• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Covid-19 miscellany

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,031
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Vaccine mandates obsolete;

It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here. mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death). As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. The little data we have suggest the opposite. One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection.

WSJ
There is an issue of medical costs. Unvacinated idiots cost too much.
I heard $200K number on average if they get to hospital.

But I am fine with them dying at home isolated fro the rest of population.
Anecdotally, our company in Fall, had paid over $1 million for Covid related hospital bills. We aren't a tiny company, but that $1 million was very noticeable in the profit column.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,718
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Vaccine mandates obsolete;

It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here. mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death). As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. The little data we have suggest the opposite. One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection.

WSJ

The WSJ piece is complete bullshit and is anti-vax territory,


Dr. Montagnier was a winner of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for discovering the human immunodeficiency virus.

Obviously an anti vaxxer. :rotfl:

I haven't laughed this hard since my granny got her tits caught in the wringer :rotfl:
 

repoman

Contributor
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
8,304
Location
Seattle, WA
Basic Beliefs
Science Based Atheism
By March or April there WILL BE omicron vaccines that will be effective again. So at that point the WSJ article will be outdated.

This is just a rough patch...
 

TomC

Celestial Highness
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
4,656
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
The WSJ piece is complete bullshit and is anti-vax territory, a justification for ending most mandatory vaccinations. Reducing hospitalizations is and has always been critical.
It's that most effective of lies, the partial truth.
The vaccine is not a magic bullet, making the vaccinated invulnerably immune. Our best method of fighting the virus, and all the attendant problems, is herd immunity. That requires a high level of vaccination across the population.

Writing that article, without mentioning that truth, is a lie.
Tom
 

repoman

Contributor
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
8,304
Location
Seattle, WA
Basic Beliefs
Science Based Atheism
Only comparing people who got the vaccine to people who got covid before delta and seeing how often that they each are getting omicron is fair.

If even the previously infected are getting omicron at the same rate as only vaxxed and non infected, then that is not a shade on the vaccine as a platonic ideal.

But if the previously infected are still more protected vs omicron then would that be a point of study to find a way to improve vaccines, which everyone on this board should want to happen.

We already have lots of vaccines and hopefully each can be studied regarding this.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,031
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Vaccine mandates obsolete;

It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here. mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death). As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. The little data we have suggest the opposite. One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection.

WSJ

The WSJ piece is complete bullshit and is anti-vax territory,


Dr. Montagnier was a winner of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for discovering the human immunodeficiency virus.

Obviously an anti vaxxer. :rotfl:
It is anti-vax territory. There is a movement that is growing to get rid of the other mandates, and this is the exact reason they'd try to use.
I haven't laughed this hard since my granny got her tits caught in the wringer :rotfl:
You often watch your grandmother topless?

Second thought, nevermind.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,785
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Vaccine mandates obsolete;

It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here. mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death). As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. The little data we have suggest the opposite. One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection.

WSJ
Well if a large body of published research is demonstrating that there is a problem, th...

...wait, what?

One study? One preprint study?

Fuck off.

Just because the WSJ employs scientifically illiterate fools, there's no need for the rest of us to give their ramblings credence.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
31,467
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Vaccine mandates obsolete;

It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here. mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death). As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. The little data we have suggest the opposite. One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection.

WSJ
You do realize delta is still around, don't you?
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
I had a phone call with someone who was my best friend in elamentary and jr high school. We talk from time to time and did some camping about 20 years ago. He now lives in Arizona and believes some crazy shit.

He refuses to get vaccinated and doesn't wear masks inside public places unless it's required.

We try to avoid politics but we were talking about my imminent retirement and that while I'm not big in travel, my wife wants to go to Europe after the pandemic is under control.

He said the pandemic will never be under control because the Federal Government doesn't want to end the pandemic. I couldn't stand it. I told him that the pandemic will never go away so long as idiot republicans won't get vaccinated and won't wear masks in public indoor places.

