Political Debate Thread

I've heard conversation coming out of animal pens that is more intelligent than what is going on in here.
m121c
Posts: 3019
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 5:36 am
Location: Iowa

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by m121c »

Found this little nugget on the OSHA Faq page:
Are adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine recordable on the OSHA recordkeeping log?

DOL and OSHA, as well as other federal agencies, are working diligently to encourage COVID-19 vaccinations. OSHA does not wish to have any appearance of discouraging workers from receiving COVID-19 vaccination, and also does not wish to disincentivize employers' vaccination efforts. As a result, OSHA will not enforce 29 CFR 1904's recording requirements to require any employers to record worker side effects from COVID-19 vaccination at least through May 2022. We will reevaluate the agency’s position at that time to determine the best course of action moving forward.
So convincing people to take a “safe” and “effective” vaccine means ignoring adverse reaction reports and blinding the public from said information? Why on earth would that be? It couldn’t be because of how the VARRS data look is it?
InsaneFMX
Posts: 821
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:25 pm
Team: Flipin 150ft triples
Location: Canada

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by InsaneFMX »

m121c wrote: Fri Nov 12, 2021 1:07 pm It couldn’t be because of how the VARRS data look is it?
What are you on about?

If you doubt everything beyond a point of reason, you allow yourself to construct your own world view. That is insanity.
Image
baker
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 1:43 pm
Team: BakerMX.com

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by baker »

InsaneFMX wrote: Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:11 pm
m121c wrote: Fri Nov 12, 2021 1:07 pm It couldn’t be because of how the VARRS data look is it?
What are you on about?

If you doubt everything beyond a point of reason, you allow yourself to construct your own world view. That is insanity.
But if you do some flips and seat grabs it’s FMX 😁
Image
nathanjames wrote: Fri Jul 23, 2021 2:32 pm Classic Miami...
jlv
Site Admin
Posts: 14283
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:39 am
Team: No Frills Racing
Contact:

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by jlv »

m121c wrote: Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:17 am Somethings are worth obsessing over. Now take you scary death rate and apply it to healthy 18-29 year olds who have a average BMI. I know you know there is a difference; you are a smart guy.
Looks like it's about a 1 in 10,000 death rate for 20-30 year olds.
m121c wrote: Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:17 am I really don’t understand why this gets so many people bunged up. You did your risk assessment, and I did mine. You clearly see it different than I do, and thats fine! Im not saying you shouldn’t have gotten the vaccine. I must say I didn’t really picture you putting big pharma on the poster for credibility and safety.
You're putting forth arguments worthy of RFK Jr, Jenny McCarthy and Rosie O'Donnell and acting surprised when people use facts and logic to refute you.

I don't have a problem with "big pharma". That sounds like something a liberal would say.
Josh Vanderhoof
Sole Proprietor
jlv@mxsimulator.com
If you email, put "MX Simulator" in the subject to make sure it gets through my spam filter.
DBRider251
Posts: 1703
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:38 pm
Team: LCQ Studios

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by DBRider251 »

I can't really wrap my head around mandating something in a dynamic situation. It's still at a 1.6 mortality rate in the US. I think that's well within the realm of people being able to assess the risks for themselves and make a decision on their own. It's also weird to me to make someone do something they don't want to.
TeamHavocRacing wrote:it's all the liberals fault
m121c
Posts: 3019
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 5:36 am
Location: Iowa

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by m121c »

jlv wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 12:09 am [quote=m121c post_id=897076 time=<a href="tel:1636690641">1636690641</a> user_id=4369]
Somethings are worth obsessing over. Now take you scary death rate and apply it to healthy 18-29 year olds who have a average BMI. I know you know there is a difference; you are a smart guy.
Looks like it's about a 1 in 10,000 death rate for 20-30 year olds.

[quote=m121c post_id=897076 time=<a href="tel:1636690641">1636690641</a> user_id=4369]
I really don’t understand why this gets so many people bunged up. You did your risk assessment, and I did mine. You clearly see it different than I do, and thats fine! Im not saying you shouldn’t have gotten the vaccine. I must say I didn’t really picture you putting big pharma on the poster for credibility and safety.
[/quote]
You're putting forth arguments worthy of RFK Jr, Jenny McCarthy and Rosie O'Donnell and acting surprised when people use facts and logic to refute you.

