The consequences of living in a pro-Trump county

[hoot1]

Here is the headline:

Evidence is building that immunity from Covid-19 infection is at least as strong as that from vaccination. Scientists are divided on the implications for vaccine policy.

Some tidbits from article:

The role of immunity from infection, which scientists have been trying to figure out since the outset of the pandemic, has gained fresh significance amid the controversy over vaccine mandates.

Vaccines typically give rise to a stronger antibody response than infection, which might make them better at fending off the virus in the short term. Infection triggers a response that evolves over time, possibly making it more robust in the long term. A combination of both types appears to be stronger than either alone. But the jury is out on whether one form is stronger than the other, and whether their relative strength even matters for vaccine policy.

Immunity from infection hasn’t been studied as extensively as vaccine-mediated immunity. But over the course of the pandemic, clues have emerged to suggest the two are at least equivalent.

A recent Israeli study found that people who had been vaccinated with two shots of the vaccine developed by Pfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE—the most commonly used there—were 13 times more likely to later get infected than those with a prior infection. The study, which hasn’t been peer reviewed, tracked confirmed infections between June and August this year for people who had been either vaccinated or infected in January or February.

John, here is a link to the WSJ article to which you have been referring.

In reading the article it looks as if the jury of experts is still out on the subject of vaccinations versus natural immunity. Didn't see any info on the 48 million who have acquired natural immunity.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Are the Rebs out there right now stumping with their solutions to these problems whether they be local/federal, public-private partnerships, charities, saber rattling? No, they're just owning the libs.

The GOP executive and administrativ policies were in place and effective. Biden shitcanned all the important ones. What do you expect the GOP to do now?

Pelosi permitted zero debate on GOP amendments to BBB.

 

[outside shooter]

And energy! Good lord.

We are both a fan of nuclear. You need to admit that Trump also did absolutely nothing in terms of promoting a shift from coal/gas to nuclear. So it seems a status quo on that front, with the benefit of having the truth come out that "clean coal" is an absolute mythical blue unicorn.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

John, how long does "natural immunity" last and is it the same for everyone?

There were articles about how the SARS victims in Japan were still showing antibodies/t-cells after 17 years. That data got lost in the noise of the US political fight.

Heres a story from July - I seem to recall earlier ones

Could immunity last 17 YEARS? SARS patients still have crucial T cells

People infected with SARS still have crucial white T cells. Researchers in Singapore said it supports the notion the same could be true for the closely related coronavirus SARS-Cov-2.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Remember - around a third of Americans were initially convinced Trump could have stopped Covid by issuing a travel ban sooner than he did, and that 2 million would die in the US because of that failure. The politics went downhill from there. That kind of BS is why I got my data off-shore. Almost every US story was slanted by politics.

 

[larsIU]

The GOP executive and administrativ policies were in place and effective. Biden shitcanned all the important ones. What do you expect the GOP to do now?

Pelosi permitted zero debate on GOP amendments to BBB.

There were over 100 amendments offered up by Republicans and most were just gutting the bill. The few i reviewed offered nothing that could be considered a negotiation.

The first part you may prove to be right about. Joe might just be a shitty president.

 

[aajohn2000]

Any idiot can cherry pick situations where something went wrong. Your link proves nothing. And if you are correct about the low bail for this "known felon and criminal" the bail reforms that are being drawn up are designed to address just that.

Read this:

Want to fix the criminal justice system? Start by getting rid of bail.

Hundreds of thousands of unconvicted people languish in jails on any given day simply because they can’t afford bail.

www.vox.com

There's nothing irrational about being obsessed with what Trump and the FS did with the courts. Those are very real long term consequence

John, here is a link to the WSJ article to which you have been referring.

In reading the article it looks as if the jury of experts is still out on the subject of vaccinations versus natural immunity. Didn't see any info on the 48 million who have acquired natural immunity.

