Tom, your post was a needed, and very sobering, dose of reality. The truth is that opposition to the Covid vaccine and wearing a mask isn’t based on science; it’s an ideological/political belief looking for a veneer of scientific support. There is no question that individuals who have been previously infected with Covid will significantly improve their antibody levels with vaccination. Also, Covid is transmitted via aerosol particles; masks are not a perfect solution but reduce transmission rates measurably. The fact that we are even talking about this astounds me.
I’ll be at as many Iona home games as I can this season. I will wear a mask because it’s a tiny personal imposition that benefits the common good. If people don’t want to get vaccinated or wear a mask, that’s their decision and personal responsibility requires that they live with the consequences of their decisions.
Tom's post hit home. Was thinking of purchasing season tickets. After consulting with a couple of my doctors, I have decided it's just not worth the possible risk, however small it might be, due to health issues and unless things take a positive change with those issues I am not planning to attend any games. Sucks. Season is still 2 months away so hopefully something changes on a personal level.
I believe everyone is allowed their personal choice when it comes to the vaccine and masks. Honestly I hope whatever decision Iona makes, it doesn't have a negative impact on the size of the crowds. These kids sacrificed a lot last season to entertain us and help get thru a very difficult time. They deserve to play in front of sell out crowds.
Not very scientific... why should folks who already have Covid be forced to get the shot. Previously infected people are significantly less likely than vaccinated people to contract the delta variant of the virus. One study run by the Maccabi Healthcare Service looked at individuals who had either gotten two shots of the vaccine by the end of February or tested positive for COVID-19 by that time. It compared 46,035 Maccabi members who caught the coronavirus at some point during the pandemic and the same number of double-vaccinated people, so it is not a tiny study... in fact, it is the largest study of its type in the world.
What they discovered:
* People who had two vaccine shots had a six-fold higher chance of getting infected with Delta than patients who hadn’t been vaccinated but previously contracted the coronavirus, according to the research. There were 748 cases of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections, 640 of which were in the vaccinated group and 108 in the previously infected group, which was relying on natural immunity alone.
* The vaccine-dependent people had a seven-fold higher chance of symptomatic infection, and a 6.7-fold higher chance of being hospitalized.
* In addition, a sample of 16,215 who were infected during Israel’s third wave in January-February 2021 was compared to an equal number of people vaccinated during that period. The contrast for these two groups was even starker: It showed that Delta had a 27-fold higher chance of breaking through vaccine protection from January and February and causing symptoms than breaking through natural immunity acquired in the same period and causing symptoms.
Also the unvaccinated, the vaccinated, and those who previously had Covid are no more contagious than the other. In one English study, CBS News reported that “With delta, infections occurring following two vaccinations had similar peak viral burden to those in unvaccinated individuals,” So, fully vaccinated people are as contagious with the coronavirus as unvaccinated people.
Some basic thoughts for those who claim to believe in science"
* Fully vaccinated people with Delta variant breakthrough infections can spread the virus to others. - FROM THE CDC * Both flu viruses and the virus that causes COVID-19 can be spread to others by people before they begin showing symptoms; by people with very mild symptoms; and by people who never experience symptoms (asymptomatic people). - FROM THE CDC
So why would the College turn away people who were previously infected and have natural antibodies protecting them?
The biggest concern with citing the Israeli study is that it leaves the impression that it’s safer to get COVID-19 and hope to recover than to try to avoid it by getting vaccinated. That’s not the case, experts say.
The study The study is what is known as a preprint, meaning it has not yet been vetted by experts. It was posted Aug. 25 on medRxiv.com, which added this note: "This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice."
The study was led by researchers at the Maccabi Research & Innovation Center at Maccabi Healthcare Services in Tel Aviv. They reviewed the records of patients in the Maccabi health system — 674,000 patients who were fully vaccinated and 105,000 who had been infected. Among the 105,000 who had been infected, 63,000 were unvaccinated and 42,000 had received one Pfizer dose three months after recovery.