I don't have a problem with "big pharma". That sounds like something a liberal would say.
[/quote]

Please enlighten me how my argument is anywhere close to some loon equating autism to vaccines. What a toxic thing to say.

Again, you need to account for comorbidity, obesity, poor health, and prexisting conditions. And you still have yet to comment on the deferral of long term studies. Why is that not okay to wait for? You associate no risk to that? If you associate little to no risk to unknown variables, I would not want you doing a risk assessment for an engineering project.

Seems to me some need to project their anxieties by forcing others to join them in their experiment. I heard if you say “safe and effective” 3 times while clicking your heels together lord Fauci appears with a 5th booster shot :D
InsaneFMX wrote: Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:11 pm [quote=m121c post_id=897083 time=<a href="tel:1636722463">1636722463</a> user_id=4369]
It couldn’t be because of how the VARRS data look is it?
What are you on about?

If you doubt everything beyond a point of reason, you allow yourself to construct your own world view. That is insanity.
[/quote]

Everyone has their own world view Dom. The key is to be able to extract yourself from yours and see someone elses from the lense in which they see it. Something that many can’t or are unwilling to do.
DBRider251
Posts: 1703
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:38 pm
Team: LCQ Studios

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by DBRider251 »

First off, Mason, buddy, there’s a preview button on here for God’s sake, take advantage of it hahaha.
m121c wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:33 am Again, you need to account for comorbidity, obesity, poor health, and prexisting conditions. And you still have yet to comment on the deferral of long term studies. Why is that not okay to wait for? You associate no risk to that? If you associate little to no risk to unknown variables, I would not want you doing a risk assessment for an engineering project.
No one cares about any of the factors that cause COVID to be worse in some people. Most aren’t going to let that matter because they don’t want to acknowledge that being healthier increases your chances of survival tremendously.

The lack of long term studies are my main issue with it. I really don’t give a shit if nothing is happening to people right now. I don’t want to be one of the people calling a 1-800 number because “if you or a loved one experienced complications from a COVID-19 vaccine, you may be entitled to financial compensation” later on. I want to know what the hell is going to happen to me when I take it, and what happens to me 3-5 years later. Let me live my life how I want to live it and quit shoving that shit down my throat.
TeamHavocRacing wrote:it's all the liberals fault
jlv
Site Admin
Posts: 14283
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:39 am
Team: No Frills Racing
Contact:

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by jlv »

m121c wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:33 am Please enlighten me how my argument is anywhere close to some loon equating autism to vaccines. What a toxic thing to say.
How are their arguments any less valid than yours? I'm not trying to insult you. I know you were at one time a conservative. Now you're complaining about "big pharma" like some kind of liberal loon. I just want you to come back to the conservative side.

If the covid vaccine has long term side effects, it would be the first time that has ever happened in any vaccine.

"Going back at least as far as the polio vaccine, which was widely released to the public in the 1960s, we’ve never seen a vaccination with long-term side effects, meaning side effects that occur several months or years after injection."
DBRider251 wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 4:58 am The lack of long term studies are my main issue with it. I really don’t give a shit if nothing is happening to people right now. I don’t want to be one of the people calling a 1-800 number because “if you or a loved one experienced complications from a COVID-19 vaccine, you may be entitled to financial compensation” later on. I want to know what the hell is going to happen to me when I take it, and what happens to me 3-5 years later. Let me live my life how I want to live it and quit shoving that shit down my throat.
Since you've already been infected you have the same antibodies the vaccine would have made. So you're in for at least the same side effects in any case. You're kind of like someone with one vaccine shot.

