job.... The list goes on, it may not be a universal blanket like an executive order, but subsquentially it could end at that point. 

[I-90 W]

26 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

My point there being: The State won’t mandate the vaccination, but you won’t be allowed to send your kid to school without it.

Yeah I agree that sounds about right. 

[SwampD]

35 minutes ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

Most vaccines are "usually" pretty decent, save for some allergic reactions and some local irritation, the occasional case of Guillane Barre/Transverse Myelitis. 

This isn't going to be like most vaccines, a coronavirus vaccine that is rushed, I'm sure it will have some drawbacks initially, it's a mRNA(messenger RNA) vaccine which can be manufactured a bit quicker in a lab, but I need to look into it more. It probably won't be crazy unsafe, but it may not actually work as well as many would hope. Time will tell. 

So, if it only elicits a response from your body to fight it (that's way dumbed down), does that mean that you have it and could potentially spread it while the vaccine is working?

[That Aud Smell]

41 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:

I’d like to know what the side effects and long term effects, of the vaccine are, if any. 

Potential side effects will probably be known or knowable.

Long term effects are likely less clear. Well, unless you’re counting a very high probability of not getting COVID-19 (for a while, anyway (sounded like these would be needed annually?)).

[Wyldnwoody44]

8 minutes ago, SwampD said:

So, if it only elicits a response from your body to fight it (that's way dumbed down), does that mean that you have it and could potentially spread it while the vaccine is working?

The virus should be attenuated, basically inactivated, so the body is responding to the shell of the virus to invoke a response without the virus being able to replicate. Vaccines basically alert the body that there is an intruder, the body sends in the forces (usually why you feel a little crappy after the flu shot) and the body then stores that to memory, typically T cell mediation, this allows the body to be immune to future infections with an active virus. For how long is unknown, maybe each year, and most probable with this family of viruses. The biggest concern would be future mutations to the Sars-cov-2 that would render the vaccination much less effective, and that's anyone's guess. 

[rakish]

I'm not taking any Gates related vaccine without a MalwareBytes premium account

[LTS]

8 hours ago, JohnC said:

The lockdown issue is not the real issue. By following the basic public health guidelines such as social distancing, wearing a mask, washing one hands and when called for quarantining infected people you can prevent the spread and avoid the more drastic action of selective lockdowns. It's not surprising to the public health experts that there was a surge of infectious cases after the motor cycle gathering in South Dakota, political rallies with large number of people not wearing a mask and tightly packed in a crowd  and even the White House where the basic public health protocols were not followed. 

There is no magic solution with this highly infectious virus. Even when an effective vaccine is developed the most effective manner to deal with this plague is to follow the public standard health guidelines. There are basic proscribed protocols for infectious viruses that are called for in order to contain (not necessarily eliminate) the spread.  What has damaged our ability to deal with this pandemic is the politicization of  public health protocols like wearing a mask when appropriate. 

This is what happens when you ignore the basic protocols. https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/09/politics/ben-carson-coronavirus/index.html

 

Yes.. it's not surprising a contagious disease spreads in groups of people. 

Frankly, Mr. Darwin would applaud those not wearing masks and taking preventative measures as they are increasing their odds of selecting themselves out of the gene pool.

If masks and hygiene are effective then you don't need lockdowns. If they are not effective, then you need to put everyone in their own biosphere.  If the government wanted to put rules in place that really made a difference, why not just implement $5k fines for anyone not wearing a mask in public, except when allowed to be removed?

That would be far more effective than closing bars at midnight and reducing tables to no more than 4 people.  Two examples of restrictions placed by the government that have no impact on reality.

Hell, make it $50k for all I care.  Just stop screwing with people's lives with regards to living life. 

 

[That Aud Smell]

7 hours ago, LTS said:

Frankly, Mr. Darwin would applaud those not wearing masks

Masks are intended to protect other people, not oneself. I need everyone else to wear a mask if I want the protection that simple masks can afford.

