Confusing Covid link

[Dave Gray]

It's not just left or right.  Anti-science is deeply rooted on the fringes of the left and is now the mainstream of the right, plus in immigrant communities, which are probably left-leaning politically, but also personally religiously conservative.  But I also know some apolitical or other contrarians that anti Covid vax.  There are more on the right, but not solely, by any means -- this kind of ignorance has a lot of different faces.

[Spider-Dan]

If you remove Covid from the conversation, those people are far and wide on the left and right.

That's a hell of a qualifier!  Let me take a swing:

"If you remove COVID from the conversation, Democratic officials haven't instituted any lockdowns or implemented any new vaccine mandates over the past two years."

In fact the further left or right you go on the spectrum the less trust there is of "Big Pharma". So I'm not sure you're helping your case

What "case" of mine is being hurt?  There is definitely a fringe group of anti-vaxxers on the crunchy granola left (and there has been for decades), but that's not remotely the same thing as the entire establishment apparatus for the Republican Party demonizing vaccines.

In any case, I'm perfectly happy to attack left-wing anti-vaxx knuckleheads too, so I'm not sure where you're going with this.

[CF DolFan]

LOL ... I really don't think you guys look at anyhting outside of liberal news. Like the progressive liberal ladies who recently switched to repiblican ... they started watching FOX because they were the only ones discussing the school lockdowns and soon found out that FOX news wasn't what CNN had told them it was.

You don't have to look any further than things like Ivermectin being used successfully in many of the outher civilised countires or natural immunity after having Covid being recognized. Both of which this regime refuse to accpet. Hell they even went a far as saying Ivermectin is dangerous for humans although it's been approved for humans for many years ... LOL. The US govornment would rather control us than give us options. That's a fact and the only question is why and I think we all know that answer ... $$$$$

[pondwater]

That's a hell of a qualifier!  Let me take a swing:

"If you remove COVID from the conversation, Democratic officials haven't instituted any lockdowns or implemented any new vaccine mandates over the past two years."
What "case" of mine is being hurt?  There is definitely a fringe group of anti-vaxxers on the crunchy granola left (and there has been for decades), but that's not remotely the same thing as the entire establishment apparatus for the Republican Party demonizing vaccines.

In any case, I'm perfectly happy to attack left-wing anti-vaxx knuckleheads too, so I'm not sure where you're going with this.

"Unvaccinated people" aren't necessarily anti-vaxxers. And more to the point, People who don't trust "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" aren't necessarily anti-vaxxers. Large groups of people have been leery of "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" for as long as I can remember, so I'm not sure where you were going with that logic.

Are you saying it's ok to be untrusting of "Big Pharma and Corrupt Doctors" when it comes to profits margins, lobbying and bribing politicians that make the laws, and rigging the laws in their favor.

But now everyone is supposed to trust "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" when they develop a vaccine that only fits the definition of vaccine when the the actual definition of the word is changed. A "vaccine" that has the vast majority of the doses paid for by the U.S. government. A "vaccine" that has only been approved for less than 6 months. A "vaccine" that has specific laws in place to protect the companies "profit makers" from any lawsuits or liability.

I wonder how much "Big Pharma" has made off the taxpayers through direct payments from the U.S. Government for this "vaccine"? I wonder how much "Big Pharma" stock is up from this "vaccine"? I wonder how much politicians on the LEFT & RIGHT have made off this vaccine through donations and stock appreciation?

If you follow the money, it's clear what's happening. To me, the way this is being handled is no different than what "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" have been doing all along. It's funny how people flip flop on issues when it suits their political agenda.

But then again, maybe "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" have fundamentally changed their ways and now put the well being of people over profits. So Spider, do you trust "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" or not?

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

LOL ... I really don't think you guys look at anyhting outside of liberal news. Like the progressive liberal ladies who recently switched to repiblican ... they started watching FOX because they were the only ones discussing the school lockdowns and soon found out that FOX news wasn't what CNN had told them it was.

You don't have to look any further than things like Ivermectin being used successfully in many of the outher civilised countires or natural immunity after having Covid being recognized. Both of which this regime refuse to accpet. Hell they even went a far as saying Ivermectin is dangerous for humans although it's been approved for humans for many years ... LOL. The US govornment would rather control us than give us options. That's a fact and the only question is why and I think we all know that answer ... $$$$$

CF Dolfan either has a vivid imagination or is personally friends with almost every single person to switch from R to D in the last 20 years. 

[Spider-Dan]

"Unvaccinated people" aren't necessarily anti-vaxxers.

At this point, if you have voluntarily chosen not to get a free and readily available vaccine for a disease that has killed nearly a million Americans in the last 2 years, and it's not because your doctor has told you that you should not get it, you're an anti-vaxxer.  If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

And more to the point, People who don't trust "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" aren't necessarily anti-vaxxers.

First: I'm not talking about people who "don't trust Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" but get vaccinated anyway.  I'm talking about the anti-vaxxers.
Second: Most of the people who "don't trust Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" seem to be the same ones sucking down corporate ivermectin, and screaming for corrupt doctors to give them Big Pharma monoclonal antibodies when they get sick.

So Spider, do you trust "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" or not?

I would absolutely trust and rely on "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" to save my life if I were in a medical emergency... just like all the rest of these anti-vaxxers are when they catch a serious case of COVID. So the answer is "yes."

For the overwhelming majority of anti-vaxxers, "Big Pharma and corrupt doctors" is not an actual, genuine objection.  It's an excuse that allows them to do what they want when they want to.  Again, they claim to "distrust Big Pharma" as they mainline hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.

