Dr Strangetroll : or how I learned to stop arguing and be amused by the intransigence

[Bob B]

Contrary to what you might think .... the risk vs benefit is wildly different for different people

Jeez...you are an idiot!

If you can't see the truth in that statement there is no hope for you .... That's a pretty simple concept.

 

[brb58]

Yet...this is what you post. If this isn't talking out of both sides of your ass, I am not sure what is.

You are actually worse than Bmcl....you get the life saving vaccine but then promote conspiracy websites that downplay the need for getting that vaccine! You are a despicable human being.

Agreed...he is pretty much nuts. He must be fun at family gatherings. Start a conversation and he will just argue for the sake of arguing.

 

[Bob B]

Agreed...he is pretty much nuts. He must be fun at family gatherings. Start a conversation and he will just argue for the sake of arguing.

Is it possible you guys are REALLY that dense? Probably not ... it just what you lefties do when you can't deal with logic.

 

[brb58]

Is it possible you guys are REALLY that dense? Probably not ... it just what you lefties do when you can't deal with logic.

Sorry...republican here. This is science...not politics. It's an intelligence issue...something you don't appear to have any of.

 

[brb58]

Is it possible you guys are REALLY that dense? Probably not ... it just what you lefties do when you can't deal with logic.

I also don't believe for a second that you are vaccinated. You are just too stupid.

 

[Bob B]

Sorry...republican here. This is science...not politics. It's an intelligence issue...something you don't appear to have any of.

Well ... not a very good republican if you just resort to name calling .... not very good at science if you don't understand risk vs benefit

 

[bradbill]

Well ... not a very good republican if you just resort to name calling

LOL...funniest thing I have read all day!!!!

I am also a republican....but I do vote for the best person.

 

[Bob B]

I also don't believe for a second that you are vaccinated. You are just too stupid.

Wrong again ... I understand risk vs benefit. For me, it was easily on the side of getting vaccinated ... that is probably changing now that the vaccines don't work very well against the new variants.

Explain to me why we should be forcing healthy young people to get vaccinated .... can't go to college unless you risk myocarditis. That should be each individuals decision ... any good republican would understand that ... so, I think you are the one not telling the truth.

 

[bradbill]

Wrong again ... I understand risk vs benefit. For me, it was easily on the side of getting vaccinated ... that is probably changing now that the vaccines don't work very well against the new variants.

Explain to me why we should be forcing healthy young people to get vaccinated .... can't go to college unless you risk myocarditis. That should be each individuals decision ... any good republican would understand that ... so, I think you are the one not telling the truth.

Like I said before, I don't care if people get vaccinated. Just stay home when you get sick and don't infect others and die in your bed.

Are you married? Did your spouse get vaccinated? Did your kids get vaccinated? If they did, why are you not worried about myocarditis if it's such a HUGE reason not to get vaccinated?

BTW...greater risk of getting myocarditis from getting infected by covid than taking the vaccine. It's one of the reasons that having heart disease is an underlying factor for having risk associated with getting covid.

 

[Bob B]

Like I said before, I don't care if people get vaccinated. Just stay home when you get sick and don't infect others and die in your bed.

Are you married? Did your spouse get vaccinated? Did your kids get vaccinated? If they did, why are you not worried about myocarditis if it's such a HUGE reason not to get vaccinated?

You aren't worth staying up any longer .... The only reason I engage at all is that your opinions are so contrary to science that I am trying to understand how your outlook can be so warped.
I guess I will just have to chalk it up to mass formation psychosis and go to bed.

 

[MurphyGuy]

You guys need to read up on mass formation psychosis ... since your are perfect examples of the 30%.

LOL.
Oh great.. another new fad name that will evaporate in a few months.

 

[Johnson]

Conspiracy theorists have two attributes that are nearly ubiquitous: 1) They are almost all uneducated, and 2) Nearly all are religious.

You can't expect rational thought with those two factors.


Well, if our government doesn't straighten up and fly right soon, a bit of overthrowing might be in order. They're spending tax payer dollars like a teenage girl with daddy's credit card.. They're making dirty backroom deals to scratch each other's backs, and creating laws for which they have no business creating. Politicians are acting in their own self interest and that of big business rather than the public good.

They need to outlaw all corporate lobbying, cap campaign donations and make them public, and put all major policy decisions to a public vote.