The researchers said the study is "the largest real-world observational study comparing natural immunity" gained from infection by the coronavirus, with immunity provided by the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. They looked at patient records from June through August 2021, when the delta variant was dominant in Israel.
They found:
• People who received both doses of the Pfizer vaccine in January or February 2021 were 13 times more likely to get a breakthrough infection with the delta variant than unvaccinated people who had COVID-19 during the same period were to be reinfected.
• Over a longer period of time — with infection occurring anytime from March 2020 to February 2021, when different variants were dominant in Israel — fully vaccinated people in the study were six times more likely to become infected and seven times more likely to experience "symptomatic disease" than unvaccinated people in the study.
• The study "demonstrated that natural immunity affords longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization due to the delta variant," compared with the Pfizer two-dose vaccine-induced immunity, although previously infected people gained additional protection with a single dose of the vaccine.
Caution in interpreting the findings The study has been well received by some experts as an indicator of the strength of natural immunity. But it has limitations, including the fact that it was done through record reviews, which are limited by biases in health care seeking behavior — such as testing, mask wearing and social distancing — that may differ among the groups compared, Dr. Matthew Laurens of the University of Maryland’s Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health told PolitiFact.
"This type of study design is not as robust as a prospective study that follows individuals forward in time, testing them at regular intervals and collecting data on symptoms systematically," he said. "Prospective studies should be done to determine if these findings can be replicated.
Gauging immunity by comparing COVID-19 reinfection rates among the unvaccinated with breakthrough infections among the vaccinated ignores the dangers of contracting COVID-19 in the first place and the protections against severe illness that vaccines provide.
So 86 - This "Study" is NOT science. You and people like you continue to peruse the internet trying to find evidence that backs up your cock-eyed opinion. Here's the biggest piece of "science" for you. People started getting the vaccine and cases, hospitalizations and deaths plummeted. A vast majority of those flooding the hospitals today are un-vaccinated. It's completely unbelievable to me that this is still a debate.
What an angry clown...
Actually Greg, it is science. In scientific study people examine data and look for any patterns. When a pattern appears to be detected, the data is reviewed by peers. If they believe the patterns identified are true they go into smaller studies to see if the patterns continue and if they can find the cause of the pattern. When reviewing your answer it appears that you like to cherry pick. Dr. Matthew Laurens stated that while the data needed to be scrubbed for potential biases, "prospective studies should be done to determine if these findings can be replicated." When the numbers deviations are so far from what is expected, the data is usually correct in pointing to problems. This is why these studies are published, go through peer review and then folks decide if they are going to invest the money in studies that can mitigate factors within the study, to draw a final conclusion.
As for your statement that "People started getting the vaccine and cases, hospitalizations and deaths plummeted." Guess what sparky, every pandemic variant runs in approximately 18 month cycles. So as medical protocols improved, in the hospitals and via home care, the numbers improved. At first they were putting everyone on ventilator's and we see how that turned out. Also medical experts putting the infected in nursing homes was another brilliant idea by our medical experts. If you really think the numbers of IU patients dropping was due to the vaccine, you should just say "Thanks You, Trump" since they were developed quickly under his plan. Go look at India, India's coronavirus numbers declined so dramatically and so suddenly last year... months before any vaccinations were given.
But please, show me a real study that proves that unvaccinated infected people are more contagious to be around than those who are vaccinated and contract the virus. If you believe your vaccine is helping you without any side effects, why do you give a shit about other people taking the vaccine? You are covered...right? Don't worry about me... I won't get you infected any easier than the vaccinated guy sitting next to you... but your vaccinated so you are good to go.
As for my "cock-eyed opinion'... it is from watching news and reading studies from around the world. I do not limit my investigation to Rachel Maddow interviewing Fauci nor do I limit it to Tucker Carlson interviewing Li Meng Yan. I will not comply with group think or the constant shaming that you liberals try to push on people. I believe in constantly reviewing data that comes out, so that I can form or adjust my opinion. But when dealing with you I think back to what Buckley said about liberals and opinions... I think he was right on target.
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” ― William F. Buckley
Tom's post hit home. Was thinking of purchasing season tickets. After consulting with a couple of my doctors, I have decided it's just not worth the possible risk, however small it might be, due to health issues and unless things take a positive change with those issues I am not planning to attend any games. Sucks. Season is still 2 months away so hopefully something changes on a personal level.
I believe everyone is allowed their personal choice when it comes to the vaccine and masks. Honestly I hope whatever decision Iona makes, it doesn't have a negative impact on the size of the crowds. These kids sacrificed a lot last season to entertain us and help get thru a very difficult time. They deserve to play in front of sell out crowds.
I took tickets, if Iona decides to only allow vaccinated folks to attend games, I will donate my tickets to the AD's office to hand out to VIP's, high school and AAU coaches (all vaccinated of course) etc... But if next year they continue such a policy, I will not be taking any tickets going forward.
I will find a bar in Westchester that has access to the games, I will rent a back room with TV/Game access, we can all wear masks, sit 6 feet apart and drink some beer through straws. Everyone is invited... The vaccinated can even slum it with the segregated fans. I will cover unlimited wings and all the Stella Artois you can handle.
Tom's post hit home. Was thinking of purchasing season tickets. After consulting with a couple of my doctors, I have decided it's just not worth the possible risk, however small it might be, due to health issues and unless things take a positive change with those issues I am not planning to attend any games. Sucks. Season is still 2 months away so hopefully something changes on a personal level.
I believe everyone is allowed their personal choice when it comes to the vaccine and masks. Honestly I hope whatever decision Iona makes, it doesn't have a negative impact on the size of the crowds. These kids sacrificed a lot last season to entertain us and help get thru a very difficult time. They deserve to play in front of sell out crowds.
A totally reasonable outlook, very rare on this board and indeed in society today. Most important thing is your health Sharkey. If the college lets me go, i will go. If not i hope espn+ will carry most of the games
I'm going to bump this because I'm personally so fed up with this stuff. We're going in the wrong direction and the governor is not helping things. Mandates instill fear and because this pandemic became and has been political, all we hear on a daily basis is how "bad" covid is getting again.
Offices are beginning to go back to full remote again that I work for and I don't think schools are far behind.
A big reasoning for this is because it's just become too difficult to follow the protocols and mandates and it's easier to say just work from home.
If the new variant is truly more contagious but less harmful.. wtf are we doing here? Most people in this area are vaccinated and the rest have decided they don't want to be protected. Both are fine IMO as it's their right. But don't mandate vaccines AND then start to shut shit down again.
As far as Iona hoops is concerned I fear that come January we may not be able to attend games anymore.
This is getting old quickly and shutdowns are simply wrong at this point IMO. Need to start getting on with our lives and learn to live with acceptable risk.
Last Edit: Dec 16, 2021 23:29:49 GMT -5 by broguy99
It is good to see you here. If you are the person I am thinking of, I often sat with you and your wife at the Reitz Arena to watch the Gaels play Loyola back in the late 1990s through the mid 2000s.
I do not wear masks or frequent places that require them. I make two exceptions for this rule: (1) For people like you who are immune-compromised. When I go to a doctor’s office (which I have been doing far too much recently); a hospital (to which I hope not to return for a good long while); or the infusion center (where I need to get an injection monthly) I wear a mask. My monthly injections render me somewhat immune-compromised and (2) some courts in which I practice require them and I am not in a position to argue with a judge that I will not wear one.
