Have You Gotten Your Covid Vaccine? Thread.

[trenchfoot]

They've created a mess that they themselves can't reel in anymore. Trump openly said that he got the booster when he was being interviewed by Bill O'Reilly, who himself was boosted, and Trump got boo'd by the audience. All the big presenters at Fox (ain't gonna call them reporters because they ain't) are vaccinated, yet the rubes don't or can't seem to connect the dots.

Methinks a whole lot of Trumpies are up to the same role playing scheme where they're getting vaccinated and boosted while out in the streets and storefronts screaming out their anti-vax anti-mask rhetoric to the world.

 

[Saylick]

Methinks a whole lot of Trumpies are up to the same role playing scheme where they're getting vaccinated and boosted while out in the streets and storefronts screaming out their anti-vax anti-mask rhetoric to the world.

Maybe it's true for the higher ups, but I think the regular Joes eat up the anti-vax rhetoric like if they were at a buffet.

Looks like Trump is getting pushback from the MAGA crowd: https://www.businessinsider.com/rig...rupt-anger-after-trump-backs-vaccines-2021-12

The fringe factions of the right wing erupted in anger after Trump lauded the COVID-19 vaccines.
Figures from Alex Jones to Ali Alexander swiftly rebuked Trump for his pro-vaccine stance.
Members of QAnon-linked Telegram channels said they felt betrayed after Trump encouraged more people to get the COVID-19 shot.

 

[Puffnstuff]

i am awaiting with an eager but admittedly morbid curiosity to see if some of my coworkers balk at the vaccine mandate and actually leave. i suspect they will cave.

My coworkers who chose to apply for a religious exemption will be sad when they look back into their records and don't find them objecting to any other vaccines for the same reasons.

 

[MrSquished]

They are all so dumb. But also evil. Which means we are all fucked because they have a lot of power in this country

 

[pmv]

I don't understand why the WHO keeps making noises opposing the use of booster jabs. I get that they see their role as getting as many vaccines as possible to the poorer parts of the world where not many have had the first two jabs yet, but do they not realise they are just encouraging those in the West who refuse to get a booster jab?

And without the third jab, AZ, at least, apparently has less than 10% effectiveness against symptomatic infection with omicron (mRNA ones apparently do better, but I've heard Sinovax and the Russian one don't).

So in asking western countries to not administer boosters but to instead donate those vaccine doses to the poorer countries, they are asking for Western governments to altruistically leave their own citizens unprotected, and to let many of them die. That seems a completely unrealistic demand. Seems to me that all their statements do is help fuel dischord and argument by encouraging anti-vaxxers in the West.

Also, I am curious to know if that Tedros guy has had a booster himself or if he donated his third shot to a poorer person.

 

[Bitek]

I don't understand why the WHO keeps making noises opposing the use of booster jabs. I get that they see their role as getting as many vaccines as possible to the poorer parts of the world where not many have had the first two jabs yet, but do they not realise they are just encouraging those in the West who refuse to get a booster jab?

And without the third jab, AZ, at least, apparently has less than 10% effectiveness against symptomatic infection with omicron (mRNA ones apparently do better, but I've heard Sinovax and the Russian one don't).

So in asking western countries to not administer boosters but to instead donate those vaccine doses to the poorer countries, they are asking for Western governments to altruistically leave their own citizens unprotected, and to let many of them die. That seems a completely unrealistic demand. Seems to me that all their statements do is help fuel dischord and argument by encouraging anti-vaxxers in the West.

Also, I am curious to know if that Tedros guy has had a booster himself or if he donated his third shot to a poorer person.

You think they would have learned that about the mask recommendations at the start of the pandemic. They just hand ammo to anti maskers and anti vaxxers.

All the evidence so far says we won't vaccinate our way out of the pandemic, but it's not likely that all the northern rich countries will just be shipping off all their vaccines while outbreaks and demand continue to happen. Just fantasy.

Besides, Africa has the lowest death toll in the world .. They'll be ok.

 

[pmv]

You think they would have learned that about the mask recommendations at the start of the pandemic. They just hand ammo to anti maskers and anti vaxxers.

