It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Remains of WWII-era plane downed by Soviet bombers found by divers
The plane was en route from Tallinn to Helsinki when it was downed by Soviet bombers on June 14,...
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
I think vaccines absolutely need to be mandatory or else, everyone's life is put at risk.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Generally speaking, In a democratic world while I agree with the medical experts about being up to date with your vaccines I also agree that you should not be forced either.
Funnily enough, the irony of it is that if there are serious discussions about mandatory vaccination people are more likely to rebel and not take them.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
"Funnily enough, the irony of it is that if there are serious discussions about mandatory vaccination people are more likely to rebel and not take them."
Not really ironic, when you bring a topic to the forefront more people are going to be vocal about it.
I would highly expect more rebellion on rights to free speech if government started seriously discussing pulling it off thd table.
There are those who are just against the vaccines period and then those who just respect freedom.
I guess to your point there may be a few that would not get vaccine just off principle to be against authority.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
See, theinfectedmaster, this kind of simplistic reasoning can be used to justify any position in the Universe. If you want to get to somewhat solid positions, you should dig quite a bit deeper than that.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
You misunderstood my point. It's essential to note that the effectiveness and ethics of vaccine mandates are complex issues with multiple facets and can vary based on cultural, societal, and individual factors. It's not as simple as binary.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Not everyone can take vaccines. I have a friend who has a brain condition that makes him have seizures if given certain types of vaccines. He had a serious seizure when made to get one in school that resulted in motor control issues for him. You would force people to engage in a behavior that will cause harm to some. They would take away their choice in the matter.
To learn more about how what you support will harm some people please read:
COVID-19 Vaccination and Neurological Manifestations: A Review of Case Reports and Case Series
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
So to paraphrase you, its OK to force someone with a compromised immune system to take a vaccine that could kill or severally impair their cognitive ability, because once those immune deficient people die off, not as many people will die off in the future. Tell me how that differs from what you said in basic intent or application. For someone who says they support 'choice', 'bodily autonomy', and 'letting medical decisions be decided between a doctor and the individual' your statement sure does come across as hypocritical on the vaccine issue.
Just remember that the odds that someone will die as a result of you not getting a COVID shot are small, the odds that an innocent human life will die from an abortion are about 100 percent. Yet you reserve you 'bodily autonomy' argument for the case that you know results in the death of a child. A lot of dissonance there.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
In general, you engage not in a logical, but in tribal thinking. To you the main gauge of validity of an opinion is what groups its promotion benefits. If there was a religious group that promoted the idea that 2+2=4, therefore all Asian people must die, you would probably say, "I am sad to hear that you agree that 2+2=4. You are giving firepower to the murderous group".
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
You seem to be under the delusion that everyone knows that they have a weakened immune system to the vaccine. How would someone who does not know they will have seizure if they have the vaccine, get an exception? The answer is they do not. So, we are back to where we started. You will undoubtedly kill some people by imposing your mandate. And you are comfortable with that. You are comfortable with taking away their bodily autonomy and sentencing them to death.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Please stop putting words into my mouth. I will clarify my argument later even though I think it was pretty explicit myself.
Fyi, if people don't respond immediately it's either because they are busy, agree or just don't care.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
"Of all the preventative treatments ever developed through science- and evidence-based medicine, vaccines have arguably saved more lives, prevented more illness and disability, and in general alleviated more suffering than any single class of treatments or preventative measures throughout history." David Gorski
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/antivaccine-activists-attack-vaccine-mandates/
"All 50 states currently require schoolchildren to be immunized for polio, MMR (measles, mumps and rubella), Tdap (tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis), and varicella." NPR
""5. Since 1979, Mississippi has banned religious and personal belief exemptions to school vaccine mandates, and the state has the highest rate of childhood vaccinations in the U.S." NPR
https://www.npr.org/2021/11/19/1056568867/should-schools-mandate-covid-vaccine-for-children"
https://skepchick.org/2021/09/a-brief-history-of-vaccine-mandates-and-how-to-do-it-right/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/vaccine-mandates-are-lawful-effective-and-based-on-rock-solid-science/
"I’ve long said that, if you scratch an “anti-mandate” activist, nine times out of ten (at least!) you’ll find an antivaxxer." David Gorski
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/what-does-antivaccine-really-mean-since-the-pandemic-hit/
https://bigthink.com/health/future-vaccine-technology/
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
I don't disagree that vaccines, in general, are good things that reduce overall deaths. You seem to have just ignored some of the arguments that others have presented so allow me to summarize some of the arguments for you:
1) It's inconsistent. If your argument is 'if it saves lives, we must force it on people', well then we know that drunk driving kills people so we should outlaw alcohol. Alcohol causes a lot of deaths each year - drunk driving, damaged organs, violence, etc. If you were consistent you would be arguing we should get rid of alcohol. If you don't like the alcohol illustration, know that if we reduced the speed limit to 10 miles an hour, the number of highway deaths would drop dramatically. You could enforce this by having every vehicle programmed so it can only go 10 miles an hour maximum. Yet, you aren't suggesting this. It is evident that you are not truly interested in 'saving all lives' by forcing people to obey your mandates. You seem to think not getting a vaccine is much more of a 'sin' than killing someone because you got behind the wheel of a car drunk. You would prohibit choice in the vaccine, but allow it for drinking. Your autocratic policies seem to be governed by your own whims. So to summarize this point: vaping, and not getting a vaccine - bad and we must prevent people from doing them, but killing people on the road by drunk driving and driving too fast is a personal choice so we won't take away people's choice.
