GOP Governor Says It's Time To 'Blame The Unvaccinated' For Pandemic Surge
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
GOP Governor Says It's Time To 'Blame The Unvaccinated' For Pandemic Surge
Ed Mazza Fri, July 23, 2021, 4:22 AM A Republican governor in one of the states hit hardest by the delta variant of the coronavirus called out those who’ve refused the vaccine on Thursday.
“It’s time to start blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the regular folks,” saidAlabamaGov. Kay Ivey,per CBS 42 in Birmingham. “It’s the unvaccinated folks that are letting us down.”
Ivey, who wasvaccinated in December, also seemed to throw some shade at Fox News and other right-wing media outlets.
“Media, I want you to start reporting the facts,” she said. “The new cases of COVID are because of unvaccinated folks. Almost 100 percent of the new hospitalizations are with unvaccinated folks. And the deaths are certainly occurring with the unvaccinated folks.”
Although she didn’t name names, Fox News hosts, such asTucker Carlson,have attempted to cast doubt on the effectiveness of the coronavirus vaccines. Carlson said the notion that the U.S. was now in a pandemic of the unvaccinated was “simply untrue” and “a lie.”
One Alabama ER doc recently shared the haunting tales ofdying coronavirus patients who beggedfor the vaccine that they had previously refused.
“I hold their hand and tell them that I’m sorry, but it’s too late,” Dr. Brytney Cobia wroteon Facebook.
Alabama has seen a 311% jump in cases over the past two weeks,according to The New York Times, and a 92% increase in hospitalizations. The state’s rate of 23 new cases per 100,000 people was tied for the ninth highest in the nation. Alabama is also tied for the lowest vaccination rate in the U.S.
Ivey has not exactly helped her case. Last week, sherejecteda plan by PresidentJoe Bidenin which community-based volunteers would godoor to door to encourage COVID-19 vaccinationand offer help to those who need it.
She also signed a billbanning “vaccine passports”in her state. That same law also banned businesses from requiring vaccination or even asking about vaccination status and banned schools, including colleges, from requiring the vaccine despite the fact that Alabama schoolscurrently requiremultiple shots, with certain exemptions allowed.
Earlier this week, Iveyrejected a call for wearing masks in schoolsthat was made by theAmerican Academy of Pediatrics.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
409 visitors
“It’s time to start blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the regular folks,” said Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, per CBS 42 in Birmingham . “It’s the unvaccinated folks that are letting us down.”
Ivey, who was vaccinated in December , also seemed to throw some shade at Fox News and other right-wing media outlets.
“Media, I want you to start reporting the facts,” she said. “The new cases of COVID are because of unvaccinated folks. Almost 100 percent of the new hospitalizations are with unvaccinated folks. And the deaths are certainly occurring with the unvaccinated folks.”
Although she didn’t name names, Fox News hosts, such as Tucker Carlson, have attempted to cast doubt on the effectiveness of the coronavirus vaccines. Carlson said the notion that the U.S. was now in a pandemic of the unvaccinated was “ simply untrue ” and “a lie.”
It's great for FINALLY calling out the unvaccinated as the problem prolonging the problem, but what a fckn hippocritter. those last few paragraphs prove she wants it both ways, and i'm not Bi' in it. Help ignorant people, don't straddle a fence to enjoy longer harder deeper poles
Yeah I'm sick of the fence straddling too iggy. I placed my intent of the article on the statement about the pandemic and now how without a doubt that this ipandemic continues to spread like wildfre caused by the complete ignorance and selfishness of the idiots who refuse to get vaccinated
Thank you Governor Ivey! A republican with some sense. What a rarity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you for putting the blame squarely where it belongs - the majority of republicans and their enablers/supporters who refuse to get vaccinated.
Where did she put the blame on the subset you are espousing? I didn't see where she broke it down to a particular party or group other than "unvaccinated". Do you have more information than the article brings forward? Or is this just your "unbiased" opinion? Rhetorical.
Unvaccinated is Unvaccinated and they are to blame. Their party affiliation or other allegiances is irrelevant.
Tell it to the person that made the claim above.
I tell that to everyone.
Bingo!
No. Not at all
Don't let it 'worry you.' We know overwhelmingly who/where the unvaccinated are in highest percentages. Old 'talking points conservatives' are not equipped to properly concede, apologize, and admit to being on the wrong side of a narrative-so they bump their heads onto the floor "thump!" until they "comply" without grace.
So true!
There was no Blane on a particular subset, but there certainly are people here who have no problem trying to tar most if not all with the same brush brush just to suit their particular world view.
The unvaccinated is the "subset," and they are to blame. If everyone was vaccinated, we would have achieved herd immunity and possibly end the pandemic here.
Soon she will be censured, a recall petition by republicans will be circulated, and she will have no support from the RNC next election.
What about......
all the unvaccinated illegals pouring over the border, aided, enabled, and abetted, by Papa Joe?
What about the millions of citizens and legal residents that are not getting the vaccine?
That's not true.
You have evidence that they are unvaccinated???
How about you post some EVIDENCE that your 'what about' is relevant Greg?
Got any data on Covid infection surges caused by 'illegals'?
From all of the articles I have read coming out of Texas media, the data shows that those released [BTFW, they are NOT 'illegals'] haven't caused infections.
I’m far more concerned with the tens of millions of total assholes already here who refuse to be vaccinated. They are the ones possibly fucking over the rest of us.
Yes, it most certainly is.
No, it most certainly isn't.
In Florida, we have over 12,000 new cases yesterday and our governor said it's ''seasonal''...what a frickin moron.
As a country, we have over 60,000 new cases yesterday.
I saw that on the news last night. He really is an ass.
Remember when Trump said Covid would be over by the summer?
He didn't say which summer.
Good point.
Ok, fair enough
Trump: Mr. 'Wiesel worder.' Yeah, he's a sly one.
Kavika wrote: "As a country, we have over 60,000 new cases yesterday".
So what? Don't wanna get Covid, get the shots. Actions, or the lack thereof, have consequences
They gotta save the world doncha know. I just don't understand the need to infiltrate everyone's life and make them do what they may not want to. And yes they will pay the price but that's their choice.
One other point. These are more "test results" than anything. Some of these cases are with those who HAVE been vaccinated. New cases doesn't mean much without the vaccinated, hospitalization and death figures.
There are those who CAN'T get the shot that these morons put in danger. Yes, killing someone because they are going through cancer treatments, or have an otherwise compromised immune system, could very well be one of those consequences.
Do you understand that an unvaccinated person (unless they recovered from COVID) can carry the virus and serve as a host for creating new variants of the virus?
This affects everyone since these folks are interacting in society. This is not like a personal choice to eat high cholesterol foods with a heart condition. These individuals affect far more people than simply themselves.
But some of the infections are being carried by folks that have been vaccinated and get transmitted to those who haven't..............and in some cases, those that have.
And there are a lot of people out there who have concerns going forward. You must remember, these vaccines have only been approved by emergency edict and not fully vetted and some people are skeptical until all testing and normal approval processes have been followed. Can't say I blame them. It boils down to how much of a chance do you want to take and which "fork in the road" do you feel better about.
I had Covid and spent time in the ICU. I have now also had both doses of the Moderna. Doctor said I probably didn't need the vaccine due to the severity of my case and thus more than likely have antibodies but it couldn't hurt he said.
As I say below.............approval is key.
We're not talking about the minute number of people who can't the shots
[Deleted.]
First of all, show me the facts on which you base that declaration. How many vaccinated individuals have been shown to infect others?
Key point remains. The reason that everyone should be vaccinated (or at least have antibodies due to recovering from COVID) is because they can incubate new variants and they can infect others. This is not simply a personal choice that affects only the individual.
Do you or do you not understand that?
None of which justifies "making" people get an injection against their will.
The statistics are exceedingly clear and everybody keeps repeating them. Vaccinated people are safe. We are in a pandemic of the unvaccinated. All of the deaths are unvaccinated people.
If these other people want to refuse the vaccine, it is their right to be stupid.
No way to tell. I just commented and should have said "it's possible that" as there are cases where those vaccinated have gotten and tested positive after.
It's a two way street. If you don't want to take the chance on the vaccine, your choice and only go out when necessary. . If you don't want to take the chance of catching Covid, follow the guidelines, know your surroundings, be wary of those around you, and only go out when necessary.
And yes I understand that. The problem is you or anyone are not going to get 100% cooperation with your vi9ew of "the right thing". We can all try but to think our influence is going to change pig headed minds is a fool's errand.
Thanks for the discussion.
No, your siding with the large number of people who have decided not to take the shot OVER the minute number or people who can't. Small comfort to those imperiled by stupidity.
I'd say a pandemic which has already killed hundreds of thousands in this country alone, which is not going away anytime soon, and is actually flaring up again in some states, is good justification to get the vaccine, even by government mandate.
And no, vaccinated people are not entirely safe. We have not yet achieved herd immunity. The unvaccinated can cause an increase in covid variants, which might make vaccinations less effective or even ineffective, thereby putting even those who have had vaccinations at risk.
Does that mean we should do away with all mandated vaccines?
Vacs have been mandated for a long time, just for kids to be able to go to school and very few complained.
They don't give a shit about those who CAN'T get the vaccination.
Don't hold your breath.
It's not their 'right' to kill others.
"None of which justifies "making" people get an injection against their will."
Who is 'making' anyone get an 'injection' against their will????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
People who are immunocompromised or cannot get a vaccine shouldn't have to be subjected to the ignorant fucking assholes who refuse to get vaccinated because they don't give a shit about anyone but themselves and clinging to their ignorance. They're hateful ignorant scumbags garbage.
Well if I were one of those unfortunates I sure as hell wouldn't put myself in a situation that would put me at risk for the disease. Mask up, distance, wash hands, don't go out unless complete necessity. In other words, just like the rest of us did prior to vaccine development, don't put yourself in danger.
And your "they" doesn't include me or anyone I know. I do give a shit about those people but ones who can but don't? Not so much.
Absolutely.
Absolutely not.
They are "safe" by any measure of statistical significance. The stairs in their home now present a greater mortality risk than Covid.
The vaccinated herd has.
We do not forcibly inject people over the fear of the highly unlikely event that something might potentially go wrong.
So you intend to say to American citizens "other people are afraid that something bad might happen so you have to get a shot". Really?
The next time you're wondering how shit got so crazy that we actually elected Donald Trump, there is your answer.
No one is fucking forcibly injecting anyone.
"The next time you're wondering how shit got so crazy that we actually elected Donald Trump, there is your answer."
Unfucking real. YOU elected that human pile of shit, NOT US.
In most places, you can get a religious exemption for your kid and they can attend school unvaccinated. Frankly, most of these hard-core types either homeschool their kids or send them to private schools so they won't "be indoctrinated by leftists".
So the current "mandates" are really, really soft. With Covid, we're also talking about a disease that seems to bypass children altogether.
We have employer enforced requirements, which have recently been upheld in court (rightfully so, IMO).
But government mandates are entirely different. Living in a free society means allowing other adults to do shit even when it's really stupid and potentially dangerous.
which is why I basically have no problem with these dumb asses self exterminating each other. I'm only worried about the collateral human damage.
There are kids that have died from it. I know the school thing is kind of a bad analogy because we don't even have one for kids.
I don't see why this should be looked at any differently than someone intentionally spreading aids around.
That is the thing.
Of course 100% cooperation will not be achieved; that has not been argued.
And you suggest that this is my view of the right thing; implying you do not share that view.
Do you then disagree with the idea that those who do not possess antibodies to fight COVID and variants are hosts for mutations and carry the means to infect others and thus their choice to not get vaccinated does not simply affect them as an individual but all those with whom they interact?
Is it their right to be irresponsible and put others at risk by hosting a virus that could then mutate in their bodies?
THIS IS DANGEROUS AND VERY IGNORANT THINKING. CHILDREN ARE DYING FROM THIS THANKS TO THE IGNORANT SCUM WHO REFUSE TO GET VACCINATED.
Nope. Don't disagree at all. I do share that view but not quite and Utopian based as your view. There are some who will cling to the bitter end and we can't help them. To harp on it ad nauseum seems like an exercise in futility. You can only help as much as people want to be helped...............even at their own peril. And again, if someone is afraid of getting Covid from the dumbass "no vaccine for me" crowd, take the precautions as prescribed for over a year and most of all, only go out where and when you feel safe.
Children seem to have a much higher rate of infection from the Delta variant then from the "original" covid.
What is utopian in what I described?
How could you possibly characterize my comments as harping on the small minority (lunatic fringe) who will cling to the bitter end?? See Jim, this is the kind of bullshit spin that brings rebuke. If the problem were just the lunatic fringe then this would not be an issue. The problem is that roughly half of the USA population is NOT vaccinated. Seeking more people to get vaccinated under those conditions is not utopian.
I made that same argument yesterday and got crickets
I didn't say you personally harping FFS TiG. But it is noble for you to take up the fight for those you don't know. I don't feel compelled to do the same. My message is as it always was. Get the vaccine. I have a release coming out at the request of my doctor and his medical group and it's also going to appear in the Charlotte Observer in the near future about my 27 day battle with Covid. The reason I decided to do it was to let people know just what it's like to lay in ICU for a week and 9 more days in the "general population" in the hospital and ultimately 11 more days of "Healthy at Home" inpatient care and survive. The whole point is to help just one fence sitter to finally go to the healthy side.
Since, with the suggestion from my doctor, I have gotten the Moderna regimen and had some side effects but nothing like that stint in the hospital. You can only convey a near death experience so much. Some will listen, some will not. But again, I can only do so much and will not make it the main thrust in my life. Too much other living to do.
Absolutely.
These people represent far less danger to you and me than someone with garden variety influenza.....for which we don't mandate vaccinations.
My thoughts exactly.
The statistics tell us very clearly that this risk is exceedingly small.
That right there is bullshit.
You need to show the stats to back that up.
I won't hold my breath.
Except we're talking about people who don't actually have the disease currently and are not intentionally spreading anything.
So no stats Jack?
