Mandated vaccines or weekly testing for employers of 100+ people.......

foszoe

Grandmaster
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
24   0   0
Jun 2, 2011
12,669
113
The only place I've really heard it called "the jab" has been here on INGO though, honestly (or in links posted here). I haven't heard any .gov commercials calling it that, although if I had I might have tuned them out.
Watch BBC news during a vaccine segment
 

Alpo

Grandmaster
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Sep 23, 2014
13,325
113
Indy Metro Area
It appears to come from the same origin. Alpo on to something
jabberwocky-main.jpg
 

tim87tr

Marksman
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Jul 3, 2010
324
63
I agree, but I also think every word gov uses is calculated to trigger a mental response. Jab is short, and sounds harmless. Getting the jab sounds a lot more accepting than get the vaccination. I think they’re pushing that particular word for a reason. But, most of us don’t even pay attention to it, so it’s not something that really bothers me really. They can call em whatever they want, I still won’t get it.




“Get your hugs”



“Uuuurrrrrrgggggg, I’m holding in my inner big red”
Linguistics. Clif talks about them often.

 

wtburnette

WT(F)
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
36   0   0
Nov 11, 2013
20,415
113
SW side of Indy
I believe you mean correlation is not causation. Are you saying you don't believe that?

Of course I believe it, but it can also be misleading. You think that all of those reports can be discounted? I don't. I think there are a percentage of them where there was likely another factor, but I think there is a much larger percentage where the vax was the cause. Too many stories for all of them to be coincidence. While I'm not on the bandwagon of calling the vax poison, I do believe the side effects are drastically underreported and that some of that information is being suppressed.

I also have to wonder, greatly, why the administration is pushing the vax so hard, when it has been shown to be way less effective than expected. That lends credence to many of the "conspiracy theories" floating about.
 

foszoe

Grandmaster
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
24   0   0
Jun 2, 2011
12,669
113
Of course I believe it, but it can also be misleading. You think that all of those reports can be discounted? I don't. I think there are a percentage of them where there was likely another factor, but I think there is a much larger percentage where the vax was the cause. Too many stories for all of them to be coincidence. While I'm not on the bandwagon of calling the vax poison, I do believe the side effects are drastically underreported and that some of that information is being suppressed.

I also have to wonder, greatly, why the administration is pushing the vax so hard, when it has been shown to be way less effective than expected. That lends credence to many of the "conspiracy theories" floating about.
No.

But I do believe it's anecdotal.

My biggest concern with the vax is long term side effects unknown. Not that it's intentionally menacing.

But I also put off buying a cellphone until I got married which coincided with the first clocks in my house. I hate both.

I think all that radiation isn't doing anyone any good.

I drink alcohol. I am pretty sure that will affect me long term.

I never got a flu shot until 2016 and I skipped it last year because I don't really trust it.

What I am trying to say is I don't really view the vaccine as exponentially more dangerous than other things I do or put into my body. My immune system works pretty well. Only illnesses in this century have been sinus infections.

I even waited to get the vaccine until I/we had Covid that was less than the common cold.

My wife holds 2 health degrees and so I mostly let her do the reading and do as little as possible but she said since we got it we might as well get vaccinated for an additional layer of protection

That's how I made my decision. No .gov, no msm, not by reading 100s of studies.

Now I think she got it right. We would not have gotten vaccinated until we got it based on her analysis and it appears more and more studies are supporting that.
 

wtburnette

WT(F)
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
36   0   0
Nov 11, 2013
20,415
113
SW side of Indy
No.

But I do believe it's anecdotal.

My biggest concern with the vax is long term side effects unknown. Not that it's intentionally menacing.

But I also put off buying a cellphone until I got married which coincided with the first clocks in my house. I hate both.

I think all that radiation isn't doing anyone any good.

I drink alcohol. I am pretty sure that will affect me long term.

I never got a flu shot until 2016 and I skipped it last year because I don't really trust it.

What I am trying to say is I don't really view the vaccine as exponentially more dangerous than other things I do or put into my body. My immune system works pretty well. Only illnesses in this century have been sinus infections.

I even waited to get the vaccine until I/we had Covid that was less than the common cold.

My wife holds 2 health degrees and so I mostly let her do the reading and do as little as possible but she said sine we got it wr might ad well get vaccinated for an additional layer of protection

That's how I made my decision. No .gov, no msm, not by reading 100s of studies.

Now I think she got it right. We would not have gotten vaccinated until we got it based on her analysis and it appears more and more studies are supporting ng that.

Glad you're happy with your decision. I'm happy with mine as well. At this point, even if the side effects are rare, they are about the same as my chances of having serious issues with the actual disease. I feel like getting the jab would be rolling the dice of being affected by the side effects where I'm not worried about the disease itself.
 

jsharmon7

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
111   0   0
Nov 24, 2008
6,990
113
Freedonia
Of course I believe it, but it can also be misleading. You think that all of those reports can be discounted? I don't. I think there are a percentage of them where there was likely another factor, but I think there is a much larger percentage where the vax was the cause. Too many stories for all of them to be coincidence. While I'm not on the bandwagon of calling the vax poison, I do believe the side effects are drastically underreported and that some of that information is being suppressed.

I also have to wonder, greatly, why the administration is pushing the vax so hard, when it has been shown to be way less effective than expected. That lends credence to many of the "conspiracy theories" floating about.
I don’t think they can all be discounted. But they have to be taken with a grain of salt, for exactly the same reason. The one about causing deafness is questionable. It’s possible, but I highly doubt any doctor would tell them the vaccine definitely caused it. If someone presented to the doctor with sudden deafness, I don’t think a doctor could/would say “yes, the vaccine did this.” If any doctors here tell me I’m wrong, I’ll certainly admit it.

This is also my issue with the VAERS data. Anyone can claim any side effect and it’s accepted into the data set. One doctor reported an MMR vaccine turned him into Incredible Hulk just to prove a point. They called him to get more info and he admitted it was an experiment to see what would happen. They still had to get his permission to remove it. Had he said no, it would have stayed in there. I’m also reminded of the “snitch hotlines” they set up. People flooded them with fake reports to screw it up. With something as controversial as this vaccine, it’s entirely possible false reports are called in. To what extent, who knows. Certainly enough to make me consider it. It’s also possible there have been a lot of bad side effects. Make your choice, but a smart man would look at all angles.
 

Site Supporter

INGO Supporter

Forum statistics

Threads
490,036
Messages
8,829,574
Members
47,982
Latest member
rodneyw71
Top Bottom