All the evidence so far says we won't vaccinate our way out of the pandemic, but it's not likely that all the northern rich countries will just be shipping off all their vaccines while outbreaks and demand continue to happen. Just fantasy.

Besides, Africa has the lowest death toll in the world .. They'll be ok.

Not sure about your final point, because I don't know how accurate their figures are likely to be. Though there is the age-profile of the continent, that might imply a lower death toll.

But on the question of shipping vaccines to poorer countries, I really don't know what to think about it, because those, like Gordon Brown, who keep popping up doing the 'wise statesman' shtick insisting the West send vaccines to those countries rather than giving booster jabs, never seem to have much to say about the practical details of what is required.

Nigeria just destroyed a million doses that had expired before they could get them into arms. But I don't know if that is because they were too close to expiry date when they were donated in the first place, so part of the problem with the supply. But it seems as if it's more than just a shortage of vaccine supply, it's also about the infrastructure for storing and administering them.

Whatever the facts of that topic, though, I don't see that the seemingly-random comments we get from the WHO really help matters - they never seem to allow for the internal politics of the countries they are addressing.

 

[weblooker2021]

i am awaiting with an eager but admittedly morbid curiosity to see if some of my coworkers balk at the vaccine mandate and actually leave. i suspect they will cave.

SCOTUS will have hearing if the federal mandate constitutional on the 7th of January. I suspect they will quickly rule that it's unconstitutional mandate.

 

[hardhat]

I imagine the reasons trump is supporting vaccines are because
1. He hopes that his social media accounts will be available when he runs again. Facebook and youtube have both cracked down on misinformation about vaccines and trump is already on thin ice.
2. The majority of the deaths from COVID are his own constituents. Even if you are a republican and haven't had a severe illness you probably will know someone who has had one by election time. Trump DOESN'T have to be anti vaccine. He was forced out of the media circus after January, and can come back as the one republican who had common sense who didn't spread misinformation about the vaccine, who even supported it. Of course, that's betraying a large part of his constituency, but so what? There were liberals who voted for trump over Hillary. He just has to be more appealing than Biden to the voters.

 

[Pohemi]

...the one republican who had common sense who didn't spread misinformation about the vaccine, who even supported it. Of course, that's betraying a large part of his constituency, but so what?

Seriously? Do you realize how hilariously false this statement is?

He spread FUD from the beginning of the outbreak, and every fucking step of the way. COVID was a hoax, the vaccines were "a personal choice", and asking anyone to mask was being a Nazi, apparently.

He got vaccinated himself (and treated for infection), but he never stopped flinging bullshit on different aspects of the pandemic. All because of his childish feels and maniacal ego.

 

[MrSquished]

I imagine the reasons trump is supporting vaccines are because
1. He hopes that his social media accounts will be available when he runs again. Facebook and youtube have both cracked down on misinformation about vaccines and trump is already on thin ice.
2. The majority of the deaths from COVID are his own constituents. Even if you are a republican and haven't had a severe illness you probably will know someone who has had one by election time. Trump DOESN'T have to be anti vaccine. He was forced out of the media circus after January, and can come back as the one republican who had common sense who didn't spread misinformation about the vaccine, who even supported it. Of course, that's betraying a large part of his constituency, but so what? There were liberals who voted for trump over Hillary. He just has to be more appealing than Biden to the voters.

The only reason Trump is supporting vaccines is because he thinks he invented all of them. It's always about his ego

 

[hardhat]

Yes, of course he would be being disingenuous. Do you really think trump would be honest? He lies constantly about literally everything. I was explaining why he might be doing what he is doing.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I live in the red state otherwise known as Retardistan which is run by the evil Dr. Desantis but they were among the first to authorize boosters for all adults. I have to report that even less adults are wearing masks now than since this pandemic started.

 

[NWRMidnight]

SCOTUS will have hearing if the federal mandate constitutional on the 7th of January. I suspect they will quickly rule that it's unconstitutional mandate.

still hoping for a ruling based on feelz huh?

 

[weblooker2021]

still hoping for a ruling based on feelz huh?

