evidence is piling up: As the p******c continues is is becomming more and more obvious that v*****es are not necessary for those under 65 or for those with no underlying conditions..

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

As the p******c continues is is becomming more and more obvious that v*****es are not necessary for those under 65 or for those with no underlying conditions.. V*****es do NOT prevent the v******ted from contracting the disease. And even if they do, the fatality rate is extremely (below 0.5% )low. About or less than the seasonal flu

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

boberic wrote:

As the p******c continues is is becomming more and more obvious that v*****es are not necessary for those under 65 or for those with no underlying conditions.. V*****es do NOT prevent the v******ted from contracting the disease. And even if they do, the fatality rate is extremely (below 0.5% )low. About or less than the seasonal flu

While I appreciate everything you say, stirring this pot in this venue is just counter productive. Everyone has chosen a side and anyone changing their mind won't admit it.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

InfiniteISO wrote:

While I appreciate everything you say, stirring this pot in this venue is just counter productive. Everyone has chosen a side and anyone changing their mind won't admit it.

I listened to F***i at the beginning of the p******c with an open mind. But since then he has proven to be an overpaid corrupt partisan egomaniacal bureaucrat consistently wrong in his opinions and hiding behind the mantle of "science" to denigrate those who disagree with him.

F***i has said we will never eradicate C***d. I am betting we will. I have just as much a chance of being right as he.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

--Bob

Fotoartist wrote:

I listened to F***i at the beginning of the p******c with an open mind. But since then he has proven to be an overpaid corrupt partisan egomaniacal bureaucrat consistently wrong in his opinions and hiding behind the mantle of "science" to denigrate those who disagree with him.

F***i has said we will never eradicate C***d. I am betting we will. I have just as much a chance of being right as he.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

Fotoartist wrote:

I listened to F***i at the beginning of the p******c with an open mind. But since then he has proven to be an overpaid corrupt partisan egomaniacal bureaucrat consistently wrong in his opinions and hiding behind the mantle of "science" to denigrate those who disagree with him.

F***i has said we will never eradicate C***d. I am betting we will. I have just as much a chance of being right as he.

You haven't, even once, shown evidence of an open mind, since I first started reading your posts.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

thom w wrote:

You haven't, even once, shown evidence of an open mind, since I first started reading your posts.

I am v****d. I thought it would protect me. But so many of those who were v****d have been infected I no longer thi.nk it will. And if v*****es were so effective why are masks still required If thats a closeed mind. I plead guilty

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

boberic wrote:

I am v****d. I thought it would protect me. But so many of those who were v****d have been infected I no longer thi.nk it will. And if v*****es were so effective why are masks still required If thats a closeed mind. I plead guilty

Please take another look at who my post was directed to. I said nothing about you not having an open mind. I'm also not claiming that you do, just that you seem to be trying to escape an insult that was never directed to you. I've got an interesting exercise for you, collect all of your posts over the last several months, and determine how many turned out as you had predicted. It seems to me that you have the worst batting average in the attic. If I'm wrong, it isn't by much. You are generally civil, and maybe that's the best we can hope for here.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

boberic wrote:

As the p******c continues is is becomming more and more obvious that v*****es are not necessary for those under 65 or for those with no underlying conditions.. V*****es do NOT prevent the v******ted from contracting the disease. And even if they do, the fatality rate is extremely (below 0.5% )low. About or less than the seasonal flu

However, it appears to be much more contagious than the seasonal flue.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

thom w wrote:

You haven't, even once, shown evidence of an open mind, since I first started reading your posts.

I thought Lefties would understand the term 'open mind' that's why I used it.

But I don't like to use the term 'open' mind for myself since it implies I would be willing to sacrifice all my principles for politiical expediency or wh**ever is popular on the 'altar' of openness.

I like the term 'active mind' which holds fast to moral and intellectual principles and filters out the garbage passing for modern day L*****t ideas.

That's why you won't be seeing me agree with much of what you say.

David Martin Loc: Cary, NC

boberic wrote:

As the p******c continues is is becomming more and more obvious that v*****es are not necessary for those under 65 or for those with no underlying conditions.. V*****es do NOT prevent the v******ted from contracting the disease. And even if they do, the fatality rate is extremely (below 0.5% )low. About or less than the seasonal flu

The case fatality rate of C****-** as of today is 1.3% according to Johns Hopkins (https://c****av***s.jhu.edu/data/mortality).
Whereas the case fatality rate of the flu is 0.1%.
So about a 10-fold difference.

And you might consider lowering the age range for which you maintain that v*****es are not necessary, to 50 or even 40:

flip1948 Loc: Hamden, CT

David Martin wrote:

The case fatality rate of C****-** as of today is 1.3% according to Johns Hopkins (https://c****av***s.jhu.edu/data/mortality).
Whereas the case fatality rate of the flu is 0.1%.
So about a 10-fold difference.

And you might consider lowering the age range for which you maintain that v*****es are not necessary, to 50 or even 40:

His .5% figure fits right in with the "99.5% survive" claim by racman on more than one occasion. When I confronted him with the real figure (1.35% die) a few days ago based on CDC numbers he eventually admitted his was an "arbitrary" figure...but wasn't a lie. LOL.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

flip1948 wrote:

His .5% figure fits right in with the "99.5% survive" claim by racman on more than one occasion. When I confronted him with the real figure (1.35% die) a few days ago based on CDC numbers he eventually admitted his was an "arbitrary" figure...but wasn't a lie. LOL.

That's a lie, the CDC doesn't give real numbers of infected, only the numbers that are reported. Any i***t knows the reported numbers are significantly lower than the numbers that are actually number of people that have been infected. Why do you lie?

Shutterbug1697 Loc: Northeast

boberic wrote:

As the p******c continues is is becomming more and more obvious that v*****es are not necessary for those under 65 or for those with no underlying conditions.. V*****es do NOT prevent the v******ted from contracting the disease. And even if they do, the fatality rate is extremely (below 0.5% )low. About or less than the seasonal flu

The fact remains that the vast majority of those who're hospitalized across the United States are unv******ted!

Why do you think our hospitals are yet again at the breaking point and suspending elective surgeries?

The v*****es are working as designed, to keep those who have been v******ted and now boosted OUT of hospitals and for those who do get breakthrough cases, those cases are milder than those who were never v******ted, or haven't received their second shot (M*****a and P****r) or their booster shots.

Try finding an ICU bed in the hardest hit areas right now, without having to drive hours to get to that open ICU bed.

Shutterbug1697 Loc: Northeast

Fotoartist wrote:

I listened to F***i at the beginning of the p******c with an open mind. But since then he has proven to be an overpaid corrupt partisan egomaniacal bureaucrat consistently wrong in his opinions and hiding behind the mantle of "science" to denigrate those who disagree with him.

F***i has said we will never eradicate C***d. I am betting we will. I have just as much a chance of being right as he.

We may go from a P******c to C****av***s becoming endemic, but like the Flu, we may never eradicate the C****av***s.

Shutterbug1697 Loc: Northeast

boberic wrote:

I am v****d. I thought it would protect me. But so many of those who were v****d have been infected I no longer thi.nk it will. And if v*****es were so effective why are masks still required If thats a closeed mind. I plead guilty

The v*****es were never intended as a preventative for contracting the v***s, you should already know that.

Like the Flu v*****es, the C****-** v*****es are designed to lessen the effects of an infection, to keep people OUT of hospitals with milder cases!