It's amazing someone would think how he does. And he's an RN!
It's embarrassing that so many people in my profession have been vaccine deniers. I've mentioned my nurse friend who almost died from COVID, as well as losing the man that was to marry this past November, to COVID. Neither of them were vaccinated. They were both obese and have/had diabetes and hypertension and are over 70. I've tried to give her some emotional support and I sent her a few little gifts to help with grieving. I heard from her yesterday and she still suffers from long haul symptoms after more than 5 months. But, sadly, I'm pretty sure that she still hasn't been vaccinated. A number of nurses who work at our local hospital were picketing last year when they were told they were required to be vaccinated. It's crazy.

And the link I'm going to add isn't very optimistic.

https://apnews.com/article/coronavi...th-pandemics-dc99bc9f769dd6d7cb669e3d185c6261

Get ready to learn more Greek letters. Scientists warn that omicron’s whirlwind advance practically ensures it won’t be the last version of the coronavirus to worry the world.

Every infection provides a chance for the virus to mutate, and omicron has an edge over its predecessors: It spreads way faster despite emerging on a planet with a stronger patchwork of immunity from vaccines and prior illness.

That means more people in whom the virus can further evolve. Experts don’t know what the next variants will look like or how they might shape the pandemic, but they say there’s no guarantee the sequels of omicron will cause milder illness or that existing vaccines will work against them.

So, just think what it will be like if a highly contagious variant emerges that is more deadly than Omicron, but the current vaccines are even less effective than they have been for most of the previous variants. Actually, I don't really want to think about that, but it is a possibility. :eek:

It is not 'obvious'. The advice on masking has changed throughout the pandemic, from 'security theatre' to 'a good idea' to 'absolutely essential' back to 'security theatre' (for cloth masks).

I suppose you are the arbiter of what statements are 'obvious' and what questions around them are 'ridiculous'.

No. Originally it was not understood that it was contagious before symptoms, thus the recommendation to save masks for those with symptoms. Note the underlying issue--there weren't enough masks to go around, using them on the sick and the medical people was the best use of the limited supply.

By now we have addressed the supply issue, masks have continually been recommended since then. Cloth masks were a workaround for a lack of supply of the proper ones, they were never recommended.

You're trying to reduce a complex thing to a sound bite and thus you think the message has changed. It never has, it's just been more complex than a yes/no. And note that the government mandates generally have been designed very poorly.
agreed.
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
I didn't question the study. I haven't read it properly to critique it. I asked for the source of evidence.

Really, this level of hostility to a polite question isn't useful.
This has been a standard distortion by the death cultists--asking for evidence to a standard that clearly can't exist. It's been explained over and over.
Twice wrong in two minutes.

I am not a 'death cultist', nor did I ask for evidence to a standard that cannot exist. I asked for evidence, and I suggested the kind of evidence that could justify the conclusion quoted.

Your instant hostility to a polite question is noted.
a question may be "polite" in form, but crass and offensive in content and subtext.
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist

Four inmates at an Arkansas jail have filed a lawsuit against the facility and its doctor after they said they were unknowingly prescribed ivermectin to treat Covid-19 as a form of “medical experimentation” despite US health officials warning that the anti-parasitic drug should not be used for that purpose.

The Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of the men last week against Washington county jail, the Washington county sheriff, Tim Helder, and jail physician Dr Robert Karas. Last August, Helder revealed that the drug had been prescribed to patients with Covid-19.

“The lawsuit charges the defendants for administering ivermectin to incarcerated individuals without prior informed consent as to the nature, contents, or potential side effects of the drug,” the ACLU said in a statement last week.
Yikes--now, there's a precursor of the Nazis for you.
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
78% of Democratic voters support the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate plan
75% of likely Democratic voters have a favorable opinion of Dr. Fauci
59% of Democratic voters would favor a government policy requiring that citizens remain confined to their homes at all times, except for emergencies, if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine
55% of Democratic voters would support a proposal for federal or state governments to fine Americans who choose not to get a COVID-19 vaccine
48% of Democratic voters think federal and state governments should be able to fine or imprison individuals who publicly question the efficacy of the existing COVID-19 vaccines on social media, television, radio, or in online or digital publications
47% of Democrats favor governments using digital devices to track unvaccinated people to ensure that they are quarantined or socially distancing from others
45% of Democrats would favor governments requiring citizens to temporarily live in designated facilities or locations if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine
29% of Democratic voters would support temporarily removing parents’ custody of their children if parents refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccine

Rasmussen

Remember, if you oppose that, it is because you are a "Fascist".
oppose what, exactly? To what does your "that" refer?
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
So you support plague rats running around killing others and creating new and quite possibly more deadly variants.
"Running around killing others".

