# Herd Immunity



## Pink Biz

*Proceed at your own risk: this article (excerpts) wasn't written by Tucker Carlson or your conspiracy-guzzling neighbor. It was published by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health on 4-6-21. *

"When the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 first started to spread, virtually nobody was immune. Meeting no resistance, the virus spread quickly across communities. Stopping it will require a significant percentage of people to be immune. But how can we get to that point? How is the race on to get people immune by vaccinating them before they get infected?

When most of a population is immune to an infectious disease, this provides herd immunity to the disease.  For example, if 80% of a population is immune to a virus, four out of every five people who encounter someone with the disease won’t get sick (and won’t spread the disease any further). In this way, the spread of infectious diseases is kept under control. Depending how contagious an infection is, usually 50% to 90% of a population needs immunity before infection rates start to decline.  The higher the level of immunity, the larger the benefit. This is why it is important to get as many people as possible vaccinated.

As with any other infection, there are two ways to achieve herd immunity: A large proportion of the population either gets infected or gets a protective vaccine. What we know about coronavirus so far suggests that, if we were really to go back to a pre-pandemic lifestyle, we would need at least 70% of the population to be immune to keep the rate of infection down (“achieve herd immunity”) without restrictions on activities. But this level depends on many factors, including the infectiousness of the virus (variants can evolve that are more infectious) and how people interact with each other.

For example, when the population reduces their level of interaction (through distancing, wearing masks, etc.), infection rates slow down. But as society opens up more broadly and the virus mutates to become more contagious, infection rates will go up again. Since we are not currently at a level of protection that can allow life to return to normal without seeing another spike in cases and deaths, it is now a race between infection and injection.

In the worst case (for example, if we stop distancing and mask wearing and remove limits on crowded indoor gatherings), we will continue to see additional waves of surging infection. The virus will infect—and kill—many more people before our vaccination program reaches everyone. And deaths aren’t the only problem. The more people the virus infects, the more chances it has to mutate. This can increase transmission risk, decrease the effectiveness of vaccines, and make the pandemic harder to control in the long run.

In the best case, we vaccinate people as quickly as possible while maintaining distancing and other prevention measures to keep infection levels low. But if we continue vaccinating the population at the current rate, in the U.S. we should see meaningful effects on transmission by the end of the summer of 2021. While there is not going to be a “herd immunity day” where life immediately goes back to normal, this approach gives us the best long-term chance of beating the pandemic.

In the United States, current projections are that we can get more than half of all American adults fully vaccinated by the end of Summer 2021—which would take us a long way toward herd immunity, in only a few months. By the time winter comes around, hopefully enough of the population will be vaccinated to prevent another large surge like what we have seen this year. But this optimistic scenario is not guaranteed. It requires widespread vaccine uptake among all parts of the population—including all ages and races, in all cities, suburbs, and countrysides. Because the human population is so interconnected, an outbreak anywhere can lead to a resurgence everywhere."

Prolonged effort will be required to prevent major outbreaks until vaccination is widespread. Even then, it is very unlikely that SARS-CoV-2 will be eradicated; it will still likely infect children and others who have not been vaccinated, and we will likely need to update the vaccine and provide booster doses on some regular basis. But it is also likely that the continuing waves of explosive spread that we are seeing right now will eventually die down—because in the future, enough of the population will be immune to provide herd protection.

We now have multiple effective vaccines, and the race is on to get people vaccinated before they get infected (and have the chance to spread infection to others). One thing is certain: The more people who are vaccinated, the less opportunity the virus will have to spread in the population, and the closer we will be to herd immunity.

Once we get enough people vaccinated to drive down infection rates more consistently, we should be able to gradually lift restrictions. But until the vaccine is widely distributed and a large majority of the population is vaccinated, there will still be a risk of infection and outbreaks.

In the end, though, we will build up immunity to this virus; life will be able to return to “normal” eventually. The fastest way to get to that point is for each of us to do our part in the coming months to reduce the spread of the virus—continue to wear masks, maintain distance, avoid high-risk indoor gatherings, and get vaccinated as soon as a vaccine becomes available to us."

https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/achieving-herd-immunity-with-covid19.html

*IMO, even if your own health prospects are of little or no concern to you, opting not to get vaccinated is a self-centered and self-absorbed choice which displays a callous disregard for your neighbors and community.*


----------



## win231

Pink Biz said:


> *Proceed at your own risk: this article (excerpts) wasn't written by Tucker Carlson or your conspiracy-guzzling neighbor. It was published by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health on 4-6-21. *
> 
> "When the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 first started to spread, virtually nobody was immune. Meeting no resistance, the virus spread quickly across communities. Stopping it will require a significant percentage of people to be immune. But how can we get to that point? How is the race on to get people immune by vaccinating them before they get infected?
> 
> When most of a population is immune to an infectious disease, this provides herd immunity to the disease.  For example, if 80% of a population is immune to a virus, four out of every five people who encounter someone with the disease won’t get sick (and won’t spread the disease any further). In this way, the spread of infectious diseases is kept under control. Depending how contagious an infection is, usually 50% to 90% of a population needs immunity before infection rates start to decline.  The higher the level of immunity, the larger the benefit. This is why it is important to get as many people as possible vaccinated.
> 
> As with any other infection, there are two ways to achieve herd immunity: A large proportion of the population either gets infected or gets a protective vaccine. What we know about coronavirus so far suggests that, if we were really to go back to a pre-pandemic lifestyle, we would need at least 70% of the population to be immune to keep the rate of infection down (“achieve herd immunity”) without restrictions on activities. But this level depends on many factors, including the infectiousness of the virus (variants can evolve that are more infectious) and how people interact with each other.
> 
> For example, when the population reduces their level of interaction (through distancing, wearing masks, etc.), infection rates slow down. But as society opens up more broadly and the virus mutates to become more contagious, infection rates will go up again. Since we are not currently at a level of protection that can allow life to return to normal without seeing another spike in cases and deaths, it is now a race between infection and injection.
> 
> In the worst case (for example, if we stop distancing and mask wearing and remove limits on crowded indoor gatherings), we will continue to see additional waves of surging infection. The virus will infect—and kill—many more people before our vaccination program reaches everyone. And deaths aren’t the only problem. The more people the virus infects, the more chances it has to mutate. This can increase transmission risk, decrease the effectiveness of vaccines, and make the pandemic harder to control in the long run.
> 
> In the best case, we vaccinate people as quickly as possible while maintaining distancing and other prevention measures to keep infection levels low. But if we continue vaccinating the population at the current rate, in the U.S. we should see meaningful effects on transmission by the end of the summer of 2021. While there is not going to be a “herd immunity day” where life immediately goes back to normal, this approach gives us the best long-term chance of beating the pandemic.
> 
> In the United States, current projections are that we can get more than half of all American adults fully vaccinated by the end of Summer 2021—which would take us a long way toward herd immunity, in only a few months. By the time winter comes around, hopefully enough of the population will be vaccinated to prevent another large surge like what we have seen this year. But this optimistic scenario is not guaranteed. It requires widespread vaccine uptake among all parts of the population—including all ages and races, in all cities, suburbs, and countrysides. Because the human population is so interconnected, an outbreak anywhere can lead to a resurgence everywhere."
> 
> Prolonged effort will be required to prevent major outbreaks until vaccination is widespread. Even then, it is very unlikely that SARS-CoV-2 will be eradicated; it will still likely infect children and others who have not been vaccinated, and we will likely need to update the vaccine and provide booster doses on some regular basis. But it is also likely that the continuing waves of explosive spread that we are seeing right now will eventually die down—because in the future, enough of the population will be immune to provide herd protection.
> 
> We now have multiple effective vaccines, and the race is on to get people vaccinated before they get infected (and have the chance to spread infection to others). One thing is certain: The more people who are vaccinated, the less opportunity the virus will have to spread in the population, and the closer we will be to herd immunity.
> 
> Once we get enough people vaccinated to drive down infection rates more consistently, we should be able to gradually lift restrictions. But until the vaccine is widely distributed and a large majority of the population is vaccinated, there will still be a risk of infection and outbreaks.
> 
> In the end, though, we will build up immunity to this virus; life will be able to return to “normal” eventually. The fastest way to get to that point is for each of us to do our part in the coming months to reduce the spread of the virus—continue to wear masks, maintain distance, avoid high-risk indoor gatherings, and get vaccinated as soon as a vaccine becomes available to us."
> 
> https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/achieving-herd-immunity-with-covid19.html
> 
> *IMO, even if your own health prospects are of little or no concern to you, opting not to get vaccinated is a self-centered and self-absorbed choice which displays a callous disregard for your neighbors and community.*


What a crock.  If a vaccine worked, no one would be concerned about unvaccinated people.  Trying to convince others to make the same decision you made indicates a typical controlling personality.  It also indicates how little confidence you have in the vaccine.


----------



## digifoss

Pink Biz said:


> .....
> 
> *IMO, even if your own health prospects are of little or no concern to you, opting not to get vaccinated is a self-centered and self-absorbed choice which displays a callous disregard for your neighbors and community.*



While I have seen some good information come from John Hopkins during this China Whuan flu pandemic, afaic, injecting such a ludicrous opinion at the end of your post tends to discredit your entire post and is very telling about your real intentions in starting this thread.  If I wanted opinions, I would tune in to Dr Fauci.


----------



## tbeltrans

I honestly don't think we know each other well enough in a forum to make direct, personal statements about each other.  My suggestion is to read the article, and if one wants to make comments/express opinions about it, please keep them GENERAL rather than coming across as attacking those who hold different opinions.

Since I am not a moderator, all I can do is appeal to everyone's "better nature".

Thanks,

Tony


----------



## Dana

Pink Biz said:


> *Proceed at your own risk: this article (excerpts) wasn't written by Tucker Carlson or your conspiracy-guzzling neighbor. It was published by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health on 4-6-21. *
> 
> "When the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 first started to spread, virtually nobody was immune. Meeting no resistance, the virus spread quickly across communities. Stopping it will require a significant percentage of people to be immune. But how can we get to that point? How is the race on to get people immune by vaccinating them before they get infected?
> 
> When most of a population is immune to an infectious disease, this provides herd immunity to the disease.  For example, if 80% of a population is immune to a virus, four out of every five people who encounter someone with the disease won’t get sick (and won’t spread the disease any further). In this way, the spread of infectious diseases is kept under control. Depending how contagious an infection is, usually 50% to 90% of a population needs immunity before infection rates start to decline.  The higher the level of immunity, the larger the benefit. This is why it is important to get as many people as possible vaccinated.
> 
> As with any other infection, there are two ways to achieve herd immunity: A large proportion of the population either gets infected or gets a protective vaccine. What we know about coronavirus so far suggests that, if we were really to go back to a pre-pandemic lifestyle, we would need at least 70% of the population to be immune to keep the rate of infection down (“achieve herd immunity”) without restrictions on activities. But this level depends on many factors, including the infectiousness of the virus (variants can evolve that are more infectious) and how people interact with each other.
> 
> For example, when the population reduces their level of interaction (through distancing, wearing masks, etc.), infection rates slow down. But as society opens up more broadly and the virus mutates to become more contagious, infection rates will go up again. Since we are not currently at a level of protection that can allow life to return to normal without seeing another spike in cases and deaths, it is now a race between infection and injection.
> 
> In the worst case (for example, if we stop distancing and mask wearing and remove limits on crowded indoor gatherings), we will continue to see additional waves of surging infection. The virus will infect—and kill—many more people before our vaccination program reaches everyone. And deaths aren’t the only problem. The more people the virus infects, the more chances it has to mutate. This can increase transmission risk, decrease the effectiveness of vaccines, and make the pandemic harder to control in the long run.
> 
> In the best case, we vaccinate people as quickly as possible while maintaining distancing and other prevention measures to keep infection levels low. But if we continue vaccinating the population at the current rate, in the U.S. we should see meaningful effects on transmission by the end of the summer of 2021. While there is not going to be a “herd immunity day” where life immediately goes back to normal, this approach gives us the best long-term chance of beating the pandemic.
> 
> In the United States, current projections are that we can get more than half of all American adults fully vaccinated by the end of Summer 2021—which would take us a long way toward herd immunity, in only a few months. By the time winter comes around, hopefully enough of the population will be vaccinated to prevent another large surge like what we have seen this year. But this optimistic scenario is not guaranteed. It requires widespread vaccine uptake among all parts of the population—including all ages and races, in all cities, suburbs, and countrysides. Because the human population is so interconnected, an outbreak anywhere can lead to a resurgence everywhere."
> 
> Prolonged effort will be required to prevent major outbreaks until vaccination is widespread. Even then, it is very unlikely that SARS-CoV-2 will be eradicated; it will still likely infect children and others who have not been vaccinated, and we will likely need to update the vaccine and provide booster doses on some regular basis. But it is also likely that the continuing waves of explosive spread that we are seeing right now will eventually die down—because in the future, enough of the population will be immune to provide herd protection.
> 
> We now have multiple effective vaccines, and the race is on to get people vaccinated before they get infected (and have the chance to spread infection to others). One thing is certain: The more people who are vaccinated, the less opportunity the virus will have to spread in the population, and the closer we will be to herd immunity.
> 
> Once we get enough people vaccinated to drive down infection rates more consistently, we should be able to gradually lift restrictions. But until the vaccine is widely distributed and a large majority of the population is vaccinated, there will still be a risk of infection and outbreaks.
> 
> In the end, though, we will build up immunity to this virus; life will be able to return to “normal” eventually. The fastest way to get to that point is for each of us to do our part in the coming months to reduce the spread of the virus—continue to wear masks, maintain distance, avoid high-risk indoor gatherings, and get vaccinated as soon as a vaccine becomes available to us."
> 
> https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/achieving-herd-immunity-with-covid19.html
> 
> *IMO, even if your own health prospects are of little or no concern to you, opting not to get vaccinated is a self-centered and self-absorbed choice which displays a callous disregard for your neighbors and community.*



Thank you for that Pink Biz  Agree totally!
.


----------



## win231

tbeltrans said:


> I honestly don't think we know each other well enough in a forum to make direct, personal statements about each other.  My suggestion is to read the article, and if one wants to make comments/express opinions about it, please keep them GENERAL rather than coming across as attacking those who hold different opinions.
> 
> Since I am not a moderator, all I can do is appeal to everyone's "better nature".
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tony


Most people don't object to sharing information.  But if you read the last paragraph, you'll see what people are "attacking."


----------



## Dana

win231 said:


> Most people don't object to sharing information.  But if you read the last paragraph, you'll see what people are "attacking."


I am not "attacking" because I saw the large IMO in front of the paragraph. So why say "most people?"


----------



## Keesha

Pink Biz said:


> *IMO, even if your own health prospects are of little or no concern to you, opting not to get vaccinated is a self-centered and self-absorbed choice which displays a callous disregard for your neighbors and community.*


I haven’t gotten vaccinated yet so must be self centred, self absorbed and have a callous disregard for my neighbours and community.
I’m ok with that.


----------



## MarciKS

Pink Biz said:


> *Proceed at your own risk: this article (excerpts) wasn't written by Tucker Carlson or your conspiracy-guzzling neighbor. It was published by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health on 4-6-21. *
> 
> "When the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 first started to spread, virtually nobody was immune. Meeting no resistance, the virus spread quickly across communities. Stopping it will require a significant percentage of people to be immune. But how can we get to that point? How is the race on to get people immune by vaccinating them before they get infected?
> 
> When most of a population is immune to an infectious disease, this provides herd immunity to the disease.  For example, if 80% of a population is immune to a virus, four out of every five people who encounter someone with the disease won’t get sick (and won’t spread the disease any further). In this way, the spread of infectious diseases is kept under control. Depending how contagious an infection is, usually 50% to 90% of a population needs immunity before infection rates start to decline.  The higher the level of immunity, the larger the benefit. This is why it is important to get as many people as possible vaccinated.
> 
> As with any other infection, there are two ways to achieve herd immunity: A large proportion of the population either gets infected or gets a protective vaccine. What we know about coronavirus so far suggests that, if we were really to go back to a pre-pandemic lifestyle, we would need at least 70% of the population to be immune to keep the rate of infection down (“achieve herd immunity”) without restrictions on activities. But this level depends on many factors, including the infectiousness of the virus (variants can evolve that are more infectious) and how people interact with each other.
> 
> For example, when the population reduces their level of interaction (through distancing, wearing masks, etc.), infection rates slow down. But as society opens up more broadly and the virus mutates to become more contagious, infection rates will go up again. Since we are not currently at a level of protection that can allow life to return to normal without seeing another spike in cases and deaths, it is now a race between infection and injection.
> 
> In the worst case (for example, if we stop distancing and mask wearing and remove limits on crowded indoor gatherings), we will continue to see additional waves of surging infection. The virus will infect—and kill—many more people before our vaccination program reaches everyone. And deaths aren’t the only problem. The more people the virus infects, the more chances it has to mutate. This can increase transmission risk, decrease the effectiveness of vaccines, and make the pandemic harder to control in the long run.
> 
> In the best case, we vaccinate people as quickly as possible while maintaining distancing and other prevention measures to keep infection levels low. But if we continue vaccinating the population at the current rate, in the U.S. we should see meaningful effects on transmission by the end of the summer of 2021. While there is not going to be a “herd immunity day” where life immediately goes back to normal, this approach gives us the best long-term chance of beating the pandemic.
> 
> In the United States, current projections are that we can get more than half of all American adults fully vaccinated by the end of Summer 2021—which would take us a long way toward herd immunity, in only a few months. By the time winter comes around, hopefully enough of the population will be vaccinated to prevent another large surge like what we have seen this year. But this optimistic scenario is not guaranteed. It requires widespread vaccine uptake among all parts of the population—including all ages and races, in all cities, suburbs, and countrysides. Because the human population is so interconnected, an outbreak anywhere can lead to a resurgence everywhere."
> 
> Prolonged effort will be required to prevent major outbreaks until vaccination is widespread. Even then, it is very unlikely that SARS-CoV-2 will be eradicated; it will still likely infect children and others who have not been vaccinated, and we will likely need to update the vaccine and provide booster doses on some regular basis. But it is also likely that the continuing waves of explosive spread that we are seeing right now will eventually die down—because in the future, enough of the population will be immune to provide herd protection.
> 
> We now have multiple effective vaccines, and the race is on to get people vaccinated before they get infected (and have the chance to spread infection to others). One thing is certain: The more people who are vaccinated, the less opportunity the virus will have to spread in the population, and the closer we will be to herd immunity.
> 
> Once we get enough people vaccinated to drive down infection rates more consistently, we should be able to gradually lift restrictions. But until the vaccine is widely distributed and a large majority of the population is vaccinated, there will still be a risk of infection and outbreaks.
> 
> In the end, though, we will build up immunity to this virus; life will be able to return to “normal” eventually. The fastest way to get to that point is for each of us to do our part in the coming months to reduce the spread of the virus—continue to wear masks, maintain distance, avoid high-risk indoor gatherings, and get vaccinated as soon as a vaccine becomes available to us."
> 
> https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/achieving-herd-immunity-with-covid19.html
> 
> *IMO, even if your own health prospects are of little or no concern to you, opting not to get vaccinated is a self-centered and self-absorbed choice which displays a callous disregard for your neighbors and community.*


Except in cases where someone isn't able to take the vaccine. Then it's not self absorbed. It's self preservation. Nobody should have to die from taking a vaccine to make someone else feel better.


