Lying About Getting The Vaccine

1. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   ... for the sake of harmony with others and the freedom to travel.
   
   
   Is it Okay?
   
   ... when Freedom is gotten at the EXPENSE of Truth, what then?

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Kyler J Falkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      If it is for your safety, both mental and physical, I support your freedom of choice. Even should that choice be to lie, I support that choice. Should your lying save everyone from a more tragic consequence, no matter the lie, you should absolutely tell that lie.
      
      Whether or not that should apply to the jab is upon every individual to decide for themselves, and I support the freedom of choice as it concerns the vaccines for now. With all the vitriol as it concerns the jabs, it makes sense that people are feeling pressured into lying, falsifying documents, and even going into isolation.

      replyreport
   2. 77

      Castlepalomaposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      The only time I would lie, is if I can be seriously harmed. Vaccines can seriously harm me and mankind.
      Or I stick to be honest, don't harm policy, as the best policy.

      replyreport
   3. 81

      PLRAposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      My view is that what is important is your intent when a "lie" is told. We tell information children information not true but the intent for their positive benefit such as about Father Christmas or Tooth fairies. On the other extreme are con artists who tell things not true for their own personal benefit at the expense and hurt of others. So telling a "lie" about having vaccines is for us to decide where in this spectrum it sits. If in doubt I suggest use your own divine inner compass about what feels right you.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Hey, Thank you!

         replyreport
2. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   WHAT THEN?

   replyreport
3. 95

   Readmikenowposted 3 years ago

   Tucker Carlson wrote a good article about the lying concerning the vaccine.
   
   One of my favorite parts is what is put in the contracts when the vaccine is purchased.
   
   "The truth is, we don’t know. And we don’t know what we don’t know. And here’s how we know that we don’t know what we don’t know about this vaccine. 
   
   "Purchaser acknowledges the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known."
   
   https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker- … eres-proof

   replyreport
   1. 89

      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      "Purchaser acknowledges the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known."
      
      Could that not be said for every medical breakthrough in the last 50 years?  From CAT scans to knee replacements to heart stents to the vast majority of drugs on the market today, can we really say that we know the long term effects and efficacy of a drug/procedure that has only been used for 10 or 20 years?
      
      Truthfully, this sounds like just more spin; an effort to create fear of something that there is no indication exists.  An argument designed and used to get an emotional response out of a frightened population.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Kyler J Falkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         The only time you'll find me taking experimental, emergency-issued drugs is if I'm forced to do so (has happened to me in the service), or I'll otherwise die. However, COVID wasn't that big of a deal for me despite being in a "high-risk" category, and I'd trade any illness I have ever had for it. This isn't to invalidate the seriousness of COVID overall, because it's obvious I must mention that, but to say that you are refusing the vaccine and following all of the other guidelines is a perfectly fine response in lieu of the jab; the jab seems to require all the other guidelines to be followed to be truly effective anyways.
         
         "Truthfully, this sounds like just more spin; an effort to create fear of something that there is no indication exists.  An argument designed and used to get an emotional response out of a frightened population."
         
         This to me sounds like, "Stop being afraid of what we don't know enough about, and instead fear the mostly-measurable consequences of a COVID infection. Your choice doesn't matter in the face of what we decide is the greater good."
         
         It is perfectly reasonable to wait for alternatives that have undergone more pertinent testing, or to wait until the moratorium on lawsuits is lifted, which I believe is October 1st, 2024. By then we should have a better understanding of things, and no more sensational garbage on either side muddling the facts to such a degree that everything feels like, "fake news." That's the real issue, anyways, politicking and manipulation for social and political gains, not whether or not people should be shamed into getting the jab or lying.

         replyreport
         1. 92

            IslandBitesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            but to say that you are refusing the vaccine and following all of the other guidelines...
            
            
            That's the problem. They're not.

            replyreport
            1. 85

               Kyler J Falkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               Then discuss the real problem, not try to invalidate those who are rightfully worried (not to accuse you, just a general statement within the context of previous posts). Not even those who received the jab can properly take care of themselves within the guidelines, that is to say if all major news sites are to be trusted. What do we do, another forced lockdown and sink small businesses again just to make sure that even those with the jab are doing what is right?
               
               It's truly a worrisome situation, and to not have some level of wariness of it all would be dangerously ignorant. I think we are heading towards, "living with the virus," and I've adopted a healthy mentality to suit the reality dictated around me and the communities in which I take part. That's why I believe the freedom of choice is the right choice, no matter the choice if it avoids more-serious consequences physically and/or mentally.
               
               In all fairness, I'd also support another mandatory lockdown, my stock portfolio would skyrocket.

               replyreport
         2. 89

            wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Can a drug that has been administered to 160,000,000 people truly be called "experimental" any more when the rate of serious side effects is so small?
            
            When will it NOT be experimental?  When 400,000,000 people have taken it 20 years ago?

            replyreport
            1. 85

               Kyler J Falkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               When the experts deem it so, I suppose, and I'm not discussing statistics on anything these days, because statistics seem to be a great argument for all sides and only seek to confuse people intentionally; statistics in their infancy are often used this way to the detriment of the ignorant public at large. For example:
               
               Low rate of deaths from COVID, as compared to high rate of infection with "serious" symptoms for those who have been vaccinated. Statistics are too easily framed, misinterpreted, and used solely to invalidate valid concerns. I won't deign to speak on them until more data is available.
               
               For me personally, I will consider it non-experimental on October 1st, 2024, when it is set to move to the standard compensation model for vaccines. Should that date change, so shall my opinion, or if the experts deem it differently. Either way, I see things getting better rather than worse, and support the freedom of choice that has led us to this moment in time.

               replyreport
            2. 70

               Ken Burgessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               There is no documented evidence of long term side effects of these vaccines, these GENETICALLY MODIFIED/MANUFACTURED vaccines were created, evaluated and authorized for emergency use in under a year.
               
               Typically, vaccine development can take 15 to 20 years, start to finish.
               
               These mRNA vaccines are about as 'experimental' as they come and all of humanity are the 'lab rats'.
               
               Because this vaccine has not been thoroughly tested on generations of lab rats and other animals, we are going to find out the hard way if our children and grand children have genetic consequences sewn into their DNA that is damaging for them or future generations.
               
               Over a virus that is 99% or more survivable for those who get it. We may be creating a 50%  or worse rate of neurological disorders and disabilities in future generations... we don't know, because there have not been years of testing done to prove the safety or lack thereof of these vaccines.

               replyreport
               1. 85

                  Kyler J Falkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Just an addition to this post from Ken which I mostly agree with, the strange contrast between experts, their findings, and subsequent choices in interpretation by said experts worries me.
                  
                  On one end the experts will tell you to think smart, scientifically, and take everything into account. Logically, these vaccines are something to remain wary of due to their unarguably experimental, emergency-driven nature if we were to perceive them through a scientific lens. On the other hand, though, these same experts will encourage the wrongful invalidation of those openly questioning the efficacy, and moral foundation of the vaccines and surrounding issues.
                  
                  It's all so concerning, confusing, and thus a, "wait and see," approach is the only logical conclusion when freedom of choice is still available. At least that seems to be the most effective approach when viewing reality from my perspective, and that of my community.

                  replyreport
               2. 89

                  wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Would you agree that we are getting much, much smarter about tailoring a vaccine to a disease?  That after decades of making vaccines we have a much better handle on what is required and what is dangerous?
                  
                  Would you agree that a 99% survivability rate doesn't mean a whole lot when well over half a million people died in just this country of the disease in it's first year?
                  
                  Would you agree that while we don't know what disorders or disabilities a vaccine may cause, we know just as little about what COVID may cause...except that we DO know it DOES cause long term, very serious, side effects.  Something that cannot be said of the vaccine.

                  replyreport
                  1. 85

                     Kyler J Falkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                     I agree with all of this, because it continuously moves the goal posts in such a way it would be pointless to disagree, and thus must be taken at face value, and important nuances ignored to move on with constructive conversation.

                     replyreport
                     1. 89

                        wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                        That wasn't really the intent.  It sounds to me like the complaint is that we are not using the same methodology of vaccine design (and perhaps production) that was used 30-40 years ago.  That we haven't learned anything in those 40 years and thus must perform the same testing procedures for each new vaccine (even though we produce a new flue vaccine every year, based on the prior year's flue bug). 
                        
                        This does not make sense to me.  We have accumulated a vast amount of knowledge in biology, in virology, in the bodies immune system.  In virtually everything involved in vaccine design/production...and yet must use ancient methods and tools to produce what we need.  If we can copy RNA from the virus rather than using a dead virus to stimulate our immune system, why should we not do just that?

                        replyreport
                        1. 85

                           Kyler J Falkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                           Your limited knowledge of science makes a puddle of wisdom seem like an ocean of intelligence, it would seem. We are so advanced, yet we cannot accurately predict the long-term damages of the theoretical principles we create. We cannot even predict the long-term advantages properly, for a real-life example that is relevant we are seeing the efficacy of the vaccines falling under heavy scrutiny by even those who created them. Fact of the matter is that our knowledge is limited despite our advances in technology, and just because we can do something does not mean we understand it to any meaningful degree outside of direct application and empirical measurement.
                           
                           Take sciences surrounding the kinematics and kinesthetics of the feet, only a century old (considered to be in its infancy) but full of relevant scientific applications that can help rebuild or destroy a body with no real accurately measurable predictions in the long-term. We come up with untested solutions, test them, and either do away with them or hand them out regardless of consequences. Fact of the matter is, in one-hundred years and all the advancement in that modern-era we still cannot come close to even physically modeling the intricacies of the human foot.
                           
                           The same as with kinematics and kinesthetics of the feet applies to how the human body functions overall. Most sciences are theoretical, ever-evolving, and thus are called a practice. It is better to practice these sciences in a manner that they are less consequential, slowly ease it into more strenuous testing, and obtain all the long-term data we can before mass application. This basic scientific method, disproving  theory before application of it occurs, has been ignored for the sake of these experimental, emergency vaccines.
                           
                           To defend or attack them in any way is a slippery slope, and one that does not conform to the scientific method in any way. This is a novel experience unless we touch on North Korea or Nazi Germany experimentation (which would be moderately unfair), so I'd say freedom of choice without coercion is extremely important right now. Personally, more testing on the masses will bring about quicker results at the expense of the public, but so long as I have the freedom to refuse to take part in that testing then I am happy; once things have more data, more objective long-term observances, I'll gladly get my jab like I have all my others.

                           replyreport
                           1. 89

                              wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                              "It is better to practice these sciences in a manner that they are less consequential, [/b]slowly[/b] ease it into more strenuous testing, and obtain all the long-term data we can before mass application."
                              
                              Does that include instances where we lost over half a million people every year, with the numbers growing?  Or are more drastic measures required with that kind of loss?
                              
                              And there it comes down to opinion.  Mine is that yes, using the best of our knowledge and abilities we need to stop the spread of COVID, and a vaccine is the only real way we know to do it without also allowing our economy, followed by our society, to crumble.  We have already seen the results of just a few months of shut-downs (the only other way we know to truly stop the spread) and to say it was painful is a massive understatement.
                              
                              Yet that seems to be the only option you have - without a vaccine the only thing we can do is limit contact, which means ruining our economy and simply swallowing the deaths and misery that would result.  I disagree.
                              
                              You may also present the opinion that the economy, and our society, will not be seriously harmed with another few years of shutdowns, stay-at-home requirements and other partial solutions that have proven to be only minimally effective.  Here, too, I disagree.

                              replyreport
                              1. 85

                                 Kyler J Falkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                 If you want my honest opinion on the matter rather than me playing the devil's advocate or simply stimulating conversation, none of this is a moral quandary to me, it is a practical one on an individual basis. Get the vaccine and be a test subject, or do not, it won't affect me negatively. My life has only been expanded by this pandemic, and the most negative aspects of the pandemic haven't had any mention-worthy negative personal effects, in fact I am thankful for all the pandemic has taught me and continues to offer me.
                                 
                                 Nonetheless, I'll wait to see the long-term effects of the jabs, or I'll give in should I be forced since it isn't a hill worth dying on. I want a viable vaccine, but for me it just doesn't seem worth the lack of efficacy.

                                 replyreport
                  2. 95

                     Readmikenowposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                     "over half a million people died in just this country of the disease in it's first year"
                     
                     Guess what? People can die of a lot of things and Covid is one of them.  Half a million deaths is smaller than the number of people who die from heart attacks annually.
                     
                     This is from the CDC website.
                     
                     Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
                     Heart disease: 659,041
                     Cancer: 599,601
                     Accidents (unintentional injuries): 173,040
                     Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 156,979
                     Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 150,005
                     Alzheimer’s disease: 121,499
                     Diabetes: 87,647
                     Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 51,565
                     Influenza and Pneumonia: 49,783
                     Intentional self-harm (suicide): 47,511 
                     
                     
                     https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

                     replyreport
4. 77

   Castlepalomaposted 3 years ago

   Unless a few cops could possibly hold me down to the floor, and smash my face onto the floor  Then I would kick the weapon jab out of their hands upon their arse .
   Get the hell off my property.
   
   And don't try bribery with the kids without parents consent. I'll be watching for any free Ice cream for vaccine exchange. Or a free donuts and beer for the big kids. No wonder 78% obesity people count for certification covid-19 deaths of total.
   My body and nobody else's property.
   Save the animals life too.
   From every ferrets that died for you and your absence of reason.

   replyreport
5. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   I prefer not to lie, having lied once. My neighbor, "Irene", an anti-vaxer / by-the-book conservative, advised me to say, when asked, "I have taken the Johnson and Johnson vaccine."
   
   Sure enough, the next day, my by-the-book liberal neighbor, "Tom," asked me, almost accusingly, "Have you taken the vaccine?"
      
   I automatically declared, "Yes, Johnson and Johnson."
   
   From now on I will say, "I prefer not to disclose."
   
   They (liberals?) can think what they want. At least I will be able to live with myself.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Kyler J Falkposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      So it is more of a moral quandary than a practical one for you, which makes sense.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         morals are important for the smooth functioning of society. We don't want to break this vital boundary,
         
         ... wherever possible.
         
         
         I know someone, "Jill" who falsified documents to fly and go on a vacation in the south of Baja. Unfortunately, she came into contact with someone who tested positive for Covid 19. Jill tested positive, after coming home. In hindsight, perhaps, if she had not falsified those documents, she wouldn't have flown out of the country.
         
         I would advise: Try to work with the current limitations and avoid falsehoods and false-documentation.
         
         ... but in the end, survival is the most important thing. For instance, when your job requires you to travel, you are an anti-vaxer and you go ahead and have your friend-pharmacist give you false verification.
         
         Or is it?

         replyreport
      2. 89

         wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Of course it is a moral quandary.  Half the nation has assumed the risks of a new vaccine in order to protect the people of the country.  The other half refuse to share that risk.
         
         Is it a moral question of whether to participate in the risk or allow others to assume it all while (hopefully) reaping the benefits?  Absolutely it is.

         replyreport
         1. 81

            Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            its all a risk. damned if you do damned if you don't.
            what happened to live and let live, wilderness?
            
            out the window all of the sudden?
            
            
            Hilarious.

            replyreport
6. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   Maybe they (liberals?) should not ask such a question:
   "Have you gotten the vaccine?"
   .... especially not accusingly.

   replyreport
7. 0

   ValKarasposted 3 years ago

   Allow me to make this modest contribution to this discussion -- mainly by mentioning two facts.
   1) Every year, about 250,000 - 350,000 people die in the United States only from medical mistakes It would be fair to include in that number pharmaceuticals given to doctors to use after approved by FDA).
   Since this past year is probably no exception, makes you wonder how many of those people had "Covid-19" in their death certificate.
   2) There is something like biological individuality, and pharmaceuticals tend to work on "one-fit-all" basis. Just like somebody may be allergic to penicillin, an untold mass of people may be harmed by medications which some others may take without any side effects, For example, it may take time for liver to be seriously damaged, without immediate symptoms being obvious.
   Take these two facts into consideration when you judge the safety of these vaccines.
   For a "bonus", the third fact is that producers of vaccines are not legally liable -- so does that also hint at anything about their "safety"?
   I will not lie about it to anybody -- here it is, publicly: I won't take it,
   Those who did take it, have nothing to worry about getting the virus from me -- otherwise why did they get vaccinated in the first place? On the other hand, those, like myself, are taking the same chances that I am, and it's our choice.
   
   Basically, it will be a cold day in hell when I will need to explain my reasons to anybody. It's no one's damn business. Last time I checked this was not a dictatorship -- and medical establishment should not be giving any ideas to politicians.
   Thank you kindly for reading. My mind may be wrong, but that's the only one that has helped me in the last 77 years to live in a robust health and a well nourished peace of mind.

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I agree, if its right to you and contributes to your own calmness and peacefulness, according to your own consciousness and conscience, that's what matters.
      
      However and nevertheless, we need to know the F A C T S !

      replyreport
8. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   BTW. If you have the vaccine, you are shedding the virus. So stay the heck away from ME! Be honest about it. Admit you have had the vaccine and do the right thing:
   
   Step AWAY from others and tell them you have had the vaccine.

   replyreport
9. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

   and does the government have the right to Lie, to Command, to Mandate such an issue to the point where it drives us to lying?

   replyreport
10. 81

    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Such An Issue:
    
    The "vaccine" has hurt many. Why? How?
    
    "As of September 22, 2022, there have been 1,028 preliminary reports in VAERS among people younger than age 18 years under review for potential cases of myocarditis and pericarditis. Of these, 257 remain under review. Through confirmation of symptoms and diagnostics by provider interview or review of medical records, 679 reports have been verified to meet CDC’s working case definition for myocarditis. See below for counts of verified reports of myocarditis by age group.
    
    5-11 years: 22 verified reports of myocarditis after 21,380,593 doses administered
    
    12-15 years: 352 verified reports of myocarditis after 24,420,543 doses administered
    
    16-17 years: 305 verified reports of myocarditis after 13,385,065 doses administered
    
    As the COVID-19 vaccines are authorized for younger children, CDC and FDA will CONTINUE to monitor for and EVALUATE reports of myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination and will share MORE information as it BECOMES AVAILABLE. Learn more about myocarditis and pericarditis, including clinical considerations, after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination."
    
    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc … vents.html
    
    The CDC and FDA are ADMITTING we have been guinea pigs.

    replyreport
11. 81

    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    More than 616 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through September 21, 2022.
    
    During this time, VAERS received 16,595 preliminary reports of death (0.0027%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. CDC and FDA clinicians review reports of death to VAERS including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records.
    
    Continued monitoring has identified NINE deaths causally associated with J&J/Janssen COVID-19 vaccination. CDC and FDA continue to review reports of death following COVID-19 vaccination and update information
    
    as it becomes available.
    
    
    AS IT BECOMES AVAILABLE! ! ! !

    replyreport
12. 81

    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    ONE DEATH IS TOO MANY

    replyreport
    1. 81

       Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

       ~ what if it was you?

       replyreport