-
I want to thank all the members that have upgraded your accounts. I truly appreciate your support of the site monetarily. Supporting the site keeps this site up and running as a lot of work daily goes on behind the scenes. Click to Support Signs101 ...
The Vaccine - you going to take it or no?
- Thread starter GAC05
- Start date
victor bogdanov
Active Member
I just got back from round rock TX Kalahari resort/largest indoor Waterpark in usa, my third time this year and it is the most crowded place ever. During the texas mask mandate it was crowded 90% with masks. Now it's 25% with mask and as crowded as a busy night in Vegas. (City of round rock has a mask mandate but people are tired of it and business are leaving it up to the city to enforce, which it can't)
Don't be afraid nothing will happen
GAC05
Quit buggin' me
I am not. Any virus activity in Florida will have to swim a few thousand miles to get me here on Guam.
victor bogdanov
Active Member
Attachments
Texas_Signmaker
Very Active Signmaker
old news. all the lock down states are where we were months ago. we open first, got hit hard and got over it. now the ones opening up will see the surge.
Gino
Premium Subscriber
I still do not understand this mass hysteria ?? So far, world wide, what is the total number of deaths from this covid 19 stuff and it's mutations ?? A bit over 3 million.
In 1918 into 1920 it was well over 50 million, closer to 60 million.
Is this whole pandemic just something for governments to bitch about and do nothing about ?? Just get the people riled up over nothing ??
I can't believe y'all are talking about this like we're in the middle ages and living with rats and disease widespread. Get a grip people.
In 1918 into 1920 it was well over 50 million, closer to 60 million.
Is this whole pandemic just something for governments to bitch about and do nothing about ?? Just get the people riled up over nothing ??
I can't believe y'all are talking about this like we're in the middle ages and living with rats and disease widespread. Get a grip people.
WildWestDesigns
Active Member
Ironically, out in Cali (and a few other states as well), they have seen disease from that era come back. I would speculate it's due to the rise of the homeless population and what comes with that as well.
Gino
Premium Subscriber
Live in total filth, whaddya expect ?? That out there is almost entirely the government's fault and I don't care at what level you wanna blame.
That's just about any town/city in the USofA and it's despicable. You don't see it much in the north, until warmer months, but if you close up shop for the mental handicapped and force them to make it on their own, what are ya gonna do with limited mental facilities ?? You're gonna resort to animals. Live in boxes, do your duty right on the street and steal form each other. No, they can't fix it, because they're too busy trying to convince the others they're sick too.
I'm not blaming dems or republicans, they're all to blame. Ya have basically immature people who know nothing about running a lemonade stand, let alone a city or county or country. You have people who know nothing about the needs and welfare of it's people and are too concerned with bringing in the lowest forms of life, just to buy votes and this is with what you're left.
That's just about any town/city in the USofA and it's despicable. You don't see it much in the north, until warmer months, but if you close up shop for the mental handicapped and force them to make it on their own, what are ya gonna do with limited mental facilities ?? You're gonna resort to animals. Live in boxes, do your duty right on the street and steal form each other. No, they can't fix it, because they're too busy trying to convince the others they're sick too.
I'm not blaming dems or republicans, they're all to blame. Ya have basically immature people who know nothing about running a lemonade stand, let alone a city or county or country. You have people who know nothing about the needs and welfare of it's people and are too concerned with bringing in the lowest forms of life, just to buy votes and this is with what you're left.
Notarealsignguy
Arial - it's almost helvetica
It is pretty widely accepted that this is due to the large amount of antivaxxers out there. It has nothing to do with the homeless and is actually old news.
WildWestDesigns
Active Member
Not from the articles that I have been reading. They usually relate it to the hygiene of the homeless population (the fact that at least one city that I am aware of has a glorified "poop patrol" (now maybe that's common, we just don't have it around here)).
Now you have Typhus, which does have a vaccine for, but I am unaware of it being commercially available, so I don't necessarily know how anti-vaxxers would be the cause of that. That may have changed however, that is a year old as far as I remember. And I believe that Typhus is considered endemic in Cali.
Notarealsignguy
Arial - it's almost helvetica
You're taking 1 thing and making it out to be the reemergence of a wide range of previously eradicated diseases. That is not the case. Typhus is caused from poor hygiene and spread around by lice, not by people shitting on the sidewalk. That causes other problems like cholera, typhoid, hepatitis etc but none of this has anything to do with vaccines or the people that wont take them.
There are ailments that are returning that are caused by a surge in people not being vaccinated. That is a big problem and is widely documented in medical journals.
