Coronavirus

[TankTop5]

I've got nothing new to say about corona virus, the Delta strain, or anything else about the pandemic.

It's bad enough that this subject has involved politics. I see that as both unfortunate but unavoidable.

However, I strongly object to involving religion in this subject. The last time I checked, religion has little if anything to do with this virus pandemic. Whenever I see religion enter into national politics, it tends to paralyze the discussion. This applies to those who support religious doctrine as well as those who oppose it.

Please do not let that happen here.

That’s not something you can ask. To a religious person that is the central theme to their life and guiding principle to how they view the world. Suggesting someone not consider that or openly discuss how that affects any part one’s life. This modern idea that religious people cannot openly discuss religion in any capacity is false and the opposite of religious freedom.
The Christian word for church comes from the word ecclesia which is a group of people gathered for the purpose of government and politics. Also “gates of hell” is mentioned multiple times in the NT, a gate in those days is where court was held for civil matters and negotiating trade and treaties. The implication is that it is the Church’s job to insert itself into politics and civics and bring a Christian world view. Your suggestion that religious people stay out of the conversation flies in the face of Christianity and being Christians enjoy religious freedoms in this country means your heartfelt opinion carries no weight.

 

[panteragstk]

My long-winded point – anti-science beliefs can come from the left or the right, from the believers of organized religion or non-believers. But if it begins with non-religious origins, it can easily spread by allying with others from the opposite side of the coin.

The funny thing is that the anti-science beliefs are a major symptom of how badly we educate the general population. Even if college educated. This stuff wouldn't be happening (and quite a lot of other issues in this country) if people had a decent education. Not speaking of just a STEM based education, but a MAJOR focus on processing and interpreting information.

People have really bad BS detectors and will generally believe anything as long as it fits into what they already believe. It's why anti-science is so popular with the hard core religious folks. They only need their religious education, anything else isn't necessary.

This is the main reason I'm having issues finding a private school for my kids. They're all run by churches. I have no issue with that at all as long as they don't tell my kids the earth is only 5000 years old.

 

[TankTop5]

The funny thing is that the anti-science beliefs are a major symptom of how badly we educate the general population. Even if college educated. This stuff wouldn't be happening (and quite a lot of other issues in this country) if people had a decent education. Not speaking of just a STEM based education, but a MAJOR focus on processing and interpreting information.

People have really bad BS detectors and will generally believe anything as long as it fits into what they already believe. It's why anti-science is so popular with the hard core religious folks. They only need their religious education, anything else isn't necessary.

This is the main reason I'm having issues finding a private school for my kids. They're all run by churches. I have no issue with that at all as long as they don't tell my kids the earth is only 5000 years old.

I get it but this is a human issue not a religious one, there are silly uneducated people from every walk of life. I wasn’t stating my opinion just saying that religious people are fully entitled to their opinion just as everyone else is. that said I actually have an appreciation for the early Catholic church who decided to teach everything in Latin and just have religious practices and ceremonies to attempt to teach some basic religious philosophies. They knew most people just wouldn’t get it so why bother, unfortunately politics quickly got involved and realized it was best to just keep everyone stupid.

 

[panteragstk]

I get it but this is a human issue not a religious one, there are silly uneducated people from every walk of life. I wasn’t stating my opinion just saying that religious people are fully entitled to their opinion just as everyone else is. that said I actually have an appreciation for the early Catholic church who decided to teach everything in Latin and just have religious practices and ceremonies to attempt to teach some basic religious philosophies. They knew most people just wouldn’t get it so why bother, unfortunately politics quickly got involved and realized it was best to just keep everyone stupid.

What's interesting is that you posted your reply while I was typing and mine has nothing to do with yours. Except that it does, so I guess we have good timing.

I agree that it isn't a religious issue at all. Plenty of VERY religious people I know have taken COVID seriously from the very beginning.

My issue with religion and the COVID relationship is that there are MEGA churches that are telling people not to get vaccinated. It's just another source of misinformation. The reality is that religion has nothing to do with this in any way, but just like politics and COVID, people have grouped them together unnecessarily.

Politics, religion, and science can coexist without any issues, until people start using one to influence the other.

I think MY main point about this is that science is fact based. Politics and religion need not apply because they won't change facts. When people let their politics and their religion convince them that facts aren't true, that's when I have an issue.

People are 100% entitled to their opinion, and we are all allowed to tell them they're a moron.

Opinions are like a$$holes, I don't want to hear or see anyones....unless I ask

 

[GO-NAD!]

I wasn't going to comment any further on this distraction from the topic, but I can't let this go without comment.

That’s not something you can ask. To a religious person that is the central theme to their life and guiding principle to how they view the world.

You seem to assume that all people of faith share the same world view. As a Christian, I do not consult the Bible seeking guidance pertaining to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Suggesting someone not consider that or openly discuss how that affects any part one’s life. This modern idea that religious people cannot openly discuss religion in any capacity is false and the opposite of religious freedom.

Nobody is saying that you can't discuss religion openly. But, as far as I'm concerned, religion has no more bearing on this thread than say, a discussion of subwoofers - notwithstanding the fact that there are too many religious people avoiding vaccines and other public health protocols, exacerbating the spread of the virus.