Maybe we can put the unvaccinated together in one place where they can't hurt the god-fearing. Maybe concentrate them together for logistical ease. I think we should withhold their property too because they are creating a burden on the righteous.
As in killing, fucking up supply chains, slowing down the economy, stuffing ERs, making life hell for Doctors, Nurses....

I mean, it was great people got to spend T-Day and Xmas 2020 together in the states, but was that really worth 250,000 people dying?
Unvaccinated people are not killing others. But I understand the rhetoric. If you want to demonise them and persecute them, it is helpful to accuse them of crimes.
Unvaccinated people are infecting others at a greater rate than vaccinated people.
Unvaccinated people (not all, but lots) are getting sick and clogging up hospitals, and putting other sick people's treatments in jeopardy.
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
Can you explain to me why vaccine mandates for COVID 19 are bad? Please compare and contrast with mandated vaccines that all children receive routinely, and must document that they have received before attending day care, preschool, K-12 school or universities? Other vaccines mandated by the armed forces for all its military personnel? Routine vaccines such as the usual childhood vaccines, influenza, hepatitis A and B, and annual influenza vaccines mandated for health care workers and day care workers and nursing home personnel?
Tell me, has the US government forced a vaccine on its entire adult population before?
fluoridation is not quite vaccination. . . . but it does involve forcing the ingestion a mineral on the general populace, adults and children alike, for health reasons.
Lots of metaphorical, "Communist plot" politely swooning pearl clutching when that was brought in.
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
Explain to me why COVID19 vaccination is so horrifically intrusive?
We've been through this a dozen times. If you cannot see how forcing a medical procedure on unconsenting adults is not 'horrifically intrusive', I cannot change your mind. You are simply somebody who is willing to use the State to impose her authoritarian will on others.
so you disavow George Washington as an authoritarian.
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
And a bunch of other health and safety measures that help ensure the health and safety of all, including fuck witted libertarians who just care about freedom—theirs, not someone else’s.
Jacobson vs. Massachusetts, about the state coercing vaccination against smallpox, the decision said that the state is allowed to defend itself. And while the forced vaccination is a burden, one must suffer some burdens in order to live in a society. Individual liberty is not absolute.
decided at the Supreme Court, re. states' rights to force vaccination--but the Supreme court is a branch of the US federal govt.
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
Really? Omicron is as harmless as the common cold?{snip}

For the vast majority of people that contract it, yes. For some people it is more serious but there's not much can be done about that.

As for 'leaving alone those who choose not to be vaccinated:' I would love to leave them alone. Let them stay home, out of stores and restaurants and movie theaters and other businesses. Hell, let's put them all in Idaho. I understand anything goes in Idaho.

Nah, you stay home if you are worried about it. Besides, you are vaccinated right? You wear a mask right? So you're good.

Also, be aware that vaccinated people do contract the virus and can spread it. It is obvious to me that you bang on about the unvaccinated because you have an authoritarian streak.

mRNA vaccines are not nearly as 'new' as you seem to think they are. And they are not 'experimental.'

Has the FDA approved this covid vaccine yet or is it still being used under emergency rules? I can't remember.
Problem is, as has been explained that so many people get it--thank you, anti-maskers, that the low rate of serious illness and death (higher than that of a common cold, tho,), still means lots of people are going to hospital and even dying.
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
That isn't demonization, that is logistical truth. You really need to learn the difference between the two.
It is demonisation. Fat people use an extraordinary amount of healthcare resources, but nobody is forcing fat people to do something against their will. Also, it's some people with COVID that are using resources, not unvaccinated people. There are unvaccinated people who will never get COVID.