I made a decision early on in this pandemic that I was not going to let it affect my day-to-day life. I never quarantined or missed a day in the office since this whole thing started. I found it strange early on how COVID affected people. In late February 2020 I had mother (in her 80s) and daughter (in her early 50s) as clients. No one wore masks and people were still shaking hands and sitting next to one another. After meeting with the mother and spending a good deal of time with her, she called me a week later and told me that she was going to the hospital to pull the plug on her daughter who was on a ventilator with COVID. The mom never got COVID nor did I (as far as I know). From early 2020 I met with people (mostly doing real estate closings as the courts were closed down) and seldom used a mask – Fauci was saying that masks do not give protection from the virus. I always carried one with me on the off chance that a person would ask me to put one on. If they did, I would. I still do not think that they afford protection, but if it makes someone feel more at ease, so be it. I always felt that if I got COVID I could beat it. I never wanted to test out my theory and, accordingly, got the Pfizer vaccine when it was available to me. Because of my age; comorbidities; and being immune-compromised, I will get the booster in November when I am 8 months post last shot.
I know a lot of people who will not take the vaccination. Some very bright with advanced degrees (including RNs and MDs) who (1) just do not want to take the shot; or (2) have had COVID and believe they have the necessary antibodies (I read a recent article that said that a person who has had COVID and takes one shot would be the most protected person); or (3) some clients who are black and will not take it because they believe it’s similar to the experimental drugs used on Negros at Tuskegee or have bought what biden and Harris said about not getting a “Trump” vaccine. I have urged all of these people to get vaccinated, but the decision is theirs and should not be forced on them.
I can only accept the mask policy for people like you. It shouldn’t apply to vaccinated people because they are vaccinated. It shouldn’t apply to non-vaccinated people inasmuch as they have assumed the risk of contracting COVID by not getting vaccinated. If it is for the players (who I assume are vaccinated) then make the games fan free.
I wish you and yours all the best and pray you stay healthy.
Stephen P. Zachary ’73 (Z-73)
Go Gaels!!!
Z I respect your views but simply for factual accuracy I never heard Biden or Harris tell people not to get the "Trump" vaccine. In fact since he took office Biden has been virtually standing on his head trying to get people to take the vaccine. The one thing the Trump Administration actually did that was affective to combat this virus is contract to purchase and order the vaccine.
I believe everyone is allowed their personal choice when it comes to the vaccine and masks. Honestly I hope whatever decision Iona makes, it doesn't have a negative impact on the size of the crowds. These kids sacrificed a lot last season to entertain us and help get thru a very difficult time. They deserve to play in front of sell out crowds.
I respect your views Sharkey. Here is where I disagree, and I sincerely mean respectfully disagree. I believe everyone is allowed their personal choice for many things, but not when it comes to endangering their fellow citizens. In my view not getting the vaccine is irresponsible and potentially reckless (there are of course exceptions, e.g. immunocomprised folks who cannot get it). I don't believe people have a personal choice to drive 90mph on the highway, either, as it puts everyone around them at heightened risk of seriously bodily injury or death, and I suspect in most cases unnecessarily. If they were by themselves and wanted to risk death, have at it. Having said that I don't believe a democracy can mandate that the government administer vaccines to people or incarcerate them. That might ensure a higher measure of public safety, but any government cannot order its citizens to relinquish their bodies, except in time of war (with a mandatory draft), imo. That would set a rather dangerous precedent. Mandating a mask, however, is no different imo than mandating a speed limit on a highway. It is a simple, common sense health and safety measure, clearly within the constitutional purview of a State's government to exercise its police power, i.e. the power to legislate for the health and safety of its citizens as defined in the many US Supreme Court precedents dating back to the early 19th Century.
Last Edit: Dec 18, 2021 10:17:41 GMT -5 by hawaii bill
Post by hawaii bill on Dec 18, 2021 10:16:14 GMT -5
If we want to see this college basketball season continue with as few disrputions as possible, colleges who can legally (may be a problem for state universities who are quasi-government entities, but probably not) should mandate that all student athletes get the vaccine and the booster or sit it out and stay away from the team until you do so. Just like any business that has a right to ensure its workforce is safe and it can continue operations. If you don't get the vaccine, either submit to continuous testing or work from home.
I work for a large medical device manufacturer. Our customers are hospitals, physicians offices, etc. To a massive degree they will not let our sales reps on their premises without the vaccine. Our sales force has been told to get the vaccine to continue working in that role, or they will be moved to another position within the company doing something else. We cannot afford to lose revenue because some people will not get the vaccine. That puts the whole company in economic jeopardy, as well as ultimately the shareholders.
