with the occasional lolly-gag into "communist ideology"

I really gotta start betting money.

The main source of frustration comes from the fact that you often play offense and then pretend its defense. Whether or not you're doing this on purpose I'm still not sure.

There's also a myopia across all of your arguments (In this example: " If you are vaccinated you have little to worry about from the unvaccinated.") that insists on framing everything as a "What's in it for me?" proposition. Many of us in this forum, certainly myself and from what I've read over the years quite a few others, are asking "What's in it for society?" Now, you're free to disagree with or reject that question, but you've yet to even acknowledge the question the rest of us are asking. 

Why do I worry about the unvaccinated? Because not everyone who wants to be vaccinated can be, and those who can but choose not to increase the risk of everyday life for those who want to but cannot. 

Why do I worry about the unvaccinated? Because hospital beds are filling up with the unvaccinated and people with unrelated health emergencies can't get life-saving treatments. 

Why do I worry about the unvaccinated? Because children are sent home from schools that don't have enough healthy staff to remain open. 

What is the risk of death for a vaccinated person? Why is "death" the only negative? If my wife gets Covid she almost definitely won't die but a mild fever could damage or kill our unborn child. Close friends of mine have suffered year-long if not life-long debilitations from mild cases of Covid early in the pandemic. There's a whole universe of complications and additional risk factors well short of 'death' and I take them into account every time I leave the house.

You say "Each person ought to have the data to analyze what’s best for themselves and their kids." but ignore how difficult that is for every single one of the literally thousands of choices we make every day. You ignore how difficult it is to analyze data and make proper choices when whole industries exist to cloud and persuade those choices for profit or political gain. 

Lofty ideas are well and good but when they crash and burn as soon as they encounter real life scenarios they're not worth a damn.

Anyways, I have a busy day.

Xlax accusing anyone of straw man arguments is seriously funny.

So you want to have it explained to you? Ok, I am 70+ and have cancer. Everyone poses a risk to me. Unvaccinated people especially. You have no idea the degree and extent to which your immunity to Covid is and pose a greater potential threat to me than a vaccinated person. You are spreading lies, fabrications, falsehoods, half-truths, and conspiracy theories. There are many people who are high risk like me. You and your ilk refuse to get vaccinated and put people like me and everyone else
in danger of getting sick and dying purely out of pecker headed spite. That's why.

"The virus is endemic." This is true but it's not an argument against vaccines. If anything it's an argument for vaccines.

Many are saying

That is exactly what you said.

Real busy day.

What a tangled web. No surprise you can't keep up with the lies.

tdads/tdus was/is right, and we're getting there thanks to Omicron being less harmful/deadly. Spain is already treating COVID as endemic, will consider it like they do the flu, Britain will cancel measures and mandates end of next week as well. There's light at the end of the tunnel...

That light has, thus far, been the headlight of the next variant's surge train.

*holds mirror*

You are choosing to hang onto a narrative that the vaccines are more effective than natural immunity despite the scientific evidence.

This virus once had a survival of about 98% which is bad. Now it’s something like 99.99999% for the vaccinated.

“That light has, thus far, been the headlight of the next variant's surge train.”

So far didn’t hear of any variant taking over omicron (knocks on wood) and it is a very normal situation in the evolution of viruses like this that in order to survive it becomes less harmful. The increase of covid infections here has been dramatic, numbers through the roof, but this is not showing up in hospitalisations and deaths at all (yet) :-)

I honestly can't imagine a scenario where I would rely on statistics to make a medical decision. If a doctor told me there's a 5% chance of death, if I had a procedure, would that change my mind? And conversely, 5% chance it would save my life?? I guess, maybe if I was 80, but I can't see how stats would be relevant.

"That’s not to say that one should get purposely infected instead." That was exactly what you said.

I think Pfizer making any money off the vaccine, is unconscionable, but I can't figure out why you find it bad.

"Politics and profit margins have created an incentive structure that makes it impossible to believe anything coming from the anointed ones."

This view is distorting your perception of reality. You keep looking to confirm it even when it continually fails. The continual failure is the check that lets you know it isn't what you think it is. Most traditional media & government institutions are believable and are staffed by people who care about what they're doing.

