Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine

[ILOVEIT]

Dude this is not how vaccinations work, I refer you to my earlier point: they aren't magic. You can't keep criticizing the idea of vaccination if you aren't sure how they are supposed to work. They are immune system enhancers. They are not 100% prevention. They are basically prophylactics.. or maybe a better analogy is IUDs. Do they work almost every time? yes, but in some cases they do not. In some cases, installing the IUD goes wrong and hurts the patient.

i know how vaccines work, I know they are not 100%, but you are making my point for me...shaming people for not wanting to get a vaccine because YOUR vaccine 'only' has a 98% of chance of working against a virus with a 99.9% survival rate is ludicrous.

everyone has their own risk tolerance and assessment, projecting your own on everyone else is where I have a problem.

now I am done for real.

I'm not shaming people. I'm shaming you, because you are conclusively talking about something you aren't understanding and pushing people away from what the correct answer should be.

I was just chiding others who are pro-vax for attacking people when they couldn't explain **** either.. but you are just like them on the other side. Both of you are obstacles towards understanding diseases & vaccinations, as well as obstacles toward legitimate public safety.

So let me explain even in the short sentences above where you are wrong:

- vaccines are far closer to 100% than the survival rate of COVID. You simply don't understand what they do. They are boosters. In that way, they are almost always effective. They aren't a cure, or they'd be called a cure

- again, survival rate is a crutch for the ignorant. Explained this already. 3rd time you're citing it. Why? What part of what I said before is not sticking?

- projecting your own lack of critical thinking onto others (IE - choosing not to get the vax) is absolutely the other people's business because they have the right to know whether or not you choose to do something that could potentially hurt them. If individual rights are so damn important, the vaccinated people should have the right to know when someone is choosing to potentially put them in danger, and thus assess their own risk of whether or not being around them is worth it.

I'm shaming these clowns...I don't care.

This is the same idiotic stuff that says "let me smoke in the diner - it's my body". And then they go on to increase health care costs for us all because they suddenly don't want to die of lung cancer.

[FNQ]

i know how vaccines work, I know they are not 100%, but you are making my point for me...shaming people for not wanting to get a vaccine because YOUR vaccine 'only' has a 98% of chance of working against a virus with a 99.9% survival rate is ludicrous.

everyone has their own risk tolerance and assessment, projecting your own on everyone else is where I have a problem.

now I am done for real.

I'm not shaming people. I'm shaming you, because you are conclusively talking about something you aren't understanding and pushing people away from what the correct answer should be.

I was just chiding others who are pro-vax for attacking people when they couldn't explain **** either.. but you are just like them on the other side. Both of you are obstacles towards understanding diseases & vaccinations, as well as obstacles toward legitimate public safety.

So let me explain even in the short sentences above where you are wrong:

- vaccines are far closer to 100% than the survival rate of COVID. You simply don't understand what they do. They are boosters. In that way, they are almost always effective. They aren't a cure, or they'd be called a cure

- again, survival rate is a crutch for the ignorant. Explained this already. 3rd time you're citing it. Why? What part of what I said before is not sticking?

- projecting your own lack of critical thinking onto others (IE - choosing not to get the vax) is absolutely the other people's business because they have the right to know whether or not you choose to do something that could potentially hurt them. If individual rights are so damn important, the vaccinated people should have the right to know when someone is choosing to potentially put them in danger, and thus assess their own risk of whether or not being around them is worth it.

I'm shaming these clowns...I don't care.

This is the same idiotic stuff that says "let me smoke in the diner - it's my body". And then they go on to increase health care costs for us all because they suddenly don't want to die of lung cancer.

Ok but you aren't helping at all. Can't recall any time that bullying someone has resulted in them changing their mind

[FNQ]

i know how vaccines work, I know they are not 100%, but you are making my point for me...shaming people for not wanting to get a vaccine because YOUR vaccine 'only' has a 98% of chance of working against a virus with a 99.9% survival rate is ludicrous.

everyone has their own risk tolerance and assessment, projecting your own on everyone else is where I have a problem.

now I am done for real.

- vaccines are far closer to 100% than the survival rate of COVID.

great, so you shouldn't give two **** whether the person next to you has it or not.

glad we are on the same page.

I'd explain how you're wrong but I dont want to copy and paste the same thing I just said a page ago. Seriously man, what part of this aren't you understanding? What can I clarify?