Not to mention, kids under 12 are still unable to get the vaccine. That's a lot of little vectors running around, and school is about to start up again. And even though kids still don't seem to be getting very sick from Covid, every replication in an infected person is a chance at a new mutatoin.
"Except we're talking about people who don't actually have the disease currently and are not intentionally spreading anything."
You don't know that. They could be carriers/positive but not showing/having any symptoms.
I just took my son for his mandated meningococcal vaccine this morning. All returning high school seniors have to have it to enter the building. That's a new requirement for Virginia this year. I never heard or read a word of objection to it.
When you reply to a person with an allegation it will almost always be interpreted as directly applying to them.
Kudos!
Not an expert in this but it's my understanding that even vaccinated people can contract Covid. It just doesn't make them sick, in most cases. If this is so, aren't vaccinated people capable of creating new variants as well? I understand a vaccinated person would be a harder petri dish in which the virus to modify itself but it's still trying to make a more successful version of itself in spite of that, isn't it?
Capable of? Yes. But much less likely to. It's always been about lessening the odds of spread and mutation, not eliminating either entirely.
So the delta outbreak in India, for example, should be ignored and we should not be concerned about those lacking antibodies serving as potential hosts for new variants with unpredictable properties?
I disagree.
Not getting vaccinated (unless one has the antibodies) is irresponsible.
When public safety is an issue, society most definitely has the right to impose restrictions.
The human body (and life in general) is extremely complex. We all react slightly differently to vaccines and viruses. So certainly there are exceptions, but I am speaking of the rule. The vaccines are generally held to prevent the transmission of COVID-19 (and known variants) and prevent the incubation of new variants within a host.
Have you read otherwise?
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to make a case against vaccination or anything. But what worries me more than new variants being created among the unvaccinated is a new variant created among the vaccinated for which the vaccine would be ineffective. As I said, not an expert, but wouldn't that version of Covid be a lot nastier than what an unvaccinated person is likely to develop?
Again, not an argument against vaccination. Personally, I think getting vaccinated is a smart move and I have gone that rout myself.
I think that would be a reasonable concern if only a small number of people were receiving the medicine. In that case, you might want to wait until thorough studies covering a large sample size had been completed. Fair enough.
But as of today, 3.74 BILLION doses of various vaccines have been administered worldwide, with serious life-threatening reactions numbering in the tiniest fractions of a percent, and even most of those cannot yet be directly attributed to the vaccines themselves. Statistically, a typical person is in FAR more danger from the virus - and by orders of magnitude.
Not necessarily. The vaccine wouldn't push mutation in any particular direction. Emergence of new strains is dependent on the number of times a virus replicates itself. It replicates more quickly in unvaccinated people than in vaccinated people, resulting in a higher rate of mutation, which may lead to new strains. Stopping replication by stopping spread is the most effective way to prevent new strains from emerging. Right now, the best method we have of stopping spread is the vaccine.
No. Your comment made me think about the issue of possible variants emerging from the vaccinated is all. It's likely orders of magnitude less likely in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated to develop a variant, but possible. Or so it seems.
There is an enormous chasm between "concern" and "government mandate". I'm not exactly sure what you intend to do about it in India, anyway.
Yes.
Your fear of some potential problem that doesn't currently exist and looks incredibly unlikely does not give you the right to mandate other people accept medical treatment they do not want.
It was an example illustrating that COVID-19 variants do exist and can wreak havoc.
Fear ? My comments are not based on emotion. And the problem does indeed exist; the delta variant is in the USA: " Covid cases are rising again in all 50 states across U.S. as delta variant tightens its grip "
And I did not state ' mandate that people get vaccinations' ( not at this stage ) but rather impose restrictions to protect society. Impose restrictions includes wearing of masks, social distancing, proof of vaccine, etc. People who are vaccinated (or who have antibodies by virtue of recovering from COVID) would have fewer restrictions. Idea is if someone is going to knowingly walk about while capable of getting infected, incubating and spreading variants of the disease, they do not have the right to contribute to yet another pandemic.
Makes sense. As horrible as viruses often tend to be, they're also fascinating. It seems there's some argument about whether they are even alive.
In any case, I agree that vaccination is the best we can do to fight this. However, I understand the concern some have over taking it, since it was developed in a crash program and only authorized under emergency conditions. Even though I'm vaccinated, that still concerns me as well. I hope that, next summer, I'm not stumbling around looking for brains to eat with a horde of the undead looking for the same thing : )
The entire conversation revolves around Gordy's original statement in @ 3.3.11 that vaccinations should be achieved "even by government mandate."
As we are repeatedly told, we are in "a pandemic of the unvaccinated". Statistics tell us that unvaccinated people account for the overwhelming majority of cases and nearly 100% of the fatalities. We've had fewer than 900 Covid deaths among 161,000,000 vaccinated people. Statistically, we're in the same ballpark as accidental drowning.
They do. The same way they have the right to drive their cars, despite the risk of them killing you in an accident....which is massively higher than them killing you with Covid.
But my statement revolves around the words I actually wrote.
My point is still that unvaccinated people serve as hosts for creating new strains. Ergo my reference to the delta variant article.
They are thus impacting society. I do not agree with you that an individual has the right to infect others or incubate new unknown variants.
Do we have the right to drive while intoxicated? Is this right curtailed for public safety?
There is, due to the fact that they cannot reproduce independently of other species.
I do understand the concerns about taking the vaccine. To some degree, I had them myself. But the side effects of the vaccine are so much less dangerous than the infection itself for all but a very tiny minority of people, and the result of not taking the vaccine is the continuation of the pandemic, with more infectious and possibly more virulent strains emerging on occasion, as we've already seen. To me, it boils down to the needs of the many outweighing the inconvenience to the one.
I was one of those who had some pretty rough side effects from the vaccine. Nothing dangerous, but at least as uncomfortable as any time I've had the flu. I'd do it again in a heartbeat, though, to put an end to this mess.
People should get the flu vaccine and co-vid regardless if it is 'the garden variety influenza'
Another statement that is just so lackadaisical. I don't get it
That's not any different than with garden variety influenza, except that garden variety influenza is now actually vastly more dangerous than Covid to anyone with enough sense to get a shot. That includes the delta variant, BTW.
If we were talking about restricting the rights of people who actively had the flu, much less those who don't have the flu but just didn't get a flu shot...all on the off chance they may be some sort of walking petri dish...people would call that crazy. Because it is.
The statistics on this are overwhelming, and I'm sticking with them until they change so no....we're not going to agree on curtailing the rights of American citizens because some people are afraid the vaccine won't protect them despite massive evidence to the contrary.
You're not talking about people who actually have the virus. What you're talking about would be equivalent to restricting driving rights for people based on the idea that they might get drunk at some unspecified point in the future and drive through a school pickup line at 70mph.
There is no comparison. There is absolutely no restricting of anyone's rights no matter how many times you repeat these nonsensical/ridiculous claims/comparisons.
You are trolling. It's exasperating and tiresome and completely devoid of any sense or reason
This reads as though you do not see a difference between COVID-19 (and its variants) and garden variety influenza. Unless by 'that' you are referring to the fact that a human body can serve as a host for variants, but that is both obvious and I have never suggested otherwise. So, given that and the balance of your post, it seems you are equating COVID-19 with the flu. If so, it is hard to imagine what you are reading to come to such a conclusion.