----------



## tbeltrans

win231 said:


> Most people don't object to sharing information.  But if you read the last paragraph, you'll see what people are "attacking."


I read the article text, and last paragraph, and follow up posts, and then made my post.

Tony


----------



## Jeweltea

Thank you for sharing this.


----------



## Becky1951

*"IMO, even if your own health prospects are of little or no concern to you, opting not to get vaccinated is a self-centered and self-absorbed choice which displays a callous disregard for your neighbors and community."

MY own health is very much a concern to ME. Opting to not get vaccinated or waiting is MY right.  I am no threat to my neighbors or community. I wear a mask if I have to go anywhere, I use hand sanitizer, wash my hands with soap an water. I order online, only interact with those in my small bubble.*

_*You don't know me or any others here who have stated they are not sure about or not going to be vaccinated, yet in your mind we are ALL self-centered and self-absorbed, callous with no regard for our neighbors or community. SMH   *_


----------



## digifoss

tbeltrans said:


> I honestly don't think we know each other well enough in a forum to make direct, personal statements about each other.  My suggestion is to read the article, and if one wants to make comments/express opinions about it, please keep them GENERAL rather than coming across as attacking those who hold different opinions.
> 
> Since I am not a moderator, all I can do is appeal to everyone's "better nature".
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tony


If you don't see the problem Tony, then it's a good thing you're not a moderator.  The last paragragh in the op's threadstarter was a "*self-absorbed, callous with no regard*"  attack on anyone here that's out of step with her opinion on getting the wuhan china virus vaccine....   IMO


----------



## Warrigal

digifoss said:


> While I have seen some good information come from John Hopkins during this China Whuan flu pandemic, afaic, injecting such a ludicrous opinion at the end of your post tends to discredit your entire post and is very telling about your real intentions in starting this thread.  If I wanted opinions, I would tune in to Dr Fauci.


Ooh... that's a bit harsh. It was an opinion, and clearly indicated as such. 

It is my assessment, another word for an opinion, that Dr Fauci's advice is very sound, or at least as sound as current experience of the pandemic will allow.

I thought (my opinion again) that the article from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health was well written and very informative.


----------



## Dana

_I have a prediction:
Governments around the globe will have to, at some point, insist on mandatory covid vaccinations (except for those who are medically unfit).

Freedom to do certain things will be strongly curtailed and those who refuse may find themselves tied to their homes._


----------



## Warrigal

Dana said:


> _I have a prediction:
> Governments around the globe will have to, at some point, insist on mandatory covid vaccinations (except for those who are medically unfit).
> 
> Freedom to do certain things will be strongly curtailed and those who refuse may find themselves tied to their homes._


I don't think that will be necessary other than for people working in certain specified occupations. Some vaccinations are already mandatory for specified professions such as nursing. 

People who refuse vaccination for themselves may find themselves excluded from some venues, plane flights or work places. While we should all have the right to accept or reject medical treatments or vaccinations, we don't have the right to roll the dice for other people.  

Before my first grand child was born I had myself vaccinated against pertussis (whooping cough). The alternative was going to be not seeing him until he was old enough to begin his own vaccination program. As it turned out, because of COVID, I saw very little of him in his first year of life but I still think my decision was the right one.

PS I made Hubby front up for the pertussis jab too.


----------



## digifoss

Warrigal said:


> Ooh... that's a bit harsh. It was an opinion, and clearly indicated as such.


As was mine...


----------



## Warrigal

You're welcome. 
Vade in pace.


----------



## win231

Dana said:


> _I have a prediction:
> Governments around the globe will have to, at some point, insist on mandatory covid vaccinations (except for those who are medically unfit).
> 
> Freedom to do certain things will be strongly curtailed and those who refuse may find themselves tied to their homes._


Luckily, that will only happen in your thoughts.


----------



## tbeltrans

digifoss said:


> If you don't see the problem Tony, then it's a good thing you're not a moderator.  The last paragragh in the op's threadstarter was a "*self-absorbed, callous with no regard*"  attack on anyone here that's out of step with her opinion on getting the wuhan china virus vaccine....   IMO


Who said I didn't see the problem?  I saw that last paragraph and the follow up posts responding in kind to it and made my post.  Where do people get other interpretations from my post from?

What I was asking people to do essentially was to respond to the article content and not that last paragraph so that there might be civil discussion.  If I were a moderator, I would have either removed the entire thread or at least that last paragraph.

What I don't appreciate is putting up a post and then having to explain myself to all those who misinterpret or simply don't read what I said.  It is frustrating, to say the least.  Why not just move on and try to be civil in this thread despite that last paragraph?  So far, there have only been two such posts and I hope that is the end of it.  Fortunately, there were clearly more who understood it than not, based on the "like" responses to it.  

Please, reread it carefully and at least think about it.  This thread could be quite productive if we can just get past the last paragraph of the OP.

Tony


----------



## Dana

win231 said:


> Luckily, that will only happen in your thoughts.


Watch this space...


----------



## digifoss




----------



## Sunny

Or, as alternative captions for those pictures,

#1 - People flocking to mass events, such as sports, weddings, parties, political rallies, concerts, etc. without wearing masks or observing social distancing, and a few days later heading for the hospital, and for many of them, the morgue.

#2 -  A brilliant, open-minded doctor who is alert and receptive to what the research tells him, and is advanced enough intellectually to state that due to this research, he has changed his mind about some aspects. 

Changing one's mind is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign of intelligence.


----------



## MarciKS

digifoss said:


> View attachment 159420View attachment 159421


does this mean that all the fine folks who refuse the vaccine can be depicted as being the same as these folks? i'm sorry but i think it's extremely rude to refer to us as sheep because we chose to protect ourselves. you sir are ignorant.


----------



## digifoss

So NOW you think its rude, btw you forgot to call me a racist
Interesting, amusing
#1 - reaching flock immunity


----------



## MarciKS

digifoss said:


> So NOW you think its rude, btw you forgot to call me a racist
> Interesting, amusing
> #1 - reaching flock immunity


Have no need to call you that. If you are that's your business.


----------



## win231

MarciKS said:


> does this mean that all the fine folks who refuse the vaccine can be depicted as being the same as these folks? i'm sorry but i think it's extremely rude to refer to us as sheep because we chose to protect ourselves. you sir are ignorant.
> View attachment 159429


Hey, who gave you permission to take my photo without my consent?  (I'm the one with the swastika & beard)


----------



## Pecos

digifoss said:


> View attachment 159420View attachment 159421


A vigorous debate is one thing, but reverting to middle school antics is quite another.


----------



## Lakeland living

No, don't think I will rush into this.


----------



## SetWave




----------



## Keesha

SetWave said:


> View attachment 159458


People should stay away from you even though you’re vaccinated. You can still be a carrier of the disease.


----------



## win231

Keesha said:


> I haven’t gotten vaccinated yet so must be self centred, self absorbed and have a callous disregard for my neighbours and community.
> I’m ok with that.


Yes, and how dare you!


----------



## Keesha

win231 said:


> Yes, and how dare you!


I knowwww!


----------



## win231

SetWave said:


> View attachment 159458


I like that shirt.  I want one that says, _"I'm not getting vaccinated, so stay away from me."  _
Even my idiot nephew can read it & I won't have to say anything to him._  _


----------



## digifoss




----------



## Dana

digifoss said:


> View attachment 159420View attachment 159421



*These are the poor souls ...unlike the sheep...who did not have access to the vaccines. 
Lucky aren't we that we have a chance at life !!*


----------



## Dana

digifoss said:


> View attachment 159420View attachment 159421



*These healthy and happy lambs are enjoying life because mommy and daddy sheep had the good sense to have the covid vaccine...*


----------



## Rosemarie

tbeltrans said:


> I honestly don't think we know each other well enough in a forum to make direct, personal statements about each other.  My suggestion is to read the article, and if one wants to make comments/express opinions about it, please keep them GENERAL rather than coming across as attacking those who hold different opinions.
> 
> Since I am not a moderator, all I can do is appeal to everyone's "better nature".
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tony


Well said.


----------



## mellowyellow

I think we fit somewhere within these three scenarios

Those who have underlying health problems *will get the jab*

Those who are keen to get back to socializing and to go on holiday *will get the jab*

Those who will hang back and wait and see, *won’t get the jab.*

At this moment I’m in the hang back and see what happens group.


----------



## Warrigal

There is another category :  those who realise that until the majority of the population is immunised, the country will be unable to resume normal commercial operations. People will remain unemployed.

I'm one of that group.


----------



## chic

Warrigal said:


> There is another category :  those who realise that until the majority of the population is immunised, the country will be unable to resume normal commercial operations. People will remain unemployed.
> 
> I'm one of that group.