[clyde21]

- vaccines are far closer to 100% than the survival rate of COVID.

great, so you shouldn't give two **** whether the person next to you has it or not.

glad we are on the same page.

I'd explain how you're wrong but I dont want to copy and paste the same thing I just said a page ago. Seriously man, what part of this aren't you understanding? What can I clarify?

i'm not sure what YOU'RE not understanding here.

if a person does their own risk assessment, and feels like they don't need the vaccine for a virus with a 99.9% survival rate and decide not to get the vaccine, in what world is that your problem? you took the vaccine, you said it's even closer to 100% than the survival rate of the virus...so why the **** would you care if the person sitting next to you took the vax or not?

and, tbh, the pro vax cult is getting more disgusting and vigorous than the anti vax club, as evidenced by the previous poster. just leave people the **** alone, it's that simple. if you and your family are vaccined you should not worry about anyone else not vaccined and go live your lives.

and I see now why I decided to stay the f away from this thread, per usual.

[Jester_]

great, so you shouldn't give two **** whether the person next to you has it or not.

glad we are on the same page.

I'd explain how you're wrong but I dont want to copy and paste the same thing I just said a page ago. Seriously man, what part of this aren't you understanding? What can I clarify?

i'm not sure what YOU'RE not understanding here.

if a person does their own risk assessment, and feels like they don't need the vaccine for a virus with a 99.9% survival rate and decide not to get the vaccine, in what world is that your problem? you took the vaccine, you said it's even closer to 100% than the survival rate of the virus...so why the **** would you care if the person sitting next to you took the vax or not?

and, tbh, the pro vax cult is getting more disgusting and vigorous than the anti vax club, as evidenced by the previous poster. just leave people the **** alone, it's that simple. if you and your family are vaccined you should not worry about anyone else not vaccined and go live your lives.

and I see now why I decided to stay the f away from this thread, per usual.

Between this and your TS% comment in that other thread I'm beginning to wonder if your understanding of "percentages" is different from the rest of the world's

[wco81]

I wonder if these same debates were had about the polio vaccine...

I don't think there was.

Polio messed up your qualify of life even if you survived it.

Plus there wasn't the Internet, which lets nuts amplify their stupidity.

[clyde21]

I'd explain how you're wrong but I dont want to copy and paste the same thing I just said a page ago. Seriously man, what part of this aren't you understanding? What can I clarify?

i'm not sure what YOU'RE not understanding here.

if a person does their own risk assessment, and feels like they don't need the vaccine for a virus with a 99.9% survival rate and decide not to get the vaccine, in what world is that your problem? you took the vaccine, you said it's even closer to 100% than the survival rate of the virus...so why the **** would you care if the person sitting next to you took the vax or not?

and, tbh, the pro vax cult is getting more disgusting and vigorous than the anti vax club, as evidenced by the previous poster. just leave people the **** alone, it's that simple. if you and your family are vaccined you should not worry about anyone else not vaccined and go live your lives.

and I see now why I decided to stay the f away from this thread, per usual.

Between this and your TS% comment in that other thread I'm beginning to wonder if your understanding of "percentages" is different from the rest of the world's

lol what? i know Mitchell's TS% was higher than Carter's, i disagreed that it's a best indicator of shooting in the NBA...if you feel the need to rehash in argument an which you were destroyed in, by all means.

[FNQ]

great, so you shouldn't give two **** whether the person next to you has it or not.

glad we are on the same page.

I'd explain how you're wrong but I dont want to copy and paste the same thing I just said a page ago. Seriously man, what part of this aren't you understanding? What can I clarify?

i'm not sure what YOU'RE not understanding here.

if a person does their own risk assessment, and feels like they don't need the vaccine for a virus with a 99.9% survival rate and decide not to get the vaccine, in what world is that your problem? you took the vaccine, you said it's even closer to 100% than the survival rate of the virus...so why the **** would you care if the person sitting next to you took the vax or not?

and, tbh, the pro vax cult is getting more disgusting and vigorous than the anti vax club, as evidenced by the previous poster. just leave people the **** alone, it's that simple. if you and your family are vaccined you should not worry about anyone else not vaccined and go live your lives.

and I see now why I decided to stay the f away from this thread, per usual.

are you trying to lecture me on how vaccinations work? Great work citing survival rate again btw.

So clearly you are having trouble understanding. I'll give it one last shot, at which point your failure to understand is your own problem.