Anyway, giving you the benefit of the doubt, I will assume you recognize the substantial difference in contagion rates, mortality rates and long-term organ damage.
Sure, and it would be crazy to impose harsh restrictions on those with the common cold. But, again, we are not talking about the flu or the common cold but rather the virus that caused a worldwide pandemic due to its contagion rate, mortality rate and long term organ damage.
What statistics are you referring to? For example, do you disagree with this report ?:
Jack, I stuck with your analogy to make a point. I am not going to get into an analogy nuance debate. You either understood my point or you did not.
We have a right to drive but not the right to drive while under the influence and thus potentially cause harm to others. The ' under influence ' condition crosses a threshold where society should limit an individual freedom.
There are points where individual freedoms are limited for the betterment of society. Society (our society) does not impose restrictions on those with a cold (e.g. must wear a mask) but if the contagion+mortality+long-term-damage risks hit a certain point, obviously society should (and does) step in. Surely you agree that worldwide nations were correct to impose restrictions in an attempt to control the pandemic. If so, why would you object to imposing restrictions to mitigate a resurgence?
Yes, that was my meaning.
I'm reading statistics on vaccinated people.
Not. Among. Vaccinated. People.
Read the CDC data.
We limit the rights of those people because driving under the influence creates a higher than acceptable probability that a person will have an accident and injure themselves or someone else.
That analogy falls apart because we have convincing data that Covid does not represent a mortality risk to vaccinated people and therefore unvaccinated people represent no mortality risk to vaccinated people. Your entire assertion is based on the fear that these people may allow a mutation of the Covid virus to incubate and that the vaccines may prove completely ineffective against said mutation, despite the established fact that the vaccines have proven effective against every variant so far.
You believe that fear is sufficient justification to limit the rights of American citizens. I argue it is not, because there is no statistical evidence to indicate this is happening.
By the way, it calls itself community because we are expected to be civil in it. Not just a glommed-on mixed collection of heads, lips, and nether-regions. I pity the foolish people who join communities looking for a frontier wilderness.
First, the motivation is to stay alive in this world, in order to deal with getting rid of any variant Covid that proliferates. Second, any variant that eeks itself out of a vaccinated host will highly likely be crippled and diminished in the body of another individual, in my opinion. Unless, we are considering some "super bug."
Jack, your 'argument' is this: Wait for the destructive translation of the virus that surpasses our vaccine 'firewall' of protection before taking hearty preparations to deny it entry. Vaccines are several, but at a distant they are our 'single' line of defense. We're banking a great many lives in this world on 'it.'
We need backups; we need more assurances.
Have you not observed that we have lost some really good people in the hundreds of thousands (and we could have lost even Donald Trump-he did become sickened by COVID 19)?
When this novel virus ruptures our vaccine we want to be ahead of it with new defensive postures readily and handily available! We do not want a "Tsunami" to crash into our strong and only fortified 'firewall' that would be irresponsible—for we certainly have enough life experience to know better.
Well of course not among vaccinated people. I am not talking about vaccinated people as the hosts. I am talking about unvaccinated people as the hosts. Obviously. That established, vaccinated people are potentially vulnerable to new variants that could be produced in the hosts. Finally, in the USA about ½ of the population (and approximately ⅓ of the adult population) are potential hosts.
How could you possibly think that my series of comments were about vaccinated people? That would make no sense. I have been talking about unvaccinated people. They are the potential hosts; vaccinated people are unlikely (albeit possible) hosts. Unvaccinnated is what I have been writing about; per the topic of this seed. And if the unvaccinated population in the USA were about 10% then I would not even raise this concern; but that is not the case. When approximately ½ (and ⅓ of adults) of the population is unvaccinated one cannot simply dismiss the unvaccinated as irrelevant.
Why do you insist on attributing 'fear' to my comments? That is incorrect; I ask you to not characterize my comments that way; it is incorrect.
Now, in response, my concern is this:
Society has the right, and the responsibility, to impose appropriate, reasonable restrictions for safety.
Why not?
They are not necessarily safe from virus variants, which may arise from unvaccinated people. A vaccines is only effective against a specific virus and not different strains of the virus.
That demonstrates a lack of understanding of herd immunity.
No one is being forcibly injected with anything. But viral mutations happen all the time.
Dying from Covid or potentially being the cause of other people contracting and possibly dying from covid does seem to qualify as "something bad."
I've always said people are generally stupid and irrational. Never underestimate the stupidity of the American people.
Ah yes, religious exemption. The ultimate "get out of jail free" card, allowing one to do almost whatever they want.
Children have been infected with Covid. Just not at the rate of adults. But the Delta variant also seems to infect children at a higher rate than "original" Covid.
Not when it puts other people at risk.
Influenza is not as virulent or contagious as Covid. Although, many businesses, especially those in the healthcare industry, do mandate influenza vaccines.
I get where you're coming from but I wonder how much it matters if there's not a world wide push for vaccinations? I think you're largely right in what you're saying but even if every American got the vaccination months ago, the Delta variant would still exist. 65 out of every 100 people on the planet are still unvaccinated. I assume some of those 65 got immunity through having the virus, but that still leaves a lot of hosts out there creating other possible variants for which the vaccine may not be effective.
I don't intend to convey the idea that getting vaccinated isn't all that important. What I'm wondering is, how effective will the vaccination program as a whole be in the US, even if every one of us got the vaccine if there's still billions of people out there potentially creating new variants in other countries? Even if the other half of US citizens got vaccinated, that's still a tiny fraction compared to those who remain unvaccinated world wide. I don't see even a wildly high vaccination rate in this country changing our situation all that much. We would still be in the same boat we're in now, it seems to me.
To be clear, I understand and even agree with you that Americans need to be vaccinated for all the reasons you and Sandy have been giving, yet I doubt the efficacy of it overall if the rest of the world goes largely unvaccinated. That is, we still have the same problem regardless of how many get vaccinated in the US.
Of course, I have no idea how much of the world population got natural immunity through contracting and surviving the virus or how that can be calculated into just how that affects the issue going forward. Apparently a little over a third of the world has received the vaccine to date but that doesn't tell us how much of the world has the antibodies for Covid. I'm hoping it's a large number because I don't see a lot of effort to get vaccinations to much of the poorer parts of the world.
In biology, given the wide spectrum of natural variation, there are no absolutes as to the vaccinated not being able to generate a variant. The point that should taken though is that in upwards of 85% or more of the vaccinated, the virus can't even reproduce in the host, thus it dies there, or doesn't mutate. And if you can get to the point of herd immunity, even those that can throw a variant, chances are that it still won't find a suitable host to reproduce in.
Bottom line..... get everyone vaccinated.
yet, even supposedly intelligen tindividuals, tend to wish to evade the obvious with a what aboutism rushing around the end, where we should have (been) passed, long ago
Certainly.
Those do not include limiting the rights of American citizens.
Let's not pretend that's all we can do.
