Coronavirus in Massachusetts (Florida: buy, tenant, vs.)

[justyouraveragetenant]

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

And someone else got into a fatal car accident on the way back home from getting the vaccine. Do you understand even a semblance of cause & effect? Or how the scientific method works?

Yes I do it could of been a coincidence but what is the probability of it happening 45 minutes after the vaccine. Some doctors are concerned it could cause heart problems.

After you get the shot they have to watch you for at least 15 minutes because the shot is so safe.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by justyouraveragetenant

Yes I do it could of been a coincidence but what is the probability of it happening 45 minutes after the vaccine. Some doctors are concerned it could cause heart problems.

Very very high considering how many have been vaccinated. I have zero doubt you could find as many people having heartattacks 45 min before they were to get a shot as 45 min after.

[Williepaws]

Originally Posted by timberline742

Where are these large scale studies published in reviewed journals raising these legitimate concerns? And please don't me the conspiracy stuff that dissenters are being silenced or whatever.

If people don't want to get the vaccine for whatever reason, then don't. Just stand up and accept the results that come with that choice. That's your/their right.

Do the studies being conducted at Harvard and other institutions about any relationship between the vaccines and menstral difficulties and miscarriages count? or not because it only affects women? Thousands of complaints both here and in Europe. Oh I know women don't count, right? any problem with any vaccine doesnt count right?

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

Maybe we agree on this...the peer-reviewed studies that are published in reputed journals are not religious nor political.

But unfortunately you choose to wave them around as if they are. Studies only speak to specific questions under specific conditions and using specific methodology. They involve numerous variables and only relate to what we know about something at a given time. What we know about COVID is minimal. Waving the word "peer-reviewed studies" around every time raises a question, points out a weakness in your argument, or shares an opinion about something which the study does not address, doesn't form a cogent argument. So perhaps take your own advice. And if you aren't considering peer reviewed studies that challenge your beliefs then you are living an in intellectual echo chamber. This is not to mention all the social scientific (human) variables that are involved in this problem some, as I said, which are rational and some irrational but otherwise legitimate that are not even considered by your ilk. So you're really not interested in mitigating problems, you're just interested in having your way. I understand your head is centered in a black and white world of business, but that ain't the real world. Edit: should say you're interested in having your way and pretending you're smarter than everyone that doesn't fully subscribe to your view of the world by sitting here everyday lobbing insults. Yeah, that is a cogent argument.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by Williepaws

Do the studies being conducted at Harvard and other institutions about any relationship between the vaccines and menstral difficulties and miscarriages count? or not because it only affects women? Thousands of complaints both here and in Europe. Oh I know women don't count, right? any problem with any vaccine doesnt count right?

What peer reviewed published studies have found statistically significant issues?

Women of course count. I'm asking for peer reviewed published studied citations
.. not "someone is looking into something" and that is enough. Most hypothesis testing doesn't result in statistically significant results.

[mdovell]

The other odd thing within this is frankly that we have so much that can be done online that there's probably some that resist this because of it but the irony is their actions are prolonging it!

Vaccines work..period. I'm not saying I like taking them and feeling sore for a few days but so be it.

Here's something to consider. We still have the black plague. But it isn't nearly as bad
https://www.cdc.gov/plague/faq/index.html#cases

The vast majority of people aren't afraid of this even though nearly 700 years ago it killed off much of Europe. Having said this it still obviously must be treated.

Are there *some* people that cannot take vaccines? Yes. There's probably some allergic reactions. Heck look at the use of rubber gloves and then latex and how many are allergic to latex. But like all other forms of medicine is this going to be limited to a shot? If you made the vaccine into a pill then what's the issue? Changing something to a pill could change everything. I know people personally that just don't like shots. Ok fine. Heck I've almost given "doubles" at blood banks.

There's only so much resistance to treatment. If someone is against one vaccine ok fine there's plenty of others on the world market. To be against ALL of them? Yeah like there's some big global conspiracy. It's free, easily found and safe. If it cost $5,000 and could only be taken in Kansas City in May I'd argue something else.

There's already development of oral drugs.
https://www.reuters.com/business/hea...al-2021-09-01/

Science and technology never give up. Now I'm not saying you have to love it but it evolves. I might not have a huge faith in a higher power but when there's immediate problems in this world that have a direct impact naturally there's going to be development. Do we have bumps along the road? Sure but we didn't eliminate all forms of home insulation due to asbestos, we didn't get rid of paint -we only got rid of lead paint, same with gasoline (finally).

Would it be nice to have everything be perfect with no side effects or ramifications? Absolutely but it's nearly impossible to do that. Look up Six Sigma and then look at manufacturing (anything). There's always the possibility of something but that doesn't mean they stop trying

[htfdcolt]

Originally Posted by bostongymjunkie

But unfortunately you choose to wave them around as if they are. Studies only speak to specific questions under specific conditions and using specific methodology. They involve numerous variables and only relate to what we know about something at a given time. What we know about COVID is minimal. Waving the word "peer-reviewed studies" around every time raises a question, points out a weakness in your argument, or shares an opinion about something which the study does not address, doesn't form a cogent argument. So perhaps take your own advice. And if you aren't considering peer reviewed studies that challenge your beliefs then you are living an in intellectual echo chamber. This is not to mention all the social scientific (human) variables that are involved in this problem some, as I said, which are rational and some irrational but otherwise legitimate that are not even considered by your ilk. So you're really not interested in mitigating problems, you're just interested in having your way. I understand your head is centered in a black and white world of business, but that ain't the real world. Edit: should say you're interested in having your way and pretending you're smarter than everyone that doesn't fully subscribe to your view of the world by sitting here everyday lobbing insults. Yeah, that is a cogent argument.

You must be confusing me with another poster. I've never cited or claimed peer-reviewed studies are right or left. I've just said, as numerous others have, that those are the objective gold standard in science. If a study was ill-conceived, doesn't have the proper controls, and doesn't hold up to peer scrutiny, it does not and cannot hold water in terms of guiding policy. It's easy and cheap for a quack to get on Facebook and YouTube and cite anecdotal evidence.

Uninformed (which, unless you're an epidemiologist or immunologist, we all are on this forum) opinion doesn't change the facts.

[OutdoorLover]

Originally Posted by Williepaws

Do the studies being conducted at Harvard and other institutions about any relationship between the vaccines and menstral difficulties and miscarriages count? or not because it only affects women? Thousands of complaints both here and in Europe. Oh I know women don't count, right? any problem with any vaccine doesnt count right?

In the United States alone, over 181 million people are fully vaccinated. That's a lot of people. And if you follow 181 million people, you will see pretty much every form of illness, pathology and death that can occur - simply because of the size of that population. So if some women who've been vaccinated have also had miscarriages, that in and of itself isn't damning. Two questions - does the adverse event occur more frequently in the treatment group than in the naive population? Is there a hypothesized mechanistic link that could give rise to the adverse event?

You might be interested in the papers referenced in this article out of the Univ. of Minn Center for Infectious Disease and Policy - "COVID-19 vaccines don't raise miscarriage risk, 3 studies show"
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-pers...3-studies-show

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

You must be confusing me with another poster. I've never cited or claimed peer-reviewed studies are right or left. I've just said, as numerous others have, that those are the objective gold standard in science. If a study was ill-conceived, doesn't have the proper controls, and doesn't hold up to peer scrutiny, it does not and cannot hold water in terms of guiding policy. It's easy and cheap for a quack to get on Facebook and YouTube and cite anecdotal evidence.

Uninformed (which, unless you're an epidemiologist or immunologist, we all are on this forum) opinion doesn't change the facts.

I'm not referring to right vs left but your overall ideological almost pseudo-religious use of peer review to justify your claimed underlying righteousness with a given point of view. And I disagree that one needs to be either of those professions to be informed. Expertise is a different story, although there are many disagreements even among those in the medical community. Again, intelligent people can analyze a collection of facts and reach different conclusions - And no, they ain't just on FB or Youtube. There are very few all or nothing, black and white answers on this topic. Continuously referring to one set of opinions or conclusions as hard fact doesn't make it so nor does it solve any problems.

[msRB311]

From what it seems like do I dare say things covid wise seem to be going well ? I don't want to jinx it but haven't heard of any outbreaks anywhere recently. Seems like a positive sign.