Failure to do those things will most likely result in our downfall.. and we're there now. Its going to be a slow steady decline over the next 3 to 4 decades.

Trump wasn't a problem, he was a symptom.. like a deep rumbling cough because the patient has lung cancer...

Overthrow is rarely a positive thing. In the case of the US the country will turn into a bunch of small states if you are lucky not too many people will die.

 

[Shale MacGregor]

I wasn't too worried about it til they started forcing it on all the healthy young people ... When they did that they went off the deep end.

Who has forced anything on young people? If a company says the young people can't come to work and kill the old fat people, that is a decision that both parties have to weigh.

 

[Shale MacGregor]

Well ... not a very good republican if you just resort to name calling .... not very good at science if you don't understand risk vs benefit

A lot of people are mixing everyone's opinions in together. Bob has gotten vaccinated as well as his wife, and he is taking all standard precautions for someone of his age.

What he is railing against, and why he keeps going back to the anti-vax websites, isn't because he is anti-vax. He is anti-vax-when-it-isnt-needed.

The issue as he sees it, is that millions of children, teens, young adults are having this vaccine foisted upon them when it has little to no benefit for most of them, and potentially unwanted side-effects that can be negative for them.

He is doing a cost-benefit analysis and agrees that if you are older, pre-existing conditions, etc it is worth vaccinating, but if you are younger and no pre-existing conditions you are risking your health by getting vaccinated.


The issue I have with Bob is that he posts a lot of stuff that ends up being ridiculous claims, and some that isn't. When you push back on the 3 or 4 ridiculous things, he simply ignores your post, if you push back on the only semi-ridiculous things he then responds with things like "you are a bad person" "read it" "listen to it or Im not responding to you"... then when you actually read or listen to it and respond with a insightful point that disproves it, he again ignores your post and fails to respond.

It is endlessly frustrating. Just last night he posted something about excess deaths like it was a lightbulb moment, completely ignoring that vaccine rollout and subsequent immunity hadn't reached more than a quarter of the population until mid year.... and ignoring the fact that double the cases were reported this year. 20 million cases in 2020 -> 380k deaths 40 million cases in 2021 -> 480k deaths. I think it is easy to say that the vaccine and advances in treatment have helped.

The question that isn't answered is, how many have actually died of the vaccine. I think it is good to keep looking into that, but until there is hard evidence it is still better to get vaccinated.


Now, if you want to debate young people getting vaccinated or not, it becomes a moral argument. Should those with .0001% risk to themselves take on a .001 risk to themselves by getting vaccinated? The upside is being LESS likely to spread COVID if/when they get it, being LESS likely to get COVID, being LESS likely to harbour the virus and have it mutate, being LESS likely to miss work or be forced to quarantine. The downsides are the potentially increased risk of the vaccine vs no vaccine.

I would argue that it is a moral virtue to take on minimal risk to benefit others in a larger way. I would not argue that it is a moral obligation.

You might risk yourself to save someone else, but your tolerance for risk is your own to decide. If trying to save someone from a burning building is a 20% risk to yourself, but 100% chance the person will die, you are not obligated to save them but it would be virtuous to do so.

 

[Batvette]

I am goi

I am going to stop posting here. I probably will leave the forum entirely.

Those are not studies. Those are letters. The references in them are to studies and reviews of zinc and the common cold. Note they say zinc is effective against colds and coronaviruses. I already said it has limited effectiveness against colds. Some versions of what is considered the common cold are coronaviruses. The fact that something works, to a limited degree, against some respiratory infections does not mean it will work against all. So to find out if they do they don't guess. They don't read right-wing blogs and watch Tucker Carlson they do studies that are randomized (as to participants so they groups become statistically indistinguishable) double-blind (so not only do the participants not know if they are getting a placebo or zinc but the people administering the drug do not know) controlled (confounding variables identified and the study designed to eliminate their influence) trials (actual trials done in accordance with guideline and protocols). This is how they determine if something works and they were quite interested in zinc. You say "It doesn't take a degree in medicine to take in information off the internet". Well, it sure helps especially these days. You need to know how to access and read actual scientific studies. You need to know how to rank scientific information. You need to understand statistical analysis and be able to recognize deviations from the randomized double-blind clinical trial protocol. This is why the absolute best advice always is to consult with your personal physician. This is an actual study. This is what they look like. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2776305

Dont be silly. The first "letter" links to a study and gives a detailed analysis of it. Did you even read it? Or did you just see the word letter and think "look now I have a reason to reject it."