My reaction is that we cannot control the world. Same goes for pollution and global warming considerations. We cannot, for example, stop the creation of new variants in India. But we can do our part. We can mitigate the spread of the virus into new hosts here in the USA. If the balance of the planet does not do similarly then, depending upon the conditions, we could do as Canada did and restrict travel into our country.
I am not suggesting that things will get that bad, just noting what can be done if we do our part and the balance of the planet does not.
And we might see the recent delta surge here in the USA simply spike and settle. It certainly is possible. But it seems to me that this virus is not something we should be toying with. If a variant emerges that defies our vaccines we have 2020 all over again. Maybe a remote possibility, but a possibility nonetheless and one that correlates with the number of potential hosts.
Oh for God's sake.
I understand you completely.
Once again... Your entire point is based on the "concern" that disease incubating in unvaccinated people will spread to vaccinated people and that all vaccines will prove ineffective. The current data says this is unfounded.
You believe this warrants restricting the rights of healthy unvaccinated people.
We disagree on this. I do not and will not support restricting the rights of American citizens based on a statistically unsupported "concern" that something bad might happen if we don't.
I just saw an interview with Laura Trump saying that she is thrilled when her children get sick. Her justification is that it builds antibodies. What kind of sick twisted mom is thrilled when their children get sick. She is a true Trump who has not cared that half a million have died from his virus.
so you're taking the Trump approach, as it might just disappear and go away, because in about thos e words Trump did cause the decay that ate tens of thousands of lives away, cause 'God' forbid, we infringe upon ANY 'Right', cause America has deemed "itself" SPECIAL, and above the need to attempt to protect those obviously at risk, but with a broom and a whisk, wish it all away like trump did say, and that worked out so swell for so many dead and gone, but hey, 'your' right to your 'rights', could NEVER BE WRONG, now could it....?
i be thrilled if the ENTIRE TRUMP CLAN GOT SICK
Cull the fckn herd
is the word!
I guarantee she has gotten her kids vaccinated to attend private school.
You know, I get the reasoning that exposing children to pathogens gives them immunity to those pathogens. But if, via a vaccine, that immunity can be acquired without getting sick, then I'd rather do it that way. Parents used to have "pox parties" so that their kids would get chicken pox while they were young and get it over with. There was actually some logic to that. But now we have the varicella vaccine, so kids can bypass that infection, and its sequelae, shingles. I'm thrilled that my son likely won't have to worry about getting shingles, because he is immune to chicken pox without ever having had to suffer chicken pox.
Parents like Lara Trump also forget that there are multiple cancers associated with viral infections. Oral, cervical, and anal cancers are associated with human papillomavirus. Lymphomas are linked to Epstein-Barr virus (the virus that causes mononucleosis). Those who are scared of Covid vaccines "changing our DNA" either do not know or have conveniently forgotten that viruses insert their DNA into our chromosomes, sometimes with deadly results far beyond a wart or bout of mononucleosis.
I had the mumps as a kid. Wasn't fun. I remember being swollen and not able to do anything.
What I find ironic is that the 'vaccine hesitant' are the same people that will scoff down a corn dog at the drop of a hat.
I seriously doubt that most of these people actually give a shit what they put in their bodies. I work with 4 unvaccinated people that eat packaged junk food that contains unpronounceable ingredients and a ton of sugar and salt every day.
All too many base their decision on political ideology.
I had measles, but it was before I was old enough to remember.
And I remember chicken pox being pretty damned miserable. I have some scars left over from it. My brother and sister caught it from me, and my sis had a pretty bad case, too.
Don't get exasperated, I simply responded to your:
You felt compelled to slowly state this to me so naturally I take that to mean you think I was talking about vaccinated people.
You keep talking about this data that shows our vaccines will be effective against new variants (read: we do not yet know about them; i.e. delta and lambda are not new variants) that could emerge (mutations, just like delta and lambda) in hosts? And where do you find data suggesting that we should have no concern with the great number of potential hosts for these new variants in the USA?
Look, Jack, I am not arguing that the world is coming to end even though you keep trying to portray my position as an extreme. My position is that as long as a large portion of the population remains vulnerable to infection (the unvaccinated) they serve as a liability to themselves and potentially the vaccinated via new variants. Further, my position is that society most definitely has the right to impose restrictions if it sees a credible threat to the safety of the population. Just like society can restrict DUI or impose quarantines for highly infectious people. We do not, as individuals, have universal rights to do as we please to the point of harming others.
Right now I take no issue with masks and social distancing appearing again in hot spots. As we see indications of potential outbreaks more aggressive measures might be necessary. If so, then we should take them. The objective is to be free of this ongoing threat.
I can see people that don't want social distancing or any other measures implemented being the first ones to set up a leper colony...
If you could interview the unvaccinated dead what freedoms in this world they enjoy today, what do you think they could tell you? Rights as an ideology alone profits no one!
Thing is, we are emerging from a brutal pandemic. We do not want to start going backwards and certainly not to a repeat. Sure, I am against gratuitous infringement on our personal freedom, but I certainly am in favor of responsible measures designed to help keep this virus (and variants) under control.
That is, I recognize that we necessarily do not have full individual freedom in civil society. Sometimes we have to impose temporary restrictions on ourselves for our own good.
Just this Saturday, on "Cross Connection with Tiffany Cross," a physician made a startling statement: "People with natural antibodies from being infected, STILL need at least one shot of a vaccine to give them the long term effects they provide."
So Laura Trump appears to be an uninformed member of the community (again).
What is the saying...You're rights end where mine begin.
Uh, "current" is the operative word. And in science and medicine - a day can make all the difference in my and your worlds. Science exists in the 'moment' and makes no promises about tomorrow, in and of itself. When you understand and accept this rule of thought you will not feel betrayed (or swerved) when some new backward looking insight or discover comes up in the news.
You are wrong to make science say what it can not about the future of this still novel COVID virus.
However, by now, you should have enough life experience to know that commonsense, wisdom, and education tells us to do our best to get out in front and cut off as many pathways as we can for this virus' survival!
Correct. The current data speaks of known variants such as lambda and especially delta. Our vaccines appear to be sufficiently effective against these variants. Thus there is no reason to panic about these variants.
What we do not want, however, are new variants that may not be so containable. Thus we want to reduce the number of potential hosts who could serve as variant factories.
Bottom line, those without antibodies are doing a disservice to the balance of society.
Very interesting indeed, Sandy!
It is understood as under the caption: 'Out of An Abundance of Caution.'
Or some such wording. (Need coffee - off I go!)
Unfortunately, many people do not understand that, or science in general. Thus, they react emotionally when science says something counter to expectations. This was never more obvious than last year when people said they "didn't trust the science" or the vaccine or some such things.
One would think. But clearly that's not the case.
Probably so.
When I was little, mothers often let their kids play with those who had chicken pox to get it and be done with it. I never did get it as a child. I did end up getting it in college courtesy of my roommate's 4 year old. Instead of LT saying she is thrilled when she has a sick child, she should have said that it breaks her heart that her child is sick but thrilled that they are building antibodies.
Correct! A "full-blown" case of any virus or sickness is not a good look, feel, experience, or time in life! Especially if one contracts (full-blown) long-hauler effects. Lara Trump's remark is. . . ."impossible."