Of course, since the vaccine is just the spike protein and the actual virus has lots of other proteins, the actual virus way more likely to have other immune response related side effects.
Josh Vanderhoof
Sole Proprietor
jlv@mxsimulator.com
If you email, put "MX Simulator" in the subject to make sure it gets through my spam filter.
DBRider251
Posts: 1703
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:38 pm
Team: LCQ Studios

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by DBRider251 »

jlv wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 2:16 am If the covid vaccine has long term side effects, it would be the first time that has ever happened in any vaccine.
Agreed and understood, but these are the first mRNA vaccines to ever hit the public. Honestly, their effectiveness wearing off is the best thing it has going for it. If it isn’t even protecting you from COVID months down the road, it hopefully isn’t causing any other problems after it loses its strength against the main purpose it was created.

Like I’ve said before, I’m not against taking the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines after they’ve been through their complete clinical trials and are fully documented.
jlv wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 2:16 am Since you've already been infected you have the same antibodies the vaccine would have made. So you're in for at least the same side effects in any case. You're kind of like someone with one vaccine shot.

Of course, since the vaccine is just the spike protein and the actual virus has lots of other proteins, the actual virus way more likely to have other immune response related side effects.
The way I see it is, I’ve already gained natural immunity to it, why would I need a double dose of a vaccine for something I have developed the antibodies for? A study has shown that natural immunity is better than vaccinated immunity.
This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.
I’m not ignoring the last sentence either. Previous infection plus a single dose gains additional protection from the delta variant. I still would rather have the studies completed before I put even a single dose in my body.
TeamHavocRacing wrote:it's all the liberals fault
m121c
Posts: 3019
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 5:36 am
Location: Iowa

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by m121c »

jlv wrote: How are their arguments any less valid than yours? I'm not trying to insult you.
Im not saying that vaccines are bad? I never said you shouldn't take the vaccine, or any vaccine for that matter. Im not arguing that they are some how dangerous/risky at this very moment, what I am saying is Im uncomfortable with the "throw stuff at things until it sticks" approach. I don't want to take part in an experiment because Im being told that I live in a risk category that I factually do not. I don't think it is unreasonable to wait as long as I take precautions to protect myself and others.
jlv wrote: I know you were at one time a conservative. Now you're complaining about "big pharma" like some kind of liberal loon. I just want you to come back to the conservative side.
I wasn't aware there a conservative playbook that tells me what I should and should not believe in. That sounds more of a democrat thing to me. I guess Im uncomfortable with the pharmaceutical companies posting record breaking earnings due to a drug that they solely sold to the government, where the government told them they could skip all the necessary studies for, and they were also given immunity over. Meanwhile, the federal government (NOT state) are abusing their constitutional power to do a "one size fits all" vaccine mandate for that very drug. In addition, they also don't want to here or record of any adverse events that stem from that.

Oh and you have Pfizer ads sponsoring the nightly corporate news who peddles their cool aid.

Call me a liberal I suppose, but that seems wrong to me. I strongly believe this country has a wrong obsession in easy over over hard. That is not to say medicines/vaccinations are not necessary or should not be encourage, but I feel there is jump to artificial means for "health reasons", when there is a general overlook on a persons natural health. This country is projected for a 65% obesity rate by 2025. Something tells me this would all be different if Biden was telling OSHA that people need to be a certain body fat % by a certain deadline. But we know not only do the obese suffer worse from the virus, they carry a higher viral load, and often a more concentrated strength.

Yet people who have abused their bodies for years want to tell me how I should take care of mine.
jlv wrote: If the covid vaccine has long term side effects, it would be the first time that has ever happened in any vaccine.

"Going back at least as far as the polio vaccine, which was widely released to the public in the 1960s, we’ve never seen a vaccination with long-term side effects, meaning side effects that occur several months or years after injection."
You mean on a larger scale correct? I wouldn't be so sure with that statement, the medical community isn't even sure of that: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25057632/. You might enjoy this read, it's about the polio vaccine.

It's difficult to talk adverse effects when it comes to vaccines. Even the CDC has acknowledge the need for a better more robust system. VAERS is not the that great when they estimate it only accounts for 1% of actual events. Btw are you interested in what that data even looks like?

https://openvaers.com/
jlv wrote: Since you've already been infected you have the same antibodies the vaccine would have made. So you're in for at least the same side effects in any case. You're kind of like someone with one vaccine shot.
This is just not true. Studies are showing the memory B cells from natural infection are far superior then the memory B cells from vaccination. I want to say I read a study that showed that vaccination actually hurt the bodies ability to create long-term memory b cells but I would assume the line of logic there is because you are vaccinated and less likely to have a natural infection.
DBRider251 wrote:I’m not against taking the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines
Germany just pulled Moderna for ages under 30 sighting worries about cardiac effects.
TeamHavocRacing
Posts: 8005
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:52 am
Team: Havoc Racing
Contact:

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by TeamHavocRacing »

Poor JLV. You gotta argue with both sides 🤣.
jlv wrote:If it weren't for Havoc I'd have been arguing with the 12 year olds by myself.
jlv
Site Admin
Posts: 14283
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:39 am
Team: No Frills Racing
Contact:

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by jlv »

DBRider251 wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 2:29 pm Agreed and understood, but these are the first mRNA vaccines to ever hit the public. Honestly, their effectiveness wearing off is the best thing it has going for it. If it isn’t even protecting you from COVID months down the road, it hopefully isn’t causing any other problems after it loses its strength against the main purpose it was created.

Like I’ve said before, I’m not against taking the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines after they’ve been through their complete clinical trials and are fully documented.
I was actually glad to get an mRNA vaccine because I figured it was less likely to have side effects. The other vaccines use a virus to do their work. mRNA vaccines just deliver the protein you're protecting against. (I know an adenovirus isn't going to give you covid 19 but I just like how clean the mRNA way is.)

There's a pretty awesome animation on how mRNA vaccines work here.
DBRider251 wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 2:29 pm The way I see it is, I’ve already gained natural immunity to it, why would I need a double dose of a vaccine for something I have developed the antibodies for? A study has shown that natural immunity is better than vaccinated immunity.
This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.
I’m not ignoring the last sentence either. Previous infection plus a single dose gains additional protection from the delta variant. I still would rather have the studies completed before I put even a single dose in my body.
The reason to get vaccinated if you were infected is because the immunity fades. The same applies to the vaccine. That's why they want boosters six months later now. The ideal spacing for the booster would have been around six months but they're given a month apart because they want to build immunity quickly. From what I've read, if you were infected and then six months after infection you got an mRNA shot you'll have similar immunity to someone with 3 shots.
m121c wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 3:15 pm
jlv wrote: How are their arguments any less valid than yours? I'm not trying to insult you.
Im not saying that vaccines are bad? I never said you shouldn't take the vaccine, or any vaccine for that matter. Im not arguing that they are some how dangerous/risky at this very moment, what I am saying is Im uncomfortable with the "throw stuff at things until it sticks" approach. I don't want to take part in an experiment because Im being told that I live in a risk category that I factually do not. I don't think it is unreasonable to wait as long as I take precautions to protect myself and others.
So you're just saying you have fear, uncertainty and doubt about the vaccine despite testing that shows side effects are not life threatening and only happen at less than 10 per million rates, and you're happy to be a disease vector in the meantime? How is that so different from RFK? These aren't new arguments. It's just RFK Jr and his ilk in their new venue - Fox News. I liked it better when they were just a liberal embarrassment.
m121c wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 3:15 pm You mean on a larger scale correct? I wouldn't be so sure with that statement, the medical community isn't even sure of that: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25057632/. You might enjoy this read, it's about the polio vaccine.
This is just silly. You're linking an article about a contaminated vaccine.
m121c wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 3:15 pm
jlv wrote: Since you've already been infected you have the same antibodies the vaccine would have made. So you're in for at least the same side effects in any case. You're kind of like someone with one vaccine shot.
This is just not true. Studies are showing the memory B cells from natural infection are far superior then the memory B cells from vaccination. I want to say I read a study that showed that vaccination actually hurt the bodies ability to create long-term memory b cells but I would assume the line of logic there is because you are vaccinated and less likely to have a natural infection.
This was in the context of side effects, not efficacy against the virus. If you were infected you'll have all the side effects of being vaccinated and then some.