Thanks. I subscribe to WSJ and read entire article.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

TDS wouldn‘t be so bad if it were just confined to posters here, other Democrats out there, and the media. It also resides in the West Wing in and in the cabinet agencies. That against our interest. Biden’s abrupt termination of all of Trump’s foreign border agreements is a problem we can never pay for. His termination of wall construction in progress will cost us millions in contractual default compensation, not to mention all the stockpiles of materials, including high tech surveillance equipment, wasting away in the dessert. “AbrahamAccords” are a good thing. Now that term can’t even be mentioned while Biden kicked that effort to the curb. China and Russia are proceeding unrestrained because Biden relaxed everything Trump did to keep both boxed in. And energy! Good lord.

"TDS" is nothing but a stupid acronym uttered by partisan hacks who want to deflect attention away from the real TDS, which was predicted up to a year in advance, even on here, and was on full display on 1/6/21.

 

[mcmurtry66]

"TDS" is nothing but a stupid acronym uttered by partisan hacks who want to deflect attention away from the real TDS, which was predicted up to a year in advance, even on here, and was on full display on 1/6/21.

No I think it's an obsession. You see it in Cosmic, Hickory, Shooter and a few others. In 30 years of following politics and gov I've never seen anything like it. It's like they've lost that boundary and personalized him. Trump is awful, but not worth the time.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

No I think it's an obsession. You see it in Cosmic, Hickory, Shooter and a few others. In 30 years of following politics and gov I've never seen anything like it. It's like they've lost that boundary and personalized him. Trump is awful, but not worth the time.

But he is worth the time as long as the GOP, as a whole, continues to be the "Party of Trump", which it is, regardless of what you say.
There have been breaks in the romance, and that is heartening for the political future of the country, but they are still too few and too far between.

 

[mcmurtry66]

But he is worth the time as long as the GOP, as a whole, continues to be the "Party of Trump", which it is, regardless of what you say.
There have been breaks in the romance, and that is heartening for the political future of the country, but they are still too few and too far between.

Why? Who cares? Let them be the party of Trump. He's no worse than Biden and Harris. Thinking he is - is part of the misguided obsession. If that's who the Republicans put forth so be it. It is what it is; personally, I don't think he'll be the choice, for many reasons, but obsessing over him like he's worse than Biden/Harris is just partisanship.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

Why? Who cares? Let them be the party of Trump. He's no worse than Biden and Harris. Thinking he is - is part of the obsession.

So, by that logic, why even talk about Biden, if they are the same? And saying he is no longer president is tantamount to surrender. If Biden is the face of one of the political parties, Trump is the face of the other.

 

[DANC]

What exactly is the debate about on this topic? Just seems everyone shouting over each other.

The data is pretty clear and indisputable on two things....

1) Trump voters have been vaccinated at lower rates than Biden voters.... (we seem to ignore non- voters, even though there are nearly as many of them as total voters, but whatever)

And 2) vaccinations greatly reduce mortality rates from Covid.

I never imagined the idea of vaccinations would be so closely correlated with political leanings, but here we are. So many people are personally offended by data, which is humorous and sad at the same time.

You can thank the Democrats for politicizing the vaccine. So much mouthing off about not taking a vaccine developed under Trump.

You can't blame people for being skeptical of a vaccine developed so quickly and not approved by the fDA until recently.

 

[DANC]

A "win"? 800,000 dead Americans? That's f*cking sick.

Omicron variant has caused 800,000 American deaths?

You really are ignorant of the entire situation, aren't you?

 

[mcmurtry66]

So, by that logic, why even talk about Biden, if they are the same? And saying he is no longer president is tantamount to surrender. If Biden is the face of one of the political parties, Trump is the face of the other.

Because Biden is in the White House and Trump is probably sitting at a back booth at Flagler Steakhouse getting one day closer to a heart attack

 

[DANC]

Wow. That's amazing. People were discussing Covid and you interrupt by deflecting to murder and crime,

You even got DANC to agree with you.

I hope you don't start charging me for that living space in your head.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

Because Biden is in the White House and Trump is probably sitting at a back booth at Flagler Steakhouse getting one day closer to a heart attack

What was the name of that Cheap Trick song?

 

[mcmurtry66]

What was the name of that Cheap Trick song?

Surrender? Lol. The pride of Rockford

 

[hoot1]

You can thank the Democrats for politicizing the vaccine. So much mouthing off about not taking a vaccine developed under Trump.

You can't blame people for being skeptical of a vaccine developed so quickly and not approved by the fDA until recently.

DANC, think you would agree that the health decisions we make shouldn't be based on our politics. So if our health decisions become politicized we have only ourselves to blame.

I made the health decision choice in favor of getting two vaccines and a booster, but remained extremely cautious by continuing to wear a mask and avoid close contact just be safe.

Not saying my decision was a smart decision, but at least it wasn't a political decision. Taking advice about health decisions from a politician is about like following their picks when selecting your March Madness basketball brackets.

 

[DANC]

DANC, think you would agree that the health decisions we make shouldn't be based on our politics. So if our health decisions become politicized we have only ourselves to blame.

I made the health decision choice in favor of getting two vaccines and a booster, but remained extremely cautious by continuing to wear a mask and avoid close contact just be safe.

Not saying my decision was a smart decision, but at least it wasn't a political decision. Taking advice about health decisions from a politician is about like following their picks when selecting your March Madness basketball brackets.

I agree that basing medical decisions on a political stance is dumb. However, we're talking about people in general and there were many people who claimed they wouldn't take a vaccine develped under Trump. I was just responding to a post that wondered why the vaccine was so politicized.

I took the 2 Pfizer vaccines, but am holding off on the booster. I may or may not take it, but it won't be based on politics.

 

[outside shooter]

There were precisely ZERO people who claimed they wouldn't take a vaccine develped under Trump.

There were several prominent people who very specifically stated that they wouldn't take a vaccine that was ordered to be approved, by Trump, over the objections of the leaders of the FDA and bypassing all normal drug approval protocols.

Of course, many know this, since it has been stated, also very clearly, 100 times on this forum.

But it needs to be restated, again and again, for dullards like DANC.

Sometimes I regret clicking on "show ignored content"

 

[hoot1]

I agree that basing medical decisions on a political stance is dumb. However, we're talking about people in general and there were many people who claimed they wouldn't take a vaccine develped under Trump. I was just responding to a post that wondered why the vaccine was so politicized.

I took the 2 Pfizer vaccines, but am holding off on the booster. I may or may not take it, but it won't be based on politics.

I gave credit to the Trump administration for its program Operation Warp Speed.

Rather than not taking the vaccines developed under Warp Speed for political reasons, I am surprised more people didn't claim their reluctance was based on Warp Speed limiting the drug companies liability for damages as this article points out.

 

[DANC]

They were talking about Biden!

Actually, they were talking in low voices so TwentyIQ couldn't hear them talk about how they couldn't wait to get out of his house.

 

[DANC]

To each his own. Me, I just can't get past the lawlessness and corruption. Maybe I'm naive.

You seem to get past selling influence by Hunter.

And yes, it's against the law and it's corruption by the entire Biden family.

 

[DANC]

The GOP executive and administrativ policies were in place and effective. Biden shitcanned all the important ones. What do you expect the GOP to do now?

Pelosi permitted zero debate on GOP amendments to BBB.

Supposedly the courts ordered Biden to reinstate the Trump border policy.

We'll see if Joe abides by the court ruling.

 

[DANC]

We are both a fan of nuclear. You need to admit that Trump also did absolutely nothing in terms of promoting a shift from coal/gas to nuclear. So it seems a status quo on that front, with the benefit of having the truth come out that "clean coal" is an absolute mythical blue unicorn.

