Grunt

In my current calling, I see a real mix. Some don't care at all about renewing their recommend while others will kick your door in for an interview with the Bishop. Personally, I feel I must have a current recommend regardless of my temple visitation.

How can you be a good neighbor to an alcoholic? A smoker? A coffee drinker? A liar?

That's the rub, really. Lots of wolves in sheep's clothing out there.

Political donations aren't listed by the account they are taken from. They are listed by the name given at the time of donation. This certainly has me considering things.......

Great organization.

This has been a struggle for me since I joined the Church. I try to be at every service project and take my children so they can learn. I understand I'm required to serve and try to be open and look for every opportunity. I don't care if I'm the only one there and we talk with the boys about keeping it to ourselves because humble service isn't about the accolades. It becomes more and more apparent that we are frequently serving the same few people who are either perfectly capable of serving themselves or continuously willfully refuse to improve their situation. My heart is so hard towards a few of these people when their names come up every single week. I still do the service, but it isn't with the right attitude. I'm still cheerful and friendly, but inside I'm sour. I'm really not sure how to improve this and I feel horrible for feeling this way.

I honestly don't remember, but I'll try to dig it out later. I have 2, a mobil base and a handheld.

I'm well aware. If someone is going to operate they should be aware of the laws. If I'm going to have a radio for emergency use, I want one with a full spectrum of capability.

This is even more reason to own one.

For emergency preparedness, you still need to know how you're going to use it, what time of emergency you are preparing for, and who you are talking to in that emergency. Worst case scenario if communications are out and you're communicating via radio, you can assume repeaters will be out as well, since they need power to operate. Therefore, your handheld will only be useful for communicating locally to other people who have handhelds. By local, I mean 10-15 mile radius (I made that number up), depending on terrain. If you get your antenna up higher and boost your power, that radius will grow. I'm in hilly New England, so that affects my distance. I'm able to hit local repeaters 15-20 miles out with my handheld and no external antenna If you're looking to communicate with family 200 miles out, you'll want a base rig and probably multiple antenna, or an antenna tuner (I have a tuner). That's still no guarantee of communication, as you'll have to find out what frequencies you can skip to their direct location and they'll also need a radio and tuned antenna. In an emergency where you're communicating by radio, probably nobody will care who does or doesn't have a license. However, emergencies aren't the time to see how your radio works. You'll want to establish communications before hand, which would require them to have a license. I like my Yaesu handheld. I also have a BaoFeng UV-5R. I haven't tried the BaoFeng yet, but lots of people seem to think they are decent budget sets. They're really cheap. @classylady"s husband would probably know more than I do, since I still haven't set up my shack at my new house, so haven't been on the air in a few years. Maybe I'll give it a go this month. I did a lot of PSK and digital stuff before I moved. I had a crap antenna in the city and that was the best way for me to communicate DX. I managed to get that little tuned wire to bounce all around the globe.

I use both. It really depends on what you want to do with your license. Looking for DX or digital? Remote operations in your vehicle? Repeater use? If you're going to start out local on repeaters then a handheld with a mag mount car antenna and lighter plug is a good way to pass the time while commuting.

I agree. The added issue is people politicizing science.

They are the same. People prefer things that support their bias.

It's only with this vaccine. The others are mandatory unless you can get an exemption. I don't think it's as much due to the availability as much as it is the vaccine itself. They allot enough doses for my unit and when people opt out they move them back into the supply.

And that's the issue, really. Norway, as I pointed out, suggested the risk of the vaccine isn't worth the supposed benefit. It really depends on your age, condition, and potential reactions to mRNA vaccines. The groups that appear to have less concern from catching the virus also have less concern from the vaccine. The inverse is also true. Your closing statement is one of the biggest issues I have with this. Data is hard to find and information that doesn't fit the message is spun or suppressed. People refuse to be objective, as we've seen in this thread, even. Fortunately, the DOD isn't making this mandatory. I've opted to pass thus far. There are just too many variables. How often will I have to get the vaccine? How long does it last? Is it protection from all strains? Can I stop wearing the mask since I'm immune? Can I stop social distancing since I'm immune? Am I even immune?

False. The Chief Physician has stated otherwise, as I've posted. I can't combat your bias. Enjoy the rest of your evening.

Most adverse reactions start out as adverse events. As I've posted numerous times, the Chief Physician of Norway agrees.

One last time.

I've cited it three times. I've explained it to you at a fairly elementary level. I'm done.

You're missing the link between the two articles. The Chief Physician issued the statement based on the data. I'm not sure why you're having trouble connecting the dots. There have been adverse reactions, including deaths, reported after receiving the vaccine. Physicians have attributed some of those deaths to the reactions to the vaccines.

I suppose so. As someone who prefers as much information as possible when assessing risk, it seems odd to me. I would assume everyone would want all the data when making decisions.

And that's been my entire point. Odd that people appear to be writing it off.

I do understand how VAERS works, that's why I use it. Do you? All of those things appear in VAERS. They have nothing to do with COVID Vaccine, though. That's why they have report filters. That's what makes it an absurd assumption.

I get it just fine. I just think your assumption that a car accident will get entered as an adverse reaction to the vaccine is absurd. The Chief Physician at the Norwegian Medicines Agency seems to think that some of those death are attributable to the vaccine.

No, that's not true at all. False equivalency. What we'd have if there were zero deaths associated with COVID vaccine is that there were ZERO deaths attributed to COVID vaccine. I'm not sure if you make long posts because you believe they support your argument or if you do it in hopes that it will confuse people reading it. This site is merely a collection site of related deaths and issues. This report, now over a week old, directly attributes deaths to vaccination symptoms. I'm not sure why some of you (yes, including you specifically) spend so much time downplaying verifiable facts. Saying the VAERS database isn't a source is nonsense. You can attempt to prove it isn't a reliable source, but you can't do that.