Not necessarily. It depends upon where one lives and what one does for a living. In the U.S., California, our largest state, is reopening its economy in June but the governor will not repeal the mask mandate. But he does tell all residents of the state to get vaccinated anyway. There IS no getting back to normal or freedom now. It's just get vaccinated so your case of covid won't kill you while I've been doing that for the past year on my own and with no mask even because I can't wear one. I just don't see the benefit of being vaccinated at this time.


----------



## Rosemarie

tbeltrans said:


> Who said I didn't see the problem?  I saw that last paragraph and the follow up posts responding in kind to it and made my post.  Where do people get other interpretations from my post from?
> 
> What I was asking people to do essentially was to respond to the article content and not that last paragraph so that there might be civil discussion.  If I were a moderator, I would have either removed the entire thread or at least that last paragraph.
> 
> What I don't appreciate is putting up a post and then having to explain myself to all those who misinterpret or simply don't read what I said.  It is frustrating, to say the least.  Why not just move on and try to be civil in this thread despite that last paragraph?  So far, there have only been two such posts and I hope that is the end of it.  Fortunately, there were clearly more who understood it than not, based on the "like" responses to it.
> 
> Please, reread it carefully and at least think about it.  This thread could be quite productive if we can just get past the last paragraph of the OP.
> 
> Tony


If only everyone on these forum sites was as reasonable as you are! So often these threads descend into abuse and personal attacks. It's even worse when mods get involved in the attacks, which does happen on other sites.


----------



## JonDouglas

Cognitive dissonance seems to be alive and thriving in these covid threads.  The covid issues should probably be a subject where you nake few assumptions, question everthing you read or hear, keep an open mind and listen more than you preach.  Just my 2¢.


----------



## Warrigal

chic said:


> Not necessarily. It depends upon where one lives and what one does for a living. In the U.S., California, our largest state, is reopening its economy in June but the governor will not repeal the mask mandate. But he does tell all residents of the state to get vaccinated anyway. There IS no getting back to normal or freedom now. It's just get vaccinated so your case of covid won't kill you while I've been doing that for the past year on my own and with no mask even because I can't wear one. I just don't see the benefit of being vaccinated at this time.


Some sectors are OK but over in Australia there are industries that have been very severely hit - tourism, for example. You cannot come to Australia for a holiday without going into at least two weeks quarantine at your own expense, and that is only if you can get a seat on a plane. Similarly we are finding it difficult to find people to pick the fruit because the seasonal workers and backpackers are not allowed in. A lot of it is going to waste and prices in the shops is unnecessarily high.

The live entertainment industry has been devastated. Recently a much anticipated music festival was called off at a days notice because there had been an outbreak in that general area and it was feared that the festival would be a super spreader event. Financially it was a disaster to the organisers and local businesses.

Some industries, such as aviation, are hanging by a thread. Without lots of financial support from the government this sector would collapse and this arrangement cannot be be continued indefinitely. Vaccination will not be a silver bullet that puts everything back to the way it was but if 80% or so of the population are are immune then COVID 19 will be a lot less damaging to normal social and commercial life. It will certainly take the pressure of the doctors and nurses on the front line. They are getting very close to burnout and who will replace them?


----------



## Sunny

The anti-vaccine taunters will keep up their "comedy routine," no matter how effective the vaccine is in stopping, or at least greatly mitigating this killer of a disease. It's become a badge of honor with some people, tied to their politics and what their friends are thinking.

Then, after they recover from a very serious illness, with possibly lifelong effects on their health, they will quietly slink off and get vaccinated, just in case they don't have enough antibodies to fight it next time. That is, the ones who are lucky enough to survive the disease.  (I am not referring to those who have medical issues that prevent them from getting the vaccine, which I suspect is a very, very small part of the population.)  For most of us, the vaccine is harmless and 95% effective.

Coming up with these articles about "So-and-So got the vaccine and then got the disease anyway" proves nothing. There's always that unlucky 5%. But how about everybody taking a deep breath, stop the silly taunting - pictures of sheep, etc. - and try looking at this with some plain old common sense, and behaving like adults?

This week, my community (of seniors) is starting its return to normal living. Most of us have been fully vaccinated. Last night, I played Scrabble at a friend's house; it was such a pleasure for us all to take the masks off and once again have a pleasant, fear-free evening with friends!  Today, bridge resumes. Our restaurants have reopened. We probably won't completely return to normal social activities until the fall, but little by little we're getting there - thanks to the fact that most people have enough sense to take care of their health.  We were all surprised and delighted at what a wonderful thing it is to once again interact with people without fear of catching a horrible disease, without masks, without measuring the distance between us, etc.  

A big thank you to Dr. Fauci and all the other scientists and medical personnel working around the clock!


----------



## digifoss

I feel like I might lose control, can someone report me to the mods please.....


----------



## Dana

Prior to 2020, most of us had never heard of the word 'coronavirus' …however… for people in the science community, the term was nothing new.

Coronaviruses are a well-known family of viruses, thought to be behind up to a third of all common colds, and responsible for the SARS epidemic in 2003, and MERS outbreak in 2012.

Previous work on SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and other common human coronaviruses meant researchers weren't totally starting from scratch with SARS-CoV-2. They already had some understanding of the virus's biology.

For anyone to think that Covid-19 vaccine development kicked off when the pandemic did, shows they dd no research on the subject. In reality, scientists had spent years building vaccine technologies that could be quickly adapted to emerging viral threats … sometimes known as 'Disease X'.

Thanks to funding bodies like the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness (CEPI), researchers at Oxford University had been working on a vaccine that could be quickly tweaked to target COVID-19.

The technology involves using a harmless common cold virus (that infects chimpanzees) and engineering it to carry proteins of other viruses you want to protect against.

The research meant that as soon as the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) became available, the Oxford team was able to use the virus's genetic blueprint to modify their vaccine and begin testing it in clinical trials.

Similarly, development of a different vaccine approach, using mRNA technology … used in both Pfizer's and Moderna's COVID-19 vaccines… allowed researchers to work much faster than if they had relied on traditional vaccine methods, such as using weakened or inactivated parts of the virus.

Like the Oxford vaccine, the mRNA vaccines could be made fast because they only required the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2, and not a sample of the actual virus.

Vaccine research costs money … _a lot_ of money… and often this can be difficult to secure. However this time round, thanks to billions of dollars from governments, the private sector, and funding bodies like CEPI, researchers had access to immediate and substantial funding for COVID-19 vaccines.

This meant multiple clinical trials were launched quickly, and pharmaceutical companies were able to manufacture and stockpile vaccines before they even knew if they were effective.

Thanks to significant funding injections and lots of people willing to take part in research, scientists have been able to run clinical trials in parallel … e.g. recruiting for phase 3 while they're still finishing phase 1 … rather than do things sequentially (and slowly).

The message here is: the Covid vaccines were not “rushed” as some have wrongly assumed. It has been in the making for many years.

No one knows whether it is 110% effective, just as researchers did not know with all the previous pandemical vaccines. Being effective meaning whether it will protect you from the virus or not… only time will tell.

What is known at this point in time is: people with underlying medical conditions should seek advice from their doctors who have their medical history. Reasonably healthy people have no reason whatsoever not to take the vaccine.

Source of information: Various.


----------



## Dana

In order to achieve herd immunity, a significant percentage of the population has to be vaccinated.

In effect then, the brave ones who are readily getting vaccinated are carrying the can for the uncaring, selfish, closed minded non thinkers...how atrocious!


----------



## Becky1951

Dana said:


> Prior to 2020, most of us had never heard of the word 'coronavirus' …however… for people in the science community, the term was nothing new.
> 
> Coronaviruses are a well-known family of viruses, thought to be behind up to a third of all common colds, and responsible for the SARS epidemic in 2003, and MERS outbreak in 2012.
> 
> Previous work on SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and other common human coronaviruses meant researchers weren't totally starting from scratch with SARS-CoV-2. They already had some understanding of the virus's biology.
> 
> For anyone to think that Covid-19 vaccine development kicked off when the pandemic did, shows they dd no research on the subject. In reality, scientists had spent years building vaccine technologies that could be quickly adapted to emerging viral threats … sometimes known as 'Disease X'.
> 
> Thanks to funding bodies like the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness (CEPI), researchers at Oxford University had been working on a vaccine that could be quickly tweaked to target COVID-19.
> 
> The technology involves using a harmless common cold virus (that infects chimpanzees) and engineering it to carry proteins of other viruses you want to protect against.
> 
> The research meant that as soon as the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) became available, the Oxford team was able to use the virus's genetic blueprint to modify their vaccine and begin testing it in clinical trials.
> 
> Similarly, development of a different vaccine approach, using mRNA technology … used in both Pfizer's and Moderna's COVID-19 vaccines… allowed researchers to work much faster than if they had relied on traditional vaccine methods, such as using weakened or inactivated parts of the virus.
> 
> Like the Oxford vaccine, the mRNA vaccines could be made fast because they only required the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2, and not a sample of the actual virus.
> 
> Vaccine research costs money … _a lot_ of money… and often this can be difficult to secure. However this time round, thanks to billions of dollars from governments, the private sector, and funding bodies like CEPI, researchers had access to immediate and substantial funding for COVID-19 vaccines.
> 
> This meant multiple clinical trials were launched quickly, and pharmaceutical companies were able to manufacture and stockpile vaccines before they even knew if they were effective.
> 
> Thanks to significant funding injections and lots of people willing to take part in research, scientists have been able to run clinical trials in parallel … e.g. recruiting for phase 3 while they're still finishing phase 1 … rather than do things sequentially (and slowly).
> 
> The message here is: the Covid vaccines were not “rushed” as some have wrongly assumed. It has been in the making for many years.
> 
> No one knows whether it is 110% effective, just as researchers did not know with all the previous pandemical vaccines. Being effective meaning whether it will protect you from the virus or not… only time will tell.
> 
> What is known at this point in time is: people with underlying medical conditions should seek advice from their doctors who have their medical history. Reasonably healthy people have no reason whatsoever not to take the vaccine.
> 
> Source of information: Various.


