Michigan lifted Mask Mandate for Vaccinated People. Maskers are having an absolute fit.
The same groups that preached “Trust the Science and Data” are now denying the science and data. Everyone that says I should still be wearing a mask I troll them and ask them if their upset their candidate lost the presidential election. Since they’re obviously Trump supporters and Anti-Vaxxers and Anti-Science. The reactions are priceless.
Anybody have any good stories?
(Disclaimer: I’m a libertarian and I’m here. So you know how I actually feel about all this nonsense. I get to figuratively club them over the head with their own hypocritical rhetoric so you bet I’m gonna do it.)
Anybody have any good stories?
(Disclaimer: I’m a libertarian and I’m here. So you know how I actually feel about all this nonsense. I get to figuratively club them over the head with their own hypocritical rhetoric so you bet I’m gonna do it.)
Generally the Trump supporters were more inclined to be anti-mask, or at least anti-mask regulation.
There are anti-vax people on all sides of the spectrum -- they are pretty strongly represented here.
No insult intended for Trump supporters. And after all the Virtue Signaling Abuse that’s been heaped on Trump supporters for the last year I am thrilled to return the favor and insult these hypocrites. As for the vaccines...that’s a personal choice. Masking is a personal choice. Will I unleash on anyone that tries to coerce through social shaming or other means. ABSOLUTELY.
AS PER THE CDC:
IF YOU ARE VACCINATED OR HAVE ANTIBODIES TO COVID 19
MASKS ARE OPTIONAL
This is the sign I have on my office front door. Bitchmer wants us to be the vaccine / mask police which I refuse to do. But then I grew up in the sixties so I have always had anti authority tendencies.
Good that you're enjoying trolling people and getting priceless reactions on the internet, I guess.
Let me try to be helpful. Given my past, where I've worked, and who I've worked with I can say with complete conviction that the problems arise when government thinks it's going to help your health AND WHENEVER medicine is given via a government mandate. ALWAYS.
This past winter my wife staggered her staff to have only one person in the office at any one time, with everyone working from home. We had propane heaters in the dead of winter to do signings in the garage with the door open.
I got my first Pfizer shot in Feb. I started working more in the lab; I hate working from home. My older kid stepped up; we sent our 10-y/o kid to a camp that practices reasonable precautions. Staggering work schedules is the pits. My 12 y/o will get his rona shot in the next few weeks. This crap is over! Tonight my wife took our 10-y/o to one of those jump playlands for the first time since the winter of 2019-2020.
I'm happy to wear a mask if someone around me has a concern, but it's time for normal life to return. I want tech lunches and happy hours with no mask requirement. I want the library open. I don't remember what's it's like to go to UU services (church for atheists with kids :) ), but I don't see why we're not open.
I don't get this mask thing. I don't want to club them over the head. I want to know why on earth we can't accept this risk as we accept car accidents, as we accept the long-term costs from cars in the form of global warming.
My colleagues are reasonable, working together in the lab, happily wearing masks if there's a reason, but mostly taking care of business. It feels like the rest of the world, though, is like the engineers afraid to be the one to sign off on a big decision.
Today I've been listening to some of the drivel on NPR about how everyone is so scared because the rules are relaxed. It just makes me shake my head. edited for clarity as to whom I was addressing.
My theory, which is really just a guess, is this is an indirect result of good portable video devices. Parents have the option of giving them to kids, and it's hard not to if the parents themselves occasionally watch video on the phone. That results in less motivation for kids to go out into the kid world of playing in the neighborhood. That results in well-meaning parents always being on hand to resolve any difficulties, difficulties that the children would have had to muddle through on their own a generation ago. This means the kids don't learn "to adult" until their 20s. They can stay on their parents' insurance until 26 now. There's no stigma about someone in his early 20s saying he needs his mom to review documents before signing them. There's no sigma about a 13 year old whose mom walks him to school. Technology makes it easier for us to hear about the rare shooting or kidnapping, while it simultaneously allows us to keep the kids inside to protect them from these extremely rare perils.
The result, according this theory, is people of an age where mobile video was available in early childhood are afraid of everything. They never had the experience of learning to solve problems on their own. This also makes them more open to arguments for socialism and central management of people's lives. It makes them honestly terrified of taking off a mask, even though the level of risk is basically zero.
I keep saying "according to this theory" because I note it sounds like "kids these days have no grit... why, when I was their age..." When I was young, I said I would never say that. So this could be all wrong. But if I'm right, they're truly scared, and this is a slow-moving crisis. We need to get the kids taking risks, making their own decisions, talking to strangers, with no parents nearby.
What your immune system decided was the important characteristic is anyone's guess. You might be more susceptible to a variant than someone who was vaccinated.
Given who created the virus and the "vaccines" - as well as the actual hospitalization rate for COVID - I'll pass on the "vaccine." Two of my wife's friends died after getting the stab. Her sister nearly died as well. That's three more people than I know died from the actual disease.
4 coworkers out of the 10 here came down with covid a few weeks ago, but nearly asymptomatic except for smell and taste deficiencies. No other symptoms. The other 6 didnt come down with anything at all, and only one of the other 6 was vaccinated. I would say that somhow the virus is becoming weaker, or its only able to infect the remaining population who happen to have strong immune systems.
