Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

tadmjones

Regulars
  • Posts

    1258
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Everything posted by tadmjones

  1. Yeah , pretty sure. To the first question. And I'm pretty sure dui/dwi laws are only applicable when intoxication is indicated. Reckless driving violations apply whether or not intoxication is a factor. So 'endangering' is like the genus with different species. Instances of violating laws aren't immoral acts based on the existence of laws, though it'd be nice if they were.
  2. We keep bouncing back and forth between the general and the particular, between the abstract and the concrete. IF there were such as thing as an objectively provable safe and effective vaccine for a communicable disease that poses a severe health threat to the majority of a population, one that can be proven to only confer the recipient with perfect immunity and no other biological outcomes: a mandate for its requirement to participate in the general/common market place would be plausible in a society based on the protection of individual rights. But as I have claimed since the 'beginning' of the covid pandemic , this 'disease' and the current slate of 'vaccines' do not meet those standards. The comparison to dui/dwi isn't analogous because self intoxication is a volitional act.
  3. I objected to the OP based on the fact that a 'vaccine passport' scheme would be an infringement of civil rights based on the fact that the vaccines do not curtail transmission to a degree that ensures adherence to such a scheme would guarantee the alleged health benefit. So any phrasing should be viewed in that context.
  4. Yes and it seems like the reasoning one would use to rationalize the fact they were gaslit, check your premises.
  5. If the vaccines can not prevent transmission, according to the CDC, they still impact transmission ?
  6. https://welovetrump.com/2022/01/11/cdc-director-admits-what-the-vaccines-cant-do-is-prevent-transmission-of-the-virus/
  7. What test makes this distinction among samples ? The caveats at the end of the article you linked basically says that this distinction was not accessible for their study.
  8. The prevalence of break-through cases? As to the OP , since we agree that the COVID vaccines aren’t “100 %”, how would a system that identifies vaccine status work to provide added protection against infection among the vaccinated? I assume your argument would be that barring unvaccinated people from ‘polite society’ lessens the risk to those who responsibly vaccinated themselves. But given that any individual regardless of vax status could be contagious at any given time , wouldn’t a real time test be a more reliable indication of ‘safety’? Is a system that operates based solely on vaccine status reliable ‘enough’ for the privacy rights and freedom of association rights violations such a system would confer ? I take the question in the OP assumes that vax passports in themselves are a proven medical safety measure , and proven to a degree that would necessitate relinquishing certain civil rights enjoyment , ie that violations of the policy would merit criminal and or civil repercussions.
  9. My argument is that covid vaccines do not work to meaningfully slow transmission, so what use is a vaccine verification system? It could or may be useful if they showed a high 'enough' efficacy against transmission. Even if the jabs were highly associated with transmission reduction, covid isn't a life threatening disease to the majority of society. It shouldn't be a question if people living their day to day lives unnecessarily endangers others, it should be what level of necessary risks are those most endangered by the disease willing to take.
  10. This argument implies the jabs are sterilizing vaccines. If we are talking about Ebola and there were a sterilizing vaccine I doubt much ‘coersion’ would be necessary. With these vaccines and this contagion , vax passports aren’t a health measure , that premise is just an excuse for centralizing data and any and all power that would accrue to the ‘authorities’ that collected it. Why would individuals need the power of government to protect themselves , if vaccines ‘worked’ ? Getting vaccinated would confer protection. If the vaccines don’t ‘work’ how does distinguishing ‘vax status’ among individuals provide any added protection above common sense and risk analysis?
  11. But won’t it be the case that the later vaccinated cohort provided a stronger ‘barrier ‘ as they were waxing compared to the waning earlier cohorts ? And was the early due to reluctance or availability? Wasn’t the ‘rollout’ stratified by risk group ? Sounds like a lot of ifs and buts and still no candy or nuts.
  12. Do you mean with the currently formulated jabs , or a more general statement about virology in regards to sterilizing vaccines ? The data on current formulations seems to point findings such as https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00258-1/fulltext
  13. And https://www.revolver.news/2021/12/damning-new-details-massive-web-unindicted-operators-january-6/
  14. Would Israel be an example of this changed nature ? My impression is that that population has most eligible people included in that level of vaccination. I think they have fairly controlled travel so as a group the population could be view as an isolated population and the data can be a clearer picture of at least large signals for cause and effect.
  15. Of course no one was saying introducing leaky vaccines during initial spread would halt transmission. But no one was saying these are leaky experimental vaccines , no ‘sanctioned’ health officials anyway. But the idea that the jabs would end the pandemic was the narrative being pushed by all sanctioned officials. Government officials are pressuring the large media groups to suppress discussions that point to the levels of ineffectiveness and the fact that there are no known long term safety perimeters. If the data shows case/infection rates near ‘peak’ levels attained prior to introduction of the jabs , that is a far cry from allowing some transmission. Perhaps no one literally said the jabs would sterilize 100% of the recipients , but the guidance certainly said , more than intimated , that spread would dramatically decline.
  16. Has the mechanism that increased the transmissability been defined ? Higher viral loads? Spike protein increased 'binding' site (s) ? What would the data look like if the transmissability stayed the 'same' but the vaccines were ineffective against transmission?
  17. "He should read a book or watch some tasteful pornography to learn what to do with a girl. " lol, I'll know tasteful when I see it.
  18. The graphs may show reduced mortality in reported covid death and that could be attributed to the jabs, but what is happening with total excess death ? https://informscotland.uk/2021/11/an-update-on-all-cause-deaths-as-of-18th-november-2021/
  19. Just get your bimonthly booster , if everyone did we can go back to normal , it’s sensible and science. Any other action is obviously moronic. Ask the USAToday and stay away from ‘fringe’, it’s fringe for a reason .
  20. Are saying that the jabs function was only to ameliorate worry ? That safety and effectiveness were secondary or non-relevant concerns? That EUA's were granted in order to quell panic?
  21. What was the hoped for accomplishment? and as an aside , does anyone think the local CVS, Rite Aid Walmart jab clinic followed the rather precise storage and handling specifications of the Pfizer formulations? I have my doubts on the abilities of my local Rite Aid employees and I question if the facility has the proper equipment in good working order to be up to the task. I bet there is probably a significant failure rate given the mass distribution, which I would count as a plus.
  22. You’re right the USAToday fact check says 97.1% of the covid deaths in Italy were of those with comorbidities.
  23. Speaking of Italy, they revised their pandemic death toll severely downward from 138k to 4K to reflect the number that died from covid as opposed to with it. Either people die differently in Italy , or other revisions are in order , eh ?
  24. and some more with the advent of time https://www.revolver.news/2021/10/meet-ray-epps-the-fed-protected-provocateur-who-appears-to-have-led-the-very-first-1-6-attack-on-the-u-s-capitol/
  25. Not to quibble for the sake of quibbling, but you do see the arguments both for and against are here based on collectivist morales? "life on Earth" "Earth's valuable.." "Hey Hank, I'll trade you Dagny for that metal" "Um ok deal, If you don't mind , what do you plan to do with it?"
×
×
  • Create New...