The Christian word for church comes from the word ecclesia which is a group of people gathered for the purpose of government and politics. Also “gates of hell” is mentioned multiple times in the NT, a gate in those days is where court was held for civil matters and negotiating trade and treaties. The implication is that it is the Church’s job to insert itself into politics and civics and bring a Christian world view. Your suggestion that religious people stay out of the conversation flies in the face of Christianity and being Christians enjoy religious freedoms in this country means your heartfelt opinion carries no weight.

As a Christian, @Swerd's opinion carries a great deal of weight for me.

 

[Swerd]

That’s not something you can ask.

I certainly can ask that. I’ll say it again. Don’t mix religion into this thread on Coronavirus. If you have something religious to say about this subject, start another thread. No one would stop you.

To a religious person that is the central theme to their life and guiding principle to how they view the world. Suggesting someone not consider that or openly discuss how that affects any part one’s life. This modern idea that religious people cannot openly discuss religion in any capacity is false and the opposite of religious freedom.

You have a mistaken view of what religious freedom means in the USA. The First Amendment of the US Constitution says:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."​

Although the First Amendment applies only to federal, state or local governments, there is a common misconception that it prohibits anyone from limiting free speech, including private, non-governmental entities. So many from the political and/or religious right get that wrong.

 

[Swerd]

People are 100% entitled to their opinion, and we are all allowed to tell them they're a moron.

Although it's likely to inflame some people, I can't resist re-posting this cartoon.

Unlike the cartoon, I'm not kicking you and your opinions out altogether. Post them on another thread.

 

[TankTop5]

I intentionally didn’t post my opinion on Covid and tie it to my statement as they aren’t related. I was simply addressing @Swerd blanket statement and stating for religious people that is always part of the conversation and consideration on any matter. I will admit I haven’t heard any logical religious arguments against the Vaccines.

 

[Mr._Clark]

It's often said: "There's no education in the second kick of a mule."

This appears to be true in the case of Lamar Jackson, but I would rephrase it slightly in his case: "There's no education in the first or second kick of a mule."

>>>OWINGS MILLS, Md. -- Baltimore Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson was noncommittal on whether he would get vaccinated after being infected with COVID-19 twice in the past eight months, saying it was a "personal decision."<<<

Observation: One's belief that a decision is personal does not mean a particular choice a wise one.

Lamar iffy on vaccine despite 2nd bout of COVID

Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson is back with the team after testing positive for COVID-19 for a second time, but he remains noncommittal about getting vaccinated.

www.espn.com

 

[Kvn_Walker]

Guess he loves Russian Roulette as much as he loves football.

 

[TankTop5]

It's often said: "There's no education in the second kick of a mule."

This appears to be true in the case of Lamar Jackson, but I would rephrase it slightly in his case: "There's no education in the first or second kick of a mule."

>>>OWINGS MILLS, Md. -- Baltimore Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson was noncommittal on whether he would get vaccinated after being infected with COVID-19 twice in the past eight months, saying it was a "personal decision."<<<

Observation: One's belief that a decision is personal does not mean a particular choice a wise one.

Lamar iffy on vaccine despite 2nd bout of COVID

Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson is back with the team after testing positive for COVID-19 for a second time, but he remains noncommittal about getting vaccinated.

www.espn.com

My chiropractor and his wife have both been vaccinated and both caught Covid twice afterwards, those odds are obviously billions to one.

The vaccines are proving to greatly lower the likelihood of death, moderately lower the chances of infection but have no effect on carrying or transmitting the virus to others.

For the record my opinion it has been logical to be cautious about mRNA vaccines as testing over the last decade on other Covid viruses like MERS and SARS ended in catastrophic animal testing. There was also concern of toxicity of the spike protein as spike proteins are often toxic is proving to be not the case with the Covid-19 vaccines. Lastly there is still concern how it affects the development of adolescent brains which would logically mean there is concern of known and unknown side effects among the scientific community including the CDC and WHO. So yes in my opinion there is reason to be cautious of the Covid vaccines and it should be a persons personal decision.

 

[Swerd]

My chiropractor and his wife have both been vaccinated and both caught Covid twice afterwards, those odds are obviously billions to one.

The numbers of ‘breakthrough’ Covid-19 infections are indeed extremely rare.
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/coronavirus-pandemic-vaccine-updates-08-09-21/h_9c6a79bada1c3b54c7d873635394a789

"More than 99.99% of people who are fully vaccinated against Covid-19 have not had a breakthrough case resulting in hospitalization or death, according to a CNN analysis of data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."

"As of Aug 2, more than 164 million people in the United States were fully vaccinated against Covid-19, according to the CDC. Fewer than 0.001% of those individuals – 1,507 people – died and fewer than 0.005% – 7,101 people – were hospitalized with Covid-19."

 

[Swerd]

The vaccines are proving to greatly lower the likelihood of death, moderately lower the chances of infection but have no effect on carrying or transmitting the virus to others.