Link to this article?


----------



## JonDouglas

Sunny said:


> SNIP
> 
> A big thank you to Dr. Fauci and all the other scientists and medical personnel working around the clock!


Fauci?  Out of curiosity, did you following Fauci's advice when he said:

_There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face._​​I wonder how many people followed Fauci's advice when he changed horses and said to wear a mask and then doubled down to suggest you wear two masks, which has now been proven to be very unhealthy.   Fauci flip-flops like a slinky going down the stairs.  Definitely kudos to the experts on the front lines, but Fauci's not one of them.  He is a DC bureaucrat and mouthpiece at best and not a good one at either.  

That's my 2¢


----------



## Becky1951

Dana said:


> In order to achieve herd immunity, a significant percentage of the population has to be vaccinated.
> 
> In effect then, the brave ones who are readily getting vaccinated are carrying the can for the uncaring, selfish, closed minded non thinkers...how atrocious!


Another attack to those who haven't been vaccinated.


----------



## Keesha

What I find very disturbing lately is that this ‘herd immunity’ has also become ‘Herd hostility’ 

Those who have had their vaccination are becoming blatantly hostile towards the ones who haven’t  yet . The clear message being ....’if you don’t have your vaccination by now, you are an uncaring, selfish, close minded non thinker.’ 

Why are ya ‘all getting so vicious?
 I bet pretty soon people are going to be shot if they are suspected of not having the vaccine.
 It doesn’t matter in the least to the people who have already got there’s that vaccines might not be available for others yet. They don’t care. You suddenly become trash in their opinion. 

Atrocious?
Yes! I absolutely agree that this obvious dividing and conquering of people who have their vaccines and those that don’t, needs to stop. 

I honestly didn’t think this site would get this way. How very sad.


----------



## Keesha

Becky1951 said:


> Another attack to those who haven't been vaccinated.


Last nights attack totally shocked me. One simple sentence that I took from the post and the fangs and claws came out in a vicious attack. 
It was like being suddenly blind sided and what I wrote wasn’t even a personal opinion. It was a bit of important factual information.


----------



## tbeltrans

I had hoped that by calling this behavior on the part of some, definitely not all, would help to draw attention to it and possibly change the tone at least a little.  Maybe if more people call this behavior out, the overall tone of the discussions can become more civil.

Tony


----------



## Lewkat

The OP merely offered her own generalized opinion and it is amusing that so many on here took it personally.  What a bunch.


----------



## Keesha

Lewkat said:


> The OP merely offered her own generalized opinion and it is amusing that so many on here took it personally.  What a bunch.


Some people including myself, have been personally attacked for not being vaccinated yet. I took it personally because it was a personal attack. It was far from amusing .


----------



## Becky1951

Keesha said:


> Last nights attack totally shocked me. One simple sentence that I took from the post and the fangs and claws came out in a vicious attack.
> It was like being suddenly blind sided and what I wrote wasn’t even a personal opinion. It was a bit of important factual information.


Yes , it was ridiculous, she named you and I so it was a personal attack, and we both gave quoted information from CDC.

Something I don't understand is why can't someone post an article that's in the news that tells about vaccine serious side effects and deaths without being attacked? Or getting replies that try to downplay the article? 

Isn't it important to know about those side effects?  I feel it is so I post them if they pop up in my news. 

Why is it wrong to question information when that information is conflicting to other information?


Why be called stupid, irresponsible, non caring when you don't agree with someone regarding the vaccines?


----------



## ProTruckDriver

Dana said:


> Prior to 2020, most of us had never heard of the word 'coronavirus' …however… for people in the science community, the term was nothing new.
> 
> Coronaviruses are a well-known family of viruses, thought to be behind up to a third of all common colds, and responsible for the SARS epidemic in 2003, and MERS outbreak in 2012.
> 
> Previous work on SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and other common human coronaviruses meant researchers weren't totally starting from scratch with SARS-CoV-2. They already had some understanding of the virus's biology.
> 
> For anyone to think that Covid-19 vaccine development kicked off when the pandemic did, shows they dd no research on the subject. In reality, scientists had spent years building vaccine technologies that could be quickly adapted to emerging viral threats … sometimes known as 'Disease X'.
> 
> Thanks to funding bodies like the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness (CEPI), researchers at Oxford University had been working on a vaccine that could be quickly tweaked to target COVID-19.
> 
> The technology involves using a harmless common cold virus (that infects chimpanzees) and engineering it to carry proteins of other viruses you want to protect against.
> 
> The research meant that as soon as the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) became available, the Oxford team was able to use the virus's genetic blueprint to modify their vaccine and begin testing it in clinical trials.
> 
> Similarly, development of a different vaccine approach, using mRNA technology … used in both Pfizer's and Moderna's COVID-19 vaccines… allowed researchers to work much faster than if they had relied on traditional vaccine methods, such as using weakened or inactivated parts of the virus.
> 
> Like the Oxford vaccine, the mRNA vaccines could be made fast because they only required the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2, and not a sample of the actual virus.
> 
> Vaccine research costs money … _a lot_ of money… and often this can be difficult to secure. However this time round, thanks to billions of dollars from governments, the private sector, and funding bodies like CEPI, researchers had access to immediate and substantial funding for COVID-19 vaccines.
> 
> This meant multiple clinical trials were launched quickly, and pharmaceutical companies were able to manufacture and stockpile vaccines before they even knew if they were effective.
> 
> Thanks to significant funding injections and lots of people willing to take part in research, scientists have been able to run clinical trials in parallel … e.g. recruiting for phase 3 while they're still finishing phase 1 … rather than do things sequentially (and slowly).
> 
> The message here is: the Covid vaccines were not “rushed” as some have wrongly assumed. It has been in the making for many years.
> 
> No one knows whether it is 110% effective, just as researchers did not know with all the previous pandemical vaccines. Being effective meaning whether it will protect you from the virus or not… only time will tell.
> 
> What is known at this point in time is: people with underlying medical conditions should seek advice from their doctors who have their medical history. Reasonably healthy people have no reason whatsoever not to take the vaccine.
> 
> *Source of information: Various.*


Source of information: Various.
Is that the same as "Anonymous" ? 
I'll wait to see if a link is posted on this article.


----------



## Becky1951

ProTruckDriver said:


> Source of information: Various.
> Is that the same as "Anonymous" ?
> I'll wait to see if a link is posted on this article.


Yes I'd like the link also because this various source article is the same one she posted last night under the Earth and Science thread. The same one I and Keesha were attacked for pointing out a small conflicting bit of information which was backed up by the CDC. 

I noticed *this* article now has been changed to reflect the CDC information I quoted. 

"What is known at this point in time is: people with underlying medical conditions should seek advice from their doctors who have their medical history."

So was the original article changed or has the poster changed it? 

If the poster changed it????  Then its not a legitimate article.


----------



## chic

As one of the unvaccinated, I'm construed by others as a moronic, narcissistic, non cooperative, granny killing sociopath with conspiracy theorist tendencies. I'm none of those things. 

I just don't want to die from the vaccine. With Covid I would have a chance. Not with this vaccine. Not now.


----------



## Becky1951

chic said:


> As one of the unvaccinated, I'm construed by others as a moronic, narcissistic, non cooperative, granny killing sociopath with conspiracy theorist tendencies. I'm none of those things.
> 
> I just don't want to die from the vaccine. With Covid I would have a chance. Not with this vaccine. Not now.


Oh and don't forget non caring for others and your community and your not Brave!


----------



## digifoss

Keesha said:


> Some people including myself, have been personally attacked for not being vaccinated yet. I took it personally because it was a personal attack. It was far from amazing.





Becky1951 said:


> Yes , it was ridiculous, she named you and I so it was a personal attack, and we both gave quoted information from CDC.
> 
> Something I don't understand is why can't someone post an article that's in the news that tells about vaccine serious side effects and deaths without being attacked? Or getting replies that try to downplay the article?
> 
> Isn't it important to know about those side effects?  I feel it is so I post them if they pop up in my news.
> 
> Why is it wrong to question information when that information is conflicting to other information?
> 
> 
> Why be called stupid, irresponsible, non caring when you don't agree with someone regarding the vaccines?





chic said:


> As one of the unvaccinated, I'm construed by others as a moronic, narcissistic, non cooperative, granny killing sociopath with conspiracy theorist tendencies. I'm none of those things.
> 
> I just don't want to die from the vaccine. With Covid I would have a chance. Not with this vaccine. Not now.



It's easy to see that all the hateful spew, insults, ridicule, names of all sorts,  is flowing one-way  >> against those of us who have not ( yet ) been vaccinated.  Ironically, as far as I can tell, none of us are anti-vaxers but we are being cautious,  and that clearly will not be tolerated by some...


----------



## Becky1951

Anyone daring to post in this forum regarding not being vaccinated or waiting is most definitely BRAVE! Because they will surely be attacked at some point.