But, I can see why universal health care in the US will never be a reality. The absolute malice of some people--"we should dance on the graves of the unvaccinated"--is a sure sign there is no public will to help ideological enemies.
Are fat people in the US so clogging up the hospitals with their ailments that unfat people are having difficulty getting timely treatment? I haven't heard of this phenomenon. Please provide your source for this subtexual innuendo?
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
That isn't demonization, that is logistical truth. You really need to learn the difference between the two.
It is demonisation. Fat people use an extraordinary amount of healthcare resources, but nobody is forcing fat people to do something against their will. Also, it's some people with COVID that are using resources, not unvaccinated people. There are unvaccinated people who will never get COVID.

But, I can see why universal health care in the US will never be a reality. The absolute malice of some people--"we should dance on the graves of the unvaccinated"--is a sure sign there is no public will to help ideological enemies.
Are fat people in the US so clogging up the hospitals with their ailments that unfat people are having difficulty getting timely treatment? I haven't heard of this phenomenon. Please provide your source for this subtexual innuendo?
You haven't heard of the extraordinary burden that obesity is on health care systems, all over the world?
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
Really? Omicron is as harmless as the common cold?{snip}

For the vast majority of people that contract it, yes. For some people it is more serious but there's not much can be done about that.

As for 'leaving alone those who choose not to be vaccinated:' I would love to leave them alone. Let them stay home, out of stores and restaurants and movie theaters and other businesses. Hell, let's put them all in Idaho. I understand anything goes in Idaho.

Nah, you stay home if you are worried about it. Besides, you are vaccinated right? You wear a mask right? So you're good.

Also, be aware that vaccinated people do contract the virus and can spread it. It is obvious to me that you bang on about the unvaccinated because you have an authoritarian streak.

mRNA vaccines are not nearly as 'new' as you seem to think they are. And they are not 'experimental.'

Has the FDA approved this covid vaccine yet or is it still being used under emergency rules? I can't remember.
post Covid brain fog?
Vaccine mandates obsolete;

It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here. mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death). As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. The little data we have suggest the opposite. One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection.

WSJ

The WSJ piece is complete bullshit and is anti-vax territory,


Dr. Montagnier was a winner of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for discovering the human immunodeficiency virus.

Obviously an anti vaxxer. :rotfl:

I haven't laughed this hard since my granny got her tits caught in the wringer :rotfl:
very revealing joke as to "libertarian" values.
 

jab

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,403
Location
GTA Ontario
Basic Beliefs
non-militant atheist
That isn't demonization, that is logistical truth. You really need to learn the difference between the two.
It is demonisation. Fat people use an extraordinary amount of healthcare resources, but nobody is forcing fat people to do something against their will. Also, it's some people with COVID that are using resources, not unvaccinated people. There are unvaccinated people who will never get COVID.

But, I can see why universal health care in the US will never be a reality. The absolute malice of some people--"we should dance on the graves of the unvaccinated"--is a sure sign there is no public will to help ideological enemies.
Are fat people in the US so clogging up the hospitals with their ailments that unfat people are having difficulty getting timely treatment? I haven't heard of this phenomenon. Please provide your source for this subtexual innuendo?
You haven't heard of the extraordinary burden that obesity is on health care systems, all over the world?
You didn't answer my question, or any question. Even your question, doesn't deal with the clogging up of American hospital beds by fat people to the detriment of unfat people also needing the hospital beds.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
31,467
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
That isn't demonization, that is logistical truth. You really need to learn the difference between the two.
It is demonisation. Fat people use an extraordinary amount of healthcare resources, but nobody is forcing fat people to do something against their will. Also, it's some people with COVID that are using resources, not unvaccinated people. There are unvaccinated people who will never get COVID.

But, I can see why universal health care in the US will never be a reality. The absolute malice of some people--"we should dance on the graves of the unvaccinated"--is a sure sign there is no public will to help ideological enemies.
Are fat people in the US so clogging up the hospitals with their ailments that unfat people are having difficulty getting timely treatment? I haven't heard of this phenomenon. Please provide your source for this subtexual innuendo?
You haven't heard of the extraordinary burden that obesity is on health care systems, all over the world?
You didn't answer my question, or any question. Even your question, doesn't deal with the clogging up of American hospital beds by fat people to the detriment of unfat people also needing the hospital beds.
Not to mention that being fat isn't contagious.
 

