Poll

I have posted a possibility for the election outcome in 6 variations. Choose your preferred below.

A. https://i.imgur.com/F6TVPLY.png
8 (34.8%)
B. https://i.imgur.com/uuRmNcE.png
3 (13%)
C. https://i.imgur.com/JK2OSsA.png
1 (4.3%)
D. https://i.imgur.com/sl6MVas.png
2 (8.7%)
E. https://i.imgur.com/K1GHlD3.png
2 (8.7%)
F. https://i.imgur.com/br3Sp06.png
7 (30.4%)

Total Members Voted: 23

Author Topic: United States Politics Thread | Local President Watches Poll  (Read 97197 times)

Yes, a virus that stays alive longer in someone's body has a higher chance of mutating this is disease 101.
Yes, but it is not EXCLUSIVE like people are making it out to be.

Also to dive into this a bit further, a lot of people I have talked to about why they aren't vaccinated specifically want the vaccines to be out for longer before they get it because they're too new, which to be honest, it is a good point. Asbestos was considered safe when it was first used too, then many years down the road people started getting cancer from it. But on the flip side, it's a silly argument because literally EVERYTHING in life has the potential risk of reducing your lifespan, and yet they choose the vaccine as the one thing to not take part in...
« Last Edit: September 01, 2021, 10:36:21 PM by stargatefan »

Yes, but it is not EXCLUSIVE like people are making it out to be.
pop quiz: which group of people's bodies likely contains the greater quantity of virions, vaccinated or unvaccinated?



It is a fact that unvaccinated people are increasing the chances of mutation for the virus.


As for the money side?

Here are the stocks for Pfizer, Astrazeneca and J&J

Look at them by 5y timeframe and see that the Covid pandemic hasn't exactly launched their stocks to the moon. The lines seem to follow a common and a general upwards trend that was happening even before the pandemic.

Added to that, the unfortunate situation being, that large pharamceutical corporations are required to produce these vaccines. I personally would like most of these corporations to be state owned or state run entirely. That would cut the costs since profits aren't prioritized.


While choice is important in medical settings, things are different outside of the hospital. Your personal choice of not taking the vaccine is limiting the freedom of people who are unable to get the vaccine or have weaker immune systems or are completely immunocompromised.

The unvaccinated don't have the right to force others to live in a disease ridden world.

I said certain pandemics with higher mortality rates were handled with less control.
ok, so whats the point of saying this? the bubonic plague was handled with less restrictions. do you want us to handle it exactly the same as that or are you just farting random sentences into the wind?

there are no examples that make the "we should do as little as possible" side look good

https://www.newsweek.com/could-there-daily-covid-pill-what-we-know-about-pfizer-drug-trial-1625611

Alright, we're starting to see a light at the end of the tunnel.

As long as everyone takes the FDA APPROVED vaccine, and soon the covid prevention pills and this will be over.

It's about time we got some good news.


idk if matthew doesn't understand or if he just doesn't recognize what "covid prevention pills" sounds like but the pills spoken of in the article are an antiviral, for reducing symptoms and preventing it from getting worse, for people who already have a symptomatic case. it's like tamiflu, and frankly probably just as effective, which is to say not at all

It's about time we got some good news.
i dont see why ppl who refuse to take the vaccine would trust a daily pill from pfizer, and vaccine skeptics still seem to feel that this FDA approval was rushed. dont think this is gonna change stuff but hopefully im wrong

IMO they should distribute a weakened form of the virus that people can introduce into their bodies so their immune system can learn how to fight it. i feel like that would be popular

…..thats what some vaccines are, pretty sure that approach wasnt used in this case due to the risk a “weakened” covid virus would turn into a normal strength infection and cause a mass infection event

…..thats what some vaccines are, pretty sure that approach wasnt used in this case due to the risk a “weakened” covid virus would turn into a normal strength infection and cause a mass infection event
ulti mama x was just joking. but that's not the reason that we used mRNA vaccines for this one, and for that matter, only pfizer and moderna are mRNA vaccines. J&J and AZ, instead, use a different (relatively harmless) modified virus to carry the covid spike protein, and sinovac actually does use weakened covid virus. there's also novavax, which does something else, but I don't know how that one works lol
the reason mRNA was chosen by pfizer and moderna is just that it's quicker to develop a vaccine for a new disease with that method

idk if matthew doesn't understand or if he just doesn't recognize what "covid prevention pills" sounds like -snip-

Oh you mean the Cpp?

Cpp swing?

Oh you mean the Cpp?
Cpp swing?
you can quote the entirety of my posts or you can die. your choice

you can quote the entirety of my posts or you can die. your choice