Posts by Samuel Turner2

lonemaker14 said:You aren't going to be forced.

If things ever get too heavy, you could always just move to Armenia or something where those rules don't apply.

Are you really ready to upend your whole life over an opinion?

I did it because we started running into travel restrictions and issues moving around.

And hey, who knows if they'll actually make vaccination mandatory or not—we'll see how that plays out.
Honestly, I'd go through way more hell than just moving to Armenia if it meant doing right by my kid. What about you?

From what I'm reading in your comments, it seems like it was easier for you to just vaccinate your child than it would be to give up your comforts, like traveling or whatever. Am I reading you wrong here? 🤔

lonemaker14 said:Look, Samuel Turner2, you're not wrong.
I haven't been keeping up with your usual rants, but tell me—do you even have kids?

I actually have a kid right around the same age as yours...
And honestly, I’m not planning on getting them vaccinated unless it becomes absolutely mandatory.

So, what were the actual, real-world reasons you went through with it?

lonemaker14 said:Took my 15-year-old over to San Francisco yesterday to get him his Pfizer shot. I won't pretend to be jumping for joy about it—the benefits feel a bit murky, I guess. But honestly, our quality of life is sliding downhill fast, and he won't stay fifteen forever.

Travel, sports games, concerts.

Plus, I figure it’s one way to help out the community. My wife isn't on board, though. We had ourselves a bit of an argument.

Maybe she's got a point. 🙂

You basically just handed your kid a 10x increase in his chances of getting myocarditis.
Way to go, Dad!

Megan Green72 said:I hope you keep all your illnesses trapped inside your own four walls so you don't end up running to the ER the second something actually goes wrong.

So, you're just gonna dodge the whole thing regarding the CDC pulling their childhood vaccination recommendations?
How are the people who were out there campaigning for those shots feeling right about now?
And what about the parents who already went ahead and vaccinated their kids based on that advice?
👎

The CDC isn't recommending shots for healthy kids right now:

Comirnaty (made by Pfizer), which happens to be the only shot approved for anyone under 18 so far, is currently under the microscope. They're looking hard at its link to myocarditis in young adults—something that’s already popped up as a major safety red flag over in the USA and Israel. Honestly, until we get some real clarity on how often this heart inflammation actually shows up after getting Comirnaty, and how common this issue is in kids under 18, it's basically impossible to say with any real certainty if the benefits actually outweigh the risks for healthy kids aged 12 and up. Look, if a parent still wants to go ahead and vaccinate their healthy 12-year-old, they can—nobody is stopping them—but doctors need to make sure parents know that because we're still trying to figure out the myocarditis numbers, we haven't officially cleared healthy kids for the shot yet.

https://www.cdc.gov/media/press-releases/covid-19/index.html

Matthew Jackson2 said:Because, if history and clinical data have taught us anything, it's that targeting people during that critical incubation window is incredibly smart moves...

I heard it works like a charm!! 🙂

Is there any way to dial back how sensitive the moderators are being? 😁
Basically, they’re just locking threads for no reason at all:

http://www.exampleforum.com/showpost.php?p=8...postcount=9775

So, what's the play here? What does this actually mean?
Is the Moderator just gonna sit there and take it, staying quiet while everything goes sideways, or what? 🤔

A few questions (sent over by the Moderator)

1. Why does a moderator feel entitled to claim that anyone who disagrees with them is just "squawking" or making noise?
2. Since when is a moderator allowed to be biased and pick sides in an argument?
3. And honestly, who moderates the moderators?

Solid post, Matthew Jackson2! 👍

slyfox43 said:It is quite telling how the authors touch upon these critical epidemiological shifts while carefully avoiding any suggestion that "imperfect vaccines" shouldn't be administered at all—it’s a curious omission. Still, it might be worth looking through the study yourself, if only to gain a clearer perspective on what we might expect to see unfolding in the near future, preventing that sudden mental stall when people inevitably claim "vaccines don't work," or more pointedly, that "they do more harm than good."

What is even your deal? Why the sudden aggression and the insults? 👎
Is my questioning the efficacy, quality, or safety of current COVID-19 vaccines actually bothering you that much?
If it is, why?

If anyone actually feels like reading this:

EPIDEMIOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF IMPERFECT VACCINES FOR IMMUNIZING INFECTIONS

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4394665/

The gist of it:

So, looking at the data, it seems like both LEAKY and waning immunity models show this weird "honeymoon period" right after people start getting vaccinated—something you don't see at all in the old "all-or-nothing" models. Even though these shifts are just temporary, they could seriously mess with how we design vaccination programs. Plus, this gives us a totally different way to look at why certain diseases, like whooping cough, seem to be "rebounding" even in places where vaccination rates stay super high. That spike in cases might not be what everyone thinks; it could just be what happens when that honeymoon period ends. Those massive outbreaks? They might just be temporary swings as things settle into a new normal for the vaccine era.

Ronald Chavez2 said:No, I am simply sticking to my original point. Even a perfectly effective vaccine won't stop the virus from physically entering your body; it just ensures your immune system handles the encounter much faster and more efficiently. Or were you under the impression that a vaccine creates some kind of mystical protective aura around you that prevents a virus from ever touching you?

“When a vaccine works perfectly, as do the childhood vaccines for smallpox, polio, mumps, rubella and measles, it prevents vaccinated individuals from being sickened by the disease, and it also prevents them from transmitting the virus to others”

The problem is, because of the specific way this virus behaves and the type of vaccines we've been using, that just isn't how things work with COVID-19.

slyfox43 said:It’s entirely plausible, much like how immunity gained through a LEAKY infection often results in a vast array of viral strains, some of which inevitably turn out to be more aggressive or contagious than their predecessors. Are you suggesting otherwise? Do you happen to have any peer-reviewed studies on hand that actually refute that?

Even SARS-CoV-2 itself evolved from something that wasn't even capable of human-to-human transmission, much like countless other viruses that preceded it.

Is "LEAKY immunity" some kind of brand new buzzword now? 🤦

slyfox43 said:It’s reached a point where being wrong feels almost impressive. My observations stem from how people are applying that specific article about livestock—where the only way to manage the situation is to cull the entire herd—to human beings, assuming that wiping out the population is a viable alternative to vaccination.

If we’re going to broaden this discussion to the general mechanics of how contagious mutations arise, we first have to establish whether they are being driven exclusively by vaccination rather than the natural circulation of the virus itself. It is impossible to reach such a conclusion, because it couldn't be more fundamentally flawed if it tried.

So we find ourselves circling back to this strange inversion of reality where the vaccine—designed specifically to halt infection and transmission—ends up acting as a primary driver for mutation itself. It’s quite a spectacle to witness, especially when we're expected to sit through endless moral lectures from people who seem to have their entire worldview turned upside down.

Honestly, I don't think you've grasped a single thing I'm saying...
The whole issue is the fact that it is entirely POSSIBLE for certain LEAKY vaccines to speed up or even facilitate the mutation of a virus into more dangerous variants.
The COVID-19 vaccines are LEAKY vaccines; if they weren't, you'd have 100% protection and wouldn't even be able to act as a potential carrier. So, yeah, that possibility definitely exists.
You want to argue otherwise? Fine. Do you have any actual peer-reviewed studies on this topic that prove me wrong?

slyfox43 said:I’m not trying to drag anyone into a full-blown conspiracy theory or a disinformation frenzy, but plenty of studies have already confirmed that vaccinated individuals face a significantly lower risk of infection—not just avoiding severe illness, but preventing transmission altogether if they don't catch it in the first place. This is just the icing on the cake, rather than the main course, when you consider the clinical benefits of vaccination if an infection does occur.

It is much less exhausting to dump a pile of nonsense into the world than it is to spend your time debunking it, which gives certain groups a built-in advantage. Even though the direct benefits of vaccination are thoroughly researched and documented, scientists tend to shy away from making categorical claims unless they can confirm them through direct experimental proof, even when the conclusion is obvious from existing data. Because other fields of human endeavor aren't held to such rigid standards, people will stubbornly cling to any "hunch" they have, even when the mountain of evidence proves them wrong.

So, are the side effects—both short-term and long-term—of these mRNA vaccines actually well-researched?
I honestly don't get why some people try to play both sides by being anti-vax while simultaneously acting skeptical about vaccines that haven't even officially cleared the standard testing procedures yet. Can someone please explain the logic there to me? 🤔
It’s exactly like saying I don't trust aviation just because I refuse to hop on a half-tested nuclear-powered plane built out of plastic wings and a fuselage. Yeah, I’m terrified of flying in THAT specific plane, and no, I don't trust it one bit—but that doesn't mean I have an issue with aviation in general.

Is that really such a hard concept to grasp?🤔

Rachel Barrett8 said:The COVID-19 vaccine doesn't stop you from catching the virus; it stops you from getting deathly ill. Like Beroš would put it, it keeps you from ending up in the ICU.
But sure, you can still get infected, and you can still pass it on to others... so calling it "protection from infection" isn't quite right.

Am I missing something here?

Nah, you nailed it. We're talking about what people call "leaky vaccines," which might actually make things worse in the long run. There was a ton of writing on this back in the Pre-COVID days. Check this out:

https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...viruses-072715

But honestly, let's just move past that for a second. 😵😵
Anyone pulling moves like this right now is either incredibly dim-witted or a freaking genius. 😁

Just sign the damn thing already. Don't even bother reading the fine print before you put pen to paper, seriously. 🤦