Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, mission27 said:

Its quite amusing to hear fat ****s complain about the risks of putting some chemical into their body 

@TLO

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.

Edited by ramssuperbowl99
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really just a broader discussion about the rights of the individual against the rights of the collective and where the line should be drawn.

Think about beards for example. Pretty disgusting things, full of dirt, excrement, germs, disease. Anyone who chooses to have a beard is increasing the likelihood that people in their presence will become unwell. Are they selfish? Or should they be able to grow a god damn sexy beard if they want to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JonStark said:

So hypothetically, if the vaccine they released was a mess and you as someone who is knowledgeable on the subject didn't feel comfortable taking it, you would be fine with the government mandating it before the FDA approved it? 

In your hypothetical, you would have credible people with subject matter expertise who would be saying "this vaccine is a mess, don't take it" 

Instead of, like, Deandre Hopkins and people who sell pillows on the internet 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

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.

So I'll drop it after this, but your attempts to discredit anyone who disagrees with you do more harm than goodto those who support the vaccine. My wife and I both work in pharmaceuticals (her more in the research aspect). Recently, she was working on something to ease covid patients off of the ventilators. 

You can say "you don't know what you're talking about", "you have no experience", and all the other condescending stuff you want, but that doesn't help anyone still on the fence decide to do the right thing and get the vaccine. It pushes them away. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, JonMcC2018 said:

Thought experiment:

Evidence emerges to show that eating fish/meat gives an individual a significant risk reduction in contracting covid. The nutrients and fats in fish/meat seem to offer a unique advantage against the disease. You are less likely to catch covid, less likely to have a severe case of it, less likely to pass it on if you do catch it.

Should a company be able to compel its employees to eat fish/meat to continue working there?

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.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JonStark said:

So I'll drop it after this, but your attempts to discredit anyone who disagrees with you do more harm than goodto those who support the vaccine. My wife and I both work in pharmaceuticals (her more in the research aspect). Recently, she was working on something to ease covid patients off of the ventilators. 

You can say "you don't know what you're talking about", "you have no experience", and all the other condescending stuff you want, but that doesn't help anyone still on the fence decide to do the right thing and get the vaccine. It pushes them away. 

What do you do?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JonMcC2018 said:

It's really just a broader discussion about the rights of the individual against the rights of the collective and where the line should be drawn.

Think about beards for example. Pretty disgusting things, full of dirt, excrement, germs, disease. Anyone who chooses to have a beard is increasing the likelihood that people in their presence will become unwell. Are they selfish? Or should they be able to grow a god damn sexy beard if they want to.

Please cite evidence that beards have killed 610,000 Americans. 

Otherwise, please stop posting logical fallacies as if they're a gotcha.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

What do you do?

Both are scientists and primarily work in that lab (different companies). She develops drugs in the animal medicine field and I test our products to make sure they are safe to release. Is that sufficient for you or do you need to know exact companies and years of experience too? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Free:

  • A new study from Hungary found that China’s Sinopharm vaccine offers weak protection against covid-19 among older populations. Researchers this week said that 50 percent of blood samples from individuals over 80 showed no protective antibodies against the virus, even after a full course of the two-dose vaccine.
  • Israel’s Health Ministry has released new data suggesting that the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine is only 39 percent effective at preventing infection from the delta variant. Protection against severe illness remained high, however, at 91 percent, the ministry said.
  • The United States is at “another pivotal moment” in the pandemic as the more transmissible delta variant tears through unvaccinated communities, causing hospitals to reach capacity in some areas, Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said Thursday.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/07/23/coronavirus-latest-updates/

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JonStark said:

Both are scientists and primarily work in that lab (different companies). She develops drugs in the animal medicine field and I test our products to make sure they are safe to release. Is that sufficient for you or do you need to know exact companies and years of experience too? 

 

Sure, may as well send the whole CV. And a LinkedIn profile too.

Enough of the general principles are similar between drugs marketed for animals versus people; I'm surprised you'd ask about the possibility of a faked clinical trial. But since you work in pharma, great, I'm sure you can forward some relevant notable examples of fake data to help prove your points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One advantage of a federal mandate is helping businesses like @Deadpulse. The healthcare workers there can’t just leave and go work in a different state to avoid the mandate.

However, I highly doubt we will ever have a national vaccine mandate. So if you’re one of those people who’s worried about that, then I would tell you to stop worrying since it probably won’t happen. We can’t even do a mask mandate because it’s been so politicized. Once the vaccine gets full FDA approval, the only federal mandate will probably be for individuals who work in a government job or part of the military.

Edited by Xenos
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, TVScout said:

Free:

  • A new study from Hungary found that China’s Sinopharm vaccine offers weak protection against covid-19 among older populations. Researchers this week said that 50 percent of blood samples from individuals over 80 showed no protective antibodies against the virus, even after a full course of the two-dose vaccine.
  • Israel’s Health Ministry has released new data suggesting that the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine is only 39 percent effective at preventing infection from the delta variant. Protection against severe illness remained high, however, at 91 percent, the ministry said.
  • The United States is at “another pivotal moment” in the pandemic as the more transmissible delta variant tears through unvaccinated communities, causing hospitals to reach capacity in some areas, Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said Thursday.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/07/23/coronavirus-latest-updates/

If true- the bolded is likely due to antibodies waning, but damn- the fact it's still that effective against severe disease suggest the memory cell response is robust, especially considering it's the most at risk who were vaccinated first, which will sway the numbers. It ain't an apples to apples comparison. Have to think the CDC recommends boosters for the immune compromised and extreme elderly soon. Need them well protected for fall/winter. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, TLO said:

Places should require proof of vaccination to enter as opposed to forcing the vaccinated to wear masks iyam. LA County got this wrong. Make life more difficult for the unvaccinated.  

Well it looks like some places are. It makes sense that it’s establishments like bars and restaurants where you have to take off your masks inside. Hopefully they succeed and this leads to more places taking that stance, which will hopefully lead to more people having no choice but to be vaccinated. The only issues are how to prove that you medically can’t get vaccinated, and how to avoid fraudulent identification.

https://news.yahoo.com/california-bars-start-demanding-proof-of-vaccinations-as-delta-surges-will-vax-requirements-spread-155002636.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...