If person A is vaxed, and B isn't and they stand next to each other, person B can infect A. Because there could be any kind of chemical inside them that mutates the virus in a way that A cannot defend. So person A, despite doing the smart thing, despite being careful, is now potentially infected because of person B. B's freedoms have now infringed on A's freedoms, and A was the one not only acting in their own best interest, but society's as well.

The vaccination, for the 3rd time, is not a cure. It helps prevention. It does not cause prevention. Do you understand that yet? It BUILDS the immune system you cited. It assists. And if enough people "assist" this way, the virus has less options to mutate, and thus it starts killing the spread long-term. And by limiting mutations, you are also limiting the virus' potential to drastically improve on its kill rate. Did you know that the earliest iterations of the bubonic plague were easily warded off by our immune system? The bacteria evolved something called PLA Protease, which was the jumping off point for millions of deaths. Vaccination, especially mass vaccination, could have prevented such a thing from occurring.

Now if you choose to ignore this, and choose to cite survival rates as if that's the only factor, you are being willfully ignorant. You are choosing to ignore knowledge and choosing not to learn, and just repeating what you thought was correct before, but very much isn't.

Let me be the first to invite you to stay away from these threads if you aren't going to learn here. Because I'm going to be very blunt: you don't know what you are talking about and you're smart enough to know that you don't. So you can either learn or try to win an argument with me on it, but I'm sure as hell not going to let medical misinformation go by unchecked during a pandemic, even here.

[FNQ]

I wonder if these same debates were had about the polio vaccine...

I don't think there was.

Polio messed up your qualify of life even if you survived it.

Plus there wasn't the Internet, which lets nuts amplify their stupidity.

There was. Lots. Are you serious? Google 1955 polio vaccination.. maybe add something like pushback, or resistance, or whatever. The arguments then mirror the same ones you'll see now. Even though the polio vaccination was an amazing success, and has all but eradicated the disease, the same arguments are being used.

"its fascism"
"its socialism"
"its my body, it doesnt affect anyone else"

its not.
its not.
it does.

[clyde21]

I'd explain how you're wrong but I dont want to copy and paste the same thing I just said a page ago. Seriously man, what part of this aren't you understanding? What can I clarify?

i'm not sure what YOU'RE not understanding here.

if a person does their own risk assessment, and feels like they don't need the vaccine for a virus with a 99.9% survival rate and decide not to get the vaccine, in what world is that your problem? you took the vaccine, you said it's even closer to 100% than the survival rate of the virus...so why the **** would you care if the person sitting next to you took the vax or not?

and, tbh, the pro vax cult is getting more disgusting and vigorous than the anti vax club, as evidenced by the previous poster. just leave people the **** alone, it's that simple. if you and your family are vaccined you should not worry about anyone else not vaccined and go live your lives.

and I see now why I decided to stay the f away from this thread, per usual.

are you trying to lecture me on how vaccinations work? Great work citing survival rate again btw.

So clearly you are having trouble understanding. I'll give it one last shot, at which point your failure to understand is your own problem.

If person A is vaxed, and B isn't and they stand next to each other, person B can infect A. Because there could be any kind of chemical inside them that mutates the virus in a way that A cannot defend. So person A, despite doing the smart thing, despite being careful, is now potentially infected because of person B. B's freedoms have now infringed on A's freedoms, and A was the one not only acting in their own best interest, but society's as well.

The vaccination, for the 3rd time, is not a cure. It helps prevention. It does not cause prevention. Do you understand that yet? It BUILDS the immune system you cited. It assists. And if enough people "assist" this way, the virus has less options to mutate, and thus it starts killing the spread long-term. And by limiting mutations, you are also limiting the virus' potential to drastically improve on its kill rate. Did you know that the earliest iterations of the bubonic plague were easily warded off by our immune system? The bacteria evolved something called PLA Protease, which was the jumping off point for millions of deaths. Vaccination, especially mass vaccination, could have prevented such a thing from occurring.

Now if you choose to ignore this, and choose to cite survival rates as if that's the only factor, you are being willfully ignorant. You are choosing to ignore knowledge and choosing not to learn, and just repeating what you thought was correct before, but very much isn't.