----------



## tbeltrans

chic said:


> As one of the unvaccinated, I'm construed by others as a moronic, narcissistic, non cooperative, granny killing sociopath with conspiracy theorist tendencies. I'm none of those things.
> 
> I just don't want to die from the vaccine. With Covid I would have a chance. Not with this vaccine. Not now.


Rest assured that not everybody who has gotten the vaccine feels this way about this who have decided not to.  My wife and I both got the vaccine and neither of us feels that way.  To us, it is an individual choice.  We have no reason, or need, to try to control anybody else in this manner.

Tony


----------



## MarciKS

Becky1951 said:


> Anyone daring to post in this forum regarding not being vaccinated or waiting is most definitely BRAVE! Because they will surely be attacked at some point.


Those of us who have been vaccinated are being referred to as sheep. So we're getting attacked too. And many of us don't feel the way the others think we do. They're just assuming the worst and acting like aholes.


----------



## Sunny

For the anti-vaccine contigent here, who are (boo-hoo) feeling so unfairly attacked by those who believe in taking care of their health, I suggest going back and looking at post #22.  

Who is doing the "attacking?"


----------



## Keesha

I haven’t been commenting on whether people get vaccinated or not. It’s none of my business what choices others make or why they make them. I’m sure each of us do what we want to do and have our reasonings behind it.  

All I know is that I follow Covid protocol completely. I wear a mask properly, I social distance myself. If others aren’t following protocol I don’t pass judgment and especially don’t attack them. As long as I’m doing my part that all that matters and I have been.


----------



## StarSong

I got vaccinated because I don't want to get sick (again), or to spread sickness.  Also, I want my social life back.  Simple as that. 

If people don't want to get vaccinated, that's ok with me as long as they're not crying in the next breath about having to wear masks, being unable to return to work in fields that require human contact, having restricted contact with family and friends who view vaccines as necessary for close contact, or possibly having to face travel and large venue restrictions.

“You are free to choose, but you are not free to alter the _consequences_ of your decisions.” - Ezra Taft Benson


----------



## ProTruckDriver

I'm sure glad I didn't follow my Oncologist advise to get the vaccine. If I were to get the J&J vaccine who knows what may have happen.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/13/us/politics/johnson-johnson-vaccine-blood-clots-fda-cdc.html
With Leukemia my Platelet Count is very low.
From the Article:
_In the United States alone, 300,000 to 600,000 people a year develop blood clots, according to C.D.C. data. But the particular blood clotting disorder that the vaccine recipients developed, known as cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, is extremely rare.  Dr. Schuchat described the condition  as *“a severe strokelike illness linked to low platelet counts.”*_


chic said:


> As one of the unvaccinated, I'm construed by others as a moronic, narcissistic, non cooperative, granny killing sociopath with conspiracy theorist tendencies. I'm none of those things.
> 
> I just don't want to die from the vaccine. With Covid I would have a chance. Not with this vaccine. Not now.


I agree @chic


----------



## Jeweltea

MarciKS said:


> Those of us who have been vaccinated are being referred to as sheep. So we're getting attacked too. And many of us don't feel the way the others think we do. They're just assuming the worst and acting like aholes.


Yes, there was a nasty meme posted attacking people who got the vaccine.


----------



## chic

Becky1951 said:


> Anyone daring to post in this forum regarding not being vaccinated or waiting is most definitely BRAVE! Because they will surely be attacked at some point.


Yes, we are attacked and called whiners about wearing masks for 13 months. I, too wish this would stop.


----------



## Becky1951

I have never ever told anyone they were ignorant or a coward or made any such comment to anyone who has stated they were vaccinated, but yet if anyone states they are not vaccinated or are waiting, they are attacked. I was personally attacked and it was totally uncalled for. 

Have I ever called a vaccinated person a sheep? No I have not, have I repeatedly stated the vaccines are a choice as it should be? Yes I have.


----------



## chic

StarSong said:


> I got vaccinated because I don't want to get sick (again), or to spread sickness.  Also, I want my social life back.  Simple as that.
> 
> If people don't want to get vaccinated, that's ok with me as long as they're not crying in the next breath about having to wear masks, being unable to return to work in fields that require human contact, having restricted contact with family and friends who view vaccines as necessary for close contact, or possibly having to face travel and large venue restrictions.
> 
> “You are free to choose, but you are not free to alter the _consequences_ of your decisions.” - Ezra Taft Benson


According to the CDC you still have to wear masks AFTER being vaccinated so this statement is not entirely accurate. I wouldn't blame anybody, vaccinated or not, for complaining about wearing masks after 13 months. That's a super long time for a non mask wearing culture.  

I wish they had never developed this vaccine because all it's done is add to our stress load which is already unbearable.


----------



## Becky1951

chic said:


> Yes, we are attacked and called whiners about wearing masks for 13 months. I, too wish this would stop.


Bullying is a trait that's hard to stop.


----------



## MarciKS

ProTruckDriver said:


> I'm sure glad I didn't follow my Oncologist advise to get the vaccine. If I were to get the J&J vaccine who knows what may have happen.
> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/13/us/politics/johnson-johnson-vaccine-blood-clots-fda-cdc.html
> With Leukemia my Platelet Count is very low.
> From the Article:
> _In the United States alone, 300,000 to 600,000 people a year develop blood clots, according to C.D.C. data. But the particular blood clotting disorder that the vaccine recipients developed, known as cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, is extremely rare.  Dr. Schuchat described the condition  as *“a severe strokelike illness linked to low platelet counts.”*_
> 
> I agree @chic


With your health issues I can certainly understand not wanting to be vaxxed. My mother isn't able to either.


----------



## win231

Dana said:


> In order to achieve herd immunity, a significant percentage of the population has to be vaccinated.
> 
> In effect then, the brave ones who are readily getting vaccinated are carrying the can for the uncaring, selfish, closed minded non thinkers...how atrocious!


"Brave ones?"  No.  "Frightened ones."  Big difference between bravery and fear.
Hey, if getting vaccinated makes you feel like a hero......go for it.  You can hang a sign in front of your house:  _"Vaccinated Hero Lives Here."_


----------



## win231

MarciKS said:


> Those of us who have been vaccinated are being referred to as sheep. So we're getting attacked too. And many of us don't feel the way the others think we do. They're just assuming the worst and acting like aholes.


Big difference:  Those individuals are retaliating after being attacked by self righteous, controlling aholes who choose to get vaccinated.
When you hit someone, you can't expect not to get hit back.


----------



## Keesha

StarSong said:


> I got vaccinated because I don't want to get sick (again), or to spread sickness.  Also, I want my social life back.  Simple as that.
> 
> Yes I'd like the link also because this various source article is the same one she posted last night under the Earth and Science thread. The same one I and Keesha were attacked for pointing out a small conflicting bit of information which was backed up by the CDC.I noticed *this* article now has been changed to reflect the CDC information I quoted.
> 
> "What is known at this point in time is: people with underlying medical conditions should seek advice from their doctors who have their medical history."
> 
> So was the original article changed or has the poster changed it?
> 
> If the poster changed it????  Then its not a legitimate article.


i noticed that too. Maybe that’s why she so quickly jumped on us for pointing it out. She probably hadn’t  thought of it that way so got her thread deleted and blamed us for it being deleted. I honestly don’t know. Only she knows why she did what she did.

The previous article seemed to have hand picked parts that she wished to high light until she realized that it didn’t make sense; ‘especially’ the part about people with underlying conditions ( which would suggest ‘most’ of us.)

And I’m ok with continuing to wear a mask when around others which is almost never. 
Im either by myself or with my husband ONLY 95% of the time  and always have been.


----------



## StarSong

In the above quoted text, only the first line belongs to me.  Not sure who said the rest.


----------



## Becky1951

StarSong said:


> In the above quoted text, only the first line belongs to me.  Not sure who said the rest.


I said the rest.


----------



## digifoss

Pink Biz said:


> ...
> *.... opting not to get vaccinated is a self-centered and self-absorbed choice which displays a callous disregard for your neighbors and community.*





Lewkat said:


> The OP merely offered her own generalized opinion and it is amusing that so many on here took it personally.  What a bunch.



Yes, I agree with *the last part of your statement* Lewkat, *What a bunch*....


----------



## tbeltrans

Bullying is easy when hiding behind a keyboard.  In person, one risks immediate consequences.  So, yes, there will likely be a lot of uncalled for bullying here.  I would not be at all surprised if we lose members over this.  Personally, I wish we could have civil discourse in which we all come out better informed, especially considering that most, if not all of us, have been alive long enough to be expected to have matured.

Tony


----------



## Keesha

StarSong said:


> In the above quoted text, only the first line belongs to me.  Not sure who said the rest.


Sorry Starsong. I goofed up. 
Sorry Becky. I goofed up.


----------



## Sunny

> According to the CDC you still have to wear masks AFTER being vaccinated so this statement is not entirely accurate. I wouldn't blame anybody, vaccinated or not, for complaining about wearing masks after 13 months.


Chic, my understanding is that people who have been fully vaccinated do not have to wear masks when they are meeting with other fully vaccinated people. I think you are supposed to wait 2 weeks, that's all. Everybody around here is still wearing the mask when mingling in public, because we don't know who has been vaccinated, and we're wearing it for their protection, not ours.  But once indoors, our masks come off. At my Scrabble game last night, and my bridge game this afternoon, nobody was wearing a mask, and we were all strict mask-wearers before getting the vaccine.

