All this weight on FDA approval seems to have vanished around the time I said it would. Glad to see your arguments aren't getting increasingly bizarre based on numbers you're snatching out of the sky. Good stuff, compelling.

Making people feel like idiot scum for not being vaccinated when you're happily approaching your 70% target already doesn't help (using up 85%of your vaccine stock in doing so). — Isaac

Why? Do they work? — James Riley

:up:

other's shouldn't as well because of X" — Cheshire

Why others should the argument be false? Why should a non-vaxxer want others not to vax too? I dont want them! Let them! Their offspring will notice!!!

If they are still living after the pandemic. And all non-vaxxers will probably die. Only the strong ones will survive or build up immunity themselves.

Why others should the argument be false? — Prishon

Exactly

Exactly — Cheshire

Are you addressing me?

I just have to let you know:

"Why make others feel like scum if their 70% is reached?"

Im on your side! And referring to how lucky we should be that the big pharmaceutical companies take care for us is bullshit. They made it in the first place (dont feel obliged to believe this though...I could be wrong).

Are you addressing me? — Prishon

Yes, but in my native language. How would you phrase this in English.

Why others should the argument be false? — Prishon

Ah yes! I see what you mean. Must have mixed two sentences up. What I meant is why should the argument not to vaxx be false? What if its right?

LOL! First you say I'm:

'encouraging' . . . everyone to get it creates a demand — Isaac


Then you say I'm making them:

even less likely . . . because all you've done is entrenched their paranoia — Isaac


Which is it? — James Riley

Both. Encouraging is an intentional activity, it doesn't imply success. Like I'm 'encouraging' you to actually think...

Uh, no. We aren't happily approaching our target. — James Riley

https://usafacts.org/visualizations/covid-vaccine-tracker-states/

61% and still rising. In what way is a figure over 60 and still rising not approaching 70? How far past 60 would a still rising number have to be before you'd consider it to be approaching 70? Are you using some idiosyncratic number line?

That's why we have variants. — James Riley

No, it categorically isn't. But then the actual facts have never bothered you have they?

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/covid-19/variants-concern

None one the variants of concern come from the US, none of the variants of interest come from the US. A single named monitored variant might possibly...

The answer isn't to coddle the Faux-News-hesitant, and hope they come along while we vax up the rest of the world. The answer is to vax up the whole fucking world, including us. We are already on the losing side of this while others clamor for the vax. Seems the foreigners (many who want the vax) are ready to play ball. Get them the vax. But little good that will do if all the imbeciles in America are listening to you and we create new variants and render the vax useless. — James Riley

So no actual argument then, just spittle-flecked invective. How, exactly, do you plan to 'vax up the whole fucking world'? What method do you advocate which doesn't include reducing current vaccine demand in the US? Does it involve waiving you gun around and shouting 'yet hah' by any chance?

Like I'm 'encouraging' you to actually think... — Isaac

:lol:

Ah yes! I see what you mean. Must have mixed two sentences up. What I meant is why should the argument not to vaxx be false? What if its right? — Prishon

Do I have to state this isn't a conversation between doctors? — Cheshire

Then why did you bring it up? You could have "false" replaced by "right".

Then why did you bring it up? You could have "false" replaced by "right". — Prishon

I don't speak bafflement. Nothing I've said approaches complicated.

Nothing I've said approaches complicated. — Cheshire

I didnt say it is complicated. I say you could have replaced "false" (in false arguments) by "true" (so it become true arguments).

I say you could have replaced "false" (in false arguments) by "true" (so it become true arguments). — Prishon

Don't think I used that word anywhere.

No, no. Just nice to get a take from someone who's looked at some research. — Srap Tasmaner

No problem.

I've only dug into the culture war part of it, which ... <sigh>. — Srap Tasmaner

Yeah, amazing isn't it? I actually came out of retirement to take up a consultancy just because of all this. I couldn't miss it. A phenomena (vaccine hesitancy) shared equally by both the uneducated and the PhD educated, but violently shunned by those in between... I don't think anything like this has ever occurred before, it's fascinating.