WildWestDesigns
Active Member
True, but I have to ask, do people with good hygiene shit on the sidewalk? They also have a needle usage problem (drugs), typically that's indicative those are used in bad hygienic ways as well (sharing). I
It also has a vaccine to be treated, but it is not commercially available, that means if people actually wanted to be proactive (and I would be if I lived in an area consider endemic for something like that and the vaccine has been around for a long time) they can't. It's hard to blame antivaxxers for the raise in that issue.
Again, my example was about the existence of a vaccine, but not widely (commercially) available. Even though it has been around for a very long time. Your assumption was that the raise was solely due to vaccines widely available but people not taking them. If ease of access isn't there (which usually comes when something is commercially available) it makes it hard to blame it on the fact that people don't want to take them for whatever reason. They may want to, but may not have access.
That's why I mentioned Typhus.
Or I guess another situation would be like what our current President thinks, people just don't know how to use the internet to find out where to get the shot and/or make an appointment to get one.
I'm sure there are journal entries that support your argument, just like there are those that support mine. It would all depend on how the testing was done (especially sampling). While we have been focusing on Cali, other states do have the issue as well. I think even Ky is a hot spot for some as well.
Or at least that was the case in my experience with Animal Science journals. Most were more nuanced though, but it did happen.
hollywoodhd
A work in progress!
Fred Weiss
Merchant Member
The following is copied from a Wikipedia article:
COVID-19
This section is an excerpt from COVID-19 drug repurposing research § Ivermectin[edit]
In vitro, ivermectin has antiviral effects against several distinct positive-sense single-strand RNA viruses, including SARS-CoV-2.[57] Subsequent studies found that ivermectin could inhibit replication of SARS-CoV-2 in monkey kidney cell culture with an IC50 of 2.2–2.8 μM.[58][59] Based on this information, however, doses much higher than the maximum approved or safely achievable for use in humans would be required for an antiviral effect.[60] Aside from practical difficulties, such high doses are not covered by current human-use approvals of the drug and would be toxic, as the antiviral mechanism of action is considered to operate via the suppression of a host cellular process,[60] specifically the inhibition of nuclear transport by importin α/β1.[61]
In November 2020, a systematic review found weak evidence of benefit when ivermectin is used as an add-on therapy for people with non-severe COVID-19.[62] A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 24 patients with non-severe COVID-19 and no risk factors found no difference in PCR-positive nasal swabs nor in viral load between patients who received ivermectin and those given placebo, thus failing the primary outcome of the study.[63] Merck, the company from which the drug originated, has said that there is no good evidence ivermectin is plausible or effective as a drug used against COVID-19, and that attempting such use may be unsafe.[64]
As of January 2021, the U.S. National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines state that the evidence for ivermectin is too limited to allow for a recommendation for or against its use.[65] Ivermectin is not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for anti-viral use.[65] Additional evidence from RCTs and dose-response studies are needed.[66] At least 45 such trials were listed as of January 2021.[63]
It was reported in June 2020 that despite the absence of high-quality evidence to suggest any efficacy, use of ivermectin for prevention or treatment of early-stage COVID-19 has become increasingly widespread especially in Latin America, raising concerns about self-medication, safety, and the feasibility of future clinical trials.[67][68] In response, the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency, Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases, and Brazilian Thoracic Society all issued position statements in July[69] or January 2021[70][71] advising against the use of ivermectin for this purpose. Furthermore, the government of Peru rescinded a previous recommendation for the use of ivermectin (alongside azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine) in hospitalized patients,[72] although as of January 2021 it is still prescribed for outpatient use.[73]
In March 2021, both the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) issued guidance that ivermectin should not be used to treat or prevent COVID-19.[74][75] After reviewing the evidence on ivermectin the EMA said that "the available data do not support its use for COVID-19 outside well-designed clinical trials".[75] Ivermectin is not authorized for use to treat COVID-19 within the European Union.[75] In the United Kingdom the national COVID-19 Therapeutics Advisory Panel determined that the evidence base and plausibility of ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment were insufficient to pursue further investigations.[76] The WHO say that ivermectin should not be used to treat COVID-19 except in a clinical trial.[77]
Fred Weiss
Merchant Member
CDC rule change:
If you have been vaccinated, you may now ...
1. Go without a mask
2. Stop socially distancing
3. Shake someone's hand, hug or generally have contact with others
If you have been vaccinated, you may now ...
1. Go without a mask
2. Stop socially distancing
3. Shake someone's hand, hug or generally have contact with others
Great watch, thanks for sharing.
He's about the tenth expert in that field I have seen, that has said basically the same thing.
They have nothing to gain and everything to lose by speaking out about the vaccines.
Anecdotally, every health care provider I have asked, has said they will not get the vaccine (it's not required for HCP in my state),
even the nurse and nurse practitioner at the main clinic in my area that that tests for covid.