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
20,946
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
Not to mention that being fat isn't contagious.
And the number of fat people requiring hospitalization doesn’t go from zero to eleven in a year, or even in twenty years. It’s relatively constant, and the system is built around it.
 

Trausti

Deleted
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Not to mention that being fat isn't contagious.

But it does make you more susceptible to Covid and any virus. You “eat up” more health resources. Think of all the health savings we’d get if people took care of themselves and quit eating crap. Nothing more ridiculous than an overweight lazy slob who moralizes that others are unhealthy for not wanting to wear a useless mask.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
That isn't demonization, that is logistical truth. You really need to learn the difference between the two.
It is demonisation. Fat people use an extraordinary amount of healthcare resources, but nobody is forcing fat people to do something against their will. Also, it's some people with COVID that are using resources, not unvaccinated people. There are unvaccinated people who will never get COVID.

But, I can see why universal health care in the US will never be a reality. The absolute malice of some people--"we should dance on the graves of the unvaccinated"--is a sure sign there is no public will to help ideological enemies.
Are fat people in the US so clogging up the hospitals with their ailments that unfat people are having difficulty getting timely treatment? I haven't heard of this phenomenon. Please provide your source for this subtexual innuendo?
You haven't heard of the extraordinary burden that obesity is on health care systems, all over the world?
You didn't answer my question, or any question. Even your question, doesn't deal with the clogging up of American hospital beds by fat people to the detriment of unfat people also needing the hospital beds.
Your 'question' is not a question. It is an attempted justification of blood libel.
 

TomC

Celestial Highness
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
4,656
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
You haven't heard of the extraordinary burden that obesity is on health care systems, all over the world?
Even your question, doesn't deal with the clogging up of American hospital beds by fat people to the detriment of unfat people also needing the hospital beds.

Everyone knows that there are other, huge, health issues.
Here's a difference between obesity and smoking and alcohol and such vs. C19.

C19 is new. It's on top of all those other problems. The other problems have a long history and are built into our health care system. C19 and variants are new and added on top of previously existing conditions. The system doesn't have enough excess capacity to adequately deal with all of the problems at once.

Here's another important thing. Fixing the underlying causes of obesity and such require a lot more struggling than getting vaccinated. Getting vaccinated is a whole lot more feasible than losing 150 pounds, or kicking the nicotine habit.

They're not comparable. Pretending that they are is denial.
Tom
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,828
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
78% of Democratic voters support the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate plan
75% of likely Democratic voters have a favorable opinion of Dr. Fauci
59% of Democratic voters would favor a government policy requiring that citizens remain confined to their homes at all times, except for emergencies, if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine
55% of Democratic voters would support a proposal for federal or state governments to fine Americans who choose not to get a COVID-19 vaccine
48% of Democratic voters think federal and state governments should be able to fine or imprison individuals who publicly question the efficacy of the existing COVID-19 vaccines on social media, television, radio, or in online or digital publications
47% of Democrats favor governments using digital devices to track unvaccinated people to ensure that they are quarantined or socially distancing from others
45% of Democrats would favor governments requiring citizens to temporarily live in designated facilities or locations if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine
29% of Democratic voters would support temporarily removing parents’ custody of their children if parents refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccine

Rasmussen

Remember, if you oppose that, it is because you are a "Fascist".
oppose what, exactly? To what does your "that" refer?
It's "take some good things, throw them in a bucket with bad things, and then play the fallacy of the excluded middle".

This is a fundamentally dishonest action to repeatedly do after being told that it is a fundamentally dishonest action.

To repeat it means someone would be pathologically incapable of honesty in this context, and to defend it would be to admit oneself dishonest after such.

I wonder which it will be, because I doubt the third road, the retraction, will ever be offered from such.

