FDA Approved Pfizer for 16+ [CLOSED DUE TO POLITICS]

[pyroguy]

https://www.facebook.com/10000109339...1719784207757/

I hate that this shares as a Facebook link, but it pretty much summarizes the vaccine/mask discussion pretty well.

[Moto-Mojo]

Originally Posted by strykerg8gt

It's the media, not science that you should be irritated with. Science requires time, which unfortunately in this case they didn't have. The scientific community was flying blind when Covid-19 first hit. They made educated guesses based on previous experience to best guide society. Since they didn't have the data needed, and STILL DON'T, their theories about how to approach this has had to change. As more data is collected, the science gets more accurate. Case in point, the data shows the vaccines are working.

The problem is most people are seeing how science works for the first time in real-time. So it's easy to criticize when every hypothesis, decision, test, etc. are being shown in real-time. What the media doesn't tell you and what most people don't know is that the science operates with statistical principals. Meaning that there is always a chance it may not work, whatever the reason may be. They operate within confidence intervals that are based on data collected and guides their recommendations.

Bottom line, for all those people bashing and doubting science, when push comes to shove and the sh*t his the fan, who do they turn to when they catch Covid-19? The hospitals and science!

While there are certainly independent, rouge ‘news’ organizations and internet sites, the main stream media does not act completely independent of science. They print what they are told. Or they just regurgitate the ‘scientist’, Fauci, et al. Take the latest media darling - Ivermectin. Do you think for a minute the Google companies are independently calling it a, “horse dewormer?” When it’s been given to 3.7 billion HUMANS for decades? Who’s funding that disinformation? Perhaps someone who stands to gain monetarily from vaccines and endless boosters?

It’s not hard to imagine why -if - something like a cheap and readily available drug might actually work, why it would be suppressed. Who’d get the blame for nearly 7 million murdered for want of something of greater sales value? For the most part, science and media act in concert. Maybe never more than now in both their evolution.

[0stones0]

Directly from the CDC site:

Immunity after COVID-19 vaccination
There is still a lot we are learning about COVID-19 vaccines and CDC is constantly reviewing evidence and updating guidance. We don’t know how long protection lasts for those who are vaccinated.

[95 imp]

Originally Posted by Moto-Mojo

For the most part, science and media act in concert. Maybe never more than now in both their evolution.

Quite honestly, it borderlines propaganda. I ALWAYS take news reports with a grain of salt as they are opinions laced with cherry picked facts now-a-days.

Even with a minute amount of research behind the story, you find how blatantly biased it really is.

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by 0stones0

Directly from the CDC site:

BUT they know for sure you are less likely to get sick and if you do you are less likely to get really sick, have lingering side effects and/or die.

[xstuntman]

Turns out the story about people ODing on animal ivermectin was refuted by the hospital they were supposedly admitted too.

Honestly, I'm completely shocked it was a lie.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by strykerg8gt

It's the media, not science that you should be irritated with. Science requires time, which unfortunately in this case they didn't have. The scientific community was flying blind when Covid-19 first hit. They made educated guesses based on previous experience to best guide society. Since they didn't have the data needed, and STILL DON'T, their theories about how to approach this has had to change. As more data is collected, the science gets more accurate. Case in point, the data shows the vaccines are working.

The problem is most people are seeing how science works for the first time in real-time. So it's easy to criticize when every hypothesis, decision, test, etc. are being shown in real-time. What the media doesn't tell you and what most people don't know is that the science operates with statistical principals. Meaning that there is always a chance it may not work, whatever the reason may be. They operate within confidence intervals that are based on data collected and guides their recommendations.

Bottom line, for all those people bashing and doubting science, when push comes to shove and the sh*t his the fan, who do they turn to when they catch Covid-19? The hospitals and science!

They sold a "best guess" with a one size fits all prescription as science and then silenced other opinion. It was a narrative, not science.

The problem is that most people could see that the statistics didn't (don't) align with the narrative. The risk for young people (30s or less) is minuscule but they paid that biggest social and developmental cost.

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by 0stones0

Directly from the CDC site:

Given that the CDC has a MASSIVE financial interest in vaccines, you can take their opinion accordingly.

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by Joshinator99

Given that the CDC has a MASSIVE financial interest in vaccines, you can take their opinion accordingly.

You could say that about any business then... even churches.

[Silveradoss573]

Originally Posted by FarmerFran

You could say that about any business then... even churches.

You know it sure was nice (while it lasted anyways) to have a place to visit without this shit being discussed. But you went and ruined that for others and myself so thanks a lot. Yeah you're #1 in my book...

[G8One2]

18 Reasons I Won’t Be Getting a Covid Vaccine

https://www.citizensjournal.us/18-re...zNAlCjcnBszQil

[Aragorn]

Originally Posted by hotlap

They sold a "best guess" with a one size fits all prescription as science and then silenced other opinion. It was a narrative, not science.

The problem is that most people could see that the statistics didn't (don't) align with the narrative. The risk for young people (30s or less) is minuscule but they paid that biggest social and developmental cost.

90% efficacy with a couple of the vaccines. Not too shabby.

[Moto-Mojo]

Originally Posted by Aragorn

90% efficacy with a couple of the vaccines. Not too shabby.

For month one. Month two: 80. Month 3: 70. Month 4: Booster talk...month 5: ER. Month 6: ? “We just don’t know.” Then, let’s talk about the CDC’s Walensky saying, vaccines won’t stop transmission. Where TF are we, really, then?

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by FarmerFran

You could say that about any business then... even churches.

Agreed. Not a church goer, personally...

That being said, if a doctor is recommending an $8 treatment vs $1000/course Remsdesivir, you know he's not doing it for the money...