[I-90 W]

26 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Masks are intended to protect other people, not oneself. I need everyone else to wear a mask if I want the protection that simple masks can afford.

Lol. I wasn’t going to say anything but was thinking the same thing. Nothing more entertaining than when someone has courage of conviction while being wrong.  

[I-90 W]

8 hours ago, LTS said:

Yes.. it's not surprising a contagious disease spreads in groups of people. 

Frankly, Mr. Darwin would applaud those not wearing masks and taking preventative measures as they are increasing their odds of selecting themselves out of the gene pool.

If masks and hygiene are effective then you don't need lockdowns. If they are not effective, then you need to put everyone in their own biosphere.  If the government wanted to put rules in place that really made a difference, why not just implement $5k fines for anyone not wearing a mask in public, except when allowed to be removed?

That would be far more effective than closing bars at midnight and reducing tables to no more than 4 people.  Two examples of restrictions placed by the government that have no impact on reality.

Hell, make it $50k for all I care.  Just stop screwing with people's lives with regards to living life. 

 

So big government imposing a $50,000 fine on working people is cool but closing bars is a step too far? 

[That Aud Smell]

4 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

Lol. I wasn’t going to say anything but was thinking the same thing. Nothing more entertaining than when someone has courage of conviction while being wrong.  

Yeah - I try not to correct needlessly, but this mask misconception seems pervasive. Chris Christie was quoted as saying, in the midst of his bad bout of COVID-19, that he should have worn a mask all along. The implication was clearly that the mask could have protected him.

Dummkopf.

[North Buffalo]

95 would have helped plus washing hands and staying away from WH

[LTS]

11 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

So big government imposing a $50,000 fine on working people is cool but closing bars is a step too far? 

What is the purpose of closing the bar?  Of limiting seating?  Do these measures have as appreciable an impact as wearing a mask?  Not even remotely. They impose limitations that further degrade the quality of life.  I am using those two examples because they are the latest rules to be implemented.  Let's not act like they are the only stupid rules that have been put in place by governments all over that have no real impact on "safety".

We want people to wear masks. So, make them wear masks.

So we close the bars at midnight... because the virus is only effective after midnight. What purpose does it serve?  It allows bars to remain open so at least there can be some income earned?  Servers can still work?  Sure.  They can if the bars are open until 2am or 4am.  NYS got rid of happy hours, specialty drink pricing, etc.  It did this because it encouraged people to binge drink, which was dangerous.  So, now NYS thinks that reducing the hours will somehow reduce the alcohol consumption.  Whereas before when someone got out of work at 11pm they might have until 2am to enjoy alcohol they now have an hour... do we not think they will cram in the drinking?

You need to ask yourself.  What is the POINT of the rules?  What is the government attempting to accomplish?  Arguments are that the mask wearing and hygiene are highly effective in limiting the transmission of the virus and yet no rules are actually put in place to force that to happen. Instead, rules are put in place so those who DO ABIDE by the mask wearing and hygiene are forced back into their homes. Rules are put in place to limit the freedoms of those who are responsible because of those who are not.

Those who do not want to wear masks will still NOT be wearing masks while hanging out at a house party at 3am drinking their face off.  

45 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Masks are intended to protect other people, not oneself. I need everyone else to wear a mask if I want the protection that simple masks can afford.

Sorry for not fully clarifying my statement.  I was using that in context of large gatherings where groups of people are not wearing masks (especially the Sturgis Rally).  I realize the purpose of them.  I appreciate you pointing out that I did not explain things well in my response late last night and doing so with civility.

24 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

Lol. I wasn’t going to say anything but was thinking the same thing. Nothing more entertaining than when someone has courage of conviction while being wrong.  

You should have stuck with your first instinct of not saying anything. But clearly you needed to get it out there.

It's long fall from that mountain of superiority you put yourself on. You keep using your jump to conclusions mat and you'll eventually jump right off the end and fall off the cliff.  I'll save my LOL for that moment. Glad you were entertained though.

Take a look above at how it could have been handled...