Silence is also an option but the turd still leaves it's smell even if you don't claim it.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
Here's another important thing. Fixing the underlying causes of obesity and such require a lot more struggling than getting vaccinated. Getting vaccinated is a whole lot more feasible than losing 150 pounds, or kicking the nicotine habit.
The people who are not vaccinated right now, in the United States, are not vaccinated because they have strong objections to getting vaccinated. Vaccines are free and, presumably, there are no egregious access issues.

I believe it is crossing a moral line for a government to force adults to undergo medical procedures that are entirely for the benefit of other adults.
 

Trausti

Deleted
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Here's another important thing. Fixing the underlying causes of obesity and such require a lot more struggling than getting vaccinated. Getting vaccinated is a whole lot more feasible than losing 150 pounds, or kicking the nicotine habit.
The people who are not vaccinated right now, in the United States, are not vaccinated because they have strong objections to getting vaccinated. Vaccines are free and, presumably, there are no egregious access issues.

I believe it is crossing a moral line for a government to force adults to undergo medical procedures that are entirely for the benefit of other adults.
Indeed. School kids gotta mask and social distance to assuage adult hypochondria. And adults?

FJj3HL5VUAAOm62
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,734
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
In good news, effective COVID treatments are being discovered and developed:

Huh? Blood thinners have been used against Covid for quite a while--and they're very much a double-edged sword because you're trying to navigate between clotting out and bleeding out and sometimes there's no space in between.
Do you have a psychological compulsion to comment on everything?

The story was 8 hours old when I posted it. It was the results of a newly published study.

The point is that while the study might be new it's not exactly new information--we have been using blood thinners pretty much from the beginning, this is not evidence of developing new Covid treatments.
 

TomC

Celestial Highness
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
4,656
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
Fixing the underlying causes of obesity and such require a lot more struggling than getting vaccinated.
Yes. Personal responsibility is hard. Too hard, actually. So let's just lock down society.
Back in the olden days, conservatives were strong supporters of the ethics of "personal responsibility". That has changed.
Unfortunately.
Tom
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,734
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Vaccine mandates obsolete;

It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here. mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death). As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. The little data we have suggest the opposite. One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection.

WSJ

Note that the issue long predates Omicron. Just because it's temporarily overtaken by events (an Omicron-specific booster is expected in March) doesn't change the fundamental issue.

And I note that 90-day-negative piece of crap. That's a bad projection, not a measurement.
 

Trausti

Deleted
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Fixing the underlying causes of obesity and such require a lot more struggling than getting vaccinated.
Yes. Personal responsibility is hard. Too hard, actually. So let's just lock down society.
Back in the olden days, conservatives were strong supporters of the ethics of "personal responsibility". That has changed.
Unfortunately.
Tom
No, no. Many of the gym bros lean conservative. They'll tell you you're fat; but also encourage your self-improvement.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,828
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Fixing the underlying causes of obesity and such require a lot more struggling than getting vaccinated.
Yes. Personal responsibility is hard. Too hard, actually. So let's just lock down society.
Back in the olden days, conservatives were strong supporters of the ethics of "personal responsibility". That has changed.
Unfortunately.
Tom
My parent's generation sure said "personal responsibility" a lot, but they didn't exercise it all that much.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,734
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
That's how the virus works in the Republican brain.

What's actually happening with restaurants is that when you're eating you're with your group, when you're walking you have many more encounters with others. It's a half-assed compromise to allow restaurants to be open while reducing the risk of transmission.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,378
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
78% of Democratic voters support the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate plan
75% of likely Democratic voters have a favorable opinion of Dr. Fauci
59% of Democratic voters would favor a government policy requiring that citizens remain confined to their homes at all times, except for emergencies, if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine
55% of Democratic voters would support a proposal for federal or state governments to fine Americans who choose not to get a COVID-19 vaccine
48% of Democratic voters think federal and state governments should be able to fine or imprison individuals who publicly question the efficacy of the existing COVID-19 vaccines on social media, television, radio, or in online or digital publications
47% of Democrats favor governments using digital devices to track unvaccinated people to ensure that they are quarantined or socially distancing from others
45% of Democrats would favor governments requiring citizens to temporarily live in designated facilities or locations if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine
29% of Democratic voters would support temporarily removing parents’ custody of their children if parents refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccine

Rasmussen

Remember, if you oppose that, it is because you are a "Fascist".
Can you explain to me why vaccine mandates for COVID 19 are bad?

