Jump to content

ramssuperbowl99

Veteran Members
  • Content Count

    52,125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    82

ramssuperbowl99 last won the day on June 3

ramssuperbowl99 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

13,316 Hall of Fame

About ramssuperbowl99

Favorites

  • NFL Team
    Whoever Plays the Rams
  • MLB Team
    Milwaukee Brewers
  • NBA Team
    Milwaukee Bucks?
  • College Team
    Wisconsin Badgers

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. No, because a vaccine exists so employees already have another way to work safely. Even if the vaccine didn't exist, it would be very easy to produce a supplement with whatever the fish/meat ingredient was that had COVID efficacy to sidestep any ethical concerns. Context matters.
  2. In the same breath these people are saying "don't tell me what to put in my body" and "it's not approved yet". They're gonna be so mad when they learn that it's the big bad gubment that approves drugs.
  3. I understand that to you it's "straightforward and simple": that's because you have no relevant experience. Unfortunately, reality isn't straightforward or simple, and what you presented isn't answerable because that's not how companies develop drugs or regulatory agencies review submissions. That's why I tried to present a real example, so we could talk about something with details that actually add up.
  4. I'm telling you right now, that's an impossible hypothetical. It would require a pharmaceutical company to legally attest that they are unaware of data that would exist, submit their data and either have the FDA fail to resolve the obvious discrepancies that come with trying to fake an entire 10,000 person plus clinical trial, or that they'd have to be in on it too. The entire time, the results would need to be published to the larger community of scientists at large. We'd all have to be in on it. It's the type of question that reveals you have no idea about how drugs are actually de
  5. The hypothetical you present is impossible. Even if it was possible, I would need way more information on the specifics to have an opinion. Relevant factors would be the damage to society based on non-immunized people getting sick, the prevalence of non-immunized people, specific transmutability/infectiousness of the disease in question, and the specific safety and efficacy concerns of the vaccine. For a real example, the FDA recently paused the J&J vaccine over a 1:1 million risk for blood clots, despite no conclusive link and a literal handful of deaths versus millions
  6. Decisions don't happen in a vacuum. Someone refusing the vaccine directly leads to outbreak risk that overwhelms our entire society's healthcare system and forces lockdowns. You don't get to pretend that individual actions don't have societal consequences.
  7. "What should we do about our mascot?" "Well in elementary school I once got an F on a test, then changed it to a B and my parents never noticed." "Done! What's for lunch?"
  8. Refusing a vaccine that isn't mandatory because you don't think the government should mandate vaccines isn't even coherent, much less understandable. All these idiots are doing, ironically enough, is putting more pressure on business and governments to mandate that slippery slope they're so afraid of.
  9. It's not 9-6 anymore because its Tua vs. Joe Burrow instead of AJ McCarron vs. Jarrett Lee. That doesn't mean the defenses got worse.
  10. Just because Alabama doesn't lead CFB in total defense doesn't mean they aren't the best defense in CFB or at least among them. And I say that as a Wisconsin fan, the posterchild school for an elite modern CFB defense by stats that is not really an elite defense.
  11. Great, then I don't feel bad reminding you that about 2/3rds of those TDs are the results of missed tackles, except for the one time Randy ******* Moss' kid was on the field and OU decided to just let him run completely unmanned. OU's defense is hot garbage. The elite SEC defenses are filled top to bottom with first round picks.
  12. I thought it'd be a chance for you to bow out with a little grace given that I assume most OU fans have blacked that night out from their memory, but if you want to try and pretend that giving up 7 passing TDs and a 50 burger in a half compared to scoring 14 points against starters total is mutually bad defense by all means dig the hole deeper.
  13. OU hasn’t played defense at all in 20 years though. Bit of a difference there. Presented without further comment:
  14. Yeah this forces GMs hands. If you aren't a massively valuable player, it's better to cut you than deal with the risk. No way guys 20-53 are worth it tbh.
×
×
  • Create New...