Modernity Sucks

Kyle Judkins wrote: ↑Tue 6 Apr 2021 02:28 Well looks like I'm on VI-vacation for spreading an anti vsxxer message.

I'm glad musicians' opinions are here to "correct" the experiences of people who actually work with the phenomenon.
I guess my experience is an illusion because CNN didn't cover it - forgive me Mike for trusting my eyes,ears, and brain over corporate media.

I'm with you brotha. Nick Batzdorf deleted one of my facebook responses, because I cited some stats about Texas and Florida's covid rates, and they conflicted with his imagined narrative (LA based only) on how the virus was spreading. My post was civil, sympathetic, and cited stats. Didn't matter. I was deleted, and targeted. <sigh>.... what a world. Sorry, man. :)

Mike

Farkle wrote: ↑Wed 28 Apr 2021 02:11

Kyle Judkins wrote: ↑Tue 6 Apr 2021 02:28 Well looks like I'm on VI-vacation for spreading an anti vsxxer message.

I'm glad musicians' opinions are here to "correct" the experiences of people who actually work with the phenomenon.
I guess my experience is an illusion because CNN didn't cover it - forgive me Mike for trusting my eyes,ears, and brain over corporate media.

I'm with you brotha. Nick Batzdorf deleted one of my facebook responses, because I cited some stats about Texas and Florida's covid rates, and they conflicted with his imagined narrative (LA based only) on how the virus was spreading. My post was civil, sympathetic, and cited stats. Didn't matter. I was deleted, and targeted. <sigh>.... what a world. Sorry, man. :)

Mike

I just kinda rolled my eyes... Ultimately it's his forum, and he's not actually obligated to entertain my opinions, even in off topic.

Luckily I can go on without having that conversation over there and no love is lost.

Unfortunately I wasn't able to even attempt pulling my stream up for fear of ruffling feathers if someone asked me why I wasn't on VIC. The goal was to get banned quietly and get unbanned quietly.

Mike and/or his mods are going to police that content - no use fighting that, not a hill worth dying on. Nick's opinion on the matter is no more valuable than a kardashian's.

To quote Starwars once more: And this is how liberty dies: With thunderous applause.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SSGsGdkJ2c

While I do think there are dangerous tendencies of people who ignore facts and confuse that with opinion, I still think it is not right to censor voices on forums. I don't know what you wrote, Kyle. It was censored, so, I cannot read it. It was also written in the drama zone. If it really was stupid shit, I could form my own opinion about it (well, if I was able to access the dram zone, which I cannot do as a banned member, anyway).

I am vaccinated against corona, now, by the way. And I do consider anti-vaccination propaganda horse shit. Facts, facts, facts ... The few risks those vaccinations have are clearly trumped by the risks the corona virus poses. But I would still not agree with people getting censored just for spreading any kind of horse shit. I think they should rather be countered with the facts in a calm way. Mike Greedy does even admit in his own posts that he has by now abandoned that path of discussion and dialectic argument. He has now officially called himself out as the Emperor of Vi-Control ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgxZr6LLS34

One should be aware that while Mike probably paid a considerable amount to the former owner, a forum is not something one ever really owns! He merely owns an URL! I don't think he really understands that ... by buying the forum he has over time completely changed it and it is not the forum it once was. It was slowly taken over by Hans Zimmer and a few clowns who have become the opinion leaders, although I have to admit that this already started under the former owner.

The fact that Vi-Control is still the largest forum by far can be easily explained. Look at how many people still use Pro Tools in spite of the program being ridiculously over-priced and at the same time behind the competition! Sometimes there are those "industry-standards" that are difficult to get rid of ... but in time, they will be replaced when the owners keep ignoring the world around them in their complacency.

I should mention, that this is a humorous exaggeration ... I am not actually convinced, reality is as black and white as Starwars does suggest! This is just to serve the comedic purpose.

ironically it was in response to a post about why everyone on VIC was in a bad mood.
then I mentioned at this point can anyone be blamed?
then someone mentioned how after the US presidential election their move significantly improved
I responded that nothing substantial has changed in terms of foreign tensions, the economy, or the health - so if you care about any of those things you wouldn't be happy. Hence trump derangement syndrome(he's happy that orange man is gone, regardless of all the things he thought trump was doing are still going on)

And ofcourse I get to enjoy the woke-tivists finally eat their humble pie as they slowly realize more military forces are sent into their cities under bidens' admin.

anyways, he tried to say biden has got the vaccine out - inwhich I simply gave him a history lesson, as it's the vaccine that the trump administration was pushing through - one of which we still don't understand the repercussions from.