Last Edit: Dec 18, 2021 10:22:55 GMT -5 by hawaii bill
The biggest concern with citing the Israeli study is that it leaves the impression that it’s safer to get COVID-19 and hope to recover than to try to avoid it by getting vaccinated. That’s not the case, experts say.
The study The study is what is known as a preprint, meaning it has not yet been vetted by experts. It was posted Aug. 25 on medRxiv.com, which added this note: "This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice."
The study was led by researchers at the Maccabi Research & Innovation Center at Maccabi Healthcare Services in Tel Aviv. They reviewed the records of patients in the Maccabi health system — 674,000 patients who were fully vaccinated and 105,000 who had been infected. Among the 105,000 who had been infected, 63,000 were unvaccinated and 42,000 had received one Pfizer dose three months after recovery.
The researchers said the study is "the largest real-world observational study comparing natural immunity" gained from infection by the coronavirus, with immunity provided by the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. They looked at patient records from June through August 2021, when the delta variant was dominant in Israel.
They found:
• People who received both doses of the Pfizer vaccine in January or February 2021 were 13 times more likely to get a breakthrough infection with the delta variant than unvaccinated people who had COVID-19 during the same period were to be reinfected.
• Over a longer period of time — with infection occurring anytime from March 2020 to February 2021, when different variants were dominant in Israel — fully vaccinated people in the study were six times more likely to become infected and seven times more likely to experience "symptomatic disease" than unvaccinated people in the study.
• The study "demonstrated that natural immunity affords longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization due to the delta variant," compared with the Pfizer two-dose vaccine-induced immunity, although previously infected people gained additional protection with a single dose of the vaccine.
Caution in interpreting the findings The study has been well received by some experts as an indicator of the strength of natural immunity. But it has limitations, including the fact that it was done through record reviews, which are limited by biases in health care seeking behavior — such as testing, mask wearing and social distancing — that may differ among the groups compared, Dr. Matthew Laurens of the University of Maryland’s Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health told PolitiFact.
"This type of study design is not as robust as a prospective study that follows individuals forward in time, testing them at regular intervals and collecting data on symptoms systematically," he said. "Prospective studies should be done to determine if these findings can be replicated.
Gauging immunity by comparing COVID-19 reinfection rates among the unvaccinated with breakthrough infections among the vaccinated ignores the dangers of contracting COVID-19 in the first place and the protections against severe illness that vaccines provide.
So 86 - This "Study" is NOT science. You and people like you continue to peruse the internet trying to find evidence that backs up your cock-eyed opinion. Here's the biggest piece of "science" for you. People started getting the vaccine and cases, hospitalizations and deaths plummeted. A vast majority of those flooding the hospitals today are un-vaccinated. It's completely unbelievable to me that this is still a debate.
What an angry clown...
Actually Greg, it is science. In scientific study people examine data and look for any patterns. When a pattern appears to be detected, the data is reviewed by peers. If they believe the patterns identified are true they go into smaller studies to see if the patterns continue and if they can find the cause of the pattern. When reviewing your answer it appears that you like to cherry pick. Dr. Matthew Laurens stated that while the data needed to be scrubbed for potential biases, "prospective studies should be done to determine if these findings can be replicated." When the numbers deviations are so far from what is expected, the data is usually correct in pointing to problems. This is why these studies are published, go through peer review and then folks decide if they are going to invest the money in studies that can mitigate factors within the study, to draw a final conclusion.
As for your statement that "People started getting the vaccine and cases, hospitalizations and deaths plummeted." Guess what sparky, every pandemic variant runs in approximately 18 month cycles. So as medical protocols improved, in the hospitals and via home care, the numbers improved. At first they were putting everyone on ventilator's and we see how that turned out. Also medical experts putting the infected in nursing homes was another brilliant idea by our medical experts. If you really think the numbers of IU patients dropping was due to the vaccine, you should just say "Thanks You, Trump" since they were developed quickly under his plan. Go look at India, India's coronavirus numbers declined so dramatically and so suddenly last year... months before any vaccinations were given.