No, but we were energy-independant under Trump.

Maybe you haven't had to buy gas in the last 10 months.

 

[DANC]

There were precisely ZERO people who claimed they wouldn't take a vaccine develped under Trump.

There were several prominent people who very specifically stated that they wouldn't take a vaccine that was ordered to be approved, by Trump, over the objections of the leaders of the FDA and bypassing all normal drug approval protocols.

Of course, many know this, since it has been stated, also very clearly, 100 times on this forum.

But it needs to be restated, again and again, for dullards like DANC.

Sometimes I regret clicking on "show ignored content"

I guess you took me off ignore!

You are 100% wrong. The vaccine was approved without FDA approval. How did that happen, if it wasn't for Trump's Operation Warp Speed.

It was alll over the media that celebrities and politicians were saying it.

Don't try to revise history now.

 

[DANC]

I gave credit to the Trump administration for its program Operation Warp Speed.

Rather than not taking the vaccines developed under Warp Speed for political reasons, I am surprised more people didn't claim their reluctance was based on Warp Speed limiting the drug companies liability for damages as this article points out.

Well, exactly. When Outside Shitter claims people said they wouldn't take it if Trump ordered it to be approved. He DID order it to be approved ahead of FDA approval.

But posters like UncleMark and OS don't want to admit this because it destroys their argument. They made the vaccine as political as anyone did.

 

[Mas-sa-suta]

But there are problems to solve. If the Reps idea of governing is to wait for the other side to offer something and then mock it, what are they doing?

Such Bullshit!

Name a 'problem' left-wing government has solved.

 

[DANC]

Such Bullshit!

Name a 'problem' left-wing government has solved.

Pretty hilarious Biden reverses every working Trump policy and then claim Republicans have no ideas to solve 'problems' that have been created by Biden.

 

[larsIU]

Such Bullshit!

Name a 'problem' left-wing government has solved.

Medicare - health insurance for the old and uninsurable.

Social Security - to prevent impoverishment in old age.

How many more you want?

 

[mcmurtry66]

Medicare - health insurance for the old and uninsurable.

Social Security - to prevent impoverishment in old age.

How many more you want?

Covering pre-existing conditions.
Lots of consumer protection stuff. On and on.

Personally I've never disliked the left. Was fine with Obama. Liked Clinton. Two incredibly smart and talented men. It's something about this current crop elicits the same revulsion in me that lefties feel about Trump.

 

[outside shooter]

I gave credit to the Trump administration for its program Operation Warp Speed.

Rather than not taking the vaccines developed under Warp Speed for political reasons, I am surprised more people didn't claim their reluctance was based on Warp Speed limiting the drug companies liability for damages as this article points out.

The reason for limiting liability damage is because no company will do research in any particularly litigious area, such as pediatrics, prenatal care, vaccines, elderly care, vaccines... a long, long list.

In the 1970s a pharma company in Cincinnati invented a drug that safely eliminated morning sickness. It was named Bendectin. They were sued 37 times for causing birth defects. They won 37 times, since the rate of birth defects was the same in people taking or not taking the drug.

But 37 lawsuits cost money. They said "we give up, we withdraw the drug, though it was safe". All pharma companies thereafter refused to work in litigious areas.

That was only ameliorated by offering limited immunity from lawsuits, other than for scientific fraud, falsifying data, or withholding safety info.

 

[mcmurtry66]

The reason for limiting liability damage is because no company will do research in any particularly litigious area, such as pediatrics, prenatal care, vaccines, elderly care, vaccines... a long, long list.

In the 1970s a pharma company in Cincinnati invented a drug that safely eliminated morning sickness. It was named Bendectin. They were sued 37 times for causing birth defects. They won 37 times, since the rate of birth defects was the same in people taking or not taking the drug.

But 37 lawsuits cost money. They said "we give up, we withdraw the drug, though it was safe". All pharma companies thereafter refused to work in litigious areas.