Not vaccinating your kids based on silly world views like JLA's above, is child abuse.  

Why won't anyone think of the poor clients who have been unfairly ignored during jla's Very Busy Day?

Well Non, it's not that black&white with the rona vaccine, at least not for me. Since it wears off so god damn quickly. I've gladly had them stick needles in my kids to protect them for the rest of their lives against all kinds of viruses and diseases, some serious some milder, but with this one...for whose benefit is it when I force them to be vaccinated every couple of months? Their benefit for not getting a little sickish, or others for not getting infected? It seems the biggest benefit of vaccinating kids is not with the kids themselves, not sure I'm okay with that (yet). It's anyhow not possible yet here to vaccinate kids their age, but it is something that needs to be discussed at our house sooner or later I guess.

I owe jla an apology - in my reading yesterday I mistook the myocarditis rant as his. Looking back this morning it was Volunteer's. Hard to keep the bullshit straight sometimes but I want say that I was wrong about this one.

As usual, my opinions evolve on this. I've refrained from ignoring him for a variety of reasons (if I've ignored anyone it's always been temporarily, not usually lasting longer than a day or perhaps a week at most). Most recently my own take on not ignoring him has been to at least be someone to call out his bullshit so it's not left sitting there in the forums like the stinking pile of shit that it is. I've never liked the idea that we are all sitting around the room with plugged noses trying to avoid smelling the shit that surrounds us and pretend that it doesn't exist or reflect poorly on the website.

I've also tried to refrain from calling for him to be banned outright from the website. The problem with all this, I'm coming to realize, is that unlike my dog and my kid, potty training doesn't seem to be working with him. I think most people would learn, after being called out on their shit over and over and over again, that they should stop dropping a deuce in the middle of the floor. Sure we can clean up a few turds here and there from a few random users or the newbies who haven't learned yet, but it's different from a regular user. At some point it becomes persistent enough that I think perhaps removal is warranted so everyone doesn't have to ignore the piles of shit the ignored user keeps leaving around.

I think we're past that point with jla, and while I don't like it ... I think he should simply be banned.

I'd also like to note that if I felt he was arguing in good faith I wouldn't be saying any of this. I have no problem with my views and opinions being challenged or engaging in a debate. But that's not what jla is doing here anymore.

All that being said. I'll put him on ignore if we all think that it will make the problem go away.

I have tried to get him to realize he should leave of his own volition for his own mental state. I don't agree with his politics but those are opinions that don't have much effect on anything that matters. Covid is different. I don't like confrontation. I simply see it as a civic duty to call him out on the ridiculously dangerous comments he makes. This matters. I am tired of playing Scrabble with him. He won't leave on his own and he won't stop posting misinformation on a deadly disease that has killed almost 1 million people in this country in 2 years. He needs to go. I knew when he was let back on it wouldn't take him long before he was doing the same shit. He won't listen to reason and he won't STFU about Covid. He needs to go.

I too agree that x-jla should be banned. He's knowingly spreading misinformation. I don't care that he says he's taking a break - he will come back. I think the current, and any future accounts of this user should be banned from this site.

You are aware of the BS you're spreading. You've admitted to it. Try harder. T0. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

x-jla, your persistence with pushing your views here is distractingly malignant to the site. You operate from a conspiracy point of view that doesn't align with fact. You overstate some facts and understate others as if those distortions aren't misinformed or just pure inventions; and you present them as if no one can see that they are distortions of fact. From what I can tell from the responses to you, many people see through these distortions. Your notion that the posters here are afraid of truth is so off it's laughable. But in your deluded world of distortion, I can only imagine it somehow makes sense to you. If you need to comfort your ego by telling yourself posters here are arrogant, you go right ahead. It seems you regularly ignore all sorts of inconvenient facts contrary to your worldview.

Guess who's back, back again...

T0. Try harder.

Don’t just stop social media; stop reading “outrage news” or alternative outlets that pretend at edgy perspective that uncovers THE TRUTH, telling you their independence illustrates their integrity when all it does is show they have zero substance behind their publishing. So much content out there today is hyperbolic purely so that it can be seen & further promoted. Twisting facts until they no longer represent the story. Or, burying the facts below an outrage headline & a provocative 1st/2nd paragraph that intentionally misleads. Twitter isn’t news. Blogging isn’t news. Settle in with the AP for a few months and just ignore the posturing for clicks.

