Joe Biden - The Fake President

Yeh, well we know that Joe is not going to be making any decisions on anything so we can skip all the messaging about how Joe will be big on deferring to others. He will be leaving everything to the committees, task forces, experts, whatever. Including wars.


You can be sure though that Joe will will be very vocal about how black people should be a higher priority than whites and that the experts even say so as the script requires.

In fact, the states should be getting allocations to distribute based on their judgement. I don't trust the "advisory committees" to Biden or the CDC to give any attention or emphasis whatsoever to the need to distribute vaccines where it would support reopening of the economy as an high priority as well. That is not even a consideration for them.


Biden will let health experts decide who will get a Covid-19 vaccine first


"Other than health care workers, others who will be first in line to get it will be people who do have chronic underlying medical conditions who are older, as well as communities of color who have been disproportionately impacted by this pandemic," Gounder told CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/27/health/vaccine-decision-biden-advisory-board/index.html
 
Last edited:
TreeFrogTrader said:
Yeh, well we know that Joe is not going to be making any decisions on anything so we can skip all the messaging about how Joe will be big on deferring to others. He will be leaving everything to the committees, task forces, experts, whatever. Including wars.


You can be sure though that Joe will will be very vocal about how black people should be a higher priority than whites and that the experts even say so as the script requires.

In fact, the states should be getting allocations to distribute based on their judgement. I don't trust the "advisory committees" to Biden or the CDC to give any attention or emphasis whatsoever to the need to distribute vaccines where it would support reopening of the economy as an high priority as well. That is not even a consideration for them.


Biden will let health experts decide who will get a Covid-19 vaccine first


"Other than health care workers, others who will be first in line to get it will be people who do have chronic underlying medical conditions who are older, as well as communities of color who have been disproportionately impacted by this pandemic," Gounder told CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/27/health/vaccine-decision-biden-advisory-board/index.html
More...

I disagree.

There must be a national level strategy on the distribution of vaccines and the priorities of different groups in our population. This strategy should be driven by science.

Having every state do their own thing.... seeing many states not making decisions based on science already... will merely lead to vaccine chaos.

Sadly the Trump administration has done NOTHING in terms of providing funds or providing equipment & trucks for the distribution of the vaccine across the U.S. Their approach was "private industry" will take care of that.

Explain to me why the first tests of transporting the vaccine in the U.S. involved a Delta Airlines plane rather than a U.S. Military plane. The military vaccine logistics advisor a week ago had to step up and admit that the Trump administration has dedicated no military equipment or funds to distributing the vaccine. This is tragic.

In Germany and the U.K. the government is spending government money to set-up hundreds of mass vaccination centers in December and doing all of the distribution. In Germany they expect to vaccinate their entire population of 83 Million between January and the end of March.
 
gwb-trading said:
.

Having every state do their own thing.... seeing many states not making decisions based on science already... will merely lead to vaccine chaos.

.
More...

I do not see the need to have a rigid full-binary discussion yet until I see the plan, which will mostly fall under Biden's administration. If a Biden plan has a strong component to it that allows for portions of the allocations to be based on state-identified priorities and hotspots then I will recognize that when I see it and be satisfied with it. On the other hand if it is just a national plan based on some of the happy horseshiite that I have heard floated- such as blacks are higher priority so it will go to blacks first then I will see that for what it is too.

Ironically, "based on science" we are not supposed to have a vaccine to even be arguing about for another 4-8 years. All the political interference is not necessarily coming from the right. The left very much wants to even scores with Trump by torpedoing any successful launch so that Biden can allegedly clean it up and have it as a Biden win.

You show me a process free of all of that, and with a distribution strategy that has not been weaponized by the left and I will have bigger fish to fry. Right now the messaging is all over the place. We are being told that we are all going to die because of poor vaccination distribution and/or that most of the people in the country will not take the vaccine so it will be sitting on the shelves instead of people fighting over it.

Just do something reasonably smart and I will not have an issue. I get that you assume the national government will do that and that states will always be ignoramasusesae/sp. There is plenty of ignaramorosity to go around. You will see plenty under Biden even though you are locked on Trump's. That would the same Joe Biden who would be bringing us a vaccine in 4-8 years because "that's what the science says."

Biden is still the good ole boy. He would not necessarily disagree with my need to see state and local planning and prioritization. It's the new Joe - with the lefty handlers- that has to be watched.
 
Last edited:
TreeFrogTrader said:
I do not see the need to have a rigid full-binary discussion yet until I see the plan, which will mostly fall under Biden's administration. If a Biden plan has a strong component to it that allows for portions of the allocations to be based on state-identified priorities and hotspots then I will recognize that when I see it and be satisfied with it. On the other hand if it is just a national plan based on some of the happy horseshiite that I have heard floated- such as blacks are higher priority so it will go to blacks first then I will see that for what it is too.

Ironically, "based on science" we are not supposed to have a vaccine to even be arguing about for another 4-8 years. All the political interference is not necessarily coming from the right. The left very much wants to even scores with Trump by torpedoing any successful launch so that Biden can allegedly clean it up and have it as a Biden win.

You show me a process free of all of that, and with a distribution strategy that has not been weaponized by the left and I will have bigger fish to fry. Right now the messaging is all over the place. We are being told that we are all going to die because of poor vaccination distribution and/or that most of the people in the country will not take the vaccine so it will be sitting on the shelves instead of people fighting over it.

Just do something reasonably smart and I will not have an issue. I get that you assume the national government will do that and that states will always be ignoramasusesae/sp. There is plenty of ignaramorosity to go around. You will see plenty under Biden even though you are locked on Trump's. That would the same Joe Biden who would be bringing us a vaccine in 4-8 years because "that's what the science says."

Biden is still the good ole boy. He would not necessarily disagree with my need to see state and local planning and prioritization. It's the new Joe - with the lefty handlers- that has to be watched.
More...

When it comes to a Covid-19 vaccine, I don’t care how it is prioritized or allocated. I’m more than happy to continue wearing my PPE, including masks, goggles, and gloves, as the situation may demand. In fact, I voluntarily offer to deprioritize myself to the maximum extent pemitted by law.
 
BeautifulStranger said:
When it comes to a Covid-19 vaccine, I don’t care how it is prioritized or allocated. I’m more than happy to continue wearing my PPE, including masks, goggles, and gloves, as the situation may demand. In fact, I voluntarily offer to deprioritize myself to the maximum extent pemitted by law.
More...

I will be happy to get an approved and safe vaccine for COVID-19 as soon as possible.
 
gwb-trading said:
I will be happy to get an approved and safe vaccine for COVID-19 as soon as possible.
More...

... and I’ll be happy for you.

By the way, what has been the historical effectiveness of flu vaccines? You have heard the term “Annual flu shots” before, right? Could it be that influenza like virus strains mutate so quickly, sometimes within 6 to 8 months, that by the time a new vaccine reaches the market, it is well on its way to becoming obsolete? Further, vaccines have different rates of effectiveness according to age groups, with the elderly often seeing the lowest effectiveness percentages. In other words, the age group most suseptable to Covid complication will likely see the least benefits from a vaccine. In addition, what proportion of Covid vaccine trial test subjects were elderly?

There is also potential for adverse reactions to a vaccine, including fatal outcomes, as seen in other vaccines and in the testing of Covid vaccines. Indeed, it is my understanding that even “Boosters” of even serious viruses are not emphasized for the elderly unless travelling outside the US. This suggests that risk to reward considerations have been applied to aspects of medical policy concerning infectious diseases.

The “95% effectiveness” claimed for one of the Covid vaccines will not be achieved in the real world for reasons stated earlier in this post.

It is good to be a pharmaceutical company today, isn’t? Maybe even better than when Obamacare was passed.

Anyway, we can do a formal battle on this issue if you want, with the inclusion of sources for our points.
 
BeautifulStranger said:
... and I’ll be happy for you.

By the way, what has been the historical effectiveness of flu vaccines? You have heard the term “Annual flu shots” before, right? Could it be that influenza like virus strains mutate so quickly, sometimes within 6 to 8 months, that by the time a new vaccine reaches the market, it is well on its way to becoming obsolete? Further, vaccines have different rates of effectiveness according to age groups, with the elderly often seeing the lowest effectiveness percentages. In other words, the age group most suseptable to Covid complication will likely see the least benefits from a vaccine. In addition, what proportion of Covid vaccine trial test subjects were elderly?

There is also potential for adverse reactions to a vaccine, including fatal outcomes, as seen in other vaccines and in the testing of Covid vaccines. Indeed, it is my understanding that even “Boosters” of even serious viruses are not emphasized for the elderly unless travelling outside the US. This suggests that risk to reward considerations have been applied to aspects of medical policy concerning infectious diseases.

The “95% effectiveness” claimed for one of the Covid vaccines will not be achieved in the real world for reasons stated earlier in this post.

It is good to be a pharmaceutical company today, isn’t? Maybe even better than when Obamacare was passed.

Anyway, we can do a formal battle on this issue if you want, with the inclusion of sources for our points.
More...

COVID-19 is not mutating quickly like the flu virus. This has been noted many times before. The COVID-19 vaccine will not be obsolete because of COVID-19 virus mutations.

The flu has many virus variants. COVID-19 does not.

According to the COVID trial registry as outlined in the AARP article overall 19% of trial participants are between ages 65 and 74. and 4% are over 74 years old based on those volunteering. These number roughly align with CDC information on the ongoing U.S. COVID vaccine trails.

As noted by the AARP - "Pfizer reports that 48 percent of its volunteers enrolled in U.S. clinical trials are between the ages of 56 and 85, but does not have information specific to those 65 and up."

For Moderna - "Moderna did not respond to AARP's request for information on the ages of its clinical trial participants, but the University of Maryland's Chen, who serves as an investigator at one site testing Moderna's vaccine candidate (out of 100 sites taking part in the clinical trial), says about 17 percent of participants enrolled at his site are 65 and older."
 
Last edited:
and Astra's trials are bogus...mostly young people. I refuse to take anything but the Moderna vaccine.....I don't care if they put me in jail. Pfizer's solution is shaky because of the storage requirement....90 below zero. What happens if the temperature is compromised ?
I'm waiting for Johnson & Johnson to announce soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top