Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Clean, Jan 28, 2020.
We absolutely don't know what this drug can do to people long term. We should force everyone on it. FDA delays Moderna vaccine for adolescents due to risk of rare heart condition
You and SH both brought up good points that I'll address separately. However, on this point, I don't think you're following my logic, and maybe I'm not explaining it well. I think Biden's EO is illegal on multiple fronts. Statutorily, I have a hard time believing that the Occupational Safety and Health Act actually gives the agency that authority, and even if it did, the Constitution doesn't give Congress the authority to delegate that authority. However, the reason I think Abbott's EO is useless is that it doesn't do anything to build that case, and if both EOs are allowed to stand, it would get trumped by federal supremacy.
Yeah. Abbott is ineffectual on all fronts.
The CDC has said 6k-7k of fully vaxxed individuals have died, nearly all over 65. That's public info. The CDC produced this dashboard last week.
The red is my circle...it greater than ZERO albeit topped out at 1.2 incidence per 100k on 8/8. The unvaccinated has been higher.
Here is the death by Age Group. 80+ is still at risk even fully vaccinated though at least 3x safer when vaxxed.
Interesting, as I read it the 18-29 unvaccinated are equal to or lesser than the deaths of fully vaccinated 18 - 29. Or I’m reading it wrong.
I do have a question that is probably easily answered but I’m still curious- why is there a bump among vaccinated deaths? Shouldn’t that be zero if the vaccine is effective? And why should it increase? The curve, albeit obviously lower in numbers, shows the same bump and at the same time interval. Isn’t that strange considering the purpose of getting the vaccine?
Here is the data (vacc and unvacc) for 18-29.
Are vaccines expected to eliminate all risk or reduce the risk? I can't find any vaccine that is 100% effective. Polio, Rubella, Measles, Mumps all carry a % effective rating in various sites. It's why in many cases they require booster shots years later. Expecting the Covid vaccine to be 100% effective and eliminate any chance that you get infected or worse yet have a breakthrough case is at odds with all vaccine research to date. The purpose of a vaccine is to give your body the antibodies to fight off the intruding virus. In other words, you've been infected and now question is how effective the body is in the ongoing battle. What we know now is that the antibodies may not last as long (see, Pfizer), didn't prompt the body to create enough originally (read J&J) or is the best option based on the data to date (Moderna).
Obviously they hope that nobody looks at the relatively small numbers being described by that chart. They want the chart to be some scary boogeyman instead of people realizing that it represents perhaps one out of a few hundred thousand people in that age bracket...a number that pales in comparison to things like overdose and suicide.
Which sort of comes back to the fundamental point made by many that the populous IS being used as a group of lab rats.
"Here, take this so we can gather data down the road." At least in the early days of the vaccine creation, they would PAY substantial sums for people to get infected with 'rona in order to play lab rat. Now the government wants people to give up their jobs if they won't play along with the lab rat game...
You guys both bring up good points here that are worth considering. When it comes to Biden's EOs, I think the Court is going to look at it on several levels. First, I think the vaccine mandate for federal employees is within Biden's power. He can make it a condition of federal employment. Could federal employees be able to compel narrow exemptions for medical reasons? Probably. For religious reasons? Perhaps. For ideological disagreement? No.
I think the reach for employers who do business with the federal government is almost as great, but I think it's less certain than for federal employees. The Court has generally said it's OK for the federal government to say, "if you take our money, you follow our rules," but it has imposed limitations on that. Will they here? I have no idea. My guess is that they won't, but it's not out of the question. I might bet a pinky toe on it but not a thumb and definitely not a testicle.
I think the OSHA-based EO on all large employers is very weak. For starters, is the Act really broad enough for this? I think that's very questionable, and even if it is, I think the constitutional reach of the federal government on this is even more questionable. Public health is generally within the authority of the states. Can the federal government regulate public health at the international borders? Of course. Can it regulate it across state lines? Yes, but for just a regular guy showing up to work, is there really a substantial interstate commerce implication? I think that's a hard argument to make.
I've heard many point out that the Court has upheld vaccine mandates on private citizens. That is true, but how many have been federal mandates? None, to my knowledge.
How far can states go? I think that's another matter entirely. I think they can require it for state employees and students (with certain limitations). Could they require it of everybody? If we're strictly following the Constitution, then yes. However, Garmel brings up an interesting point about Jacobsen v. Massachusetts (upheld a state vaccine mandate) being used to uphold forced sterilization in Buck v. Bell, a case that has been largely discredited. I understand his point, but the big factor that discredited Buck was the discrediting of the eugenics movement. And that happened mostly because the Nazis were big believers in eugenics and did some pretty sick things with it (stuff that had nothing to do with the Holocaust). Furthermore, they relied heavily on American research and procedures in their eugenics program, which made us shy away from it even more. Well, vaccines certainly have their concerns on a case by case basis, but they aren't like eugenics.
I figured this game out long time ago…government is putting all the risk on young folks to test the vaccine for the benefit of older Americans who a) need the vaccine to stay out of the hospital and b) have a lot less to lose if the vaccine is harmful in some way.
We are the lab rats without question.