The first couple of days are the weirdest, after that you’ll never want to get back and will have much more time on your hands to spend with your family, cook delicious food and catch up on reading real books made from proper paper. Godspeed!

Outside of this site, I've been social media free for a number of years now. It's very nice. Helps to have been born before social media, since the head space is familiar.

CDC recommendations align with those from professional medical organizations serving people who are pregnant, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologistsexternal icon and the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine
Your sources "some countries".
The CDC also recommends pregnant women get the flu and whooping cough and other vaccines. Do you have a problem with that?

"Some European countries have advised against pregnant women as well as children from getting the COVID vaccines" 

Which ones? Why? What's *their* rationale?

Should a person be banned for asking the question? No.

Should a person be banned for persistently presenting bad faith arguments and overtaking a conversation with selfishly motivated arguments supported by pretend science and re-iterating known half truths as if they are fact? At a certain point, yes. A community can ask to remove a consistently aggressive thorn with reasonable ethical basis.

Exactly. It's extremely easy to poke holes ad infinitum and hide behind the guise of "just asking questions", but you've made no attempt to construct a counter-narrative. Put in the effort if you want people to take your questions seriously.

Perfect example of distorting reality or using misleading statements/questions to suit a narrative.

"Some European countries have advised against pregnant women [...] from getting the COVID vaccines."

Currently no major European countries are advising pregnant people against it. Some have in the past and that's why the statement is not explicitly false, but it is misleading. The closest this comes to being true at the moment seems to be in the Faroe Islands and North Macedonia where they do not recommend vaccines for pregnant or lactating people with some exceptions. Click through the links for specifics, or view this tracker where you can see all the policy positions and even use the slider to go back in history to see that in the past some have not recommended it for pregnant people.

"It takes very little thought to realize that a young pregnant woman who gets the shot is also giving it to her unborn baby. The same thing goes for an unpregnant young woman who becomes pregnant within a few months of receiving the vaccines."

Ambiguous enough, this statement is probably best understood as false. I haven't found any information indicating that the mRNA vaccines are crossing the placenta and being passed to the baby. Most are saying that those vaccines break down rather quickly and are not a concern with transferring to the baby. What studies are showing is the pregnant person creates antibodies that are transferred to the baby through the placenta (and breastmilk) and that actually helps protect the baby.

"So why does the CDC recommend that pregnant women receive the vaccine while many European countries do not?"

Your question is based on a false premise, as I've shown, and is therefore simply misleading. Should a person be banned for this. No, but the comment should be moderated in my opinion. If the user continues to mislead requiring more and more moderation, then I do think at some point banning is the right call.

Sorry I missed my edit window for the comment above. I should point out that the policy recommendations vary by vaccine. So again the statement that some countries have recommended against getting the vaccines needs more clarity if we want to take it seriously. Which vaccines? Which countries? etc.

For the record I did a *lot* of research into mRNA vaccines (in general and Covid vaccines specifically) and various recommendations for pregnant people. We actually postponed getting pregnant until after me and my wife were both fully vaccinated, because at the time there was still a lot of uncertainty. In the months since, though, that uncertainty has largely disappeared and nearly a year of vaccination has shown essentially zero increased risk of vaccination while pregnant. In fact, we were planning to hold off on my wife receiving her booster shot until the third trimester specifically because recent research has shown that vaccines given later in pregnancies will pass immunity along to the child. Omicron accelerated that, so we're both boosted now.

the WHO has current published opinions on this as well, if you don't like america for whatever reason. it's not even hard. a 20 second search and you could have avoided spreading blatantly misleading information to this forum. you must be so embarrassed.

Austria will have a vaccine mandate (over $4000 fine when refused) but, as Volunteer noted, not for pregnant women or children and also not for people with a medical exemption…just sayin’

tduds- all well and good however, did you all consider the effects of 5g towers? Did you have the microchips removed before or after you all became pregnant? What about the side effects of magnetism? I am just asking questions.