As far as "anti science", it's really not - a vaccine at it's core is something similiar to what you're trying to prevent, modified so that you'll likely survive it and grow an immunity to it that carries over to what you're actually afraid of.

The issue with this, is when you give it to people who are severely in danger of mortality from covid itself, you're also risking killing them with a vaccine that's going to cause respiratory distress as well. The only fact I stated, was that I've taken a ton of calls as a 911 operator of people who were perfectly healthy, got the shot, went to the hospital once or twice for severe respiratory distress - and sadly the 2nd/3rd call far too often was their loved ones finding them dead in the morning. Same story, elderly couple gets the shot - one is fine, and the other declines like a sack of bricks.

the problem is that there is a tone of mis-information about these vaccines and the cause of death, because they have been unable to "prove" it's the vaccine that killed them and not just chance that they got the vaccine and died shortly after from a severe onset of flu like illness. The optimistic side says "SEE, THE VACCINE DIDNT DO IT, YOU FUCKIN ANTI SCIENCE IDIOT DICK" but in reality, it's simply the scientist unable to successfully link that information so far. Death is a complicated thing, and even when covid 19 first started killing people - medical examiners have been entirely trash as accurately assess the cause of death to a new virus. Most of which turned into people who had the virus and died of anything were counted.

You might ask why there is virtually no scrutiny on declaring a covid related death vs declaring a vaccine as the cause of death, but the answer is fairly obvious. The CDC for instance, benefits directly from the virus being deadly, as it legitimizes claim to more funds. On the flipside, being hasty in declaring the vaccine the cause of death is the exact opposite. Suddenly - there's a massive burden of proof because money and corporations are involved. Covid isn't an entity that can take you to court for saying it killed someone... Pfizer is... so if you say the vaccine killed them, you'd better be able to a.) prove it without any reasonable doubt in the court of LAW and b.) have the money, because if you say it killed them - then the company who made it is going to take you to court to contest it. Moderna and Pfizer have spend massive sums of money creating these vaccines, and if you say that their vaccines caused people to die, those families now get to sue them for damages, and they don't get a return on investment.

My actual stance? Keep in mind I work in the 911 center. You can't die in your sleep in my entire county without coming through a 911 line one way or another. If you're ill enough to need an ambulance - again - you have to come through our phone lines. While we're working we can see every respiratory/pandemic call that goes up - everytime someone dies, we see that screen sit on our computers for hours as law enforcement works the scene/contacts relatives. When someone calls for their wife/husband who can barely breath, I'm the one staying on the line until paramedics get there. Typical questions after the initial protocol are to keep them company and from freaking out - and to show them that I care and I'm interested in their well-being, I typically ask "did anything occur before this to trigger such difficulties? Were they just watching TV when it started, or exercising?", between that - and the fact that I ask them to put on a mask before the paramedics arrive - is why I hear the patients talk about how they just got the vaccine. The result of this unique perspective?

My agency has offered us the vaccine 3 times now, twice before it was opened up to the more general public - and nearly unanimously my co-workers declined it. We're people who deal with science and protocol daily, who are absolutely anal about safety first - are all simply not interested in the vaccine.

For the sake of clarity, I'm in my 30s, healthy enough - and have a low-contact life style - so I don't want the vaccine. It doesn't prevent you from getting or carrying the virus - and I'm not worried about surviving it if I get it. I'm fine with healthy reasonable aged people getting the vaccine - but I think giving it to the elderly who are already able to self-quarantine is a dangerous game of russian roulette.

Even if it was a 2% change that your grand mother got sick and died, you WOULDNT roll that dice.

