Jump to content

Danceswithoctopus

Members
  • Content Count

    1,343
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Danceswithoctopus

  1. Wow! That's a gutsy call there, chum. You're likely to get a FakeDoctor analysis anaylisis in reply.
  2. Are the vaccines still under emergency use authorization?
  3. The crux of the problem, as I've mentioned before, is that you are oblivious to the limits of your knowledge: you don't know what you don't know. I have no problem with people speculating, as long as they do not present their speculation as fact. You lack that insight into yourself. I find YOU arrogant and dangerous for the above-referenced reason.
  4. We're going in circles here. Please refer to my previous posts to you for context regarding making assumptions and presenting them as fact.
  5. Sure. Whatever. What does this have to do with Covid?
  6. I don't question your sources (usually), only your arrogant conclusions and the dangerous recommendations you make. You present your speculation as fact, the conclusions YOU draw as irrefutable. You're a danger to anyone who pays attention to you.
  7. Sure. But you're speculating. Which was my original point. And is the problem with the likes of FakeDoctor, who speculates incessantly and presents it as irrefutable fact.
  8. Perhaps that could be a possibility if we had vaccination rates as high as those with polio, etc.
  9. Thanks. That addresses my confusion about your use of "seasonal".
  10. "Count on" vs "may need". That's the leap to which I referred. Generally, there are four seasons. (Or there used to be.) Perhaps you meant "annual" rather than "seasonal".. In any case, I don't think the science is in on whether additional boosters will be needed. Perhaps, but not for certain.
  11. You did a FakeDoctor shift. You went from "we can count on yearly vaccinations" to "may need seasonal vaccines". See the difference? It's like Gorilla/Guerilla. HUGE difference! The "we can count on" was a leap that wasn't supported (unless you have a cite). You, like the Fakester, got ahead of the science and drew your own overreaching conclusion. I also question your assertion that the virus surges seasonally like the flu. The surges haven't been seasonal like the flu thus far. That said, if you provide some supporting cites, I'm more than willing to reconsider.
  12. (Clearly I wasn't after all.) Must be my age showing. You weren't a fan of Dick Tracy cartoons then?
  13. Last one: because Austria made a decision, the collective "We" (or "Us" for Max) have given up on herd immunity. The leap this time is to "yearly" shots, "as with the flu". And I'm now unclear about your "immunity" reference. Is this again the collective "we", as in herd immunity? Please treat this as rhetorical. I'm six-two-and-even, over and out for today.
  14. Us. Remember Max said we should use "Us". So: "[I]t looks like us can count on yearly vaccinations as with the flue then, is that right?" And IMHO, you've made another of those weird leaps to your conclusion again.
  15. Rain!?? In the San Juans? In November? Shocking! Maybe it's just God's way of helping us to justify the expense of our foulies.
  16. Oh, ZING. You got me on that one. The ultimate burn. You truly ARE the master.
  17. What?!? No violent clashes between the masked and anti-maskers in Roche? Not even a water balloon fight (oh yeah, not WIRW)? Just two days of sailing around the San Juan Islands? The world didn't end because OIYC and the RTC RC imposed a mask mandate on participants? Imagine!
  18. Well, I don't think it grammatically correct, but just for you: The collective "us" don't agree on anything.
  19. See? He's his own cite. Because he's self-appointed expert on everything about which he opines.
  20. The OP regarded an Austrian policy. So the underlying presumptions are Austrian, by the Austrian healthcare authority (whomever they are), not the collective "We".
  21. You've changed your subject from Austria's decision to the issue of natural immunity and how it bears on herd immunity. He's FakeDoctor. He's his own cite because he knows better than ANYONE.
  22. Perhaps he meant when we all feel that "we are in this together"?
  23. Who is this "We" to whom you keep referring? The collective "we" would include everyone. With so many anti-vaxxers out there, the obvious answer to your question is no. The collective "we" don't agree on anything.
×
×
  • Create New...