 

[Batvette]

Am I the only one who thimks that it is funny when those conspiracy theorists, who loudly oppose government controll and communism, complain about pharmaceutical companies earning money?

If theyre making a ton of money off an ineffective virus I dont see the concerns as conflicting. "Opposing government control" hardly means abolishing the FDA. Opposing communism is not advocating corporate fraud.

 

[Shale MacGregor]

If theyre making a ton of money off an ineffective virus I dont see the concerns as conflicting. "Opposing government control" hardly means abolishing the FDA. Opposing communism is not advocating corporate fraud.

Who decides what percentage efficacy is "ineffective"? The antibody response and quantities have been measured, and the overall efficacy has been borne out. The numbers are low against preventing breakthrough infections of Omicron, but even a blunting of the effect and reducing hospitalization is surely worth something?

 

[Batvette]

Exactly....I advocate for personal freedom for people to not get vaccinated and die by themselves in their bed.

Who decides what percentage efficacy is "ineffective"? The antibody response and quantities have been measured, and the overall efficacy has been borne out. The numbers are low against preventing breakthrough infections of Omicron, but even a blunting of the effect and reducing hospitalization is surely worth something?

It turned out to be a LOT less than they initially claimed.

 

[Shale MacGregor]

It turned out to be a LOT less than they initially claimed.

Fair enough. They could have been lying, or the sample size could have been too small and had delta #'s included as an average. If they lied it would still have been worth getting vaccinated for the reduced severity of infection?

 

[A.Justice]

LOL...another thing that doesn't exist. And while you are at it, it's spelled 'mass formation psychosis'

 

[A.Justice]

Let's set something straight. I could give a rat's ass if you get vaccinated. Just don't infect anyone when you get it and stay at home and die in your bed.

I'm curious, what exactly are you doing here on diysolarforum? Other than a few posts gloating about how much smarter you are than other people, I don't see that you've asked any questions or contributed any content to this website. If you want to argue about politics, and wish people dead, there's much better places to do that, Twatter comes to mind, I'm sure they'd love to have you.

Everyone else involved with this conversation I've personally seen talking about solar and energy related things elsewhere on this forum, except for you buddy. Even bmcl, who everybody loves to call a shill, is engaged in conversations elsewhere in this form.

I don't know if you're having a bad day, a bad week, or just a bad life, but talking to other people like that shows me that you're not really very happy with yourself. I genuinely hope that things change for you, and you're able to release some of that anger in a healthy way.

Also, just a FYI; If you're actually trying to win people over to your "side", the name calling and insults are completely counterproductive. Even if I agreed with a point that you made, I would never admit it, because I wouldn't want you to have the smug satisfaction of being right.

 

[Johnson]

If theyre making a ton of money off an ineffective virus I dont see the concerns as conflicting.

The virus has a mortality rate of about 2% among those who are not vaccinated. With the vaccine the mortality rate is reduced to about 0.2%. Some other viruses are of course more "effective"

"Opposing government control" hardly means abolishing the FDA.

Abolish the FDA

The role of the state is to protect rights and guard against fraud, not to prevent people from making risky choices.

reason.com

Opposing communism is not advocating corporate fraud.

Nice straw man, we are talking about limiting about the amount of profit a company should be allowed to make for a vaccine that saves millions of lives.

 

[BMcL]

Since the Dept of Defense has admitted that ivermectin and HCQ are effective treatments

And the vaxed and unvaxed can both spread the virus

And the death rate has plummeted to where covid is a bad flu

There is no need for vaccines anymore. Time to move on Bucko !

COVID-19 Provisional Counts - Weekly Updates by Select Demographic and Geographic Characteristics

Tabulated data on provisional COVID-19 deaths by age, sex, race and Hispanic origin, and comorbidities. Also includes an index of state-level and county-level mortality data available for download.

www.cdc.gov

 

[Bob B]

Who has forced anything on young people? If a company says the young people can't come to work and kill the old fat people, that is a decision that both parties have to weigh.

You know that's just wrong ... What about school?

 

[Bob B]

A lot of people are mixing everyone's opinions in together. Bob has gotten vaccinated as well as his wife, and he is taking all standard precautions for someone of his age.

What he is railing against, and why he keeps going back to the anti-vax websites, isn't because he is anti-vax. He is anti-vax-when-it-isnt-needed.