Where did you get this 13 months idea from?


----------



## digifoss

Sunny said:


> Chic, my understanding is that people who have been fully vaccinated do not have to wear masks when they are meeting with other fully vaccinated people. I think you are supposed to wait 2 weeks, that's all. Everybody around here is still wearing the mask when mingling in public, because we don't know who has been vaccinated, and we're wearing it for their protection, not ours.  But once indoors, our masks come off. At my Scrabble game last night, and my bridge game this afternoon, nobody was wearing a mask, and we were all strict mask-wearers before getting the vaccine.
> 
> Where did you get this 13 months idea from?



The CDC recommendations are a little contradictory..

They define fully vaccinated as:
*People are considered fully vaccinated:*
_2 weeks after their second dose in a 2-dose series, such as the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines, or
2 weeks after a single-dose vaccine, such as Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen vaccine_
*If you don’t meet these requirements, you are NOT fully vaccinated.*

Then they say *"After you’ve been fully vaccinated against COVID-19, you should keep taking precautions—like wearing a mask, staying 6 feet apart from others, and avoiding crowds and poorly ventilated spaces—in public places until we know more."*

Then just below that, they say *"Keep taking all precautions until you are fully vaccinated."*

Their recommendations are not consistent.  They should either say wear a mask UNTIL you are fully vaccinated, or continuing wearing a mask AFTER you are fully vaccinated.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html


----------



## Dana

Ah, so a few are clamouring for a link to my post # 47…  never fear, o ye of little faith. I do have a link ... Í never post any information unless I can prove where it coms from…however…why should I make life easy for non-believers? Let us see how skilful you are at doing your own research 

Now let’s see… any seven year old these days can find that information on the internet in three minutes, takes about two minutes to post the link…that’s five minutes flat.

If and when you produce a link… then… I shall post the original link….so hurry up, get busy!


----------



## Dana

_Just for the record....no one was* "attacked"* on the Earth Science section where I posted my thread yesterday.* Those claims are twisted and mangled*...I am not going to waste my precious time defending myself against gossip... anyone is welcome to believe what they like.
_


----------



## Dana

tbeltrans said:


> I honestly don't think we know each other well enough in a forum to make direct, personal statements about each other.  My suggestion is to read the article, and if one wants to make comments/express opinions about it, please keep them GENERAL rather than coming across as attacking those who hold different opinions.
> 
> Since I am not a moderator, all I can do is appeal to everyone's "better nature".
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tony


_*No...you are certainly not a moderator...perhaps you should leave that job to the SF moderators...*_


----------



## Dana

tbeltrans said:


> Who said I didn't see the problem?  I saw that last paragraph and the follow up posts responding in kind to it and made my post.  Where do people get other interpretations from my post from?
> 
> What I was asking people to do essentially was to respond to the article content and not that last paragraph so that there might be civil discussion.  If I were a moderator, I would have either removed the entire thread or at least that last paragraph.
> 
> What I don't appreciate is putting up a post and then having to explain myself to all those who misinterpret or simply don't read what I said.  It is frustrating, to say the least.  Why not just move on and try to be civil in this thread despite that last paragraph?  So far, there have only been two such posts and I hope that is the end of it.  Fortunately, there were clearly more who understood it than not, based on the "like" responses to it.
> 
> Please, reread it carefully and at least think about it.  This thread could be quite productive if we can just get past the last paragraph of the OP.
> 
> Tony


*There is nothing wrong with the last paragraph of the OP's post;*


----------



## ProTruckDriver

Dana said:


> Ah, so a few are clamouring for a link to my post # 47…  never fear, o ye of little faith. I do have a link ... Í never post any information unless I can prove where it coms from…however…why should I make life easy for non-believers? Let us see how skilful you are at doing your own research
> 
> Now let’s see… any seven year old these days can find that information on the internet in three minutes, takes about two minutes to post the link…that’s five minutes flat.
> 
> If and when you produce a link… then… I shall post the original link….so hurry up, get busy!


Are we sure this is a Senior over 55 posting this??? It sounds more like a child.


----------



## Dana

ProTruckDriver said:


> Are we sure this is a Senior over 55 posting this??? It sounds more like a child.


_Yes...a child with a PhD_  _and I am 55...legitimately here._


----------



## Dana

*This man and all the scientists around the globe, working their behinds off neglecting their own families, need all the thanks and praise we can heap on them....*


----------



## Ladybj

win231 said:


> What a crock.  If a vaccine worked, no one would be concerned about unvaccinated people.  Trying to convince others to make the same decision you made indicates a typical controlling personality.  It also indicates how little confidence you have in the vaccine.


I agree.  No one including doctors/hospitals have all the answers... they are just as confused as we are.  No one should be made to feel bad for getting or not getting the vaccine.. it's a personal decision.  What confuses me is people that has been FULLY vaccinated are afraid to go out in public without a mask and visit love ones. I understand in some States masks are still mandated.  A friend of mine has been fully vaccinated but said she will continue to wear a mask even when it is no longer mandated.


----------



## Ladybj

Becky1951 said:


> *"IMO, even if your own health prospects are of little or no concern to you, opting not to get vaccinated is a self-centered and self-absorbed choice which displays a callous disregard for your neighbors and community."
> 
> MY own health is very much a concern to ME. Opting to not get vaccinated or waiting is MY right.  I am no threat to my neighbors or community. I wear a mask if I have to go anywhere, I use hand sanitizer, wash my hands with soap an water. I order online, only interact with those in my small bubble.*
> 
> _*You don't know me or any others here who have stated they are not sure about or not going to be vaccinated, yet in your mind we are ALL self-centered and self-absorbed, callous with no regard for our neighbors or community. SMH   *_


GREAT POST!!!!  I am SMH with you.  I contacted my dr office and she understands why I am not able to get the vaccine. She said she will notate my medical records. Does that make me self-centered...No, makes me aware of my body.


----------



## Becky1951

Dana said:


> Ah, so a few are clamouring for a link to my post # 47…  never fear, o ye of little faith. I do have a link ... Í never post any information unless I can prove where it coms from…however…why should I make life easy for non-believers? Let us see how skilful you are at doing your own research
> 
> Now let’s see… any seven year old these days can find that information on the internet in three minutes, takes about two minutes to post the link…that’s five minutes flat.
> 
> If and when you produce a link… then… I shall post the original link….so hurry up, get busy!


Yes even a 7 year old can see right though this.
You cannot provide a link because there isn't one, so you challenge other to find this non existent link knowing it can't be found, therefore you never have to show a link that you don't have. Nice try.


----------



## Ladybj

I fore see that we will hear more and more about the vaccines (not all bad).  As we know J&J vaccines are currently not being given.  More info to come.


----------



## Becky1951

Ladybj said:


> GREAT POST!!!!  I am SMH with you.  I contacted my dr office and she understands why I am not able to get the vaccine. She said she will notate my medical records. Does that make me self-centered...No, makes me aware of my body.


I had a virtual appointment this afternoon with my Dr. She said she honestly didn't feel comfortable recommending for me to get the vaccine. In a way that took a lot of pressure off me and I was planning to get the vaccine when I felt more comfortable about its safety, and so far I certainly did not feel that comfort level with all the reports of serious side effects and deaths. 
Who knows what the future will bring, maybe new meds to treat Covid or a safer vaccine.


----------



## tbeltrans

Dana said:


> *There is nothing wrong with the last paragraph of the OP's post;*


No matter what I say, somebody will find fault.  I don't intend to go around and around here.  I just wish people would practice civility.

This is what I said: I saw that last paragraph and the follow up posts responding in kind to it and made my post. Where do people get other interpretations from my post from?

Whatever we might each think of that last paragraph, much of the snarkiness was in response to it.  That was my point, not taking sides about the paragraph itself.  I didn't attack that paragraph, but instead asked for civility after seeing responses to it.  I guess that is too much to ask for.  I am ashamed of the course this thread has taken and no longer wish to be a part of it.

Tony


----------



## Dana

Becky1951 said:


> Yes even a 7 year old can see right though this.
> You cannot provide a link because there isn't one, so you challenge other to find this non existent link knowing it can't be found, therefore you never have to show a link that you don't have. Nice try.



_I hope you have an egg ready for your face Becky  when I post the link. I am waiting for Pro Trucker to do his research. Obviously, you did not do any yourself or you would have found it_


----------



## Ladybj

Becky1951 said:


> I had a virtual appointment this afternoon with my Dr. She said she honestly didn't feel comfortable recommending for me to get the vaccine. In a way that took a lot of pressure off me and I was planning to get the vaccine when I felt more comfortable about its safety, and so far I certainly did not feel that comfort level with all the reports of serious side effects and deaths.
> Who knows what the future will bring, maybe new meds to treat Covid or a safer vaccine.


Same here..when I was told by my doc office that they understand why I was not able to get it - she understood and said better safe than sorry.  Imagine 10 people in a room..all but 1 has been fully vaccinated..  so the 1 can spread the vaccine to those fully vaccinated or the 10 can spread the virus to the 1 person that has not been vaccinated.  Something is wrong with that picture....JMO


----------



## Dana

tbeltrans said:


> No matter what I say, somebody will find fault.  I don't intend to go around and around here.  I just wish people would practice civility.
> 
> This is what I said: I saw that last paragraph and the follow up posts responding in kind to it and made my post. Where do people get other interpretations from my post from?
> 
> Whatever we might each think of that last paragraph, much of the snarkiness was in response to it.  That was my point, not taking sides about the paragraph itself.  I didn't attack that paragraph, but instead asked for civility after seeing responses to it.  I guess that is too much to ask for.  I am ashamed of the course this thread has taken and no longer wish to be a part of it.
> 
> Tony



_If music is the food of love...play on and stop stressing_


----------



## Becky1951

Dana said:


> _I hope you have an egg ready for your face Becky  when I post the link. I am waiting for Pro Trucker to do his research. Obviously, you did not do any yourself or you would have found it_


I searched earlier today and didn't find it.


----------



## Dana

Becky1951 said:


> I searched earlier today and didn't find it.


_Since I am a kind hearted person...I believe you_


----------



## Becky1951

tbeltrans said:


> No matter what I say, somebody will find fault.  I don't intend to go around and around here.  I just wish people would practice civility.
> 
> This is what I said: I saw that last paragraph and the follow up posts responding in kind to it and made my post. Where do people get other interpretations from my post from?
> 
> Whatever we might each think of that last paragraph, much of the snarkiness was in response to it.  That was my point, not taking sides about the paragraph itself.  I didn't attack that paragraph, but instead asked for civility after seeing responses to it.  I guess that is too much to ask for.  I am ashamed of the course this thread has taken and no longer wish to be a part of it.
> 
> Tony


Yes snarky. But who is being snarky?

_ "I hope you have an egg ready for your face Becky  when I post the link."_


----------



## digifoss

_I hope you have an egg ready for your face Becky  when I post the link. I am waiting for Pro Trucker to do his research. Obviously, you did not do any yourself or you would have found it_


----------



## tbeltrans

Becky1951 said:


> Yes snarky. But who is being snarky?
> 
> _ "I hope you have an egg ready for your face Becky  when I post the link."_


I don't understand what you are looking for in your question.  I have been asking for civility, but seem to need to explain and re-explain my posts.  Some here understand these posts, and others don't, but respond to what they think I said and then I have to repeat somewhat differently hoping that clarifies.  

There are several here who have been snarky with personal attacks.  This could have been quite an informative thread as we all learn together.

Tony


----------



## ProTruckDriver

Dana said:


> I am waiting for Pro Trucker to do his research


If you're waiting for me you will die of old age.   
I don't have time to play your childish games.


----------



## Dana

ProTruckDriver said:


> If you're waiting for me you will die of old age.
> I don't have time to play your childish games.



_Reading between the lines...you tried to find it, but were unsuccessful_


----------



## Dana

..._ one per person please!_
.
_Now here is the link requested. I did not post it previously because of all the adverts and pictures, which detract from the wording…so I took out the salient points._

https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/...ccines-were-developed-in-record-time/13096682

_No need to apologise…I forgive you because I am too excited ….off to choose the colour of my new car._


----------



## Keesha

Dana said:


> Ah, so a few are clamouring for a link to my post # 47…  never fear, o ye of little faith. I do have a link ... Í never post any information unless I can prove where it coms from…however…why should I make life easy for non-believers? Let us see how skilful you are at doing your own research
> 
> Now let’s see… any seven year old these days can find that information on the internet in three minutes, takes about two minutes to post the link…that’s five minutes flat.
> 
> If and when you produce a link… then… I shall post the original link….so hurry up, get busy!


What game is this you are now playing?


Dana said:


> _Just for the record....no one was* "attacked"* on the Earth Science section where I posted my thread yesterday.* Those claims are twisted and mangled*...I am not going to waste my precious time defending myself against gossip... anyone is welcome to believe what they like.
> _


Correction: you started a thread in the earth science section where both Becky and I added a post and you instantly came in and attacked us saying we could spill our guts worth of negative garbage elsewhere and to run along.
I wrote one factual sentence. It wasn’t opinionated. 



Dana said:


> _*No...you are certainly not a moderator...perhaps you should leave that job to the SF moderators...*_



This is being snarky




Dana said:


> _Yes...a child with a PhD_  _and I am 55...legitimately here._


A humble snarky


Dana said:


> _I hope you have an egg ready for your face Becky  when I post the link. I am waiting for Pro Trucker to do his research. Obviously, you did not do any yourself or you would have found it_


Snarky once more.


digifoss said:


> _I hope you have an egg ready for your face Becky  when I post the link. I am waiting for Pro Trucker to do his research. Obviously, you did not do any yourself or you would have found it_
> View attachment 159664


LOL!


----------



## Becky1951

Dana said:


> ..._ one per person please!_
> .
> _Now here is the link requested. I did not post it previously because of all the adverts and pictures, which detract from the wording…so I took out the salient points._
> 
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/...ccines-were-developed-in-record-time/13096682
> 
> _No need to apologise…I forgive you because I am too excited ….off to choose the colour of my new car._


In the article link you posted, where is,

*"No one knows whether it is 110% effective, just as researchers did not know with all the previous pandemical vaccines. Being effective meaning whether it will protect you from the virus or not… only time will tell.

What is known at this point in time is: people with underlying medical conditions should seek advice from their doctors who have their medical history. Reasonably healthy people have no reason whatsoever not to take the vaccine.

Source of information: Various."*

So you only took parts of it and added something that wasn't even in that article? I have no need to apologize.  SMH


----------



## MarciKS

tbeltrans said:


> Bullying is easy when hiding behind a keyboard.  In person, one risks immediate consequences.  So, yes, there will likely be a lot of uncalled for bullying here.  I would not be at all surprised if we lose members over this.  Personally, I wish we could have civil discourse in which we all come out better informed, especially considering that most, if not all of us, have been alive long enough to be expected to have matured.
> 
> Tony


We're already losing members.


----------



## MarciKS

Ladybj said:


> I agree.  No one including doctors/hospitals have all the answers... they are just as confused as we are.  No one should be made to feel bad for getting or not getting the vaccine.. it's a personal decision.  What confuses me is people that has been FULLY vaccinated are afraid to go out in public without a mask and visit love ones. I understand in some States masks are still mandated.  A friend of mine has been fully vaccinated but said she will continue to wear a mask even when it is no longer mandated.


because the vaccine isn't 100% effective. and i don't know about you but i don't want covid in any form.


----------



## MarciKS

win231 said:


> Big difference: Those individuals are retaliating after being attacked by self righteous, controlling aholes who choose to get vaccinated.
> When you hit someone, you can't expect not to get hit back.


Not all of the people who have been vaccinated are attacking people. For the most part I've not noticed many who've been vaccinated saying some of the things the unvaxxed have been saying.

I didn't get vaccinated just out of fear. I was doing it to help keep myself safe and taking into consideration the safety of those around me. I don't know too many people who are willing to risk their lives to get vaccinated in an effort to keep people who don't want the vaccine safe.

The fact that people have been arguing about this and being nasty to each other for an entire year is just ridiculous. I'm disappointed in the fact that people my age are bickering like children over something they have no control over.

There isn't one single thing you can change about what's happening right now by fighting in a forum. And the fact that y'all can't find something better to do than tear each other apart like this is senseless. It's been a year. Can you guys not find something better to do with your time than treat each other like crap and fight over covid and racism and what color the sky is?

Posting memes to try to make those of us feel bad for making a choice to take care of ourselves. Accusing us of letting fear control us. Are you gonna tell me that not one of you is afraid of getting COVID and dying? It scares the hell outta me. So I'm taking the measures I need to in order to try to protect myself. I don't give a crap what anyone else chooses. What I do give a crap about is logging into this site every day for the past 365 days only to see covid this and covid that and you're a sheep and you're a this and you're a that.

And yes everyone is entitled to their opinion on an open forum but at what cost?

Grow up already. Good Lord!


----------



## Dana

Becky1951 said:


> In the article link you posted, where is,
> 
> *"No one knows whether it is 110% effective, just as researchers did not know with all the previous pandemical vaccines. Being effective meaning whether it will protect you from the virus or not… only time will tell.
> 
> What is known at this point in time is: people with underlying medical conditions should seek advice from their doctors who have their medical history. Reasonably healthy people have no reason whatsoever not to take the vaccine.
> 
> Source of information: Various."*
> 
> So you only took parts of it and added something that wasn't even in that article? I have no need to apologize.  SMH


.



*You are quite right Becky…the paragraphs you mention are not found in the article because they are my own comments. I should have written “Personal Comment” before that section, as I usually do. I’ll do that now….I am one of the "various."

Personal Comment:  "No one knows whether it is 110% effective, just as researchers did not know with all the previous pandemical vaccines. Being effective meaning whether it will protect you from the virus or not… only time will tell.
*
_*What is known at this point in time is: people with underlying medical conditions should seek advice from their doctors who have their medical history. Reasonably healthy people have no reason whatsoever not to take the vaccine.*”_

*Source: Dana: Member of SeniorForums.com. Dated 14th April 2021

*


----------



## Dana

*As of today 14/4/21... I shall cease all postings on any thread relating to:
Race .. Religion .. or Covid-19.*


----------



## jerry old

Were a delicate bunch


----------



## digifoss

My final thought on this subject.  If anyone was OK with the OP's last paragraph in their opening post of this thread, then they should also be OK with everything else that has been posted since.  This horse has been ridden long enough, time to put it in the barn....


----------



## Don M.

"Herd Immunity" against this virus is going to require that at least 70 or 80% of the population gets vaccinated.  We are still months away from that number.  In the interim, masks and social distancing are still the best way to avoid this illness.  We will still see fluctuating numbers, especially in urban areas, and among the "partiers", for the immediate future.


----------