If this ONLY affected unvaccinated people then I would be with you. Unfortunately no vaccine is 100% effective so even if you h e been vaccinated there is still a chance, but the real risk is giving the virus fertile ground to keep mutating (aka evolving) into a more infectious, possibly more lethal, or a strain that the vaccines are ineffective against.
So these dick heads are screwing over everyone by being selfish pricks.
The vaccines have proven effective against every variant so far.
Then clarify your use of the phrase "by government mandate".
Obviously. But we don't limit rights or vaccinate "by government mandate" because something that has never happened might occur at some unspecified point in the future.
We agree completely on this point.
It does seem that way sometimes. Alas.
We allow people to pose a risk to each other all the time. It's an unavoidable part of living. We limit behavior when adverse events happen often enough to exceed the threshold for acceptable risk. Numerically speaking, a vaccine mandate is about as justified as outlawing the production of chicken because of the possibility of salmonella poisoning.
For fully Covid vaccinated people, influenza is a FAR more serious threat.
Do at least attempt to contribute something intelligent.
Look...we're in this loop where you rephrase and misrepresent my statements. I don't know if you do that intentionally, or if it's just a habit, but I'm asking you respectfully to stop the practice.
No. That's not at all what I said.
I said the data shows our vaccines are effective against current variants. I am making the point, once again, that we do not limit the rights of American citizens because a series of events that have yet to ever happen may possibly occur in the future.
That's not what I said.
I said the data shows no justification to limit the rights of American citizens. When we're talking about the desire to take deleterious actions against fellow citizens based on something that might happen but we all know hasn't, we've moved beyond "concern".
I said nothing of the sort.
Current data says you are half right. They absolutely are vulnerable to infection and they are absolutely a liability to each other. They are absolutely not a liability to vaccinated people, based on current evidence. If that evidence changes, my position will almost surely change with it.
Yes.
Note the difference between "credible" and "possible". Our disagreement is around whether or not the threat you describe is "credible". It is undoubtedly possible. Currently, the data says it is a long way from being credible. In this country, we do not pre-emptively curtail the rights of our citizens, any more than we lock people up for crimes they might commit at some point in the future.
What an odd question.
People who are unvaccinated are making a deliberate choice to live dangerously. However current data says overwhelmingly that if you are vaccinated they present no danger to you.
I don't want to see anyone die, but they won't listen....but I'm not their mother.
It's a stupid decision. But in this country, we don't outlaw stupid decisions.
No Danger? I do not believe that is true as vaccinated people apparently CAN contract and spread the variants even if they are highly unlikely to suffer the worst symptoms. As children are not vaccinated yet and are more vulnerable to the Covid variants, that means vaccinated people can spread infection to children. I call posing death to kids a danger.
I think you could be charged with reckless endangerment for willy nilly spreading Covid-19 to others just because you personally are vaccinated. It could even be considered negligent homicide if people die.
De facto: Carriers.
Vaccination, mean solely for good transforms innocent, good people into carriers for the unvaccinated. Moreover, I don't want what some 'yahoo' is standing nearby with simply because science has not caught up with what humans are capable of 'serving up'!
We should all have a discussion about vaccination as a tool, not as a 'glory.' That is, if you find something wrong with the science of Covid vaccination end the program, but until such findings, liberty needs to defer to its equal: wisdom.
People who are unvaccinated put me, a fully vaccinated person at risk of COVID 19. I am told I can have the virus asymptomatically, a 'mild case,' or in rare cases die from it. Plus, there are masses of people who for various reasons can not benefit from the vaccine who are caught in the thick of it - subject to exposure from folks qualified to vaccinate who just won't. Now then, I am not arguing for removal of anybody's liberty or decision-making process. There are quality of life issues, reproductive issues, mental stability issues, "whole body systems issues," and suffocating death, nevertheless!
Liberty is of no earthly value in the graveyard.
Our citizenry deserves the best chance to live!
And no one is asking you to "parent" - in this discussion we're asking you to accept that liberty has a lane and survival (as a community) outranks it!
Can the meta Jack. I never intentionally misrepresent anyone and I always try to get an accurate understanding of what other's write. If we are miscommunicating then let's fix it rather than engage in accusations.
And where have I disagreed with you on that specific point? Where have I even hinted otherwise? Given there is no disagreement on known variants, when you make ambiguous references to data I naturally and reasonably interpret that as you claiming that the data shows that I am wrong to express a liability with unvaccinated people serving as hosts for new, potentially troublesome, variants. I have been talking about the fact that unvaccinated people are potential hosts for new (i.e. unknown variants). The concern of course is that our vaccines might not be effective on these new variants (i.e. variants that we do not yet know of). Thus, my point, it is important that we not continue with a large portion of our population unvaccinated.
So let's cut to the chase:
You (again) ambiguously reference 'current data' (no qualification, no link) and claim that my statement is half right. You go on to explain that new variants (and, again, I am talking about variants that are actually new ... thus currently unknown) are not a liability to vaccinated people based on current evidence.
How on Earth do you know this? There is no current evidence on new variants. We have data on COVID-19 and existing (as opposed to new) variants alpha, beta, gamma, delta, epsilon, zeta, eta, theta, iota, kappa and lambda. We cannot possibly have any data on new variants. What we do have is the knowledge, based on biology, that variants can and do emerge from hosts with quite varied properties and we know that the fewer the hosts the less likely a troublesome (i.e. bypass the vaccines) variant will emerge.
I am not half-right here, I am fully right. If you disagree then show me the data that says new variants (i.e. currently unknown variants that will almost assuredly emerge from hosts) will not be troublesome to society.
Remember: My position is that as long as a large portion of the population remains vulnerable to infection (the unvaccinated) they serve as a liability to themselves and potentially the vaccinated via new variants.
And, finally, tacking on my position on controls: society most definitely has the right to impose restrictions if it sees a credible threat to the safety of the population. On this you agree but claim that (per data, unqualified and with no supporting link) we are a long way from having a credible threat.
Well I doubt anyone knows how far away we are. We could have a new variant (mu) emerge tomorrow to which the vaccines are ineffective. How could you possibly have data that shows how far such a mu is from us?? We do, however, have data that shows COVID-19 variants absolutely do emerge with new properties and we know how many potential hosts are out there so I can say, based on this data, that such a large body of potential mu threats is something we should not ignore.
What should society do about this? Seems obvious that we should continue to push to get everyone vaccinated (unless they already have antibodies). In the meantime, as I noted yesterday, we should take actions based on the hot spots. Areas where we see outbreaks of a known variant seem to be pretty good candidates for restrictions: masks, social distancing, etc. And, ultimately, if the situation warrants, society has the right and the obligation to impose temporary restrictions on itself for its own safety. That means we temporarily lose some freedoms. Do you agree or do you hold that under no circumstances should society limit individual freedom? I refer you back to the example of society temporarily removing the freedom of individuals to drive if they are under the influence.
Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.
They're not quite as effective against the variants. Although, they still provide some protection. According to the New England Journal of Medicine, current Covid vaccines are about 95% effective against the main Covid virus, but only about 75% effective against the Delta variant. That still puts 1/4 of the vaccinated (approximately 40 million fully vaccinated individuals) at risk. There are still other variants and I think the newest variant to emerge is the Kappa variant. The variants tend to spread more easily too, which will only make things worse. It is also plausible that newer variants that emerge will cause the vaccines to be less effective than the current vaccine.
Vaccines should be required, much like children are required to have vaccines before entering school, or healthcare workers being required to have the influenza vaccine during flu season. But that is not happening and is probably not likely to either.
It's about public health and safety. People have already been hospitalized and died from it. That has happened. Never mind the potential long term effects of having Covid too, which we're currently discovering.
More like all the time.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't take steps to reduce the risk.
I'd say 600,000+ deaths in the US alone in a little over a year is sufficient justification. Especially since deaths will only continue to rise, especially among the unvaccinated, as this drags out. If people were smart enough to get the vaccine, rather than refuse or argue against it, we might put an end to the pandemic. Alas, people are stupid and need to be told what to do, like children.
See previous statement. That's also a poor analogy.
But we're talking about the unvaccinated. The variants will also increase the risk too.
What series of events are you imagining?
Not entirely true. Until Covid is squashed, even the vaccinated are at some risk, especially from newer variants. Data shows the current vaccine is effective against variants, but at a reduced efficacy. It's likely efficacy will continue to drop as new variants emerge. The more people that get vaccinated, the less likely variants will have the chance to emerge.
Covid has already proven to be a "credible" threat to the population. The numbers demonstrate that. Another factor to consider is that, just like during the middle of the pandemic last year, Covid "flare-ups" will tax the healthcare system and significantly strain healthcare personnel, space, and resources.
They are also putting others around them in danger.
Maybe we should?
Glad we cleared that up. *thumbsup*
As of July 19, there have been 849 of 161,000,000 vaccinated people have died from Covid. You are significantly more likely to die from a dog bite.
Yes. Exactly.
Do you not see a problem limiting the rights of American citizens based on no evidence?
I do.
Most hospitals already require employees to be vaccinated, a practice which has already been upheld in court. I agree it will likely be a different matter with schools, in no small part because we still don't have significant numbers of kids dying of Covid or any variants.
The question is "what steps"? If we're talking about things like prohibiting air travel or barring people from certain public events, I believe that's unacceptable. I also believe it would not survive a constitutional challenge.
We're not talking about Covid. We're talking about restricting unvaccinated people who do not have Covid based on the idea they might be harboring an as yet undiscovered variant that might infect vaccinated people and might render vaccination ineffective.
There is zero current evidence to support this assertion. The best you can say accurately is that they might put others around them in danger at some unspecified future point if several as yet unseen things happen in sequence.
Seriously, Donald Trumps accusation that undocumented immigrants are violent criminals is more statistically accurate....and it is wildly inaccurate.
You and I would probably agree on a veritable host of stupid behaviors we would see outlawed.
Well...show us the statistics on this. What percent of kids have contracted a variant and how many have died?
I'm not sure I understand what "willy nilly spreading" involves. What does that look like, exactly?
Then we agree on the major point, and everything else is just splitting hairs for no reason.
Do not waste time here, Jack_TX! You pulled my statement out of context, and that leaves a pretext. Sickness, hospitalizations, and death issues are not "child's play." Get serious or at least admit you're doing this for the "theatrics" alright?!
Because push come to shove, it is 'do-able' that mandates can be issued (though not desirable) that push the stubbornly unvaccinated out into the 'wilderness' edge of society, but it really should not take that if we. really. do. exist. as. civilized. beings. doing. the. best. for. each other. to. hold. community. together.
OK... so now I'm confused.
You said you were not in favor of removing anybody's liberty or decision making process. In which case we agree.
I presume you favor things to encourage vaccination, like information campaigns, enticements, celebrity endorsements, etc. On which we would also agree.
Now you're talking about mandates, which of course remove liberty and the decision making power, are contrary to your earlier statement, and upon which we would not agree.
So which is it? And if you support a "mandate", what would the consequences be for non-compliance?
*
These are two states that have already radically altered their stances on unvaccinated workers continuing to service the community. What 'drove' them to re-act?
Jack_TX, try not to be confused. As with anything to do with the larger themes in life. For the record, here is partially what I wrote relevant to how you attempt to state my position:
Jack_TX it is not hard to understand that there is more than any one single person's liberty that concerns me (including my own).
To be clear, I want what is best for the community and that seems to be vaccination at this point (by the way, there are various articles coming out today alone from "stubborn" unvaccinated influencers who are in the hospital or have died (today)).
I am sadden for these individuals and their families.
In their case, the vaccination could only help; some are sick and others dead as the alternative.
I do not support a mandate and for that matter neither does the two states above: however, governors have a responsibility to regard and wholly "service" the organism of the state - not just any component group of members at crucial times. There are times when it is necessary to protect the citizenry from its own faulty judgements based on poor or "anemic" data.
So once again, we agree.
Play the part then, Jack_TX. It's demonstrative for readers as to why we are in the current "mess" our country is existing. This attitude you present is indicative of why the GOP Governor of Alabama is "exasperated" with unvaccinated citizens in her state-who can not be properly reasoned with despite 97 percent of the total unvaccinated being hospitalized and dying due to COVID-19 variants.
We as a country count and suffer the 'costs' in blood, sweat, and tears.
Moving on.
We agree people should get vaccinated. We agree government agencies should work creatively and diligently, using all means at their disposal short of a mandate to encourage vaccinations. We agree employers should have the right to require employees to be vaccinated, at the very least when they work in environments where contagion would be of greater than normal concern.
So where, exactly, are we not aligned?
Why do I feel like you're determined not to take "yes" for an answer?
I feel like it cuts both ways. A government agency cannot tell a company they cannot mandate the vac themselves.
I am a realist. While I do not want to go the mandate route for states, I am pragmatic enough to understand this: Individuals and groups can have their privacy and secrecy (no fear of being 'outed') in the case of un/vaccinated status. We have 'elected' to hold to a system of governance which respects the individual over and beyond society with one significant exception: When a threat is one that is communicable to the welfare of humanity.
At what point do you allow a governor shall re/act in suspension of liberty for the "greater good" (of humanity)?
I have stated that we should react rationally to what we know and that includes limiting rights. My closing paragraph described what I believe we should do based on current info. Essentially we should continue to encourage the unvaccinated to get vaccinated to mitigate the threat they pose as hosts for new variants. Also, we should impose restrictions such as masks and social distancing on hot spots to help contain the outbreaks. The objective is ultimately to reduce the number of infections. The fewer infections, the fewer hosts for new variants.
I don't know, you tell me...
I've done all I can...
How do these idiots keep getting elected.
I don’t watch TV news much, but I’ve seen enough of Tucker over the last year (while working out) to know that he has done a lot of damage. Both before and after these vaccines were approved, he was saying things like the government just wants people to line up for a shot and no questions will be allowed. Just do as you’re told.
I get that Tucker doesn’t trust government or bureaucrats, and that’s fine, but the notion that there has been no review of vaccines, no transparency, no questions allowed, or that there is some nefarious ulterior motive to vaccines is complete and utter bullshit.
Here's Candance!
I mean what “experiment” is she thinking about? The experiments - both scientific and merely practical - have been done by millions of volunteers at this point. In the United States alone, 340 million vaccine doses have been administered. How big of a sample size does she require before this no longer strikes her as some crazy fringe experiment?
We are "experiment" subjects she is railing against. She has not gotten a "RECENT UPDATE" on where her stance should migrate. My-my-my. Candace with the Good Hair is fallen short!
The irony is that the right is all in on it's support of Israel yet seem to ignore the FACT that Netanyahu volunteered the entire country of Israel to be a part of the 'experiment'.
Anti vaccination usa, is why we still have a spreading pandemic. If all had gotten vaccinated asap we would NOT be in nearly the high risk mutated version spread, that we are still in. People believing Social Media over Medical Experts is the Pandemic, and it has spread FAR TO FAR. The majority of this BULLSHIP falls back to 45 and the Republican hustle and Jive. The GOP, stupid believers and followers of a stupid , SOB, cause so many should be still alive...and sad so many STILL can't see.
While the debate continues the US had 67,000 plus new cases yesterday with 418 deaths. The state of FL had 13,000 plus new cases and 148 deaths. Not to worry if you live in Florida our governor said that it's seasonal.
Florida's vaccinated rate is 48.06%
She is right, at this point you can 100% blame the unvaccinated, GOP reps, and conservative media. They are keeping the pandemic going by either being stupid, looking to score political points with their stupid base, or looking to keep the advertiser $s flowing.
I think we can all agree based on discussion above that the unvaccinated are the problem with respect to the increase in infections and deaths as of late. That is clear from the numbers.
So who are they is the question and what can we do about it in each case and in general? Here is a chart according to a recent KFF study by state and by race/ethnicity:
While many here wish to focus the blame on what they see as the right-wing anti-vax crowd, and no doubt some focus and efforts at mitigation should land there, there is also vaccination hesitancy among many Black and Hispanic Communities that must be addressed.
Hesitancy in general must be addressed with education and compassion, not with the ridicule and scorn that seems popular among those who wish to make this a political issue, rather than a medical issue that we must ALL work together to address.
I am not clear how you 'articulate' a conservative-liberal (red-state/blue-state) discussion into a racial 'fault' discussion. I could be missing something from the comments; though at this time I can not revisit them all to refresh! Perhaps you can straighten me out on your thinking?
I'm most certainly not "articulating a conservative-liberal (red-state/blue-state) discussion into a racial 'fault' discussion", I'm simply pointing out that it goes much deeper than that either way. There are a myriad of reasons why people are hesitant to get vaccinated in any case, and we must all work together to help mitigate those reasons rather than simply casting blame.
Did you read the links I provided? I feel like if you had there would be no reason for you to assume that I am assigning any sort of "racial fault" in this discussion.
I agree with your overall sentiment about cooperation by all in doing better. You wrote the above as well, nevertheless. There are laggards and non-participants all over the place with a heavier concentration in red-state conservative 'zip codes.' I don't like pointing it out, I wish it was not so, but it is so. While there may be swaths of Liberals that are not getting vaccinated (I don't know that for sure), in my opinion, I see no concerted effort in liberal politics encouraging people to consult and regard conspiracy theories, faux science, or superstition to not resolve our current health crisis sweeping across this nation.
(And no, I am not looking or "itching" for a fight over this.)
One more thing: While there are various reasons for citizens to lag this far behind in vaccinations respectfully, let us not 'kid' this discussion about "GOP governor says it time to blame the unvaccinated for pandemic surge" as not being about red-state conservatives and influencers telling their constituents and anybody who would listen to them not to consider getting vaccinated. Because it did so happen and we have numerous news articles, shows, and statements regarding this activity.
Like who? Kay Ivey just said the opposite. Trump said the opposite many times as far back as January, February and March. No governor or elected official in any state I've seen is telling their constituents not to consider getting vaccinated.
Trump did very clearly urge all Americans in February and March to get the Covid-19 vaccine.
Candace Owens (whom you mentioned above) is from Connecticut, not exactly a "red state". So who are we talking about exactly that is telling their constituents not to get vaccinated? Yes let's counter them with science and education if they are in fact discouraging people or causing hesitancy.
Aren't you just as concerned that in almost EVERY state the percentage of African-American and Hispanic people being vaccinated is considerably lower than white and Asian people? Who is influencing them to continue being hesitant about the vaccination? Why don't we get to the bottom of that as well, and provide the education needed to close that gap and lower the risk to those folks? This has nothing to do with "red or blue state" at the core, it has to do with digging deeper, identifying the source of vaccination hesitancy and then doing what we can to help mitigate it.
Florida governor to forbid COVID-19 ‘vaccine passports’
You know darn well I mean obstructionist strategies and tactics to interfere with the smooth 'roll-out' of vaccine protocols. . . .
Texas bans government-mandated 'vaccine passports' | KVUE
But that is okay. . .I will keep pushing out articles and videos over the next 'occasions' and days accordingly on this subject.
Really. You're going to attempt disowning @6 Candace Owens, conservative Influencer, now in this discussion?
Really? Sure looks that way to me.
You said:
You still have not shown where those "red-state conservatives" are telling their constituents not to consider vaccination. Which of course is the only comment of yours I took exception to, before you then changed the subject.
No I did not darn well know that because that is not what you said. You said the " red-state conservatives and influencers telling their constituents and anybody who would listen to them not to consider getting vaccinated." That is simply not true. The only "protocol" those things you later posted obstruct are mandates for vaccinations, NOT the rollout of the vaccines or the message to their constituents that they should in fact get the vaccine. Anyone who wants a vaccine can still get one and in fact those very Governors have recommended it and taken it as an example to their constituents, just as any "blue-state liberal" Governor has.
So you can argue with me on this all you want, but do us both a favor and quit moving the goal posts. You and I will likely agree on the rest of it, including influencers like Owens (I will address that below), but the problem is not one of red states discouraging the vaccine any more than blue states, it boils down to addressing the hesitancy that people have in all the states about getting what is now a readily available and effective vaccine for everyone.
No I will not. I tend to agree with you that her message is sometimes misguided, especially when she specifically talks about her family not getting vaccinated and uses her influence in the national community to discourage vaccination. You brought her up in a post above where she objected to a mandate, which is the only reason I did. You mentioned "red-state conservatives" and "influencers" in the same sentence and indicated that they are telling their "constituents" not to get vaccinated. I was trying to separate her situation from that of the "red-state conservatives" in my comment at 10.1.4 and I most certainly said, "Yes let's counter them with science and education if they are in fact discouraging people or causing hesitancy".
She, for example, could set a better example for the African American communities in ALL states where percent of those vaccinated lags behind other races/ethnicities, and I agree that messages like hers should be countered as those are the types of messages that discourage people or cause hesitation when it comes to getting the vaccine.
I think it's time to split the Republican Party into two - one with members who are intelligent and principled, and the other brainless 'Trump*suckers' who are in the game only for the money.