2) It's hypocritical. When people call for forced vaccine mandates they are arguing against a) choice, b) bodily autonomy, and c) allowing these decisions to be made by the individual and their doctor. Those 3 arguments are often made by the same people pushing vaccine mandates, for justifying the killing of an innocent unborn baby. This is incredibly hypocritical. The odds that someone will die as a result of someone not getting a vaccine are very small, however, the likelihood that an innocent human life dies from abortion is about 100 percent. Its more than just inconsistent, it is blatantly hypocritical because it devalues the humanity of pre-born children, treating them as less than human. So to summarize your point of view - if you are intentionally killing an innocent baby - then choice and bodily autonomy matter, if you aren't intentionally trying to kill anyone, knowing that your decision will likely not harm anyone, you must be denied bodily autonomy and choice. That's just a hypocritical and illogical stance.
3) Its dictatorial. When people want to force people, some of whom will have immune deficiencies, to get a vaccine, knowing that statistically a certain percentage of people will either die or suffer serious health consequences from taking the vaccine they have decided other's fate for them. People who think that they know better how someone else should live her life than she does, are not just vain, or self-righteous, but are just like comic book villains. Marvel villain, Thanos, sought the infinity gauntlet, which when he snapped his fingers with it on, killed half the population, ensuring a better future for the other half, in his mind. He believed that killing all those people was the logical conclusion. They had no choice in his decision, but had to suffer the consequences of it. In case you haven't figured it out, you are like Thanos. No, I'm not saying you are purple. I'm saying that you are willing to impose your will on others, without their consent, even though you know some will die because of your actions. You, like Thanos, think you are the hero. But you are mistaken. Avengers Assemble!
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
The issue is they have a scewed view of rights. First off they believe in forced provision of anything they deem a right not understanding that can turn them into slaves. Second they believe they can be changed or violated at as long as they see an overall group benefit.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
"Argument Topic: I want to have my cake and eat it too. To be free and everyone to get their vaccines"
Nope I just want people to be free, said nothing everyone needing to get a vaccine. If an effective vaccine is available anyone who wants it can get it and they should have no issues.
If anyone wants have cake and eat it to it is you. You want freedom and rights but are ok with eliminating them if you see a perceived benefit.
I.e. You may believe in bodily autonomy as a right, but then want to be able to remove it.
You want a right to a vaccine even though that would infringe on other rights.
Lets say their are 1000 people and only 100 vaccines. Youve made a free for all because its everyones right to get and therefore they can attack/defend it.
"Therefore, we have a choice we let the virus rip and watch as poor people die 4.5x"
Im trying to figure out whether you think the virus targets poor people or maybe the rich paid the virus off.
One with a critical mind wonders what are living conditions, overcrowding, could the rich be more likely to isolate themselves?
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
It is the same with freedom. Freedom is painful, difficult, uncomfortable, and some people will abuse it - but in the long run it produces great, powerful and flexible societies. Often authoritarian measures such as extreme lockdowns or vaccine mandates can improve some short-term metrics, but getting in the habit of implementing those measures whenever something unpleasant happens leads down the North-Korean road. And no, it is impossible to overall move towards freedom, but make an exception once or twice when it is "really" needed: just like with lying, doing it once makes it easier to justify doing it next time, after which it is even easier to justify it again...
Principles matter. Systems matter. If you want to run a sub-3 hour marathon, you have to stick to your training program religiously. It does not matter if there is a thunderstorm and tsunami outside: you go out there and work out. Skip one session - 90% chance it is going to go downhill from there. Skip three - and you might as well forget about your goal and come back to your easy and comfortable, but unfulfilling life.
If you think that freedom is just some currency that can be traded off for statistical indicators whenever convenient, you will not have freedom. You will have a temporary allowance that will be taken away eventually. And I am not even talking about purely political freedom on the societal scale... No, I am talking about your personal freedom. You make a compromise with yourself, you take an easy path and involve an authority and have it tackle everything for you in exchange for your ability to choose how to live your life - you are screwed. Look at any couple in which one of the partners have given up their autonomy and started relying on the other one in everything... These are relationships from hell.
You, @Dreamer, have very little idea just how hard you are crippling yourself with your reliance on others to tell you what the truth is, to protect you from virus carriers around you. I remember in a different thread you mentioned something like this: "I will never have a good career with a decent income; I have accepted that". You just committed a suicide, buddy. Just threw your life out like that. It is very sad and painful to see.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
You must also believe that the FDA recommended a PCR-test cycle-threshold of 40 because they didn't know that anything over 35 would make the test meaningless.
At this time, data are not available to make a determination about how long the vaccine will provide protection, nor is there evidence that the vaccine prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from person to person.
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-takes-key-action-fight-against-covid-19-issuing-emergency-use-authorization-first-covid-19
10. This device is a qualitative test and does not provide information on the viral load present in the specimen.
11. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for monitoring treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
12. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for the screening of blood or blood products for the presence of SARS-CoV-2.
13. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.
14. Cross-reactivity with respiratory tract organisms other than those listed in the Analytical Specificity Study may lead to erroneous results.
https://www.fda.gov/media/139832/download"
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
and @everyone else in this thread
The question asks "should vaccines be mandatory?" The OP didn't state what, which, why, how, etc, and hence for my general response:
Now, if the question was "should covid vaccines me mandatory?" then we have a debate that is much more sensible to explore. Quite, frankly, the question "should vaccines be mandatory" is akin to asking "should medication be mandatory?"
I really cannot make that any more simpler.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
I cannot pull you out of this kind of thinking. Maybe 5-10-15-20 years later, when you see where it has led you in your life, you will recall this conversation.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-takes-key-action-fight-against-covid-19-issuing-emergency-use-authorization-first-covid-19
10. This device is a qualitative test and does not provide information on the viral load present in the specimen.
11. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for monitoring treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
12. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for the screening of blood or blood products for the presence of SARS-CoV-2.
13. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.
14. Cross-reactivity with respiratory tract organisms other than those listed in the Analytical Specificity Study may lead to erroneous results.
https://www.fda.gov/media/139832/download"
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Your thinking is so deeply corrupt and self-defeating, it is almost painful to read. I have no idea how you are going to connect with any person in this world on a deep level, when your thinking is so ridden with stereotypes, templates and placeholders. And more so, how you are going to get anywhere in this life yourself when, wherever you look, you see obstacles that only a nanny can help you overcome.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
11. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for monitoring treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
12. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for the screening of blood or blood products for the presence of SARS-CoV-2.
13. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.
14. Cross-reactivity with respiratory tract organisms other than those listed in the Analytical Specificity Study may lead to erroneous results.
https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download
“PCR-based testing produces enough false positive results to make positive results highly unreliable over a broad range of real-world scenarios.” — Andrew N. Cohen, Ph.D.1*, Bruce Kessel, M.D.2, Michael G. Milgroom, Ph.D.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.26.20080911v3.full.pdf
“…all or a substantial part of these positives could be due to what’s called false positives tests.” — Michael Yeadon: former Vice President and Chief Science Officer for Pfizer
“…false positive results will occur regularly, despite high specificity, causing unnecessary community isolation and contact tracing, and nosocomial infection if inpatients with false positive tests are cohorted with infectious patients.” — The European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases
https://www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.com/article/S1198-743X(20)30614-5/fulltext
“…you can find almost anything in anybody…it doesn’t tell you that you’re sick and it doesn’t tell you the thing you ended up with really was going to hurt you…” — Dr. Kary Mullis, PhD (Nobel Peace Prize Winner inventor of the PCR test)
https://maskoffmn.org/#kary
“I’m skeptical that a PCR test is ever true. It’s a great scientific research tool. It’s a horrible tool for clinical medicine.” — Dr. David Rasnick, biochemist and protease developer
“…up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus.” — The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
“…detection of viral RNA by qRT-PCR does not necessarily equate to infectiousness, and viral culture from PCR positive upper respiratory tract samples has been rarely positive beyond nine days of illness.” — Muge Cevik, clinical lecturer1 2, Krutika Kuppalli, assistant professor3, Jason Kindrachuk, assistant professor of virology4, Malik Peiris, professor of virology5Francis Drobniewsk – Professor of Global Health and TB, Imperial
“A positive RT-qPCR result may not necessarily mean the person is still infectious or that he or she still has any meaningful disease.” — Michael R Tom, Michael J Mina
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/71/16/2252/5841456
“PCR does not distinguish between infectious virus and non-infectious nucleic acid” — Barry Atkinson: National Collection of Pathogenic Viruses (NCPV) Eskild Petersen: infectious disease specialist
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30868-0/fulltext
“Detection of viral RNA does not necessarily mean that a person is infectious and able to transmit the virus to another person” — The World Health Organization
“Caution needs to be applied to the results as it often does not detect infectious virus. PCR results may lead to restrictions for large groups of people who do not present an infection risk.” — The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/infectious-positive-pcr-test-result-covid-19
Why COVID-19 Testing Is a Tragic Waste
“The challenge is the false positive rate is very high, so only seven percent of tests will be successful in identifying those that actually have the the virus. So the truth is, we can’t just rely on that…” — Dominic Raab – First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs
https://www.globalresearch.ca/why-covid-19-testing-tragic-waste/5729700
“positive results […] do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite.” — FDA
https://www.fda.gov/media/136151/download
“A positive RT-qPCR result may not necessarily mean the person is still infectious or that he or she still has any meaningful disease.” — Michael R Tom, Michael J Mina
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/71/16/2252/5841456
“…no single gold standard assay exists. The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be somewhere between 0·8% and 4·0%.” — Dr. Elena Surkova; Vladyslav Nikolayevskyy – Public Health Englamd; Francis Drobniewsk – Professor of Global Health and TB, Imperial College
“…detection of viral RNA by qRT-PCR does not necessarily equate to infectiousness, and viral culture from PCR positive upper respiratory tract samples has been rarely positive beyond nine days of illness.” — Muge Cevik, clinical lecturer1 2, Krutika Kuppalli, assistant professor3, Jason Kindrachuk, assistant professor of virology4, Malik Peiris, professor of virology5Francis Drobniewsk – Professor of Global Health and TB, Imperial College.
Also, you're not responding to the question of why you took an experimental injection that does not confer immunity. Where did you learn that the experimental injection prevents transmission? What did you hear that contradicts the manufacturer's admission that they have no evidence that their experimental injection prevents transmission?
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
11. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for monitoring treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
12. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for the screening of blood or blood products for the presence of SARS-CoV-2.
13. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.
14. Cross-reactivity with respiratory tract organisms other than those listed in the Analytical Specificity Study may lead to erroneous results.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
11. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for monitoring treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
12. The performance of this device has not been evaluated for the screening of blood or blood products for the presence of SARS-CoV-2.
13. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.
14. Cross-reactivity with respiratory tract organisms other than those listed in the Analytical Specificity Study may lead to erroneous results.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Ok, it seems like the OP is a coward and would rather just make sweeping statments and not answer specific questions. So, let me present the same questions to you:
"What vaccines should be mandatory?"
- All vaccines?
- Some vaccines
- Untested vaccines?
- Vaccines currently in trial?
- Anything other to be more specific?
Oh, And what grounds? What probabl cause, etc?  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
The dumbfounded pseudo-christians don't need vaccines, or any healthcare for that matter, because all of these primitive thinking Christians have to do is just pray that they will not get Covid19 or any other malady that will endanger their life, as shown herewith:
JESUS STATED: “And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.” (Matthew 21:22) Key word: “believing,” which triggers the prayer in a direct and absolute manner in receiving your prayer request of healing! The unfortunate position is that if a pseudo-christian isn't healed from their sickness after their prayer, then they didn't truly BELIEVE enough in Jesus!. LOL!
In return, subjectively the Atheist should use the 21st century science of any vaccine to cover them to live long enough in possibly seeing ALL RELIGIONS are not existing anymore in our lifetime remaining! BUT, there are too many inept thinking minds that have swallowed the primitive thinking Bronze and Iron Age religions.
.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
So, why did the FDA recommend a cycle-threshold of 40? That's a rhetorical question; they obviously wanted to create the illusion of a pandemic. Also, why didn't Tony bother to speak up concerning what can only be described as a deliberate and gross misapplication of a test? We'll never know because, thanks to a complicit media, Mr. Fauci is not required to publicly answer even one challenge to his dire predictions which are based on 90% false positive returns from a PCR test that was knowingly set too high.
Unfortunately, unless some talking head comes on tv and tells people it's okay to apply their own critical thinking skills to those factual numbers, they won't do it. They think they need permission to make the obvious inference and then respond to the falsehood they've been fed. And the real kicker is that the only ones they'll accept permission from are the same ones who neglected to inform them of the reason for all the false positives in the first place.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
- All vaccines?
- Some vaccines
- Untested vaccines?
- Vaccines currently in trial?
- Anything other to be more specific?
Oh, And what grounds? What probabl cause, etc? "  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra