If we are mandating vaccines and masks for community health, shouldn't we also be refusing and banning boosters?

SFC Casey O'Mally — Thu, 21 Oct 2021 10:16:42 -0400

This is a question SPECIFICALLY for those who support vaccine and mask mandates. The logic behind these, I am told, is that we have to require people to mask up and get vaccinated to protect EVERYONE's health. I disagree with that view, but I understand it.

But the only way to stop a new variant from emerging and to slow and stop COVID completely is to get the whole world vaccinated. WHO has begged countries like the US to stop worrying about boosters and get those extra doses out to the rest of the world.

If the purpose of forcing me to get a jab is to protect public health, and public health is BETTER protected by giving a 1st jab to a guy or gal in Botswana than by giving you a 3rd (or some people are talking about a 4th!) Jab, then shouldn't we ba banning booster shots with the same fervor as we are trying to mandate initial shots?

I am asking this question seriously. Yes, I know it is political in today's society, but I am not looking for political talking points or partisan attacks. I legitimately would like to hear from folks who support mask and vaccine mandates what their thoughts are (and their reasoning) on boosters.

Please, keep it civil, folks.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2021 10:45 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 Oct 2021 10:45:11 -0400

Of course you are. You are simply trying to justify not wearing a mask or getting vaccinated with this BS.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2021 11:07 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 Oct 2021 11:07:59 -0400

Im not anti-vax, but im skeptical of a vaccine created to combat one of the most frequently occurring natural viruses in the world. COVID-19 has turned into a multi-billion dollar industry, now rivaling the cancer industry. We don't give away cancer screenings for free and the vaccines arent free either. Turns out, our tax money is going to the manufacturers of the vaccines. I also find it mildly convenient that a majority of the Democratic party are major shareholders in Pfizer....

Response by SPC Lyle Montgomery made Oct 21 at 2021 1:46 PM

SPC Lyle Montgomery — Thu, 21 Oct 2021 13:46:22 -0400

If a person want's to be vacinated, That's fine also if a person dosen'twant to get vacinated, that is fine also I wish we could know who is getting filthy rich from the vacine mandate. I think that information would shock many of us.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2021 2:58 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 Oct 2021 14:58:13 -0400

All politics aside, it's a matter of logistics. I'll stick to using objective and non-partisan terms. In the US we are only officially endorsing boosters for people who are immuno-compromised. As for mask mandates, I don't think vaccine availability figures into mask mandates.

Pfizer came out and said that boosters would help, and a lot of evidence does point to the vaccine resistance only lasts about nine months and then starts to taper off. It still provides protection, just not enough. Maybe it was an attempt by Pfizer to raise consumption. We're no longer in the beginning stages of COVID where a vaccine is hard to find, now we're trying to convince consumers to take the vaccine.

If it were a simple matter of putting vaccines in the places they are needed most, it would make sense to ban boosters, except for the most vulnerable, until everyone has had their initial series.

However, as anyone who has been in the Army knows, the good stuff goes to the fancy pants people while the grunts on the ground wait for the scraps. Anyone who has been in a unit where the staff officers get the new pistols, carbines, laser sights and Nods while the ground troops are using M16A2 muskets from the Cold War, is familiar with this.