By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!
Get StartedTypical chicom libdem play book, attack the person not the message.
except here, the "person" or "persons" is/are (failed) actor(s) being paid to spread "the message" by someone unidentified behind the scenes.
the Q shaman guy also had a profile on that site.
I led the horse to water. The data trough is right there on the CDC website. And your ghoul of a governor wants to vaccinate every public-school kid in California!?
I never was ?looking at it? that way. Link
As for making me ?understand?, I ?understand? that the cases and deaths from COVID are overwhelmingly slanted to people about 50 and up, and negligible in the age range < 18.
Age Group Percentage of deaths Count of deaths Percent of US population
0-4 Years <0.1 212 6
5-11 Years <0.1 133 8.7
12-15 Years <0.1 161 5.1
16-17 Years <0.1 131 2.5
18-29 Years 0.6 3,590 16.4
30-39 Years 1.5 8,421 13.5
40-49 Years 3.5 19,807 12.3
50-64 Years 16.3 92,415 19.2
65-74 Years 21.8 123,523 9.6
75-84 Years 26.7 151,851 4.9
85+ Years 29.5 167,460 2
If after two years you?re still not looking at this from a perspective of risk categories, I don?t believe anyone can make you understand.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-58547659
You say you're not looking at it that way, but you're literally only sharing numbers that are affected by if the person died or lived.
That's ironic because that's exactly what I'm doing. I'm taking risks into consideration outside of if the person is buried or walking around. MIS-C, long term Covid, permanent lung damage, etc. These don't pop up on your death charts. I'd rather my kids not suffer a lifelong issue because I was all of a sudden afraid of them getting an immunization when they've already had a half dozen before immunizations were politicized in the last year.
Typical chicom libdem play book, attack the person not the message.
You say you're not looking at it that way, but you're literally only sharing numbers that are affected by if the person died or lived.
Literally?
Six?
Parents having the option to vacc their kids =/= parents being required to to vacc their kids, against a malady that their kids are statistically at zero risk from.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-58547659
You say you're not looking at it that way, but you're literally only sharing numbers that are affected by if the person died or lived.
That's ironic because that's exactly what I'm doing. I'm taking risks into consideration outside of if the person is buried or walking around. MIS-C, long term Covid, permanent lung damage, etc. These don't pop up on your death charts. I'd rather my kids not suffer a lifelong issue because I was all of a sudden afraid of them getting an immunization when they've already had a half dozen before immunizations were politicized in the last year.
Yes, six. As in my kids have had six (non Covid) immunizations prior to Covid. I'm not sure what you think I meant or what you were referring to. And no not literally, it could be 5, it could be 7.
The post I replied to originally said "Help me understand the rationale for vaccinating kids against COVID." The question and my response never mentioned mandates. I've purposely stayed away from the mandate topic. People can't even agree on whether we should be taking preventative measures or not, there's no point in debating the next level.
Okay.
In case you are not aware, the Governor of California, last week, through executive fiat, ordered that all eligible K - 12 students must be vaccinated by a certain date - I think Jan 1 - in order to attend school for (worthless) in person instruction.
This followed on the heels of a similar mandate imposed by the school district of Los Angeles.
Back in March 2020, the city of Los Angeles impose a stay at home order for residents of the city, which was shortly followed by the same stay at home order imposed on residents of California by the governor.
During Newsom?s declaration last week, he bragged that California was the first state to lock down in 2020 - he didn?t use the word lockdown ? and that most of the country followed suit shortly there after.
We?re at the next level - whether you like it or not.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms0hugRkgv8
The narrative is it's the unvaxed at risk, and the unvaxed are putting others are risk, the narrative is wrong, the natural immune system is not a bio hazard and this isn't the plague, technically though I'm just crazy because I get my news from a crazy guy who isn't always right as is nobody.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N4jf6rtyuw
Another elected psychopath. Where are these people coming from?
Okay.
In case you are not aware, the Governor of California, last week, through executive fiat, ordered that all eligible K - 12 students must be vaccinated by a certain date - I think Jan 1 - in order to attend school for (worthless) in person instruction.
This followed on the heels of a similar mandate imposed by the school district of Los Angeles.
Back in March 2020, the city of Los Angeles impose a stay at home order for residents of the city, which was shortly followed by the same stay at home order imposed on residents of California by the governor.
During Newsom?s declaration last week, he bragged that California was the first state to lock down in 2020 - he didn?t use the word lockdown ? and that most of the country followed suit shortly there after.
We?re at the next level - whether you like it or not.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms0hugRkgv8
I care about your whack-job state and it's policies as much as I care about Texas' whackjob abortion policies. If/when it comes to Michigan, I'll worry about it then.
Well I think the data is showing the unvacced are primarily at risk.
That said, you know I think the vacc should be one?s personal choice.
Founded in 2011, Detroit Sports Forum is a community of fanatics dedicated to teams like the Lions, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Wolverines, and more. We live and breathe Detroit sports!