Let me be the first to invite you to stay away from these threads if you aren't going to learn here. Because I'm going to be very blunt: you don't know what you are talking about and you're smart enough to know that you don't. So you can either learn or try to win an argument with me on it, but I'm sure as hell not going to let medical misinformation go by unchecked during a pandemic, even here.

you've repeated yourself many times already, i already know how this works, you don't have to keep repeating yourself. and I still think it's ridiculous...you're saying that there is a 1% off chance the vaccine doesn't work because the virus latched onto someone that never got the vaccine mutated into a different form of the virus that the current iteration of the virus can't help prevent...I get it, i think it's a **** ridiculous argument and I think using that to shame people who have done their own risk assessment on this virus and don't want to take the vaccine.

and I really don't give a crap what you will 'allow' or don't 'allow'...it's just hilarious seeing the pro vax cult on their self-righteous high horses talking down to everyone who might not agree with them. good luck with that.

[FNQ]

you've repeated yourself many times already, i already know how this works, you don't have to keep repeating yourself. and I still think it's ridiculous...you're saying that there is a 1% off chance the vaccine doesn't work because the virus latched onto someone that never got the vaccine mutated into a different form of the virus that the current iteration of the virus can't help prevent...I get it,

No. You dont. Because thats not what I said. You are again demonstrating that you do not understand. You don't get it, get it? You can't even understand the basics of vaccination, because you keep referring to it like its a cure, like the success of the vaccination depends on whether or not any mutation of the virus ever infects the vaccinated person. Again, thats not how it works.

and I really don't give a crap what you will 'allow' or don't 'allow'...it's just hilarious seeing the pro vax cult on their self-righteous high horses talking down to everyone who might not agree with them. good luck with that.

Dude, you're on the high horse. You are literally in my wheelhouse, something I had to study for 7+ years. And you're telling me you understand the arguments while proving to me you don't. You dont know what you're talking about and you do not understand your own risk assessment. And if that only affected you, fine, I wouldnt stop people from eating tide pods either, I feel like Darwinism is just fine. But your idea - and any others who have it - are dangers to public health and are choosing willful ignorance over intelligence. The Earth doesnt revolve around the Sun. Science is once again, correct.

[Jester_]

i'm not sure what YOU'RE not understanding here.

if a person does their own risk assessment, and feels like they don't need the vaccine for a virus with a 99.9% survival rate and decide not to get the vaccine, in what world is that your problem? you took the vaccine, you said it's even closer to 100% than the survival rate of the virus...so why the **** would you care if the person sitting next to you took the vax or not?

and, tbh, the pro vax cult is getting more disgusting and vigorous than the anti vax club, as evidenced by the previous poster. just leave people the **** alone, it's that simple. if you and your family are vaccined you should not worry about anyone else not vaccined and go live your lives.

and I see now why I decided to stay the f away from this thread, per usual.

Between this and your TS% comment in that other thread I'm beginning to wonder if your understanding of "percentages" is different from the rest of the world's

lol what? i know Mitchell's TS% was higher than Carter's, i disagreed that it's a best indicator of shooting in the NBA...if you feel the need to rehash in argument an which you were destroyed in, by all means.

I envy your ability to form such a strong intellectual bubble around yourself I've met some characters here but sheesh... 48,000 posts of this my word

[and1GS]

The 1% mortality rate stuff is interesting to me. 1% of 330 million is a LOT of people. Obviously not all have it, but given how easily COVID spreads, 1% of maybe half that number is still a **** load of deaths. Way worse than the flu.

[Sleepy51]

The 1% mortality rate stuff is interesting to me. 1% of 330 million is a LOT of people. Obviously not all have it, but given how easily COVID spreads, 1% of maybe half that number is still a **** load of deaths. Way worse than the flu.

But hey, it's all old and fat people so their lives are worth less anyway. Heck, some of them are even old, fat and black! amirite?

[Old_Blue]

The 1% mortality rate stuff is interesting to me. 1% of 330 million is a LOT of people. Obviously not all have it, but given how easily COVID spreads, 1% of maybe half that number is still a **** load of deaths. Way worse than the flu.

But hey, it's all old and fat people so their lives are worth less anyway. Heck, some of them are even old, fat and black! amirite?

This thread is starting to read like something on Parler.

[Sleepy51]

The 1% mortality rate stuff is interesting to me. 1% of 330 million is a LOT of people. Obviously not all have it, but given how easily COVID spreads, 1% of maybe half that number is still a **** load of deaths. Way worse than the flu.

But hey, it's all old and fat people so their lives are worth less anyway. Heck, some of them are even old, fat and black! amirite?