My answer here is more in-depth, since it's not cut and dry. I'm fine with the vaccine, but I also understand that the very nature of a vaccine can potentially be dangerous for the most vulnerable people. I don't think any crazy conspiracy that it's bill gates injecting soccer moms with microchips to control their thoughts... I just think they are completely dishonest about the reality of mortality rates with these shots because it would be opening themselves up to financial ruin if they left any margin for error on the table.

so TLDR version: vaccines in general can be dangerous to vulnerable populace, and the burden of proof for declaring a death by COVID is basically non existent, while declaring a death by vaccine requires that you have airtight evidence because you'll be sued in the court of law by an entire pantheon of corporate demigods who made the vaccines.

Kyle, you undoubtedly know more about this as you are working in the frontline and have more direct experience and knowledge about this. I think the logic is slightly confusing though because, on the one hand you are saying that life ends for some people with the virus but not proven to be caused by the virus, and on the other hand life ends for people with the vaccine but it is suspected to be caused by the vaccine. Does this not seem contradictory?

I am on the same page as you in terms of being wary of new vaccines and not getting a covid vaccine unless it becomes absolutely necessary. Like you, I have a low contact lifestyle and hoping to ride this pandemic out until the virus hopefully mutates into something less severe. My main concern with the vaccines is that they may force the virus to mutate into something extremely severe, bypassing all treatment options.

As for the origins of the virus, this may be of interest. Note the date of the first case, June 30 2019, in a retirement home next to Fort Detrick (a US army base which is home to most elements of the United States biological defense program):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dfs7vu-3CyI

Both of you have the right to not get vaccinated, of course. That is common throughout the world - I have not heard of any country forcing anyone! There may be exceptions in some countries where there is no democracy implemented (well, not even the illusion of a democracy, but that is a topic on its own ...).

But both of you have to take responsibility for the implications of your decisions to not get vaccinated! It basically means, you wait for a majority of everyone else to get vaccinated for you to finally profit from those people. That, or not enough people ever get vaccinated and it will cost much more lives then necessary until herd-immunization is reached. In both cases, however, you accept the fact that a lot of unnecessary suffering and death will rule due to your decision to be suspicious about it.

Scientific results, however, completely discredit your skepticism in that matter: even for entirely egoistic reasons, your chances of living longer due to getting vaccinated are much larger than by not getting vaccinated! And this is true for any age - grandma as much as young man! The only exception are those groups that are not recommended for vaccination, like pregnant women or some sick people. If you ignore those facts and prefer to believe some story some dude heard from another dude, or some shady homepage by people who think the Clintons drink baby blood ... I wouldn’t know where to even begin with any discussion! There of course are reasons to sceptical about stuff, but in this matter, it virtually is a matter of life and death to not be wrong about it!

It's not really wether or not I get sick from the vaccine

My thing is, it doesn't matter if I get vaccinated because it doesn't prevent me from getting or carrying the virus. It'll make me more resilient if I encounter it but there's a massively high chance that is be asymptomatic anyways. I've been sick maybe once every 2-3 years with anything resembling a flu.(last time I had a flu was nearly 4 years ago).

That's my reasoning, it's easier to live with minimal exposure and not worry about a vaccine for me - and the result is the same. if I got vaccinated I'd still have to live the same life style to lower the risk of exposing other people in my life who aren't in the same position health wise.

I don't care if others get the vaccine but I wouldn't. The people who are both unhealthy enough to worry about the virus AND healthy enough that the vaccine is worth the extra risk is kind of narrow - but that's where I think the vaccine is best implemented.

Plus I'd be willing to bet I've probably already came in contact with covid at some point and just didn't know it, because my girlfriends parents for instance work in hospitals and the jail. both of which tested positive at points.(althought nether have ever shown symptoms)

Flo I get the feeling that you didn't really read my post and you're just kind of imagining what you think people who disagree with you think. You've skipped over my actual reasoning and replaced it with a stance you picture fox news watchers having. Hope you take the time to read it, understand exactly how and why vaccines work - because that's where my viewpoint ultimately stems from.

Sherlock, you might have misunderstood my comparison.

People who die from covid have little to no burden of proof
People who die after taking the vaccine have an insurmountable burden of proof.

Again the reasoning is simple: blame covid even if it's not a major factor if you detect it on a corpse - because the CDC can ask for more money and covid can't sue you for blaming it.

The vaccine on the other hand has an entire army of lawyers ready to contest that - because it would mean that people could sue pfizer/moderna for damages, while throwing away the billions on RnD they spent on the vaccine.