I have trouble with the choices of some words you used.

moderately – as in “moderately lower the chances of infection”
no effect – as in “have no effect on carrying or transmitting the virus to others”​

How about some numbers? Can you cite references that back these statements up? I’d prefer scientific or medical publications instead of news reports. But I’ll take anything with real numbers.

 

[Swerd]

For the record my opinion it has been logical to be cautious about mRNA vaccines as testing over the last decade on other Covid viruses like MERS and SARS ended in catastrophic animal testing. There was also concern of toxicity of the spike protein as spike proteins are often toxic is proving to be not the case with the Covid-19 vaccines.

Where do I begin with this?

Catastrophic animal testing? Again, please provide references. And, please explain how this directly relates to vaccines against Covid-19.

I understand that animal testing of SARS and MERS vaccines showed some signs of pathology in liver and lung. In both cases those viral diseases vanished before any further testing could be done. No further work was done to develop vaccines against these viruses.

The vaccines being developed against both SARS and MERS viruses used significantly different vectors than are presently being used for Covid-19. All the Covid-19 vaccines were tested in lab animals, Macaque monkeys. Full pathology was done examining the tissues from all organs looking for any signs of toxicity or abnormal appearances. If I recall, nothing unusual was found. As usual, all this was required before any clinical trials in humans could begin. How was any of this catastrophic?

Lastly there is still concern how it affects the development of adolescent brains which would logically mean there is concern of known and unknown side effects among the scientific community including the CDC and WHO.

Where is this story coming from? Any effect of a vaccine on adolescent brains could not appear in animal testing. The clinical trials of the Covid-19 vaccines on adolescents are still going on now. Has there been any news about this?

If this is of concern with Covid-19 vaccines, is it more risky than damage to the development of adolescent brains due to Covid-19 disease?

All this is leading me to conclude that you believe no one, including the FDA, can adequately test vaccines, or any other medication, to your satisfaction.

 

[Mr._Clark]

My chiropractor and his wife have both been vaccinated and both caught Covid twice afterwards, those odds are obviously billions to one.

The vaccines are proving to greatly lower the likelihood of death, moderately lower the chances of infection but have no effect on carrying or transmitting the virus to others.

For the record my opinion it has been logical to be cautious about mRNA vaccines as testing over the last decade on other Covid viruses like MERS and SARS ended in catastrophic animal testing. There was also concern of toxicity of the spike protein as spike proteins are often toxic is proving to be not the case with the Covid-19 vaccines. Lastly there is still concern how it affects the development of adolescent brains which would logically mean there is concern of known and unknown side effects among the scientific community including the CDC and WHO. So yes in my opinion there is reason to be cautious of the Covid vaccines and it should be a persons personal decision.

Early parachutes sometimes failed. Modern parachutes also fail from time to time. Some people survive parachute failures.

For purposes of discussion, let's call wearing a parachute a "personal decision." Is it a wise "personal decision" to jump out of an airplane without a parachute?

Paratrooper whose parachute failed to open survives after crashing into house

British soldier falls through roof of California house, crashing into the kitchen in a burst of insulation and roofing material

www.theguardian.com

 

[TankTop5]

I have trouble with the choices of some words you used.

moderately – as in “moderately lower the chances of infection”​

no effect – as in “have no effect on carrying or transmitting the virus to others”​

How about some numbers? Can you cite references that back these statements up? I’d prefer scientific or medical publications instead of news reports. But I’ll take anything with real numbers.

We can use your own language, hospitalizations and death.Lacking that information it’s tough to tell. Do you have data that suggest

Early parachutes sometimes failed. Modern parachutes also fail from time to time. Some people survive parachute failures.

For purposes of discussion, let's call wearing a parachute a "personal decision." Is it a wise "personal decision" to jump out of an airplane without a parachute?

Paratrooper whose parachute failed to open survives after crashing into house

British soldier falls through roof of California house, crashing into the kitchen in a burst of insulation and roofing material

www.theguardian.com

Don’t act like you know it all…

anyway I was just stating there has been some logical reasons to have a little hesitation on the Vaccines. I am a fan of vaccines and I hope I do not come across as being an anti-vaxxer.

 

[GO-NAD!]

For purposes of discussion, let's call wearing a parachute a "personal decision." Is it a wise "personal decision" to jump out of an airplane without a parachute?

Well...it was the best course of action for this guy.
Nicholas Alkemade - Wikipedia

 

[highfigh]

Most of this caused by one individual, former President Trump, that still holds a mostly complete control of G.O.P. If Trump had responded to this in a way that a normal decent human being would, many of the problems we see in USA and elsewhere would have been far less.

So, the CDC and WHO had nothing to do with this debacle? I beg top differ.

 

[cpp]

I don’t believe you can still board an airplane without the vaccine or proof.

As of July 2021,
For domestic travel within the US, airlines are not currently requiring proof of vaccination or a negative COVID-19 test result to fly. This may change as new standards are developed.

International travel will be a different story. You will need to show proof of vaccination, or a negative test result, to enter most other countries that are accepting travelers from the US.

 

[Trell]

So, the CDC and WHO had nothing to do with this debacle? I beg top differ.

Nice straw man there.