Posts by Nicole James

Noah Diaz said:So, we can pretty much forget about an audit then?

With all due respect, I'm signing off on this. 😁

Well, looks like you just got tossed out of the club.

As far as I'm concerned—and this is just my take—it isn't exactly some massive, earth-shattering offense; honestly, you could probably argue that it’s well past the point of being relevant now.

wearypilot34 said:Look, we are already eighteen months past the initial cases. I am not sure what additional "severe long-term consequences" for children we can realistically discuss at this stage. Any common virus can leave lasting effects... we don't go around vaccinating kids with mRNA shots against every single minor virus they might encounter.

The consensus among most virologists is that this is simply another highly adapted coronavirus. The mortality rate among the elderly is primarily driven by the fact that they haven't been exposed to similar viruses enough times to build up natural immunity.

Besides, the FDA set the efficacy threshold for approval at 50%. So, a 40% difference isn't actually that massive...

When people talk about vaccines, there's always this recurring argument that long-term side effects might not surface for many years, which is why I find this line of questioning a bit confusing.

50% efficacy against what, exactly?

mellownomad7 said:Looks like the connection finally held up, so let's give this another shot. 😁

Basically, we’re looking for justone legit reason to vaccinate minors.

Their bodies are still developing, and since this vaccine is too, we have no clue what the long-term fallout might be.

What they’re giving adults doesn't mean squat when it comes to kids.
If there’s actually something nasty in there, it’ll take seconds for them to crash. 😛

The folks over in Sweden are pretty upfront and precise with their data.

https://experience.arcgis.com/experi...6f9f87457ed9aa

I don't see a single valid reason to jab anyone under 19.

Plus, from what I can tell, the shot isn't even stopping transmission, infection, or people getting sick.

Supposedly it keeps you out of the hospital, but they aren't even seeing those severe cases anyway.

Give me a throwaway, not three, not seven, not fifteen—just one single reason.

later

It feels like they’ve managed to slash the odds by about 40 percent just by changing the wording to "not to protect"—it's a subtle shift, but it changes the whole equation. 😢
There are several potential outcomes to consider here.

Their bodies are still developing—it’s a delicate stage of growth—and honestly, we just don't know yet if there will be any lasting, long-term consequences from this viral infection.

That little comment you made is basically a textbook example of low-effort trolling—just pure shitposting. You aren't actually making any concrete points here; you're just trying to stir the pot.

You’ve got about the same amount of cards from me—but honestly, you caught me red-handed 🙄

We updated the rules thread, and Ada ended up posting a warning on every single individual topic. Man, I really feel for you—it sucks that one little Cardboard slip-up led to a ban—but looking back at your post, it was definitely in direct violation of the guidelines

If you're looking for deep dives into conspiracy theories or alternative viewpoints regarding how the mainstream media targets and persecutes you, you can find all that information there.

You received a warning because making tasteless comparisons to Nazi atrocities is strictly against the rules.

The thread was deleted because this wasn't framed as an actual discussion topic—it was more of a personal rant from you—and besides, we already have a dedicated thread covering the legal aspects of the pandemic.

The President was banned because he racked up enough points. His final straw was posting a link to some news article about a woman who supposedly suffered vaccine side effects—which is a topic that should really be reserved for personal anecdotes alone.

Matthew Jackson2 said:https://www.bbc.com/news/health-57766717

Yeah, the actual danger the disease poses to kids is relatively low—this article mentions two in a million, though I’ve seen slightly higher figures elsewhere, but it doesn't really change the point. That risk is essentially comparable to the risks associated with vaccination. This is why, from what I've observed, routine vaccination isn't being pushed for children as a blanket rule, but rather based on an individual risk assessment.

But of course, the moment anyone mentions even a tiny incidence of vaccine side effects, someone is always quick to jump in claiming the vaccine wasn't tested enough—questioning the long-term implications or any potential side effects we haven't discovered yet—while they completely gloss over the long-term and currently unknown consequences of the virus itself...

bluerider63 said:Exposing your own kid to something that sketchy and undefined—even to those total CDC zealots—just because you're traveling? Honestly, I don't even know how to respond without losing my cool and being rude

Are you talking about something unknown and uncertain, like a new virus?

Can't help yourself, can you?

bluerider63 said:The same logic should probably apply to those rushed COVID shots that were fast-tracked through under conditions we've never seen before. I mean, if you personally want to roll the dice with your own kid, fine, but don't act like that's some universal logical standard for every other child out there.

And let's not forget the context—we are dealing with a pandemic involving a novel virus. We already know it can cause severe clinical issues in adults, and it can trigger multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children. Honestly, we still don't have a clear picture of how all of this might negatively impact their long-term health.

swiftotter46 said:Why was my post deleted—the one where I was just sharing news about how:

Why isn't there any room for open discussion regarding global events on this COVID-19 vaccine thread??? 😕

Why is there such persistent censorship and why are posts being wiped out??? 😕

Look, you can't just copy and paste a massive image of an entire article that takes up half the forum page.

Scott Hall5 said:Where on earth are you getting these loaded statements? Just more pure fiction...

As of today, 18.7 million people in Germany have been vaccinated! And we're talking about a country with an incredibly high-standard healthcare system. Where else are you going to find another 1.98 billion vaccinated people?!
Just wishful thinking at this point....

China has administered 845 million doses.
The USA has hit 300 million.
India has reached 245 million.
Brazil stands at 75 million.

I’m fairly certain that none of you would actually enjoy having some anonymous internet troll giggling while sending death threats your way—so, frankly, I’m a bit surprised it's taking this long for everyone to grasp why I had to issue such a heavy-handed penalty for that specific post.

As far as I’m concerned, the user in question is more than welcome to return to the forum once they've served a one-week cooling-off period. After that, the ball is entirely in their court.

In response to that comment from some idiot making death threats against people, the reply was

It was about damn time we started the hunting season for those so-called "COVID experts"—the mouthpieces for this whole COVID dictatorship and cult.
Happy hunting, Corporal!

Which is what you're responding to.

He’s a hero, not a criminal...

Honestly, I don't find this funny at all. I'll leave it to the admins to make a judgment call here.

Nathan White9 said:Hey,
I have a question. Can an employer actually force me into quarantine? Here’s the deal: a coworker I was in contact with—we were wearing masks and stayed more than six feet apart—just tested positive. She isn't even showing any symptoms. Now, management is calling me up, telling me I need to go into isolation and contact my doctor to get put on medical leave. The weird part is they only called me and one other girl. Neither of us has symptoms. If we're being honest, the whole shift of about 20 people should probably be dealing with this. Plus, the health department didn't even call her, so she wasn't even added to the official contact tracing list. Does an employer really have the right to play judge and jury regarding isolation? It feels like they're just trying to cut costs. We all know Medicare covers 100% of the pay during isolation, so it’s a massive incentive for them to keep people off the payroll.

An employer can't simply mandate your isolation. However, if you have reason to believe you've been exposed to someone who tested positive, it is your responsibility to contact your doctor and follow their specific instructions.

The Coronavirus subforum is a serious space for discussion—there’s absolutely no room here for anyone peddling "progressive propaganda" or political distractions"