Posted on 10/28/2021 3:06:09 PM PDT by null and void
As most of us in our community have heard by now, the Nevada Board of Health unanimously voted to mandate COVID-19 vaccinations for all college students throughout the state. It is required of all students at the University of Nevada, Reno to be fully vaccinated by November 1st, 2021 before students can enroll in the Spring 2022 semester. This means that some current students who have not been vaccinated yet are left with an ultimatum, either be forced into making a health decision they do not feel comfortable with or drop out of school. This decision ultimately hinders the development of our education and leaves us at risk to an uncertain future.
Forcing vaccination against a virus with an approximately 98% recovery rate is against our individual freedoms. Although this vaccine has been preached as safe, nobody is certain on the long term implications. We should not be academically penalized by being wary about our own wellbeing. Denying access to finish our education because of a personal health decision, as such, is discriminatory. With the majority of the student population being healthy 18 - 24 year olds, we are statistically not a high risk age group for major complications from the virus. If a student feels unsafe from COVID-19, they have access to the vaccine for their protection as we all know and support as their health decision.
Where is the support for our health decision?
Let's push this over the top, FReepers!
There are plenty. They are called illegal aliens. They are the ones that get free tuition
Hmmm. Good point. To bad there’s no way to directly contact “Name Less” to point that out...
3 out of 4 employee’s at Starbucks have a College Degree, Become a Plumber, you will make a lot more if you are good...
UNR produces a lot of very good engineers.
Although it is possible to have a career in engineering without a college degree (I’ve done it) it is a lot more challenging than drawing ferns in the foam on an overpriced cup of burnt coffee.
Pays better too!
“...approximately 98% recovery rate...”
The mortality rate is extremely low, the cure rate about the same - there is no need to vaccinate anyone until they reach age 65.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/COVID-deaths-9-15-21-by-age.jpg
Yup. Did you sign the petition?
If the people lead, the leaders will eventually, and very reluctantly, follow...
To add your name to the growing Nevada ping list, FReepmail me...
Forcing vaccination against a virus with an approximately 98% recovery rate is against our individual freedoms.
that's all fine and dandy if someone no acquired immunity is concerned only with their own health and they live in a cave.
However, there is a high chance an unvaccinated may infect another unvaccinated or otherwise immunocompromised person who may not have that same 98% recovery rate.
In other words, one person's 'individual rights' ends where another's start.
You would prefer that every non-compliant person be pinned down and forcibly injected?
Good to know.
You just made that up out of whole cloth
I didn’t say that at all.
“Individual rights” is a weak excuse during a pandemic of an airborne disease, when it involves “forcing” other unvaccinated or the disabled/immunocompromised (about 12% of the US pop), such as those with cancer, transplant, ms, autism, sicklecell, lupus, diabetics, arthritis, cardiac and pulmonary issues, to engage.
Vaccinated who aren’t immunocompromised and those with acquired immunity have no worries from the unvaccinated. But remaining unvaccinated and without acquired immunity requires acting responsibly according to your environment.
If nobody’s vaccinated in your town and you’ve never had an outbreak, who cares what your status is? But in a different environment, do as the Romans do. In this case, sign up for on-line classes and call it a day. If you’re a senior, take a year off. Transfer to another college. Find a solution instead of ‘forcing’ 70+% of the school population (which may include many disabled/immunocompromised folks) to do what suits you.
I’m 68, multiple co-morbitities.
No jabs.
I’m not a UNR student, nor will I ever be, although I have been an industry advisor for a few of them.
I’m hoping by next year nobody will need a jab because the virus will burn itself out.
(of course that depends on how we control intl travel/borders, and how far CCP is going to take their little bio games)
Do feel free to rub my nose in my stubbornness next Columbus Day.
As it stands now, even the CDC admits, not quite the right word, even the CDC's own VAERS data shows, more people have died of the mRNA COVID vax than of all other vaccines since 1990 added together.
Just out of curiosity, how was I supposed to interpret your statement: "In other words, one person's 'individual rights' ends where another's start." other than as a another persons rights to feel safe trump my rights to control what is put into my body?
I'll spot you a couple no right to not buy medical insurance points.
Though I really have trouble imagining you being in favor of Obama care...
I believe you’re relying on old science
and missing a very important development - locking the spike before it can shape-shift :
” This 2P mutation enabled McLellan and Ward to solve the MERS prefusion spike structure in 2017 (Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1707304114). Graham began working with Moderna to make an mRNA vaccine for MERS using the 2P mutation that same year
https://cen.acs.org/pharmaceuticals/vaccines/tiny-tweak-behind-COVID-19/98/i38
as to deaths. Reported and confirmed are two different animals. “VAERS reports alone generally cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness.” blah blah blah
Let’s hop over to the UK:
“In contrast, the different statistical agencies have reported that to August 2021 (June 2021 in Northern Ireland) there were 4 deaths in England, 0 deaths in Wales, 4 deaths in Scotland and 1 in Northern Ireland. Of these, 4 in Scotland and 1 in Northern Ireland had the vaccine as the underlying cause of death. This meant that there were 9 deaths in the UK that involved the vaccine (meaning the vaccine contributed to the death), of which 5 had the vaccine as the underlying cause (meaning the vaccine initiated the chain of events directly leading to the death). For these deaths, there was evidence to suggest that the vaccine played a part in the chain of events that led to the death.”
https://finchannel.com/how-many-people-have-died-as-a-result-of-a-covid-19-vaccine/
now heres the rub - if there were 9 acknowledged deaths in the UK directly attributed to the vaccine after 9 months of distribution, why would the US number be so out of wack? Doesn’t that violate the basic laws of probability? Maybe because VAERS doesn’t match with the real world? AFAIK, the CDC has confirmed about half a dozen deaths that can be related to vaccines. Even with a 3-month coroner backlog at times, there can’t be that many unconfirmed left to count into the ‘confirmed’ column (and suspected would go to a coroner for final say).
Or you can trust Bill Gates, who is on record as wanting to eliminate 85-90% of the world's population, and has never released a product that didn't require a service pack or two to do work as promised.
Or you can trust Fauci who funded Wuhan labs research into making the bat derived corona virus more contagious and more lethal.
Or you can trust the companies who refused to release the mRNA vaccinations unless they were fully indemnified against any legal action. And who also did no animal testing on the latest versions.
Bet your life, be the beagle!
VAERs doesn’t match the real world, it UNDERREPORTS events. This has been admitted by the CDC: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X20312548?via%3Dihub
And in these studies by Harvard: https://www.talkingaboutthescience.com/harvard-studies-on-vaers/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.