I've long been interested in the way the pharmaceutical industry has somehow become a poster boy for the left since way before the pandemic. One of the most profitable industries in the world, the largest lobbying budget the world has ever seen, sales practices bordering on psychopathic... ripe targets for right wing support you'd have thought (like arms, oil, and tobacco), but no. it's the left for whom they can do no wrong, the left who'll work tirelessly to dismiss any suggestion they might be doing anything underhand... A real oddity.

And then this shitstorm happened. Now the plan is to inject the whole world with a (possibly endless) round of a privately developed, commercial product for a profit-making corporation and there's not a peep from the usual suspects about maybe having a look at whether that's entirely sensible. And, no, not because it might contain Chinese nano-bots, or 5G receiving mercury... just because private, profit-making industries have a track record at looking after the welfare of the population about as good as Pol Pot's

But thinking about how people are responding (and more importantly, going to respond in future) to these sorts of events... Social media has changed the playing field entirely, this place is just a microcosm. The polemicising effects are well document already, but the degree to which it actually creates narratives so fast, which then become the constructed reality... We've never lived in a world in which global social narratives can be created real-time in response to events as they unfold, but divorced from any real-world anchors, where governments can actually devise responses based on the narrative that's only just emerged. Interesting - fucking terrifying, but interesting.

— Cheshire

Its getting all mixed up now. If someone has an argument for not taking the vaxx, it can be a potential harmLESS argument as well. Why do you emphasize harmFULL? Because thats worse? Of course. But thats the point. You dont know. So better be sure and not take it. Off course with the chance of getting infected.

Both. Encouraging is an intentional activity, it doesn't imply success. — Isaac

Then you stepped on your dick. If I am failing in my efforts to gin up U.S. demand then you would champion my driving them away. But since you walked yourself into that corner and slapped yourself, I'll just leave it at that.

61% and still rising. In what way is a figure over 60 and still rising not approaching 70? How far past 60 would a still rising number have to be before you'd consider it to be approaching 70? Are you using some idiosyncratic number line? — Isaac

It's been how many months that the U.S. and state governments, and the people you think you know better than, have been begging, pleading and providing incentives for people to vax, even pre-delta, and we haven't reached that goal? A goal that you and your ilk have been interfering with, by questioning the governments and the people who are smarter and wiser than you? A goal that we would have met long ago, but for the likes of you and Faux News and Tucker Carlson, et al? We'd be at 80% months ago, but for the dummies who think they know better than the CDC and Fauci, et al.

No, it categorically isn't. But then the actual facts have never bothered you have they? — Isaac

BS. We have variants because we haven't distanced, masked and vaxxed. It's people like that have killed thousands of people who listen to your ilk. This isn't a U.S. problem. The virus does not respect borders. People like you are in France, Germany, Brazil and all around the world, naysaying the advice of people that are smarter than you. All because you think you have the critical and analytical skills to make yourself an expert in the area by reading some articles. You, and people like you, remind me of the meme: "If you are not a scientist and you disagree with scientists about science, it's not a disagreement. You are wrong." I don't care if you, Isaac, actually might be some kind of scientist; you don't know shit or you wouldn't be here on TPF flapping your key board. You'd be hard at work somewhere helping out.

So no actual argument then, just spittle-flecked invective. — Isaac

Just because you can't rebut the argument doesn't mean it's not there.

How, exactly, do you plan to 'vax up the whole fucking world'? — Isaac

Well, if you really want to help, you'll quit undermining efforts to get people to distance, mask and vax with your pseudo-scientific questioning of people who you couldn't even carry the corn in their shit.

What method do you advocate which doesn't include reducing current vaccine demand in the US? — Isaac

First, there was little demand in the U.S. (thanks to you people) until the variant came along and even more people started dying, and sharing their come-to-Jesus meetings on T.V. after a close call. There were providers standing around with their thumbs up their ass because there was little demand. There is still not enough demand. But regardless, we (the whole fucking world) should have dumped everything into production, seven months ago, shared the tech and spun up a proper response.

You want to help? Take a god dam seat.

Why do you emphasize harmFULL? — Prishon

↪Prishon Distribution of a potentially harmful argument that others mistake for medical advice. — Cheshire

I emphasized potentially.

Its getting all mixed up now. — Prishon

Don't see how. I essentially provided a single sentence that I've had to requote against misstatement several times.

Do you disagree with the sentence? Would establishing that prior to throwing words at it help zero in on your target?

