Jump to content


The P&R Plague Thread (Covid-19)


Recommended Posts


18 minutes ago, suh_fan93 said:

 

Well before he took a turn for the worst being an unstable Trump lapdog who completely sold out his country.  So much even that during the transition from Obama to Trump President Obama warned Trump against hiring him and warned against putting Flynn in a high level national security post.  Trump didn't listen.  Nice try though.

I’m not trying anything.  I’m literally (there goes my literalism again) stating a fact about Flynn as did you earlier.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

For those of you (Archy?) struggling to follow along with this whole issue and Rand Paul specifically.

 

Simple summary of protection/immunity from Covid, listed from least effective to most effective. Effective meaning- least likely to lead to infection, hospitalization and death.

 

No Vax, no prior infection

no vaccination

no prior infection

prior infection

vaccinated

prior infection & vaccinated

 

Take away- Rand Paul is wrong and his words are not helpful if not downright dangerous. Sticking up for him is wrong and dangerous and makes a person look like a fool.

  • Plus1 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
29 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

For those of you (Archy?) struggling to follow along with this whole issue and Rand Paul specifically.

 

Simple summary of protection/immunity from Covid, listed from least effective to most effective. Effective meaning- least likely to lead to infection, hospitalization and death.

 

No Vax, no prior infection

no vaccination

no prior infection

prior infection

vaccinated

prior infection & vaccinated

 

Take away- Rand Paul is wrong and his words are not helpful if not downright dangerous. Sticking up for him is wrong and dangerous and makes a person look like a fool.

For those (JJ?) who still talk about break through infections for those who previously were vaccinated or infected and are struggling to follow what’s truly important….
 

In terms of hospitalizations and deaths it’s inconclusive on whether you are correct or not.   Multiple studies have shown previously infected being more protected than immunized against hospitalization and death for a second infection and there are some that show otherwise.    
 

The main takeaway should be that both offer a big advantage over the unvaccinated and if you haven’t been vaccinated you should.  Don’t wait for or try to get infected.   And policy decisions should account for those who have already had the vaccine but chose to not get vaccinated.   Mandating previously infected people to get the vaccine is just silly as they are not going to be drain on the hospital system.  At least that’s what the science shows up to now.  That is why Dr. Paul talks about naturally immunity.   


Not talking correctly about the science nor what the true discussion is actually about is dangerous

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

22 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:


Not talking correctly about the science nor what the true discussion is actually about is dangerous


Silly me. I thought the discussion and replies should be based on what words posters are typing out right before they choose to hit the “submit reply” button. Always figured it was the posters duty to make sure others know what they are truly discussing. Most of us aren’t mind readers.

 

I avoid this problem by not sticking up for political parties, politicians and people who are predominately wrong about everything. Maybe you should try it.

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
22 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:


Silly me. I thought the discussion and replies should be based on what words posters are typing out right before they choose to hit the “submit reply” button. Always figured it was the posters duty to make sure others know what they are truly discussing. Most of us aren’t mind readers.

 

I avoid this problem by not sticking up for political parties, politicians and people who are predominately wrong about everything. Maybe you should try it.

I’m starting to understand now that you truly don’t know what the discussion is/was about.  @Scarlet made a false statement that I pointed out.  And then he tried to change the discussion to immunity which didn’t work out for him to well either.  And now you chime in about Rand Paul and immunity without discussing why he brings up natural immunity.  So here we are.   I try my best to correct inaccuracies.   You should try rather than follow the inaccurate crowd.  

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
1 minute ago, Archy1221 said:

I’m starting to understand now that you truly don’t know what the discussion is/was about.  @Scarlet made a false statement that I pointed out.  And then he tried to change the discussion to immunity which didn’t work out for him to well either.  And now you chime in about Rand Paul and immunity without discussing why he brings up natural immunity.  So here we are.   I try my best to correct inaccuracies.   You should try rather than follow the inaccurate crowd.  


And this right here is what is usually wrong with P&R discussions.