Point is that if you accept the premise of a two-poke process, most of the US is only at 30% right now. (I don't find it persuasive which is why I use the higher number representing a single poke.) The original estimate for herd immunity was 60% (which they altered to 90% for purely political reasons). If you include the 40%, it explains and tracks nicely with the declining trends we've been seeing for nearly five months.
"I would say that somehow the virus is becoming weaker, or its only able to infect the remaining population who happen to have strong immune systems."
My son got COVID just before coming home from college for Thanksgiving break. We didn't know until he got tested the Friday afterwards. Yet despite two family Thanksgiving feasts (combined over 60 people) and 13 people living in the same home as my infected son during that period, not a single other person got it. And that was despite half a dozen (including my then-future son-in-law and his father) getting tested the next week after we informed them. And yes, my 19-yr-old son was symptomatic, registering a fever of 103 for two days.
(Just to be absurd, my wife actually sucked on the thermometer she had just used to take his temperature in hopes of contracting the illness.)
Purely anecdotal, of course, but does cause me to seriously question the numbers from the CDC...
Also, how many of those survivors have not gotten the disease because of the vaccine. I understand that those who died were close to you. And it IS your choice.
I feel stupid wearing masks now, and am happy the leftist democratic governor in Nevada finally took away the statewide mask mandate. Some very leftist businesses still require the mask, but I will just NOT frequent them until they come to their senses.
Agreed. Most stores in my town saw huge business booms the day after the State finally lifted the mask mandate. Most business owners hadn't been pushing the masks for weeks prior because they recognized that they were just antagonizing a huge part of their customer base. So they posted their signs but were pretty lax on enforcement. There are still a few die-hards but they have their own rabid clientele and might as well post a "Zombies Welcome" sign on their doors.
Example: A family I'm good friends live down the street. COVID knocked out their entire family (parents with several grown kids living with them) for a week. Everyone survived with no lasting consequences but were really sick at the time. Contrast with a brother-in-law who just got his second shot and was - ironically - crowing about how the second dose knocked him on his can and put him out of work for a week. Now my sister (his wife) had almost no symptoms from the shots, but that seems to be pretty par-for-the-course regarding the pathogen as well - with most people getting it and never even noticing.
If I could give this last year a title from a Shakespearean play, it would be "Much Ado About Nothing."
If the virus mutates, and they do all the time, the protein your system picked might be one that changes and it doesn't do a good job of recognizing the threat.
The vaccine picked the protein for the "spike" which is the most dangerous part so as long as it's still there you will recognize it. And if it mutates away the virus will be less dangerous.
1) That the body's own immune system will create a response to the origianal pathogen inferior to that of an artificial vaccine
2) That the body's natural immune response will be less effective against mutations than an articially-induced response
and most dangerously
3) That an artificially-induced response will not have serious complications not present in a naturally-occurring immunity.
Neither 1) nor 2) above has been shown to be accurate. With respect to 3), the evidence of serious side-effects (with over 600,000 recorded to date) such as blood clots and the potential for placental separation are known concerns. Blood clots have been a serious concern in the UK and were what killed my wife's friend - only 40 years old - when one descended into her lungs. Placental separation causes miscarriage and renders the woman infertile.
I don't believe science's understanding of genomic biology is nearly as perfect as is necessary to claim superiority to that of nature itself.
I'm not sure if I would characterize an artificially induced response as more or less effective. I'm just talking about the target.
And, just to be clear, I am saying why one might want to get a vaccination after having the disease. One might also chose to forgo the theoretical advantage to avoid the risk of a vaccine. And any thing that triggers an immune reaction has a small risk of it getting out of control.
Natural Covid has a lot of evidence for serious side effects too, so saying I'll just get the disease and build immunity the natural way doesn't mean you are free from side effects.
I never claimed that the pathogen can not generate serious side effects on its own. The evidence states otherwise. The question is one of risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis. I simply question the premises you present as being fundamentally flawed and as such leading to a flawed conclusion.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/K1RWgx...
This was presented on another thread here in the Gulch. It is an interview with the world's foremost vaccine engineer. Eye-opening to be sure.
I do think that conscious design is, at least theoretically, preferable to random reactions.
I got the vaccine. Would I have done so if I had gotten Covid before hand? I don't know, I guess it would have been based on how my system reacted to getting it in the first place. I have a number of the risk factors and specifically am taking ACE2 inhibitors which may provide additional binding points for the virus spike (or might block some binding points -- studies are underway).
I understand that. The premise, however, is that human medicine can produce a more effective response than the natural body. That is prima faciae a highly questionable premise. Again, see the video I posted above.
"I do think that conscious design is, at least theoretically, preferable to random reactions."
Ah, so you see a natural response as "random" and therefore less effective. A curious premise and hardly supported by anything scientific, but each is entitled to draw their own conclusions.
Your decision to get the vaccine was your choice and - based on your divulged medical conditions - not without merit. I'm on the other end where I have none of the vulnerabilities to the virus that make a vaccine more attractive. When coupled with the personal experiences of complications as a direct result of the "vaccine" - including two deaths - I hope you can appreciate that my risk-reward equation swings decidedly in the opposite direction.
I think there is an advantage, how much of an advantage is clearly subject to question.
Indeed. If you come across any information to support your theory, please share it.