Even when I agree something is a good idea, I don't approve of mandating it. Just as an example, I wear a helmet when I ride my motorcycle, yet I oppose helmet laws.

Saying something should be mandated is a whole second step above and beyond saying it is a good idea. Each of those two arguments is a separate argument.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,634
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
78% of Democratic voters support the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate plan
75% of likely Democratic voters have a favorable opinion of Dr. Fauci
59% of Democratic voters would favor a government policy requiring that citizens remain confined to their homes at all times, except for emergencies, if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine
55% of Democratic voters would support a proposal for federal or state governments to fine Americans who choose not to get a COVID-19 vaccine
48% of Democratic voters think federal and state governments should be able to fine or imprison individuals who publicly question the efficacy of the existing COVID-19 vaccines on social media, television, radio, or in online or digital publications
47% of Democrats favor governments using digital devices to track unvaccinated people to ensure that they are quarantined or socially distancing from others
45% of Democrats would favor governments requiring citizens to temporarily live in designated facilities or locations if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine
29% of Democratic voters would support temporarily removing parents’ custody of their children if parents refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccine

Rasmussen

Remember, if you oppose that, it is because you are a "Fascist".
Can you explain to me why vaccine mandates for COVID 19 are bad?

Even when I agree something is a good idea, I don't approve of mandating it. Just as an example, I wear a helmet when I ride my motorcycle, yet I oppose helmet laws.

Saying something should be mandated is a whole second step above and beyond saying it is a good idea. Each of those two arguments is a separate argument.
I understand that. But I don’t understand your argument for NOT mandating COVID vaccines. Can you please share it?
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,677
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
That's how the virus works in the Republican brain.

What's actually happening with restaurants is that when you're eating you're with your group, when you're walking you have many more encounters with others. It's a half-assed compromise to allow restaurants to be open while reducing the risk of transmission.
So why can't school kids do that?
In restaurants you sit with a small group and only take the mask off when eating and drinking, not merely when sitting, though sitting in a restaurant is approximately the same as eating and drinking. In school, sitting and eating are not equivalent, and the students unmask when eating at their desks, i.e. in small groups and then mask back up. So, it is actually largely consistent to the extent that people do what they're supposed to do in restaurants.

Let's review: Students spend about 8 hours in school of which about 30 minutes is eating and drinking. They take off mask when eating lunch and drinking for that time. They mask when getting up to leave room etc etc. Meanwhile, persons in restaurants mask up, then when sitting with the purpose of eating and drinking for about an hour, they remove mask, but if they get up to use a bathroom or whatever, they mask again...like they do in school. Largely consistent policy.

The real problem here is that it seems silly to wear a mask for 10 seconds, then unmask for an hour, then mask up again for 10 seconds, not that school and restaurants are largely inconsistent, because they actually are largely consistent. Further, what people ought to do is minimize going to restaurants but when they do go to restaurants that structurally reduce transmission, such as outdoor seating, spacing out tables and people well, good ventilation, protective barriers, masked and vaxxed employees, etc.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,718
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Starbucks told its employees in a memo on Tuesday that they would no longer be required to be fully vaccinated or submit to weekly coronavirus testing.

NYT

Good news, hopefully other national companies will follow.
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,677
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
Vaccine mandates obsolete;

That excerpt you gave is really crappy. I mean, really really crappy. Let's go over that.

It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target.

Yes, it would be irrational, but the vaccines are somewhat effective in stopping the spread and somewhat effective at reducing the severity.

Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here. mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death).

The vaccine does reduce the spread, though it isn't as great against omicron as we'd like and so that has to be supplemented by other protections that Qarens don't want to do while complaining at the same time that Biden isn't stopping the virus.

As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.”

