ADVERTISEMENT

Vaccine mandate beginning Jan 10 at the Rock...... makes no sense

The fully boosted numbers will never come close to 62%.Why haven’t they change the definition now?

And let’s face it, people trust the governments and MSM math less and less. Like saying ICUs are at 94% because of Covid yet normally ICU capacity is normally between 85 and 95%.

There's no reason to change the definition. I had J&J one shot. I've had covid as well. It was the sniffles for me for a couple of days. I do not need a booster and I shouldn't be forced to take one to go to a Seton Hall game, go out to eat, etc.

"Fully vaccinated" is a political term, not a health term.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bac2therac
There's no reason to change the definition. I had J&J one shot. I've had covid as well. It was the sniffles for me for a couple of days. I do not need a booster and I shouldn't be forced to take one to go to a Seton Hall game, go out to eat, etc.

"Fully vaccinated" is a political term, not a health term.
Now that I would agree with…and given the transmission rates and vaccinated getting infected, makes no sense to need a vaccine card for entry
 
You didn’t answer the question…why not change the definition?

Changing the definition doesn't really make sense.

And just watch the MSM any night to get the “facts” on ICU capacity.

I don't watch any, so just wondering what you are referring to specifically when you say they are still doing it now.
 
Now that I would agree with…and given the transmission rates and vaccinated getting infected, makes no sense to need a vaccine card for entry

But that's exactly what will happen if they change the definition. Millions of people will be forced to get another shot most of them don't need in order to gain entry to workplaces, restaurants, gyms, entertainment venues, etc. It's wrong.
 
Changing the definition doesn't really make sense.



I don't watch any, so just wondering what you are referring to specifically when you say they are still doing it now.
It does make sense. If you’re telling people that they need to take the booster you should change the definition to include it.
 
It does make sense. If you’re telling people that they need to take the booster you should change the definition to include it.

If a booster meant you couldn't get or transmit the virus, I'd consider that a valid point.
As it stands, I don't believe that is correct and doesn't really make sense to change.
 
If a booster meant you couldn't get or transmit the virus, I'd consider that a valid point.
As it stands, I don't believe that is correct and doesn't really make sense to change.
The administration is telling you to get the booster. Not that it’s optional.
 
Because it is a contradiction

Not really. It’s just a nuanced issue with many moving parts and you’re trying to over complicate it because the response can’t be perfect.

Ideally we would all live with Star Trek tolls and they could zap us and tell us If we have enough antibodies or not. We’re not there yet though.

I’d prefer the right decision with a contraction over a wrong decision without one.
 
Not really. It’s just a nuanced issue with many moving parts and you’re trying to over complicate it because the response can’t be perfect.

Ideally we would all live with Star Trek tolls and they could zap us and tell us If we have enough antibodies or not. We’re not there yet though.

I’d prefer the right decision with a contraction over a wrong decision without one.
Could you translate that response in English?
 
Could you translate that response in English?

Not sure what’s confusing.

There is no reason to change the definition at this point. I don’t care if you think it’s a contradiction, and thankfully neither do the people in charge of that decision.
 
Not sure what’s confusing.

There is no reason to change the definition at this point. I don’t care if you think it’s a contradiction, and thankfully neither do the people in charge of that decision.
But it is a contradiction. The messaging has been to get vaccinated which includes the booster. But the measurement is different. Isn’t that the definition of contradiction?
 
But it is a contradiction. The messaging has been to get vaccinated which includes the booster. But the measurement is different. Isn’t that the definition of contradiction?

Again, in my opinion, no.

Even if I agreed it was, I don’t care if there is a contradiction because it wouldn’t make any sense to make a change at this point other than satisfying your worries about a contradiction. Cost/benefit - it would do more harm than good.
 
Again, in my opinion, no.

Even if I agreed it was, I don’t care if there is a contradiction because it wouldn’t make any sense to make a change at this point other than satisfying your worries about a contradiction. Cost/benefit - it would do more harm than good.
Because everything is working so well now….lol
 
So if they change the definition, would you get another shot? If so, why?
 
I give you credit for being self aware of your personal quirks.

lol.. you realize you just keep this going for no reason, right? You just can’t accept that maybe they thought about when to change the definition and they think it doesn’t make sense yet?
 
lol.. you realize you just keep this going for no reason, right? You just can’t accept that maybe they thought about when to change the definition and they think it doesn’t make sense yet?
I guess I gave you too much credit in my last post….


giphy.gif
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT