History's rife with those thinking God rather than medical science prevents deaths

Yes . . . because all of those were also NOT FDA innoculations against a virus with a 99.8% recovery rate that also needed boosters about every four months to remain effective . . . oh and yet STILL allowed you to pass along the virus to others.

The death rate of covid stands at 2% not 0.2% both within the US and globally. That equates to almost 7M potential deaths in the US alone, which is why the FDA (after receiving preliminary safety, quality and efficacy data post Phase III clinical trial testing) issued an EUA (emergency use authorization) to get the vaccine into more people faster. Other countries regulatory bodies did the same thing.

The main difference between an EUA and full approval is that the former can be granted after two months of monitoring trial subjects post-vaccination (due to most side effects occuring right after vaccination) whereas the latter requires 6 months of monitoring.

Do you really want to get into a debate about semantics over the past 100 years about every beneficial and/or idiotic policy ever established? If so, I'm game.

Basically yes they supported the “vaccination programs” that were carefully created over years and years of research and development not some weird shit they came up with in less than a year

Had you ever conducted research on how they were able to develop vaccines in under a year, you would know they were not starting from scratch. Coronaviruses have been studied for 50 years so they already had an understanding of what they were dealing with. Due to the SARS and MERS outbreaks years ago, mRNA and adenovirus platforms were established for creating vaccines for them but development of such ceased after those viruses were contained.

It is a result of all that previous research, regulators moving more quickly than usual and the enormous funding provided by governments and private sector groups around the world (which allowed them to run multiple trials concurrently rather than consecutively) that they were able to come up with a vaccine for Covid in record time.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03626-1

Right but my grandfather is 79 he got COVID last year and after having symptoms for a week he was fine he checked his lungs everything was fine he got the vaccine and 2 months later there was damage to his lungs my other grand father (77) got damage to his lungs after the vaccine as well and he never even got COVID

My sympathies to each of your grandfathers is that is the case. No vaccine is ever 100% risk free and there's always a small percentage of people that do develop adverse affects from them. Did they actually have their lungs checked out by doctors or is it something they just feel has happened? If its the former, what damage did the doctors state to had occured?

Idk the specifics but the one that didn’t have COVID the doctors thought he had been smoking recently but he hadn’t smoked at all for the past 30+ years

Hopefully, in both their cases this is a temporary situation and their lungs will clear. Are they currently being monitored by their doctors? This is very type of information the FDA seeks to obtain regarding any new drug.

I don’t think so

I don’t really know the details for the one who had COVID as far as I know they just told him he had damage to his lungs

For those most religiously inclined, has it ever occured to you that perhaps listening to the advice of medical professionals that have studied virulent diseases for decades and seek to preserve and protect the life of everyone, that when they tell you Covid can be deadly and that you should vaccinate yourself and your family against such, might be one method in which God seeks to protect individuals lives?

Did God give man the knowledge/inspiration to create vaccines? Yes. Does man abuse such knowledge/inspiration? Yes.

And what leads you to think abuse of knowledge is or maybe currently happening?

Lies about Hydroqualhoweveritsspelled, being told to wear more than one mask at the time, government claiming to know more about my health situation than I do, the rampant fear mongering, ideas like Vaccine Passports which should make any Christian a bit nervous.

I agree that the messaging in the US has definitely been sh*t with far too many politicians politicizing both covid and the vaccine such that many people don't know who or what to believe and trust. Compared to Canada, the US' response has been a disaster.

In Canada, where they have universal health care, all political parties came together and delivered the same consistent messaging: Covid was a highly contagious virus affecting everyone differently and can be lethal to those of advanced age and/or underlying health issues. They then turned full power over to the medical experts for all later messaging.

They literally shut down all non-essential businesses across the country between March - May 2020, providing $2000 p/m checks to those who couldn't go to work. In June, as non-essential businesses reopened, mask wearing was mandated for all indoor environment with limits placed on the number of people who could be inside a store at any given time. Movie theaters, sports stadiums, concert halls, etc all remained closed, however, as no large gatherings were permitted anywhere. Restaurants all ran at 50% capacity and limited 6 people per table. At one point, even non-essential travel between different health districts was not permitted without good reason.

Those protocals remained in place for an entire year, until June 2021 when mask wearing was no longer required if vaccinated and people were once again allowed to gather and travel, due to the high percentage of vaccinated citizens. Canada currently leads the world in highest percentage of citizens vaccinated with over 80% of 12+ having received at least one dose and 72% being fully vaxxed. That country is scheduled to completely reopen by September 1st.

There's a reason why the US with only 9 times greater population than Canada has 26x the number of Covid cases and 24x the number of Covid per capita than Canada. They did things right. The US didn't.

24x the number of Covid DEATHS per capital

The mRNA shot is not a vaccine.

Pretty sure every medical scientist and regulatory body in the world would disagree with you on that.

"mRNA vaccines are a new type of vaccine. They don't use live virus to trigger an immune response. Instead, they teach your cells how to make a protein that will trigger an immune response. Once triggered, your body makes antibodies. These antibodies help you fight the infection if the real virus does enter your body in the future."

Funny how the Salk or Tetanus Vaccines never needed any of that stuff to be effective.

There been a whole lot of decades and medical advances since either of those were developed. They're also completely different types of viruses.

"Pfiizer, Moderna, Dr Anthony Fauci and Dr Soumya Swaminathan, the WHO’s chief scientist, have made it abundantly clear that the novel mRNA strand entering the cell is not intended to stop transmission but rather as a treatment. However, were we at long last permitted to hold public discourse on the profoundly viable and formerly ubiquitous treatments such as Ivermectin, [20] for one example, and were these treatments not denied us both in access and scientific data but disseminated to the global community, we might not have had need for an emergency use technology at all."

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/294852

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/07/joseph-mercola/mrna-vaccine-inventor-erased-from-history-books/

I appreciate the links you provided as it provides insight into your thinking and I get why you believe what you do. Would you still think the same had you also read this...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982215006065

or possessed any prior knowledge as to who are actually considered global experts worldwide on virology and communicable diseases over the past 20 years? Believe it or not, Fauci ranks #11 on that list out of more than 12,000 other specialists internationally in that field, while neither Malone nor Mercola even appear in top 200.

https://expertscape.com/ex/communicable+diseases%2C+emerging

Something else you should consider when evaluating the material presented to you is that the US is the ONLY first world nation globally that does not consider health care to be a human right and as such, there are many unscrupulous individuals within that industry willing to exploit the naivety of trusting individuals into supporting total BS claims that advance greater financial profits for themselves.

"Something else you should consider when evaluating the material presented to you is that the US is the ONLY first world nation globally that does not consider health care to be a human right and as such, there are many unscrupulous individuals within that industry willing to exploit the naivety of trusting individuals into supporting total BS claims that advance greater financial profits for themselves."

And this is where I understand why you stand where you stand.

You are wrong to state that the USA does not consider health care to be a human right. Someone can walk into the ER of any hospital across the national and be treated, no questions asked.

What is not a human right is health INSURANCE. You gotta pay for that. That isn't free, nor should it be.

You want to know where the true corruption comes from in the medical industry, look no further than the swamp of insurance, manufacturers, and research "institutes" willing to generate a study with the results requested by the underwriter.

My refusal of the mRNA gene therapy experiment traces to zero "BS claims that advance greater financial profits for" anybody. That is laughable. Are you so naive that you honestly think the "free shots" are generous donations from the medical industry? They're being paid handsomely, you just aren't seeing the bill because it is baked into our taxes. My beliefs are also highly unprofitable to the industry; Ivermectin and HCQ are quite inexpensive (not due to governmental subsidy) and available globally. What is more profitable to the nefarious and corrupt, an expensive new proprietary treatment, or an old standby that's long since lost it's patent protection and can be bought OTC on Amazon?