[Dave Gray]

I don't really get the Ivermectin thing.

I think it's some weird obsession on the right, but I don't give one shit about Ivermectin, one way or the other.  If it was a functional treatment that the doctor recommended, I'd take it.  If they tell me that the dangers outweigh the risks, I wouldn't.  I don't have a vested interest in which medicine works or doesn't.  ...same with Hydroxychloriquine from before.

I am not fully up on Ivermectin (because why would I be) but as I understand it, it's not helpful (enough) against COVID vs. the other damage it causes.  But the drug is used for other things sucessfully.   That seems reasonable to me.

But Ivermectin isn't a left vs. right thing.  The left isn't against Ivermectin.  It's whatever the doctors prescribe.  I don't think you can make a doctor prescribe something for you that they don't agree with the treatment, though.  I don't know if that's a political issue or what.

[Dave Gray]

I just read a New York Times article that indicated that getting COVID at all is greatly reduced when vaccinated, even with Omicron.

I may have to change my position on mandates based on that.

I knew that you could get it and that break-through cases used to be rare, but now aren't.  ...but it still seems that you're much likelier to contract COVID if unvaccinated.  I was wrong about that.

[pondwater]

I just read a New York Times article that indicated that getting COVID at all is greatly reduced when vaccinated, even with Omicron.

I may have to change my position on mandates based on that.

I knew that you could get it and that break-through cases used to be rare, but now aren't.  ...but it still seems that you're much likelier to contract COVID if unvaccinated.  I was wrong about that.

Hey Dave, put up a poll to see who supports or opposes government Covid vaccine mandates. Be interesting to see the results. I can't figure out how to do it

[Spider-Dan]

While we're on the subject of corrupt entities pushing false information because it makes them money:

Anti-vaxxers making ‘at least $2.5m’ a year from publishing on Substack

"A group of vaccine-sceptic writers are generating revenues of at least $2.5m (£1.85m) a year from publishing newsletters for tens of thousands of followers on the online publishing platform Substack, according to new research.

Prominent figures in the anti-vaccine movement including Dr Joseph Mercola and Alex Berenson have large followings on Substack, which has more than 1 million paying subscribers who sign up for individual newsletters from an array of authors who include novelist Salman Rushdie, the writer musician Patti Smith and former Downing Street adviser Dominic Cummings.

Mercola, a US alternative medicine doctor and prolific producer of anti-vaccine content, and Alex Berenson, a journalist banned from Twitter last year after questioning the efficacy of Covid-19 vaccines, are among five vaccine sceptics on the platform who earn themselves and Substack a minimum of $2.5m a year from their newsletters. Under Substack’s business model, writers keep about 90% of the subscription income, with the platform taking 10% and payment company Stripe charging the writers 3% of their take.

Research by the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a campaign group, showed that Mercola’s newsletters made a minimum of $1m a year from charging subscribers an annual fee of $50, with Berenson making at least $1.2m from charging people $60. Three other vaccine sceptic newsletters, from tech entrepreneur Steven Kirsch, virologist Robert Malone and anonymous writer Eugyppius, generate about $300,000 between them."

So we are supposed to distrust virtually every medical organization and pharmaceutical company on the planet because of their overt greed, but when specific individuals PERSONALLY make millions from peddling anti-science BS, they are Bold Truth Tellers.

[Dave Gray]

Do you suppose that those people are liable?  If he's a doctor using his platform to push things that he knows are bunk, but is doing it for the money -- does that not open him up to malpractice claims?

[Spider-Dan]

No.

In America at least, a doctor must be licensed to professionally practice medicine.
These scammers are simply exercising their right of free speech to tell people harmful things.  You don't need a degree or a license to tell people that washing your hands is a plot by the lizard people to strip away your essential oils.

[Dave Gray]

No.

In America at least, a doctor must be licensed to professionally practice medicine.
These scammers are simply exercising their right of free speech to tell people harmful things.  You don't need a degree or a license to tell people that washing your hands is a plot by the lizard people to strip away your essential oils.

I understand the difference.  I thought this Joseph Mercola guy was an MD....but I haven't looked him up or anything.  Maybe he's a chiropractor or something.

[CF DolFan]

There are plenty of legit Drs and Scientists who are constanly silenced. Most notbaly Dr. Robert Malone was banned from Twitter for violating the platform's COVID-19 misinformation policies. Soon after, YouTube removed videos of a controversial interview he did with Spotify podcast host Joe Rogan.  He was a big part of the research team who developed the mRNA vaccine technology now used in the COVID-19 vaccines. They like to discredit him and say he is "lying" becuase he said he invented it and not a research team. I've heard him tell his story and it wasn't loke that at all but thank god they have semantics on their side so they can ban him for his "lies". hahahaha

[Spider-Dan]

There are plenty of legit Drs and Scientists who are constanly silenced. Most notbaly Dr. Robert Malone was banned from Twitter for violating the platform's COVID-19 misinformation policies. Soon after, YouTube removed videos of a controversial interview he did with Spotify podcast host Joe Rogan.

Yay, more whining about being "silenced."

So the day after Malone was banned from Twitter, he went on the most popular podcast on the internet, and then shortly after that, spoke on the most watched cable news network in the country.  This dynamic is what conservatives describe as "being silenced."

They like to discredit him and say he is "lying" becuase he said he invented it and not a research team. I've heard him tell his story and it wasn't loke that at all but thank god they have semantics on their side so they can ban him for his "lies".

Interesting.  So I guess you consider a direct quote from his own (pre-ban) Twitter account profile to be "semantics"?