Killed three people blames on COVID-19 vaccine

[R P]

I'll bookmark it, and look for an opportunity to read more. I can usually read many times faster than to listen to something. Although will slow down with heavy material, and even reread, if necessary. But at home on the computer isn't the best, as I usually do other things simultaneously (on the markets in the mornings), and not a lot of time for sustained heavy reading. I prefer to do that sitting on a beach in Maui, or at my lake cabin on my dock in the summer. But Maui may not happen this year (still booked for Dec, though) because of covid travel restrictions. And winter approaching here, so won't be spending much time on the dock.

The audio recording would be good for a long road trip, although not planning that either for a while. And never alone with that, and I know my wife wouldn't appreciate me listening to it,... instead of her.

There's another book I want to read, American Marxism, by Mark Levin. That is another concern with me, with how the world (incl the US) is going.

 

[SouthernDude]

I'll bookmark it, and look for an opportunity to read more. I can usually read many times faster than to listen to something. Although will slow down with heavy material, and even reread, if necessary. But at home on the computer isn't the best, as I usually do other things simultaneously (on the markets in the mornings), and not a lot of time for sustained heavy reading. I prefer to do that sitting on a beach in Maui, or at my lake cabin on my dock in the summer. But Maui may not happen this year (still booked for Dec, though) because of covid travel restrictions. And winter approaching here, so won't be spending much time on the dock.

The audio recording would be good for a long road trip, although not planning that either for a while. And never alone with that, and I know my wife wouldn't appreciate me listening to it,... instead of her.

There's another book I want to read, American Marxism, by Mark Levin. That is another concern with me, with how the world (incl the US) is going.

Fair enough. I prefer to read when I can, but listening is also a good option. I would argue that the author I linked you probably has a better diagnosis for the direction where things are headed than Mark Levin.

 

[R P]

Fair enough. I prefer to read when I can, but listening is also a good option. I would argue that the author I linked you probably has a better diagnosis for the direction where things are headed than Mark Levin.

He may, although didn't see anything in the chapters related to economic strategies. I think Mark's book is more about the history, and how and where we are now, not so much of where we will end up. I still have some faith in the US electorate waking up, and seeing what is happening, and how it will affect their lives going forward. Might even start in 2022.

I sure hope Trump doesn't run again. While he has a very passionate following, there are also many that will never vote for him, no matter what is policies and actions might be.

 

[SouthernDude]

He may, although didn't see anything in the chapters related to economic strategies. I

This is beyond economic strategy. It's more or less a cultural analysis. In my opinion, the economic situation will not be fixed until the culture is fixed.

I still have some faith in the US electorate waking up, and seeing what is happening, and how it will affect their lives going forward.

I don't have much faith in that. It requires too many people to understand what is actually happening and then have a sympathetic candidate be put on a ballot - fat chance either would ever happen at the national level. Anything useful can only happen at the local/state level, but the right doesn't understand that because they have too much faith in the system. At least that is how I see it.

I sure hope Trump doesn't run again.

I hope he does. lol. The most useful thing that happened during his presidency was the utter hysteria that came from the elite - i.e. the media, universities, the majority of federal politicians, etc. It exposed the system for what it is. It radicalized so many people. Why? Because they realized that Trump really wasn't some authoritarian something-ist demagogue. His views were really not much different than what most mainstream politicians were saying during Obama's presidency (even Obama took similar stances on immigration when he first ran). Only view that was genuinely different was anti-globalism (part of why the system reacted the way it did). That's really it.

 

[R P]

This is beyond economic strategy. It's more or less a cultural analysis. In my opinion, the economic situation will not be fixed until the culture is fixed.
Well, the current govt is trying very hard to "fix" it in their favour. I don't think they will succeed, as we are seeing a lot of backlash. Both with parents against CRT and the out of control crime in the cities. They are not going to give the vote to the new illegal aliens fast enough to win the next election.

I don't have much faith in that. It requires too many people to understand what is actually happening and then have a sympathetic candidate be put on a ballot - fat chance either would ever happen at the national level. Anything useful can only happen at the local/state level, but the right doesn't understand that because they have too much faith in the system. At least that is how I see it.
I don't think you need full understanding to see the obvious. People are figuring out that all is not good, despite what is being told to them. And calling in the DOJ to intimidate common folks will backfire, too. The similarity to China and other totalitarian regimes is becoming more and more evident.

I hope he does. lol. The most useful thing that happened during his presidency was the utter hysteria that came from the elite - i.e. the media, universities, the majority of federal politicians, etc. It exposed the system for what it is. It radicalized so many people. Why? Because they realized that Trump really wasn't some authoritarian something-ist demagogue. His views were really not much different than what most mainstream politicians were saying during Obama's presidency (even Obama took similar stances on immigration when he first ran). Only view that was genuinely different was anti-globalism (part of why the system reacted the way it did). That's really it.
While I have never liked Trump as a person, I have to admit I took some pleasure in seeing/hearing the consternation of the elite after the 2016 election. And I was pleasantly surprised to see some positive actions and policies come from the Trump admin, that greatly improved the economy and the livelihoods of everyone, incl blacks, poverty, etc. But wow, he sure was a crazy man when it came to handling the media, and even his own team. His extreme narcissism did not serve him well, and was a huge turn-off to many potential supporters.

My reply above in bold.

 

[bwilson4web]

I want Trump to run and get heavy into 2022 midterms. He take contributions for his ‘life-style’ and does not support lower ticket candidates financially.

Bob Wilson

 

[SouthernDude]

Well, the current govt is trying very hard to "fix" it in their favour. I don't think they will succeed, as we are seeing a lot of backlash. Both with parents against CRT and the out of control crime in the cities. They are not going to give the vote to the new illegal aliens fast enough to win the next election.

A lot of the backlash isn't really going to go anywhere unless the parents do something that actually results in change - like taking their children out of government run schools and putting them in private schools/homeschools instead of trying to 'fix' a ruined institution. Nothing else will work. Rampant crime will only result in a temporary backlash - this cycle has already played itself out I think twice since the 50s. It's not just illegal immigration, it's basically all immigration since the Hart-Celler act of 1965 - the goal here was demographic replacement to ensure that a particular ideology always wins in the US, party is irrelevant since both have maintained it.

I don't think you need full understanding to see the obvious. People are figuring out that all is not good, despite what is being told to them. And calling in the DOJ to intimidate common folks will backfire, too. The similarity to China and other totalitarian regimes is becoming more and more evident.

Improper diagnosis of the problem will result in ineffective measures taken, so it does matter if people don't have a full understanding of the problem. The right has barely put up any successful fight because most have no clue what is going on.

While I have never liked Trump as a person, I have to admit I took some pleasure in seeing/hearing the consternation of the elite after the 2016 election. And I was pleasantly surprised to see some positive actions and policies come from the Trump admin, that greatly improved the economy and the livelihoods of everyone, incl blacks, poverty, etc. But wow, he sure was a crazy man when it came to handling the media, and even his own team. His extreme narcissism did not serve him well, and was a huge turn-off to many potential supporters.

The interpretation of any personality flaws in any given politician is determined by the media. Think about it. Before Trump ran for president, the media loved him and everyone found his personality entertaining. Look at whose president now. The guy is a gaffe machine, but it doesn't matter because the media tells people how to interpret whatever Joe says. Same goes with the interpretation of any actions taken. It is only a controversy if the media spins it into one. This is actually a picture on how the media effectively acts like a priest class, something that Moldbug, the author I cited earlier, points out. (In essence, the media is an unaccountable arm of power in the US - along with Universities.)

 

[R P]

Yeah, too bad that that public perception is so influenced by the media. But distrust for them continues to decline. That's what spawned the anti vax movement, who are the most distrustful. In Canada, we don't have Repubs or a strong conservative movement, and no Fox News equivalent. Yet we have the same anti-vaxers here. I have talked to many of them (and converted a few to get vaxed). I hear the same arguments from them here about inconsistent messages from govt leaders, and they just don't believe them anymore.

