Federalist Article by Former Cadet

Status
Not open for further replies.
Some thoughts...

When did mandatory vaccination start in the military? Maybe the 60's? Prior to that vaccines were pretty limited.

Is the military healthier now? I would venture to say no. My data to support this is that the percentage of the population that die every year has not changed since that advent of vaccines. Yes, many diseases reduce in frequency or severity. Smallpox has even been eradicated (remember: this one had a 30% IFR!) But the same percentage of people die.

Is the military less healthy now? It would be hard to measure this as well.

What is the phrase? death and taxes?

I know several docs who are ex-military that talk about the fact that the corps is always sick after the flu shots are given. Say what you will. They also noticed that the guys who got an ME for the flu shot didn't get sick.

Maybe military readiness isn't truly dependent on a vaccinated force?

This is fairly volatile topic, I am certain. I have read enough posts on this forum that are substantially "I was a pincushion, so every other newbie must be one too." That is never a good reason. I am all for discipline. You can ask my children. You can ask my MIL. :oops: But vaccination is not a discipline issue. And it may not be a military readiness issue either.

Just something to chew on. (No matter how "persuasive" you may be, I will not be returning the volley on any response to this particular post. ;))
 
prairie full moon said:
When the paperwork arrived for intake, there were 2 columns for ALL required immunities, serology results and vaccination date. You only had to provide one for each of the diseases.

Things are different now than when I started working too.
Click to expand...
I can assure you that in the fleet and Navy Reserve, shots are given when your time is up and there is not a serology option.

If you think that shots started in the 60's, you are mistaken.
1636166968245.png
 
Earliest vaccine "mandate" for the Army I found was the following. George Washington supposedly mandated the Continental Army to receive the smallpox vaccine in 1777.

www.historyofvaccines.org

Timeline | History of Vaccines

The story of vaccines did not begin with the first vaccine–Edward Jenner’s use of material from cowpox pustules to provide protection against smallpox. Rather, it begins with the long history of infectious disease in humans, and in…
www.historyofvaccines.org www.historyofvaccines.org
 
trad2026 said:
Earliest vaccine "mandate" for the Army I found was the following. George Washington supposedly mandated the Continental Army to receive the smallpox vaccine in 1777.

www.historyofvaccines.org

Timeline | History of Vaccines

The story of vaccines did not begin with the first vaccine–Edward Jenner’s use of material from cowpox pustules to provide protection against smallpox. Rather, it begins with the long history of infectious disease in humans, and in…
www.historyofvaccines.org www.historyofvaccines.org
Click to expand...


Nothing "supposed" about it.

You are correct, and "mandatory vaccines" did not start in the 1960's as was stated earlier. They did indeed begin almost a full 200 years before that in 1776/1777:

www.health.mil

Gen. George Washington Ordered Smallpox Inoculations for All Troops

George Washington’s tactics included directing the first mass military inoculations
www.health.mil www.health.mil

"According to the U.S. Library of Congress's Science, Technology, and Business Division, the smallpox inoculations began Jan. 6, 1777, for all of Washington's forces who came through the then-capital of Philadelphia, and through Morristown, New Jersey, following the Battle of Princeton."

www.armyheritage.org

A Deadly Scourge: Smallpox During the Revolutionary War - Army Heritage Center Foundation

During the Revolutionary War, one of the greatest threats to the Army came not from enemy bullets, but from disease. ...
www.armyheritage.org www.armyheritage.org

"Despite these precautions, smallpox fear grew among the men of the Continental Army. Recruiting suffered, and by late June, official attitudes toward inoculation began to change. Despite precautions, the illness continued to spread. By August 1776, some troops were being inoculated in segregated camps."

OldRetSWO said:
I can assure you that in the fleet and Navy Reserve, shots are given when your time is up and there is not a serology option.

If you think that shots started in the 60's, you are mistaken.
View attachment 10452
Click to expand...

Correct and correct.
 
Maybe this has already been said, but I don’t think the natural immunity argument holds up at all for a couple of reasons.
First, it is too early in the pandemic to know if having Covid infection will provide immunity for most people. Studies and evidence are preliminary and conflicting, but there are many cases of people contracting Covid infection more than once.
Second, the Covid virus is likely more similar to influenza than something else like measles. We can test measles antibody serology to tell if a patient is immune to measles and doesn’t require immunization. We don’t do that with influenza because it is continually mutating. Even though a patient may have contracted influenza in the past, we don’t test for serology or consider past infection as a protection against future infection. We still recommend flu vaccine every year for almost everyone without regard to history of past infection.
 
One of the reasons natural immunity is ignored by our governmentis because many people got tested positive falsely I would presume.

My father tested positive in Florida twice - COPD and asthmatic. Slight symptoms. When he wanted to get the antibody test they discouraged him. When he finally took the test it was negative.

We know natural immunity is real. My sister got covid and was instructed by her Ivy league doctor not to get the vaccine as her natural immunity is sufficient- and she had cancer twice and has autoimmune diseases.
 
Walman888 said:
I don't think we are quite to this point yet.....
Click to expand...
+1

Why do Americans rush to the Nazi allusions and metaphors so quickly? Politicians, protesters, holders of petty grievances of all political stripes do it and it shows thoughtlessness at best and dangerous ignorance at worst.

Nothing illustrates it better than former Cadet MacDonald’s citing of the Nuremberg Code as a justification for refusing the vaccine. Really!?!?!? She, or whoever is advising her, should type “Josef Mengele” into her Google Machine.