 

1- Posters falsely thinking they are always right/accurate and that others are wrong/inaccurate.

 

2- Posters always, constantly promoting their preferred party line rather than conceding the simplest most obvious points in a discussion.

 

3- People who want to argue for the sake of arguing.

 

Congrats on batting 1.000.

I will now avoid P&R again for multiple weeks until I forget how useless it is to think some posters may actually change/grow/learn.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

I’m starting to understand now that you truly don’t know what the discussion is/was about.  @Scarlet made a false statement that I pointed out.  And then he tried to change the discussion to immunity which didn’t work out for him to well either.  And now you chime in about Rand Paul and immunity without discussing why he brings up natural immunity.  So here we are.   I try my best to correct inaccuracies.   You should try rather than follow the inaccurate crowd.  

Another @Archy1221lie.  I never made a false statement in the post you are referring to and you never pointed it out.  You just keep on bellowing about it with nothing to back it up.  No wonder you identify with Trumpism like you do.  Birds of a feather.

 

Go ahead.  Get the last word in.  I'm in the giving mood today.  

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, JJ Husker said:


And this right here is what is usually wrong with P&R discussions.

 

1- Posters falsely thinking they are always right/accurate and that others are wrong/inaccurate.

 

2- Posters always, constantly promoting their preferred party line rather than conceding the simplest most obvious points in a discussion.

 

3- People who want to argue for the sake of arguing.

 

Congrats on batting 1.000.

I will now avoid P&R again for multiple weeks until I forget how useless it is to think some posters may actually change/grow/learn.

1) well unfortunately you are wrong here, just yesterday I admitted a stupid mistake.   So there’s that.  
2) it was a post about Covid and it didn’t matter who @Scarletwanted to make an inaccurate post about.   I would have called it out just the same. 
3). Seems like that is what you joined in to do :dunno

 

Talk to you later I guess 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/jan/07/rand-paul/sen-rand-pauls-ad-was-wrong-claiming-there-are-no-/

 

Quote

"The COVID hysteria has already gone on too long and these power-hungry bureaucrats don’t want to let go," Paul said in a 50-second video ad on Facebook that started running Jan. 4, the day he filed to run for a third term. "That’s probably why we’re hearing a lot about this new scary omicron variant.

 

"But let’s be clear. The omicron variant in South Africa, and now California and across the United States, is reported as an illness with mild symptoms. We hope that will play out over the next few weeks as we learn more. But so far, no one has been hospitalized for it. That’s good news."

 

More wisdom from noted virologist Rand Paul.  This time minimizing the virulence of Omicron.   Dude's on a roll. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment

 

 

Quote

So let's be clear about a few things

Is infection-induced immunity real?

Absolutely

 

Does it help prevent future infections/hospitalizations? 

Probably...for a while

 

For first 90 days or so? Almost surely

 

Beyond that? probably not that much

 

Infection-induced immunity is helpful.  But really doesn't seem to last that long  And as virus becomes endemic you are looking at constant reinfections

 

Or you could just get vaccinated

And avoid all the heartache and misery of having to get infected over and over again

 

Great thread dispelling the notion that previous infection will keep you out of the hospital as well as vaccines and boosters.

 

Like I said before, you can take the Rand Paul track and just get reinfected with every future variant and hope.   Or as Dr Jha says, you could just get vaccinated.  

Link to comment
On 1/29/2022 at 3:59 PM, HuskersNC949597 said:

I wonder if you put a bunch of spoons on your face (since vaccines magnetize you, you know, according to this brave doctor), I'm talking, like, hundreds and hundreds of spoons, if all that metal will help dampen the signals beaming out of your headbones from the TOXIC JAAARRRRRRRRBBBBB and save your Google credit score? I didn't even know Google had its own credit service but it does not surprise me.

 

:waste

 

Wait, the vax was supposed to make us magnetized? I'M SUPPOSED TO BE MAGNETO AND I'M NOT?!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...