On Tuesday, September 14, 2021 at 1:39:08 PM UTC-4, blo...@columbus.rr.com
> On Tuesday, September 14, 2021 at 1:08:46 PM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
You agree that 80 to 100 million Americans are "naturally immune"? How do you come up with that number? There are only 42 million diagnosed infections. Where do these other numbers come from?
Even if you allow those with infections to not be immunized, how do you know who they are? If they have not, with a high confidence level, been tested to be infected, how can they know they were previously infected? My understanding is the tests for this have a high false positive rate. That's the worst way to fail in this case, leaving someone with no immunity while they think they have immunity.
> But a five year old says the sky is blue with the same authority as a nuclear physicist does.
> Obvious does not need a "scientist" to justify it
Whatever that means.
> My vaccine does not work if you do not take your vaccine.
Now you are talking nonsense.
> Animal storehouses for the virus
> Everyone in the world cannot be vaccinated
Uh, we are working toward exactly that. We presently have a third of the world population fully vaccinated with closer to half at least one injection. We can step up that effort, but in the US, we simply need to convince the butt heads to either get injected or infected. If it weren't for the overcrowding in hospitals I would say we should require everyone to do one of those two things.
> No consideration to natural immunity
Yes, because that is the safest way since it is hard to be sure when someone has been infected if they were not tested at the time.
> The (now) need for boosters every 6-12 months.
Yes, so? I'm happy to get shots every 6 months if it significantly reduces my chances of being infected. My 95 year old friend is happy to get the booster as well, but it may not help him nearly as much. To protect him with confidence requires we get rid of the disease by getting everyone vaccinated.
> Its all a big cluster -F
Your ranting and raving? Yes, indeed.
> And then the low death rates and the ravaging of the economy and the complete immunity of economic consequences for those calling the shots.
When you talk about the "low death rates" you ignore the long Covid and those may never recover fully.
> You do not need "science" to sort through the bullsh!t
No, but it would help a lot if all of us actually understood the science. There would be much less bullshit.
It's interesting that you are so vehement about this and yet you literally won't discuss the actual issues. You insist on ranting in ten directions at once rather than discuss any one of them at a time. Your arguments are easy to pick apart, but you refuse to actually discuss them. I've tried to discuss these issues with you, but once we get into any one issue, you stop responding to that discussion and start somewhere else with a new rant of the same, tired nonsense.
I guess that's the best you can do in terms of staying on task. So sorry, not much to discuss with you. Continue your ranting.
Fortunately for the rest of us, people like you are not allowed to be in charge of much.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209