Okay, that was really dumb. He said A is better than B and then he quotes the WHO to try to support him but they said A and/or B. So he's quoting a source that contradicts him. That is the WHO is saying "preventing ____serious____ infection," i.e. severity "and/or transmission."

For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. The little data we have suggest the opposite.

The data we have does NOT say the opposite. The data we have says the vaccines are somewhat effective and so is getting a boost. I recommend to read the fact-check link IN FULL below.

One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection.

WSJ

That is clearly against common sense and so it is an issue of a correlation of a confounding variable and not a causation. The vaccine will not cause people to be more susceptible. Here is a fact-check on that:
"An Instagram post claimed that a Yale study showed that vaccinated people are more likely to be infected with omicron than people who are not vaccinated.

The claim misrepresents the source and findings of the study. It was done by Danish researchers at the Statens Serum Institut, not by Yale researchers.

The study shows a sharp decline in vaccine effectiveness against omicron over time in people who have received two doses. It also shows that effectiveness is restored with a booster dose of Pfizer, although there is not enough data on a Moderna booster. The authors said the study did not conclude that vaccinated people are more likely to be infected with omicron than people who are not vaccinated."​

Again, I recommend to read the link in full.
 

repoman

Contributor
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
8,304
Location
Seattle, WA
Basic Beliefs
Science Based Atheism
Why isn't infection treated in a similar manner to vaccination?

Wouldn't infection be similar to having an injected and nasal vaccine at the same time?

Note that I am using Eric Motherfucking Topol, the guy who made sure that the vaccine EUA happened after the election. One of the most respected medical guys who is not senile like the HIV discoverer.

 

Trausti

Deleted
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Let's review: Students spend about 8 hours in school of which about 30 minutes is eating and drinking. They take off mask when eating lunch and drinking for that time. They mask when getting up to leave room etc etc. Meanwhile, persons in restaurants mask up, then when sitting with the purpose of eating and drinking for about an hour, they remove mask, but if they get up to use a bathroom or whatever, they mask again...like they do in school. Largely consistent policy.

The real problem here is that it seems silly to wear a mask for 10 seconds, then unmask for an hour, then mask up again for 10 seconds, not that school and restaurants are largely inconsistent, because they actually are largely consistent. Further, what people ought to do is minimize going to restaurants but when they do go to restaurants that structurally reduce transmission, such as outdoor seating, spacing out tables and people well, good ventilation, protective barriers, masked and vaxxed employees, etc.

It has been known from the beginning that Covid has little affect on kids. The infection fatality rate for those aged 5 to 9 is less than 0.001 percent. Adults can get vaccinated. There is no benefit to anyone to treat children like lepers; denying them their childhood because some selfish neurotic adults can’t break from their Covid cult. As for your restaurant recommendations: you wear a mask alone in the car, right?
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,785
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Let's review: Students spend about 8 hours in school of which about 30 minutes is eating and drinking. They take off mask when eating lunch and drinking for that time. They mask when getting up to leave room etc etc. Meanwhile, persons in restaurants mask up, then when sitting with the purpose of eating and drinking for about an hour, they remove mask, but if they get up to use a bathroom or whatever, they mask again...like they do in school. Largely consistent policy.

The real problem here is that it seems silly to wear a mask for 10 seconds, then unmask for an hour, then mask up again for 10 seconds, not that school and restaurants are largely inconsistent, because they actually are largely consistent. Further, what people ought to do is minimize going to restaurants but when they do go to restaurants that structurally reduce transmission, such as outdoor seating, spacing out tables and people well, good ventilation, protective barriers, masked and vaxxed employees, etc.

It has been known from the beginning that Covid has little affect on kids. The infection fatality rate for those aged 5 to 9 is less than 0.001 percent. Adults can get vaccinated. There is no benefit to anyone to treat children like lepers; denying them their childhood because some selfish neurotic adults can’t break from their Covid cult. As for your restaurant recommendations: you wear a mask alone in the car, right?
What part of 'children are vectors' do you not understand?

Children don't have to be at risk of death to threaten the lives of their grandparents.

This isn't difficult to grasp, unless you are truly committed to making damn sure not to grasp it.
 
Top Bottom