But please, show me a real study that proves that unvaccinated infected people are more contagious to be around than those who are vaccinated and contract the virus. If you believe your vaccine is helping you without any side effects, why do you give a shit about other people taking the vaccine? You are covered...right? Don't worry about me... I won't get you infected any easier than the vaccinated guy sitting next to you... but your vaccinated so you are good to go.
As for my "cock-eyed opinion'... it is from watching news and reading studies from around the world. I do not limit my investigation to Rachel Maddow interviewing Fauci nor do I limit it to Tucker Carlson interviewing Li Meng Yan. I will not comply with group think or the constant shaming that you liberals try to push on people. I believe in constantly reviewing data that comes out, so that I can form or adjust my opinion. But when dealing with you I think back to what Buckley said about liberals and opinions... I think he was right on target.
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” ― William F. Buckley
86, you are going to carry more credibility in this debate if you stop blasting "liberals." This is not a political issue, it never has been, and people who keep characterizing it as such are hampering the effort to get past this.
Actually Greg, it is science. In scientific study people examine data and look for any patterns. When a pattern appears to be detected, the data is reviewed by peers. If they believe the patterns identified are true they go into smaller studies to see if the patterns continue and if they can find the cause of the pattern. When reviewing your answer it appears that you like to cherry pick. Dr. Matthew Laurens stated that while the data needed to be scrubbed for potential biases, "prospective studies should be done to determine if these findings can be replicated." When the numbers deviations are so far from what is expected, the data is usually correct in pointing to problems. This is why these studies are published, go through peer review and then folks decide if they are going to invest the money in studies that can mitigate factors within the study, to draw a final conclusion.
As for your statement that "People started getting the vaccine and cases, hospitalizations and deaths plummeted." Guess what sparky, every pandemic variant runs in approximately 18 month cycles. So as medical protocols improved, in the hospitals and via home care, the numbers improved. At first they were putting everyone on ventilator's and we see how that turned out. Also medical experts putting the infected in nursing homes was another brilliant idea by our medical experts. If you really think the numbers of IU patients dropping was due to the vaccine, you should just say "Thanks You, Trump" since they were developed quickly under his plan. Go look at India, India's coronavirus numbers declined so dramatically and so suddenly last year... months before any vaccinations were given.
But please, show me a real study that proves that unvaccinated infected people are more contagious to be around than those who are vaccinated and contract the virus. If you believe your vaccine is helping you without any side effects, why do you give a shit about other people taking the vaccine? You are covered...right? Don't worry about me... I won't get you infected any easier than the vaccinated guy sitting next to you... but your vaccinated so you are good to go.
As for my "cock-eyed opinion'... it is from watching news and reading studies from around the world. I do not limit my investigation to Rachel Maddow interviewing Fauci nor do I limit it to Tucker Carlson interviewing Li Meng Yan. I will not comply with group think or the constant shaming that you liberals try to push on people. I believe in constantly reviewing data that comes out, so that I can form or adjust my opinion. But when dealing with you I think back to what Buckley said about liberals and opinions... I think he was right on target.
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” ― William F. Buckley
86, you are going to carry more credibility in this debate if you stop blasting "liberals." This is not a political issue, it never has been, and people who keep characterizing it as such are hampering the effort to get past this.
Don't agree with a lot of what 86 said, but to say this has never been a political issue? Where have you been hiding. When you have people in high power pushing their agendas to tell their followers what to do with covid.. and I'm talking either side.. then it has no choice but to be political. That is a SAD reality, but very true. I agree that it hampers the effort, but it's coming directly from the top.
86, you are going to carry more credibility in this debate if you stop blasting "liberals." This is not a political issue, it never has been, and people who keep characterizing it as such are hampering the effort to get past this.