Not hoping, SCOTUS had 2 choices. 1)Rule on appeal by either granting or rejecting injunction appeal went on .2) Instead they took rare step and going to hear the case bypassing the appeal. That is highly likely that they will rule against Biden administration on this mandate.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Not hoping, SCOTUS had 2 choices. 1)Rule on appeal by either granting or rejecting injunction appeal went on .2) Instead they took rare step and going to hear the case bypassing the appeal. That is highly likely that they will rule against Biden administration on this mandate.

Holly Hell Dude! Can you type something that makes sense. Maybe use proper sentence structure and punctuation. My head hurts trying to understand what you are trying to pull out of your ass.

From what I can make out, you are trying to say that it's rare for the SCOTUS to hear oral arguments on a case, which is not true at all. It's their primary function. But due to the amount of cases they are requested to hear each year (between 7 and 10 thousand), they are required to pick and chose which ones they will take, hear actual arguments on, and which ones they will just issue a written opinion based on all previous courts records. The SCOTUS takes 100 to 150 cases each year, and hear arguments on 50 to 75 of those cases. So no, it's not rare for them to hear oral arguments at all. And they certainly don't just take cases that they disagree with the appeals courts ruling on. They choose cases that are of high importance to the country, and it's Citizens.

The SCOTUS taking up a case, does not bypass the appeal court at all, as it's part of the very process on how our court system works. It also doesn't mean they disagree with the appeal courts ruling. But it does show they know the seriousness of the case, the impact it will have on EVERY AMERICAN, and know it's vital that they hear verbal arguments. It's their constitutional duty! They are not taking a rare step, they are doing exactly what they are required to do which is their duty to the Constitution, the Citizens of this country, and their very purpose.

All you have done in your incomprehensible response is shown that you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. Which is why your response are just hopes and feelz backed up by fairy dust that has no baring on how the SCOTUS will rule.

 

[K1052]

Not hoping, SCOTUS had 2 choices. 1)Rule on appeal by either granting or rejecting injunction appeal went on .2) Instead they took rare step and going to hear the case bypassing the appeal. That is highly likely that they will rule against Biden administration on this mandate.

If you get a ruling you favor it's likely to be because Gorsuch and company think OSHA is illegal or something. Which is of course absurd but so is SCOTUS commanding the executive branch to implement foreign policy they favor. My suspicion is that the mandate for healthcare workers stands while the OSHA emergency rule is put on hold due to whatever anti-administrative state BS conservatives on the court feel like pulling out of their asses that day.

 

[fskimospy]

If you get a ruling you favor it's likely to be because Gorsuch and company think OSHA is illegal or something. Which is of course absurd but so is SCOTUS commanding the executive branch to implement foreign policy they favor. My suspicion is that the mandate for healthcare workers stands while the OSHA emergency rule is put on hold due to whatever anti-administrative state BS conservatives on the court feel like pulling out of their asses that day.

The only tquestions SCOTUS needs to answer are:

1) is COVID a workplace hazard? By their own precedents the answer is unquestionably yes.

2) is COVID an emergency? Close to a million people are dead so…duh.

3) did Congress authorize OSHA to require vaccination as one of the possible remedies to this emergency? Well, the whole point of OSHA is to mitigate workplace hazards and that’s how you mitigate this one.

The answer is blindingly obvious to any normal person but yes I share your fear that they will use this opportunity to yet again act as a super legislature and substitute their own legislation for the real legislation passed by elected officials.

 

[JEDIYoda]

weblocker2021 is living the dream! Fantasy 100%!!

 

[weblooker2021]

weblocker2021 is living the dream! Fantasy 100%!!

No it's the reality. But it's okay we will know soon who is right and who is wrong.

 

[blackangst1]

Interesting...

Viral Loads Similar Between Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People | UC Davis

 

[K1052]

Interesting...

Viral Loads Similar Between Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People | UC Davis

We've known this and that viral load falls off much faster in the vaccinated for quite some time now.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Interesting...

Viral Loads Similar Between Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People | UC Davis

Interesting that you still have no clue about vital load and what it all means when it comes to the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.

 

[MrSquished]

We've known this and that viral load falls off much faster in the vaccinated for quite some time now.

Yep. About 50% faster. Which makes you contagious for nearly half the time.

 

[blackangst1]

Interesting that you still have no clue about vital load and what it all means when it comes to the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.

Don't i?

If you disagree with the science say so. Just posting an article.