At the same time, putting her particular Christian-centric worldview on the same continuum as Auschwitz shows a similar level cluelessness.
 
1636213211561.jpeg

It is here again. I asked my German friend if this was real or photoshopped....

We can call people Nazis, not really a good idea.

We can look at behavior and call it what it is and make direct observations about what it looks like.

We cannot fully understand anyone's intentions, they are held deep within us.
 
trad2026 said:
Earliest vaccine "mandate" for the Army I found was the following. George Washington supposedly mandated the Continental Army to receive the smallpox vaccine in 1777.

www.historyofvaccines.org

Timeline | History of Vaccines

The story of vaccines did not begin with the first vaccine–Edward Jenner’s use of material from cowpox pustules to provide protection against smallpox. Rather, it begins with the long history of infectious disease in humans, and in…
www.historyofvaccines.org www.historyofvaccines.org
Click to expand...
That is right! I totally forgot about that.

OldRetSWO said:
I can assure you that in the fleet and Navy Reserve, shots are given when your time is up and there is not a serology option.

If you think that shots started in the 60's, you are mistaken.
View attachment 10452
Click to expand...
I did not know about that.

This is why I asked.

But the premise still stands. Those were HIGH IFR diseases (smallpox at 30% and typhoid at 10-20%).

Maybe the Navy Reg is different than the Army Reg on serology. Maybe the application is inconsistent.

I am asking for serious consideration of the facts on the table.

(Shoot, too persuasive. Maybe this topic is just too important. :cool: )
 
cb7893 said:
+1

Why do Americans rush to the Nazi allusions and metaphors so quickly? Politicians, protesters, holders of petty grievances of all political stripes do it and it shows thoughtlessness at best and dangerous ignorance at worst.

Nothing illustrates it better than former Cadet MacDonald’s citing of the Nuremberg Code as a justification for refusing the vaccine. Really!?!?!? She, or whoever is advising her, should type “Josef Mengele” into her Google Machine.

At the same time, putting her particular Christian-centric worldview on the same continuum as Auschwitz shows a similar level cluelessness.
Click to expand...
Are you aware of what the Nuremberg Code says? If not, you should read it. It is an outcome of the Nuremberg trials but it’s not alleging the experiments.

MacDonald didn’t reference it without real research on the topic

The FDA approved vaccine is not available anywhere in the US. There are legal differences between what is FDA approved and what is EUA. It’s not a stretch to argue forcing people to take one as if it’s the other is an illegal order.

eventually the courts will decide
 
cb7893 said:
+1

Why do Americans rush to the Nazi allusions and metaphors so quickly? Politicians, protesters, holders of petty grievances of all political stripes do it and it shows thoughtlessness at best and dangerous ignorance at worst.

Nothing illustrates it better than former Cadet MacDonald’s citing of the Nuremberg Code as a justification for refusing the vaccine. Really!?!?!? She, or whoever is advising her, should type “Josef Mengele” into her Google Machine.

At the same time, putting her particular Christian-centric worldview on the same continuum as Auschwitz shows a similar level cluelessness.
Click to expand...
Are you aware of what the Nuremberg Code says? If not, you should look it up

There is no FDA approved Comarity (so?) drug available in the US only the legally distinct Emergency Use Only drug

The leadership is quibbling when they say they are the same.

it’s not a stretch to argue it’s a violation of the Nuremberg Code and thus an illegal order

The courts will decide soon enough, but don’t shoot the messenger if you aren’t familiar with the Nuremberg Code or the legal differences in the ‘vaccines’
 
Cerberi said:
Are you aware of what the Nuremberg Code says? If not, you should look it up

There is no FDA approved Comarity (so?) drug available in the US only the legally distinct Emergency Use Only drug

The leadership is quibbling when they say they are the same.
Click to expand...
If they are not biologically identical, the FDA and CDC could not approve them as there are no usage studies while the EUA version had many millions of people who have already had it with lots and lots of data.
From what I've been able to find out the difference is literally the marking on the vials and paperwork.
 
cb7893 said:
+1

Why do Americans rush to the Nazi allusions and metaphors so quickly? Politicians, protesters, holders of petty grievances of all political stripes do it and it shows thoughtlessness at best and dangerous ignorance at worst.

Nothing illustrates it better than former Cadet MacDonald’s citing of the Nuremberg Code as a justification for refusing the vaccine. Really!?!?!? She, or whoever is advising her, should type “Josef Mengele” into her Google Machine.

At the same time, putting her particular Christian-centric worldview on the same continuum as Auschwitz shows a similar level cluelessness.
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, citizens of many nations, including Israel and the UK, are citing the Nuremberg Code (regarding medical experimentation ethics) to oppose mandatory vaccines. Their arguments hinge on their interpretation of Consent and Experimentation. Lots of information can be found in your Google Machine @cb7893
 
OldRetSWO said:
If they are not biologically identical, the FDA and CDC could not approve them as there are no usage studies while the EUA version had many millions of people who have already had it with lots and lots of data.
From what I've been able to find out the difference is literally the marking on the vials and paperwork.
Click to expand...
My understanding is they are not exact. The new one was slightly altered.

Or the old one would have been approved I assume.
 
A1Janitor said:
My understanding is they are not exact. The new one was slightly altered.

Or the old one would have been approved I assume.
Click to expand...
So you're stating that the new one has not been tested AT ALL. . . No limited or widespread user trials.
I don't think so. They are really really strict on this stuff. Generally, the US takes a much more rigorous and conservative
approach than most of the rest of the world and is often criticized for just that reason.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top