In the US it's only a human right to receive medical attention if you have medical insurance and/or can pay for it. In other countries that is not the case. Whatever health care is needed will always be provided no matter what and no one will ever walk out of a hospital with bills in the thousands that could easily bankrupt some.

In Canada and the UK, for example, people don't even pay monthly premiums for medical coverage as its covered by their taxes (equating to approximately $2,000 per year). There's no such thing as deductibles nor even co-pays if anyone ever needs to attend a doctor or ends up in hospital, let alone a bill at the end of their treatment.

While some things aren't covered by basic health coverage in those countries e.g. hearing aids, eye glasses, ambulance transport, dental care, prescription drugs, etc. (which one can purchase extended health care plans for) basically everything else is covered.

Need to visit the doctor, it's free. Need to go into the hospital to deliver a baby, it's free. Need any type of surgery whatsoever, it's free. The only out of pocket expenses most ever have to pay for is generally the meds required post their treatment.

That's the difference between what other countries perceive to be a basic human right versus that of the US.

Your concept of "free" is warped. It's not free, you still pay for it in your taxes whether you ever use it or not.

By contrast, I pay for it in my medical insurance premium whether I ever use it or not. Or I had the freedom to forego buying insurance at my own risk if I saw fit, before Obamacare foisted it upon everyone.

The sad stories of people getting bankrupted by medical bills generally gloss over the part where that person previously opted to not buy insurance or chose a catastrophe-only type of plan. That is their right, to purchase or not purchase a service as they see fit. Personally, I purchase a rather expensive policy every year because my wife and I have illnesses that require regular doctor visits and prescriptions. It's my responsibility. The delusion that "oh this could be FREE if only Uncle Sam would pick up the tab" is precisely that - a delusion. It would simply move from my bills to my taxes and my options to choose the plan go away entirely. The options for my adult stepdaughter, who is healthy, and does not need this level of coverage, goes away entirely. No thanks.

I did specifiy that "free" meant as in no direct out of pocket expenses and that it was taxes that provided the funding for whatever health care costs were needed.

Unlike in the US, there's no such thing as different tiers of coverage. Everyone is granted the exact same access and medical care they need no matter what their financial status. While those with health issues are obviously going to be more of a drain on the system than those that are healthy, it's viewed as a collective benefit to society much in the same way as public schools, libraries, hospitals, police & fire departments, roads and bridges, etc, are.

I don't think anyone has a problem with their taxes funding those even if they're going to schools one will never use, libraries they'll never visit, emergency services they may never need, nor roads and bridges they may never travel on. Why then is there such an objection to universal health care within the US by so many?

You continue to conflate "paying for" something with "access to" something.

A person can go to any county hospital anywhere in the USA, be seen, and be treated. No one is turned away from having a broken bone set because they cannot pay for it.

And yes, people take great umbrage at paying for things they do not use. I, a Texan, should not pay for roads in Maine. Nor do I wish someone in Maine to pay for mine.

I'm not conflating anything. My entire point was the fact that in every other first world country in the world, a person - rich or poor - can walk into any doctor's office or hospital and receive whatever treatment they need without EVER receiving a bill afterwards from either. Nor will they every recieve an invoice from an insurance company in the future stating costs they're personally responsible for due to deductibles or co-pays.

The entire cost of their medical attention (absent subscription meds) is covered 100% by their national UHC programs, which like schools are controlled at a provincial (Canada) or county (UK) level. Even if one lives in one province/county but requires medical attention while in another, the one that administers such just invoices the home province/county for reimbursement.

While its true anyone can and will receive medical attention in the US with or without insurance, there's always going to be a major bill at the end of it which one is ultimately responsible for paying.

Your point about living in Texas but not wanting to pay for roads in Maine doesn't really hold water, as taxes are collected at a municipal, state and nation level, which all get disbursed for different things. Your state taxes will only ever go to paying for things in Texas. It's national taxes that support things outside of your state, e.g. the military, social security, etc.