As for Trump, the media helped him win the Repub primaries, thinking that he will be easy to defeat. And just before the 2016 election they peddled the Clinton sponsored smear campaign with the false Russian dossier. But to their horror, he still won. Ever since then they have done everything they could to bring him down, and continue to this day. And if it wasn't for Covid and the mail in ballots, he would still be president. 2024 is still a long ways off, so will have to see what happens. Meanwhile, 2022 is not looking too good for the Dems. I am sure the media will try to fix that, too.

And as for the arrogant senile puppet that you have there for a president, just a very pitiful situation, but unfortunately also very destructive with being managed by the extreme left radicals. I see his approval rating is down to 38% which is even lower than Trump ever was except after the Jan Capitol riots and his impeachment. So the public is not completely blind.

 

[SouthernDude]

Yeah, too bad that that public perception is so influenced by the media. But distrust for them continues to decline. That's what spawned the anti vax movement, who are the most distrustful. In Canada, we don't have Repubs or a strong conservative movement, and no Fox News equivalent. Yet we have the same anti-vaxers here. I have talked to many of them (and converted a few to get vaxed). I hear the same arguments from them here about inconsistent messages from govt leaders, and they just don't believe them anymore.

Yes, lack of trust is the prevailing institutions is why people are anti this vaccine. It's far more accurate to say that the majority of the vaccine hesitant now are just against this vaccine. I personally am not taking it because it doesn't significantly affect my risk and I am concerned that vaccinating the entire population may put evolutionary pressure on the virus to become more resistant to the vaccine (the entire population isn't required to take the flu vaccine every year for a reason). I have no trust in the prevailing institutions. I never take what any politician or media organization at face value anymore. Why should I? They violated my trust by lying so much.

As for Trump, the media helped him win the Repub primaries, thinking that he will be easy to defeat. And just before the 2016 election they peddled the Clinton sponsored smear campaign with the false Russian dossier. But to their horror, he still won. Ever since then they have done everything they could to bring him down, and continue to this day. And if it wasn't for Covid and the mail in ballots, he would still be president. 2024 is still a long ways off, so will have to see what happens. Meanwhile, 2022 is not looking too good for the Dems. I am sure the media will try to fix that, too.

Yes, the media was utterly insane with Trump. Funniest one to me was when the MSM used a picture from Obama's presidency slander Trump with the "kids in cages" narrative. This is beyond bias, it was an outright lie. But whatever. Best thing about the 2020 election is that it made people not trust democracy in general. Make people start to realize that democracy doesn't actually function at large scales.

And as for the arrogant senile puppet that you have there for a president, just a very pitiful situation, but unfortunately also very destructive with being managed by the extreme left radicals. I see his approval rating is down to 38% which is even lower than Trump ever was except after the Jan Capitol riots and his impeachment. So the public is not completely blind.

All modern presidents have been controlled by an unelected bureaucracy. Approval ratings don't really mean anything either. Like I said, an improper diagnosis of the problem will result in ineffective actions taken. It doesn't matter how many people recognize that something is wrong with the system if they don't actually know what's making it wrong.

 

[gooki]

Make people start to realize that democracy doesn't actually function at large scales.

Two party politics isn't democracy.

NZ had the same problem (two party politics) and moved to a mixed member proportional voting system. This has drastically improved our democracy.

 

[R P]

Yes, lack of trust is the prevailing institutions is why people are anti this vaccine. It's far more accurate to say that the majority of the vaccine hesitant now are just against this vaccine. I personally am not taking it because it doesn't significantly affect my risk and I am concerned that vaccinating the entire population may put evolutionary pressure on the virus to become more resistant to the vaccine (the entire population isn't required to take the flu vaccine every year for a reason). I have no trust in the prevailing institutions. I never take what any politician or media organization at face value anymore. Why should I? They violated my trust by lying so much.

Wow, you seemed like a fairly intelligent/logical person, so am surprised by this (not meant as an insult, just my genuine reaction). I have talked to a lot of anti-vaxers, but have not heard the concern about evolutionary pressure to become more resistant to vaccines. Taking that reasoning to its extreme, you could say that no vaccines for any disease are good. So please elaborate. I would like to learn more about why you think this way.

 

[SouthernDude]

Two party politics isn't democracy.

NZ had the same problem (two party politics) and moved to a mixed member proportional voting system. This has drastically improved our democracy.

That doesn't actually solve the problem. The unelected bureaucracy is still present and it does nothing about the subversion of the media and universities.

 

[SouthernDude]

Wow, you seemed like a fairly intelligent/logical person, so am surprised by this (not meant as an insult, just my genuine reaction). I have talked to a lot of anti-vaxers, but have not heard the concern about evolutionary pressure to become more resistant to vaccines. Taking that reasoning to its extreme, you could say that no vaccines for any disease are good. So please elaborate. I would like to learn more about why you think this way.

I am not an anti-vaxxer. Think about it like this, the word vaccine describes a class of medicine, much like the word 'pain killer' describes a class of medicine. Are all pain killers the same? Do they all affect the same mechanisms in the body to suppress pain? No. So why would all vaccines be the same? They aren't. No two species of viruses are the same - hence why they are species. Because of that, the effectiveness of each vaccine is different and the strategy of use for each vaccine will be different.

Polio only has 3 strains and I've never heard anything about the poliovirus that suggests that it mutates quickly. The polio vaccine is almost 100% effective (minus the small number of breakthrough cases). Because of these characteristics, administering the vaccine to 100% of the population will suppress - even eradicate - the virus with little risk of creating evolutionary pressure for the virus to become resistant to the vaccine.

There are far more covid variants and the virus has shown itself to mutate quickly, much like the flu. The current vaccine is not 100% effective and breakout cases are relatively common and the vaccine is only effective for a short period of time, which is exactly like the flu vaccines. With these characteristics, administering the vaccine to 100% of the population will put evolutionary pressure on the virus to mutate to be more resistant to the vaccine. This would ultimately make things worse for the sick and old. We already do not force the whole population to get all the flu vaccines (there are different vaccines for different strains of the flu), so why make the situation worse with covid? The virus is going to mutate to become less of an issue than it already is and it doesn't make sense to make any weapon against it lose power.

 

[R P]

I am not an anti-vaxxer. Think about it like this, the word vaccine describes a class of medicine, much like the word 'pain killer' describes a class of medicine. Are all pain killers the same? Do they all affect the same mechanisms in the body to suppress pain? No. So why would all vaccines be the same? They aren't. No two species of viruses are the same - hence why they are species. Because of that, the effectiveness of each vaccine is different and the strategy of use for each vaccine will be different.

Polio only has 3 strains and I've never heard anything about the poliovirus that suggests that it mutates quickly. The polio vaccine is almost 100% effective (minus the small number of breakthrough cases). Because of these characteristics, administering the vaccine to 100% of the population will suppress - even eradicate - the virus with little risk of creating evolutionary pressure for the virus to become resistant to the vaccine.

There are far more covid variants and the virus has shown itself to mutate quickly, much like the flu. The current vaccine is not 100% effective and breakout cases are relatively common and the vaccine is only effective for a short period of time, which is exactly like the flu vaccines. With these characteristics, administering the vaccine to 100% of the population will put evolutionary pressure on the virus to mutate to be more resistant to the vaccine. This would ultimately make things worse for the sick and old. We already do not force the whole population to get all the flu vaccines (there are different vaccines for different strains of the flu), so why make the situation worse with covid? The virus is going to mutate to become less of an issue than it already is and it doesn't make sense to make any weapon against it lose power.

Well, I am not a scientist or doctor, so I can't assess your response. Do you have some references you can cite to back up your theory? I will do some further research myself, but assume you would have already done that.

 

[SouthernDude]

Well, I am not a scientist or doctor, so I can't assess your response. Do you have some references you can cite to back up your theory? I will do some further research myself, but assume you would have already done that.

It's just something that makes sense and we already have the flu as a comparable situation. You can check this dude out: https://www.geertvandenbossche.org/

 

[R P]

It's just something that makes sense and we already have the flu as a comparable situation. You can check this dude out: https://www.geertvandenbossche.org/

OK, I'll give you credit for backing up your assertion. But I also know on the internet you can find "experts" basically on anything you want to back up your beliefs. I read some of the material in the links, but it sounds very theoretical and didn't see references to peer reviewed studies (not saying there aren't any) with data to back up this theory. The jist that I gathered was the vaccines should be used for the elderly and vulnerable, but not for the healthy and young. And let herd immunity happen naturally.

I have followed (with some trust) what the John Hopkins University people say. And they don't always support the common/current views on what is going on with this pandemic and vaccines. But have not heard/seen any discussion about this aspect, with too many vaccinations leading to more virulent variants and prolonging the pandemic.

To me, it still makes more logical sense to use vaccines as much as possible to hasten herd immunity and hopefully stop this virus for good, or at least in its current deadly form. I could be wrong of course. But I am still not convinced otherwise.

And BTW, I do support taking the flu vaccines. Has worked for me and my wife over the years. Would like to see a similar vaccine taken once a year, maybe combined with the flu vaccine for covid, to prevent a repeat of this past pandemic experience. Basically, we take any vaccine that comes along, eg the Shingles one, incl the boosters.

 

[SouthernDude]

I read some of the material in the links, but it sounds very theoretical and didn't see references to peer reviewed studies (not saying there aren't any) with data to back up this theory.

Well, it hasn't happened yet, so there won't be any evidence now. We have an analog in the flu as a model.

The jist that I gathered was the vaccines should be used for the elderly and vulnerable, but not for the healthy and young. And let herd immunity happen naturally.

This is what makes sense to do.

I have followed (with some trust) what the John Hopkins University people say. And they don't always support the common/current views on what is going on with this pandemic and vaccines. But have not heard/seen any discussion about this aspect, with too many vaccinations leading to more virulent variants and prolonging the pandemic.

I don't think anyone will hear anything about this until it becomes obvious it is happening. With the climate as it is now, it wouldn't surprise me if this idea was being suppressed - even in institutions like John Hopkins.

To me, it still makes more logical sense to use vaccines as much as possible to hasten herd immunity and hopefully stop this virus for good, or at least in its current deadly form. I could be wrong of course. But I am still not convinced otherwise.

This is not a virus that can be eliminated with a vaccine. The characteristics of the virus and the vaccine do not allow this possibility.

 

[R P]

This is not a virus that can be eliminated with a vaccine. The characteristics of the virus and the vaccine do not allow this possibility.

Do you believe in herd immunity? IE, when the virus can't find anymore infectable targets and the chain is broken. And if more, and close to everyone gets vaccinated, wouldn't that hasten that condition? Plain simple logic would tell me yes.

Of course that won't stop the virus from reemerging again some time in the future because of travel spread. The problem we have is that the world is now one connected community. But at least we should be able to eliminate it for a time in locations, while they work on the next vaccine, similar to the flu vaccine. Which BTW, has been proven to reduce deaths. Then at least we can get back to normal living.

 

[SouthernDude]

Do you believe in herd immunity? IE, when the virus can't find anymore infectable targets and the chain is broken. And if more, and close to everyone gets vaccinated, wouldn't that hasten that condition? Plain simple logic would tell me yes.

Herd immunity doesn't always eliminate viruses. The vaccines for covid are really only effective for about a year and the vaccines do not prevent transmission of the virus 100% of the time. All mass vaccination will do is select for more resistant strains.

Of course that won't stop the virus from reemerging again some time in the future because of travel spread. The problem we have is that the world is now one connected community. But at least we should be able to eliminate it for a time in locations, while they work on the next vaccine, similar to the flu vaccine. Which BTW, has been proven to reduce deaths. Then at least we can get back to normal living.

It is virtually impossible to vaccinate the entire world within an 8 month period. It's not a realistic goal. Secondly, I doubt that it would actually fully suppress the virus either. This isn't polio. I also reject the idea that vaccination rate will return things to normal. I have no faith that the government will do that.

 

[R P]

With all due respect, you are not exactly addressing my questions and statements. Eg. about herd immunity. Saying it doesn't always eliminate viruses does not directly relate to my questions. And saying ALL mass vaccination will do is select more resistant strains is not exactly relevant either. Ditto about vaccines being only effective one year. We both know that a new strain booster can be developed in less than a year. They are working on that right now, while so far the vaccines are resistant to all current variants.

And re your last point. Are you arguing against my assertion that a virus can't be eliminated through herd immunity in a location for a time (until it is introduced from somewhere else)?