As far as efficacy against further infection, I've seen stuff that goes both ways but it's definitely believable to me that infection is more effective than being vaccinated. It's just that getting infected is very likely to damage your brain, whereas with the vaccine you're looking at a 1 in 100000 chance of having a side effect and the side effect isn't even that dangerous. This shouldn't be a hard choice.
TeamHavocRacing wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 3:46 pm Poor JLV. You gotta argue with both sides 🤣.
It's hard being the only guy who's always right!
Josh Vanderhoof
Sole Proprietor
jlv@mxsimulator.com
If you email, put "MX Simulator" in the subject to make sure it gets through my spam filter.
m121c
Posts: 3019
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 5:36 am
Location: Iowa

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by m121c »

jlv wrote: Mon Nov 15, 2021 1:34 am So you're just saying you have fear, uncertainty and doubt about the vaccine despite testing that shows side effects are not life threatening and only happen at less than 10 per million rates, and you're happy to be a disease vector in the meantime?
Josh, I want to respectfully say I think you are using data incorrectly. If the whole basis of your argument is on the numbers, you should easily understand why I have uncertainty about all of it.

I will stand by idea that this vaccine is unprecedented, and in no way like any other in history. All of which I have had.

Regardless, just because YOU associate a higher risk to Covid, doesn’t mean I do, and I don’t think the numbers call for a one size fits all mandate through federal coercion.
jlv wrote: Mon Nov 15, 2021 1:34 am This is just silly. You're linking an article about a contaminated vaccine.
Im betting the people who took that vaccine over that several year period don’t find it to be silly. I also would think they had no idea they were taking a contaminated vaccine, and Im sure no else did either.

Wonder if they too had a OSHA like agency deciding to not record/report adverse effects? Maybe they had corporate news that was being sponsored by drug companies insert their bias? Wonder if they had social media giants censor any opinion (even medically educated research) that went against the vaccine? Wonder if they had a Fauci get caught lying multiple times? Do you think their VAERS system saw more adverse event reports than the last 30 years combined? Do you think they had an increase of high performing athletes drop to their knees from unexplainable sudden cardiac arrest? Wonder if they had undercover journalists/whistleblowers show the reluctance of medical professionals to report Covid vaccine effects? Company insiders showing how they dipped their manufacturing processes when the FDA came through? Or how they are just now studying the cardiac effects their new mRNA vaccines have?

There is a constructed culture around this Pandemic, and now this vaccine, that I find to be dangerous. You can’t in one hand believe they are diligently tracking vaccine effects, while in the other hand all these other things are happening. Thats foolish.

If the vaccine is the solution, when do we call an end? Whats our priorities? Our goals? Transmission levels? Death decreases? Eradication? Maybe if there was some goal posts locked in, I can see more people doing a risk/reward analysis.
jlv wrote: As far as efficacy against further infection, I've seen stuff that goes both ways but it's definitely believable to me that infection is more effective than being vaccinated. It's just that getting infected is very likely to damage your brain, whereas with the vaccine you're looking at a 1 in 100000 chance of having a side effect and the side effect isn't even that dangerous. This shouldn't be a hard choice.
Likely to damage the brain of whom? Everyone? To what extent? What is “likely”? You act as if healthy people haven’t gone in to get their vaccine and died. In any other circumstance we would think this is odd and unacceptable if we were talking about federally mandating it as a blanket solution.
TeamHavocRacing
Posts: 8005
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:52 am
Team: Havoc Racing
Contact:

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by TeamHavocRacing »

jlv wrote: Mon Nov 15, 2021 1:34 am...with the vaccine you're looking at a 1 in 100000 chance of having a side effect and the side effect isn't even that dangerous. This shouldn't be a hard choice.
This the face palm moment every time. The thing is that at ANY cost these people will do ANYTHING to avoid sounding like they're agreeing with the left. Even if it means playing Russian roulette with you and your family and friends and taking horse de-wormer.
jlv wrote:If it weren't for Havoc I'd have been arguing with the 12 year olds by myself.
m121c
Posts: 3019
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 5:36 am
Location: Iowa

Re: Political Debate Thread

Post by m121c »

TeamHavocRacing wrote: Mon Nov 15, 2021 7:40 pm horse de-wormer.
You are a clown.
Post Reply