Don't agree with a lot of what 86 said, but to say this has never been a political issue? Where have you been hiding. When you have people in high power pushing their agendas to tell their followers what to do with covid.. and I'm talking either side.. then it has no choice but to be political. That is a SAD reality, but very true. I agree that it hampers the effort, but it's coming directly from the top.
It isn’t a political issue. It’s a public health crisis. That certain people in high office or partisan commentators on social media hi-jack it for political purposes does not make this a political issue. And the legitimate role of government during a public health crisis is to try to end the public health crisis.
Last Edit: Dec 18, 2021 12:17:52 GMT -5 by hawaii bill
Don't agree with a lot of what 86 said, but to say this has never been a political issue? Where have you been hiding. When you have people in high power pushing their agendas to tell their followers what to do with covid.. and I'm talking either side.. then it has no choice but to be political. That is a SAD reality, but very true. I agree that it hampers the effort, but it's coming directly from the top.
It isn’t a political issue. It’s a public health crisis. That certain people in high office or partisan commentators on social media hi-jack it for political purposes does not make this a political issue. And the legitimate role of government during a public health crisis is to try to end the public health crisis.
I agree that it shouldn't be. But to deny what it became with people like Trump denying and Cuomo covering up as just brief examples. Or Kamala Harris saying something stupid like "If Trump tells me to get the vaccine, I won't be doing it." I get that quote is paraphrased and I've read the whole thing she said, but why the hell even mention those words? People follow politics now a days like sports teams with blind affiliation. So yes when politicians say or do stupid things in regards to covid, people take it to heart no matter what. Therefore something as simple as taking a vaccine which we all have done our entire lives to do anything, like GO TO SCHOOL.. becomes a decision based on political affiliation for many in this country.
It isn’t a political issue. It’s a public health crisis. That certain people in high office or partisan commentators on social media hi-jack it for political purposes does not make this a political issue. And the legitimate role of government during a public health crisis is to try to end the public health crisis.
I agree that it shouldn't be. But to deny what it became with people like Trump denying and Cuomo covering up as just brief examples. Or Kamala Harris saying something stupid like "If Trump tells me to get the vaccine, I won't be doing it." I get that quote is paraphrased and I've read the whole thing she said, but why the hell even mention those words? People follow politics now a days like sports teams with blind affiliation. So yes when politicians say or do stupid things in regards to covid, people take it to heart no matter what. Therefore something as simple as taking a vaccine which we all have done our entire lives to do anything, like GO TO SCHOOL.. becomes a decision based on political affiliation for many in this country.
Oh I get your point. Various people have turned this into a political issue. And as I said to 86, that hampers our getting past this. However, at its essence, it is not a political issue. We should all strive to keep that in mind.
No one has more contempt for Trump than I do, but if calling the vaccine the “Trump Vaccine” or the “MAGA Vaccine” would get most of the 60 million Americans who are unvaccinated, vaccinated, I’m all for it.
Last Edit: Dec 18, 2021 12:46:33 GMT -5 by hawaii bill
I agree that it shouldn't be. But to deny what it became with people like Trump denying and Cuomo covering up as just brief examples. Or Kamala Harris saying something stupid like "If Trump tells me to get the vaccine, I won't be doing it." I get that quote is paraphrased and I've read the whole thing she said, but why the hell even mention those words? People follow politics now a days like sports teams with blind affiliation. So yes when politicians say or do stupid things in regards to covid, people take it to heart no matter what. Therefore something as simple as taking a vaccine which we all have done our entire lives to do anything, like GO TO SCHOOL.. becomes a decision based on political affiliation for many in this country.
Oh I get your point. Various people have turned this into a political issue. And as I said to 86, that hampers our getting past this. However, at its essence, it is not a political issue. We should all strive to keep that in mind.
No one has more contempt for Trump than I do, but if calling the vaccine the “Trump Vaccine” or the “MAGA Vaccine” would get most of the 60 million Americans who are unvaccinated, vaccinated, I’m all for it.
Yes I agree with that, at it's core the actual issue is not political. I think we both get each other's points for the most part.