So that is why the line does not show on the main chart, because the level is so low? Nah, I think they forgot it. Thanks for providing the additional chart SH.
Regarding Colin Powell, didn't he have some kind of blood cancer that makes vaccines in general less effective?
I can't believe it is even a consideration that any government can force a person to take a medical product. This country is so far gone. The Constitution has failed. Or maybe it was designed to slowly enslave us and therefore has been a horrible success.
The Constitution as written puts very few limitations on state power. Originally, the Bill of Rights didn't apply to them at all. They could prohibit speech, religions, have official religions, summarily jail people, etc. The expectation was that state laws and constitutions would limit themselves. However, if the people of a state choose a heavy-handed government, there's little to stop them.
Have you seen the required vaccines to be a public school student? Or I’m the military? Or work in health care?
You mean those vaccines which actually have a multi-year track record behind them and don't use people as the ongoing lab rat population? Those vaccines which actually WORK? Those vaccines?
WTF? "obviously they hope"? The data is standard PowerBI stuff. It's up to the data consumer come to a conclusion. If that consumer can't read the x/y axis of a chart that's on them.
Step back, the CDC didn't add any narrative. The data is pretty plain as can be. Painting the chart and data as something that it isn't is on the consumer of the reader and their analysis. The only thing better would be access to the datasheet behind it.
My comment applies to State Constitutions as well. The Texas Constitution doesn't give these kinds of powers to the governor.
So these vaccines don’t work?
Two problems though. First, recall that the state is a government of general powers as opposed to one of enumerated powers. That means it has all power not denied to it, and if you look at the Texas Constitution, it doesn't give the Governor or the Legislature a lot of specific substantive powers, but it doesn't deny many to them either.
So does the Legislature have the power to impose lockdowns? Yes, it does, and it delegates pretty broad authority to the Governor to fight public health crises. That's why it's pretty tough to really challenge lockdowns at the state level.
Second, we have an elected, partisan and political judiciary. The same people who elect the Governor also elect the Texas Supreme Court. That means that they are usually from the same party and will seldom clash when they are. Bottom line - The current court isn't going to rein in Abbott.
Not sure if he did, but I think the vaccine really aggravates the cancer and speeds up the process.
Ironically, cancer patients who got covid were said to have died of covid. Cancer patients who get the jab and then die, died of cancer.
Interesting here that his own family says he was vaccinated yet died of covid.
Yes, and the vaccines against multiple diseases that kids CAN get and would actually overwhelm the already, apparently, fragile and under managed. hospital ICU bed situation.
Some consumers cannot read the flyspeck because they look at the chart on a phone or smaller screen and lack reading glasses that sufficiently magnify. The whole point of them using rolly charts and a flat line for their comparisons IS to scare people.
They didn't NEED to add narrative although they SHOULD have. But their goal is to scare, not inform. And the CDC (and other agencies) HATE when people actually look at the data because then the curtain has been pulled back and the wizards are exposed.
It is essentially no different than the media lying about the hospital situation in Texas and refusing to acknowledge that we had fewer than 5K in hospital beds of ANY type yesterday for the sniffles and that, as of yesterday, there were more than 700 ICU beds for adults and 132 pediatric ICU beds available. The metrics show that Texas is doing just fine, but because the feds and the mainstream media HATE Abbott, they ignore the realities.
Just another reason for the informed people to be chanting #LetsGoBrandon at each opportunity.
You okies really are reading-challenged...
The Texas Constitution's Bill Of Rights denies politicians the ability to restrict assembly and private property rights. Abbott and the courts violated that right. And really no one said anything about it. I made a few comments on here and in other outlets, but no one really supported the statements.
IF, and this is a big if, a governor or a legislature wants to restrict assembly rights or access to businesses there is a comment that it is allowable through due process. There was no due process. There was authoritarian action that all Ds and most Rs supported. If there had been a discussion, a debate, then a vote either by the people or the representatives, then I would have no leg to stand on. But none of that happened. Ever. King Abbott took rights and gave them back, and the vast majority of Texans simply saluted. Eff that.
Americans have been programmed to accept and support fascism. It's here, now. A person either changes that stance or we will continue to suffer more and more fascistic incursions into personal and property rights. Rs are no good on this issue, so the solution isn't some Republican, "conservative" candidate, unless that person is specifically calling out this and related issues and demonstrates courage enough to keep speaking up as the political parties put pressure on him.
Either way the vaccine didn't "work" for Powell. It didn't work for my uncle. It doesn't work for many others. We don't know the real number because the NIH, CDC aren't interested in knowing.
To stop or reverse the processes you referred to (fascism, erosion of property and personal rights) is going to require massive civil disobedience, strikes/work stoppage such as what appeared to happen with SW Airlines recently, or worse. Any happy thoughts that the justice system, Congress, or some institutional pillar will come rescue society is delusional. Social contracts are being dismantled at an accelerating pace. Chaos, anger, disillusionment, and disgust is becoming the norm. Apathy and compliance won’t last mush longer I suspect.
I think the opposite is true. I see the vaccines being VERY successful at staving off hospitalization and death. Is that inaccurate?
Typical glass half full, Pollyanna viewpoint.