2mReplyOptions — Cheshire

The very fact that you write "harmful" lroves that you emphasize harmful. Why didnt you write "potentially harmless"?

If I am failing in my efforts to gin up U.S. demand then you would champion my driving them away. — James Riley

There's more than one demographic in receipt of your rhetoric.

A goal that we would have met long ago, but for the likes of you and Faux News and Tucker Carlson, et al? We'd be at 80% months ago, but for the dummies who think they know better than the CDC and Fauci, et al. — James Riley

Any evidence for that, or just more of your storytelling?

Well, if you really want to help, you'll quit undermining efforts to get people to distance, mask and vax ... — James Riley

I asked what your plan was, not mine.

your pseudo-scientific questioning of people who you couldn't even carry the corn in their shit. — James Riley

I've asked before for you to back up these accusations, but you've failed to do so. What is 'psuedo' about the scientists I've cited, are you suggesting the BMJ is a 'pseudo' scientific journal, is the World Health Organisation a 'psuedo' health organisation? Is this your new go-to, anyone who doesn't support your naive John Wayne inspired version of the solution is 'pseudo'-whatever?. If you can't provide any evidence you shouldn't be making such strong statements.

There were providers standing around with their thumbs up their ass because there was little demand. — James Riley

Evidence?

The very fact that you write "harmful" lroves that you emphasize harmful. Why didnt you write "potentially harmless"? — Prishon

It's implied by the use of the word potentially that arguments which are harmless exist. In example, anyone reading this discussion would not be overwhelmed by the perceived creditability derived from the counter position being served. If you made a really good argument that compelled some one to forgo protection from the virus it would potentially be harmful. The harm is ultimately done by an outcome that results in an element of chance. Currently, it's a 29x greater chance of harm from an infection without a vaccine.

it's 29x greater chance of harm from an infection without a vaccine. — Cheshire

No it isn't. Check your statistics (or learn some).

No it isn't. Check your statistics (or learn some). — Isaac

I'm 70% right by your math.

I'm 70% right by your math. — Cheshire

As usual, I haven't the faintest idea what you're on about. I asked you to check the source of your claim. In what bizarre, Twitter-corrupted world is that a strange request meriting such an eccentric response?

Making people feel like idiot scum for not being vaccinated when you're happily approaching your 70% target already doesn't help (using up 85%of your vaccine stock in doing so). — Isaac

Find that number on paper.

There's more than one demographic in receipt of your rhetoric. — Isaac

Well, according to you, I'm doing you a favor and freeing up the vax for overseas.

Any evidence for that, or just more of your storytelling? — Isaac

Can't prove a negative. It's like how many lives were saved by all those people who played ball since day one? How much worse would it be if they had all been like you? It's all academic BS that you'd probably waste time and resources studying instead of distancing, masking and vaxxing.

I asked what your plan was, not mine. — Isaac

That's my plan. Calling out your BS so everyone who thinks you're the bees knees can see it. Trying to get you to change your plan, take a seat and quit killing people.

I've asked before for you to back up these accusations, but you've failed to do so. — Isaac

I've already taught you about experts. I never claimed to be one.

What is 'psuedo' about the scientists I've cited, are you suggesting the BMJ is a 'pseudo' scientific journal, is the World Health Organisation a 'psuedo' health organisation? — Isaac

I didn't say they were, I said you are.

If you can't provide any evidence you shouldn't be making such strong statements. — Isaac

Again, I already taught you about the professions and how they work. When I walked you through the vax questions, you agreed with Fauci, et al, and I left you hanging on one thin little made-up reed that had to do with the U.S. hogging all the vax with a non-existent high demand.

Evidence? — Isaac

Yeah, I saw them at Fremont County DHE drinking coffee and waiting for people to show. I saw it in Denver and I saw it on the boob tube. It picked up, marginally, with Delta and FDA approval. Some people couldn't bring themselves to pivot after using the FDA as an excuse. But others are still taking their que from the likes of you.

Find that number on paper. — Cheshire

I cited the US vaccination rates. The supply rates are changing all the time, but the figure I got was from https://www.ft.com/content/a832d5d7-4a7f-42cc-850d-8757f19c3b6b.

Now your turn - your 29x citation please.

You cited a paywall.