That was only ameliorated by offering limited immunity from lawsuits, other than for scientific fraud, falsifying data, or withholding safety info.

Bullshit. Lobbyists are the reason. Pfizer will make 80 plus billion this year. No lawsuits are deterring research with those profits.

Do you have any clue how MDLs work? Obviously not. No one is filing frivolous suits - they cost a fortune and take an army.

Direct marketing from pharma has blown the doors open on litigation

 

[hoot1]

The reason for limiting liability damage is because no company will do research in any particularly litigious area, such as pediatrics, prenatal care, vaccines, elderly care, vaccines... a long, long list.

In the 1970s a pharma company in Cincinnati invented a drug that safely eliminated morning sickness. It was named Bendectin. They were sued 37 times for causing birth defects. They won 37 times, since the rate of birth defects was the same in people taking or not taking the drug.

But 37 lawsuits cost money. They said "we give up, we withdraw the drug, though it was safe". All pharma companies thereafter refused to work in litigious areas.

That was only ameliorated by offering limited immunity from lawsuits, other than for scientific fraud, falsifying data, or withholding safety info.

OS, hope you understand that the Trump administration limiting liability as part of Warp Speed didn't deter me from getting vaxed.

Only mentioned it as a reason for some to avoid being vaccinated.

By the way, OS, found your reasons for limiting liability to be illuminating..

 

[DANC]

Medicare - health insurance for the old and uninsurable.

Social Security - to prevent impoverishment in old age.

How many more you want?

It's true that Leftists are good at creating ponzi schemes.

 

[mcmurtry66]

OS, hope you understand that the Trump administration limiting liability as part of Warp Speed didn't deter me from getting vaxed.

Only mentioned it as a reason for some to avoid being vaccinated.

By the way, OS, found your reasons for limiting liability to be illuminating..

OS, hope you understand that the Trump administration limiting liability as part of Warp Speed didn't deter me from getting vaxed.

Only mentioned it as a reason for some to avoid being vaccinated.

By the way, OS, found your reasons for limiting liability to be illuminating..

His reasons are nonsense. Look at big pharma/med annual revenue and compare same to lawsuits and settlements. Lawsuits are a cost of doing business that's a drop in the bucket compared to profits. Zimmer Biomet and so many in fine Warsaw Indiana get sued non stop and just keep on cranking out newer versions etc. - to cite one of countless examples.

Limiting Liability has always been a product of lobbyists to maximize profits. The companies are cash cows

His take on lawsuits is even goofier. Cases languish in mdls for years while the companies continue to profit.

 

[DANC]

Covering pre-existing conditions.
Lots of consumer protection stuff. On and on.

Personally I've never disliked the left. Was fine with Obama. Liked Clinton. Two incredibly smart and talented men. It's something about this current crop elicits the same revulsion in me that lefties feel about Trump.

They have good intentions, Only problem is, those great intentions eventually run out of money.

Figure the amount you'd have at retirement if the money you and your employer put into SS and Medicare and tell me they aren't ponzi schemes.

 

[mcmurtry66]

They have good intentions, Only problem is, those great intentions eventually run out of money.

Figure the amount you'd have at retirement if the money you and your employer put into SS and Medicare and tell me they aren't ponzi schemes.

I do believe they often have good intentions.

 

[UncleMark]

Figure the amount you'd have at retirement if the money you and your employer put into SS and Medicare and tell me they aren't ponzi schemes.

They are not investment programs or medical insurance programs, they are generational transfers of wealth. Otherwise financially sophisticated people refuse to acknowledge that reality. If you want to call that a Ponzi scheme, you're not really wrong.

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

I do believe they often have good intentions.

Do you think Hitler thought his intentions were bad?
I ask because good intentions that are focused on taking from one who does, so you can give to one who doesn't, can not be dressed up in "good intention" cloths.
Our politicians good intentions are totally focused inward.