This thread is starting to read like something on Parler.

This was frustrated satire

[sjballer03]

Clyde is basically a meme at this point.

[michaelm]

you've repeated yourself many times already, i already know how this works, you don't have to keep repeating yourself. and I still think it's ridiculous...you're saying that there is a 1% off chance the vaccine doesn't work because the virus latched onto someone that never got the vaccine mutated into a different form of the virus that the current iteration of the virus can't help prevent...I get it,

No. You dont. Because thats not what I said. You are again demonstrating that you do not understand. You don't get it, get it? You can't even understand the basics of vaccination, because you keep referring to it like its a cure, like the success of the vaccination depends on whether or not any mutation of the virus ever infects the vaccinated person. Again, thats not how it works.

and I really don't give a crap what you will 'allow' or don't 'allow'...it's just hilarious seeing the pro vax cult on their self-righteous high horses talking down to everyone who might not agree with them. good luck with that.

Dude, you're on the high horse. You are literally in my wheelhouse, something I had to study for 7+ years. And you're telling me you understand the arguments while proving to me you don't. You dont know what you're talking about and you do not understand your own risk assessment. And if that only affected you, fine, I wouldnt stop people from eating tide pods either, I feel like Darwinism is just fine. But your idea - and any others who have it - are dangers to public health and are choosing willful ignorance over intelligence. The Earth doesnt revolve around the Sun. Science is once again, correct.

I am staying out of this on general, despite having a medical degree myself, because I claim no particular expertise in this area.

I pretty much 100% agree with your very reasonable takes on this thread however. The quantum of risk thing is much discussed in regard to medicine and imo applies here, people will worry about a 1 in 200,000 chance of a problem with something like vaccination for instance but not about smoking with a near certainty of health effects. I don’t think the mortality, short or long term, and particularly the morbidity of this virus are at all clear at this stage but the mortality is clearly at least an order of magnitude greater than with influenza and the virus is also more infectious than the latter. The other thing is the chance of clotting is orders of magnitude higher if you actually contract the virus, and this occurs even in some young people.

[michaelm]

Opinions are always rooted in some sort of ignorance. Otherwise they'd be facts right?

I don't have an opinion that the sky is blue - its a fact - but I do have an opinion that vaccines are mostly safe except for some one-offs, not unlike any other medication. Since I, along with everyone on this planet, doesnt have a 100% grasp on it, there is some ignorance for everyone. For some, a lot more than others, though. And for many, its willful. Willful ignorance is terrible. Ignorance in general? That's literally everyone, on almost every topic.

LOL...too true....but the sky is not blue for those who are color blind.

Let me ask you this, as I know you'll give a thoughtful response. At what point along the risk/benefit spectrum is it okay for someone to assert their own personal autonomy and say they're not interested in assuming the (unknown) risk of a vaccine vs. the known risk of the harm they seek to avoid? For diseases like small pox, the death rate was in some instances upwards of 30% of those infected and those that survived it came away with some terrible side effects. Having everyone be vaccinated to get rid of such a lethal disease makes total sense. But if you lower the risks associated with a disease, at what point does compelled vaccination (forced, browbeat or otherwise) no longer become justifiable in comparison to the risks when known? How about when unknown?

Evidence now suggests that the mortality rate of those who contracted COVID is 2% or less (we'll never know because of asymptomatic carriers), and far less in some demographics. The mortality rate for the common flu is about .1% in any given year (still a huge number when spread across large populaces), but the shaming, brow beating, etc. doesn't exist for those not taking vaccines against the common flu. So, where is the line, and why?

What is fairly clear is that society functions in a significantly impaired manner if this virus is running rife, which affects everyone, even those whom the virus is unlikely to kill outright, and the problem with this virus as opposed to influenza is that the morbidity and mortality while not approaching that of diseases like rabies, Ebola or smallpox is sufficiently high to be disruptive. I accept there is some trade-off between the risks of the virus and the risks including to general economic welfare of countermeasures to the virus, but in countries with populist leaders who have attempted to ignore the virus like India and Brazil this doesn’t seem to have resulted in good outcomes, and in the Western world a brief experiment with waiting for herd immunity to occur naturally in the UK was fairly abruptly terminated.

[RichmondWarrior]

I never realized how many beta cuck liberals there were here lol but I’m not shocked.....if ur that scared of a virus that has a 99% survival rate then I’m guessing ur wives (if you even have any) must be the man of the house