The issue as he sees it, is that millions of children, teens, young adults are having this vaccine foisted upon them when it has little to no benefit for most of them, and potentially unwanted side-effects that can be negative for them.

He is doing a cost-benefit analysis and agrees that if you are older, pre-existing conditions, etc it is worth vaccinating, but if you are younger and no pre-existing conditions you are risking your health by getting vaccinated.


The issue I have with Bob is that he posts a lot of stuff that ends up being ridiculous claims, and some that isn't. When you push back on the 3 or 4 ridiculous things, he simply ignores your post, if you push back on the only semi-ridiculous things he then responds with things like "you are a bad person" "read it" "listen to it or Im not responding to you"... then when you actually read or listen to it and respond with a insightful point that disproves it, he again ignores your post and fails to respond.

It is endlessly frustrating. Just last night he posted something about excess deaths like it was a lightbulb moment, completely ignoring that vaccine rollout and subsequent immunity hadn't reached more than a quarter of the population until mid year.... and ignoring the fact that double the cases were reported this year. 20 million cases in 2020 -> 380k deaths 40 million cases in 2021 -> 480k deaths. I think it is easy to say that the vaccine and advances in treatment have helped.

The question that isn't answered is, how many have actually died of the vaccine. I think it is good to keep looking into that, but until there is hard evidence it is still better to get vaccinated.


Now, if you want to debate young people getting vaccinated or not, it becomes a moral argument. Should those with .0001% risk to themselves take on a .001 risk to themselves by getting vaccinated? The upside is being LESS likely to spread COVID if/when they get it, being LESS likely to get COVID, being LESS likely to harbour the virus and have it mutate, being LESS likely to miss work or be forced to quarantine. The downsides are the potentially increased risk of the vaccine vs no vaccine.

I would argue that it is a moral virtue to take on minimal risk to benefit others in a larger way. I would not argue that it is a moral obligation.

You might risk yourself to save someone else, but your tolerance for risk is your own to decide. If trying to save someone from a burning building is a 20% risk to yourself, but 100% chance the person will die, you are not obligated to save them but it would be virtuous to do so.

At least you have coherent ideas .... unlike those other 2 who don't even understand risk vs benefit.

Where you are going wrong is in the assumption that the vaccinated aren't spreading the virus .... I have previously posted data showing that there is no correlation between the % of the population that is vaccinated and the number of cases .... in some areas of the world, the number was actually reversed .... meaning that the vaccinated are spreading the virus just as good or better than the unvaxxed.
I also posted info on the major Cornell University outbreak where 99% were vaccinated .... because they weren't allowed to go to school with out it. They sent all those kids home to spread the virus to their families.
So .... in light of that information, the argument to get vaccinated to protect other people falls apart. (This was before Omicron ... when Delta was still the primary variant.)

We don't have good data one way or the other about vaccine risk .... we know it exists .... especially in previously healthy young people who have heart problems after the vaccine and sometimes die ... We know the has been a huge uptick in reporting on the VAERS system .... but that system is so bad it is impossible to extrapolate real data from it. Under reporting is estimated to be at least a factor of 10 and maybe as high as in the 100's

We know the deaths from Covid have been inflated ... When they finally start releasing some of the data for vaccinated people, we can see that around 40% of deaths were not FROM Covid, but WITH Covid .... All of them were reported as Covid deaths .... Even CNN has done reporting on that .... and on average the people dying had 4 comorbidities. If a person died after getting in a car accident and tested positive for covid they were listed as dying from covid.
The really odd thing is that they could provide that information for vaccinated people .... but not unvaccinated people ....So ..... we can't do a comparison. Why would they have the info for one group and not the other?

You are correct in saying I don't think there is a good risk vs benefit for HEALTHY young people.

The vaccine doesn't even work for people on immunosuppressant drugs .... they would have to stop there meds for a significant time to ..... There are approximately 10 million of those people in the US. The risk vs benefit is upside down for these people.

People who have natural immunity have better immunity that the vaccinated .... Why in the world would you just blatantly ignore that and try to force them into getting vaccinated anyway. That would be another scenario where the risk vs benefit goes the wrong way.

There are pregnant women who have legitimate concern that the vaccine could cause misarrange.

There are as many scenarios as there are people .... We are NOT all the same and shouldn't be treated as such. Everyone should be doing their OWN assessment and deciding what is best for themselves and their families.