More over, if you pay attention to the language used by the professionals, they carefully state that they are unable to link the cause of death to the vaccine, not that the vaccine didn't kill them.

Either way, I don't really care about the discussion. I got way more in depth here than I did in ViC and it basically ends up the same.

People with even an ounce of skepticism have to deal with people who drink the coolaid and they tend to be loud about it. There is 0 degree of nuance with that line of thinking, and even though I'm pro-vaccine under specific criteria you still respond with "listen up Alex jones, this is life or death!!". Surely you can imagine how little incentive I have to continue on the topic.

Kylo, I DID read your post. But you assume there was anything I could have missed that was new to me. Believe me, I haven't! I have read multiple versions of that same lore again and again, that is why it is really difficult to not get annoyed by it at this point. I see it like this: people like you take what is actually part of my own philosophy - being critical and careful to not blindly believe everything the media is telling them. But then you draw hair-raising conclusions out of that position of skepticism - so absurd, that it makes me doubt wether the critical POV is really a good idea for everyone. You know, I donÖt like sheep, but following the mainstream in this instance is really better than what you come up with.

That is because being critical first and foremost means being critical with YOURSELF! Otherwise, you might miss that you own conclusions pose a much greater problem than the main stream simplifications, which may sometimes be incomplete or sometimes even straight lies.

I have seen this so often that it never really works to discuss with this type of person, as any fact can be countered with some pseudo-fact and even though the fraud is very obvious to me, the other person is still as convinced of his wrong conclusion as before ... it unfortunately never helps to discuss, which is why I really struggle with myself to take the time to answer to something like this!

Let me make a little example: If you were to talk to a pilot who told you, there were pink fluffy unicorns flying in the sky ... they are pretty rare, but he has already seen them two times and two colleagues also. Most people were just to much into main stream to see it. Those unicorns only appear to children and adults with the heart of children. What would you do? Would you change your assumption about pink fluffy unicorns not being a serious discussion? I bet you wouldn't spend much time in doubting what you thought to be your view of what is a reasonable doubt and what is just rubbish. And you probably would not spend a lot of time in trying to persuade that person of the non-existence of those unicorns, if that person would just counter every of your reasonable arguments with just rhetorical trickery! That person might not be really dumb in terms of unable to find a lot of reasons and be rhetorically strong ... it would just not be worth it and you would let it go ...

Of course, my unicorn example is much more drastic and I freely admit there is more doubt and criticism justified when talking about government, big business, big Pharma, etc! So far, we even don't disagree! However, it is of critical importance WHERE exactly to have doubts and where that otherwise valid skeptical POV might lead to dangerous mis-conlusions due to the lack of experience you yourself (just as myself) might have in this particular field! And - sorry - a job in an emergency call center does not qualify you to make me disbelieve everything I know from all the MDs who I know and talk to ... Even though, I do not think that MDs are "gods in white" as we jokingly call them in German, I still think it is important to know when you better listen to them and all those other experts like virologists in this case.

These are some of the problems with your assumptions:

My thing is, it doesn't matter if I get vaccinated because it doesn't prevent me from getting or carrying the virus.

Wrong! While there is simply not enough data available at this point to say how much a vaccination does reduce the risk of you transmitting it - and that is the reason vaccinated people should still wear masks and keep distance - it is safe to assume that it does significantly reduces infections! This will of course be different regarding which substance you look at, but generally: the more people vaccinated, the fewer infections there will be! Hence, my earlier comment about taking responsibility for your decision, as it is not a decision that just affects you yourself Viral spread is a bit more complex than just looking at two people. You have to see the whole picture: when 50% of the population is vaccinated, the statistical probability of infections will be reduced by much more than 50%. That is the major point of vaccinations: they protect the individual, but they have the potential of almost eradicating the virus (almost in this case, because the covid can be spread by animals).

Again the reasoning is simple: blame covid even if it's not a major factor if you detect it on a corpse - because the CDC can ask for more money and covid can't sue you for blaming it.

The vaccine on the other hand has an entire army of lawyers ready to contest that - because it would mean that people could sue pfizer/moderna for damages, while throwing away the billions on RnD they spent on the vaccine.

More over, if you pay attention to the language used by the professionals, they carefully state that they are unable to link the cause of death to the vaccine, not that the vaccine didn't kill them.


One problem with this is when you basically declare any scientific data as irrelevant - it just serves the goals of big Pharma or whatever - you just render any means of objectifying things useless! I DO think that SOME clinical studies are driven by wrong interests (mostly money). But nobody should therefore doubt the general concept of clinical studies - especially meta-studies (looking at the results of multiple studies and comparing them). That is precisely the problem with the Trump-camp and the Fox-News-camp (by the way, are you joking by associating me with those?)! If facts do not matter any more, nobody will ever loose an argument and even the most stupid arguments and positions will remain valid!

And the simple truth is this: mortality rises by a factor X whenever many infections took place before (a wave of infections)! Death is a complicated thing and it might in some cases be difficult to decide, wether covid was the reason for death, wether it was just one of the causes or wether it was entirely unrelated to that case of death. But if you simply care to draw the right conclusion from (A) deaths are rising drastically and (B) covid is found in the bodies and add (C) in most of the cases, covid-related symptoms like severe lung tissue damage was found in the body, you should easily see that it is preposterous to assume, that many of those deaths are not even related to covid. How else do you explain the rise of deaths and why are all of those hospital beds used up that quickly!? Of course that is related to the virus!

So, the scientist is just honest in telling you that sometimes it may be difficult to say with certainty what exactly an individual died from. But you on the other hand draw completely crazy conclusions from that! It is of course crystal clear that covid does cause most of the deaths that are above the usual mortality! With simple logic thinking this should be self-evident ...

As you also question the scientific data on risks of covid vaccines and claim that actually a much larger number of people would die from those vaccinations ... well, it always comes back to that: we cannot find a conclusion to what is right and what is wrong, if you question repeatedly proven data gathered by science ... with that attitude you make it impossible to have a thoughtful dispute or argument. That way, you will never be proven wrong but at the same time, nobody serious will really care for your opinion.

The issue with this, is when you give it to people who are severely in danger of mortality from covid itself, you're also risking killing them with a vaccine that's going to cause respiratory distress as well. The only fact I stated, was that I've taken a ton of calls as a 911 operator of people who were perfectly healthy, got the shot, went to the hospital once or twice for severe respiratory distress - and sadly the 2nd/3rd call far too often was their loved ones finding them dead in the morning. Same story, elderly couple gets the shot - one is fine, and the other declines like a sack of bricks.


Again: you understand half of the basics of how vaccination works and draw wrong conclusions! I already mentioned why your personal observations of some dude are not a valid proof to me that will make me doubt all I know from scientists. So, let's hit the shit directly:

First, no vaccination literally is the injection with the virus! In the case of mRNA (Biontec/Pfizer and Moderna) it is not even the virus itself, but just parts of its DNA. For the vector vaccinations it is killed viruses AFAIK that get injected. I don't want to go into details here, as neither me nor you are experts enough to do so ...

However, both you and me are able to understand that fact, that studies have clearly shown that the injection of those vaccines are extremely safe! Sure, there were some complications - some more with the vector based vaccines with women of certain age. Whenever you use medicine on a huge part of the populations, there will be some few cases with complications and even deaths related to it. But what you fail to acknowledge is that this is the case with ALL vaccinations and even freely available drugs like pain killers - even with food or some chemicals in your sanitary needs or whatever!

It is simply a matter of statical probability that something bad will happen in a few cases when you do it to millions and billions of people. E.g., the risk of dying from thrombosis is drastically higher with most birth-control pills then it was with AstraZeneca. Why so many people were afraid to take that vaccine, but not nearly as many women were afraid to swallow those birth control pills is not evidence based, but purely a decision based on emotion, attention to a topic, false information and some people not being sharp enough to get it. Of course, I understand that those women rather choose the vaccine with even less dangerous potential, which is just as fine as more and more women refuse to take birth control pills nowadays. But you on the other hand compare potentially getting covid and the risks related to that with those slim risks! You can use a comdom to not get pregnant, but there is nothing as good as the vaccine in reducing the chances of you catching that virus.

Just take look at the numbers of deaths of people vaccined and compare them to those who had the virus. You don't even have to add to that all the people who did survive covid but suffer from long-term effects to make the right decision.