We actually had extra 5G chips implanted. Hoping for a cyborg boy.

randomised, that's not what Volunteer noted, and you know it ... just sayin'

That’s how I read it, they advise against a vaccine mandate for pregnant women (and children and people with medical exemptions)…

Read again and ask yourself where the word "mandate" shows up in Volunteer's post (hint: it doesn't). 

A vaccine mandate is different from advising a group to receive a vaccine, which is different from advising that group against receiving a vaccine.

But why are they advising against a vaccine mandate for pregnant women…

I don't know. I can speculate and probably get close, but I'm not interested in doing that.

Why don't you go to the Austrian government's website, find out, and come back with details instead of whatever it is you think you're doing here?

Nah, I have better things to do, I made my point. They advice against a vaccine mandate for pregnant women, children and people with a medical exemption, but will enforce such a mandate for everyone else, that’s all I wanted to share. Do with that information whatever you want.

the unresearched gotcha...

plus the self-certified re-iteration

ok, gotcha

"Do with that information whatever you want." But then we'd be no better than your uninformed ass.

randomised came in to play the game, moved the goalpost while the rest of us called foul, then kicks the ball into the net and runs out of the stadium screaming, "I am the champion of the world!"

Gee, thanks for playing.

Just helped to fill in some gaps in your info, or so I thought…mandate schmandate.

Your first error is assuming you *thought*.

pretty sure this is the australian link randomised has better things to than click. https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/who-can-get-vaccinated/pregnant-women

I don’t think so…

@rando that is what australia says, coming from the australian department of health. if their opinion changes, that's where it would show up. that's different than getting the australian government's opinion from facebook. here's a fun skit for more information https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYxjExUetqc

I’m not on Facebook and it’s about Austria…fun fact, the only political party there against forcing people to get a vaccine that works less and less effective against infection (source Pfizer CEO) is the far-right FPÖ

You guys so badly want to have a fight, any fight, that you collectively jump the first person that bumps your elbow and makes you spill your drink a little…come with info that masks don’t fully protect? Get jumped…Dare to mention that it is about aerosols not the bigger droplets that spark infections, so you need to focus on ventilation…get jumped. Dare to mention that you can’t jab yourself out of this pandemic when the vaccine works only temporary and less effective with each new variant? Get jumped. And on top of that rich countries have received about 50 times as many Covid-19 vaccine doses as low-income countries, and that only a little over 1.3% of people living in the poorest parts of the world are fully vaccinated so vaccinating out of this will be next to impossible, the moment everyone will finally have received their first shot it already wore off and your back at square one…and you’ll get jumped by the angry mob. Dare to mention that some countries will have a vaccine mandate but specifically not for pregnant women, children and people with medical exemption? Get jumped…
I’m fully vaxxed and boostered and wear a

mask (N95 or equivalent)

my apologies. i linked australia because i read to fast. this is from austria: https://broschuerenservice.sozialministerium.at/Home/Download?publicationId=846

it's the deliberate misinformation that people don't like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-qbqz9zSKA

And you, rando, are the person at the party who jumps into a conversation, pointer finger raised, high-pitched "Well, ACTUALLY..." at the ready. You wonder why everyone rolls their eyes and walks away, suddenly discovering their drinks are needing a refresher. We don't need to get to perfect, and pointing out the unknowns only serves to make you a contrarian, saying a lot but adding little of substance beyond a frustrating love of your own voice.

Well, actually I disagree...it's this false sense of security that people get from not knowing the entire truth that makes them behave in ways that is costing unnecessary lives.

Would you excuse me? My drink needs a refresher.

Ask yourselves: "Does this pass the Steve test?" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Steve

Yup.

The problem is in my opinion that one side is arguing reason and the other side is not arguing at all

FIFY.

It's not even an argument. It's people spreading misinformation and other people correcting it.

Both of those work.

Can you imagine if they’d won…oh my!

If you have Prime membership, the free Amazon Music catalog isnt too bad either. Or youtube with the adblocker on lol

Uncle Neil > Rogan

Joe Rogaine.

And in other news, apparently Spotify's live customer support is overwhelmed with complaints and cancelation requests and had to shut it down.

Apparently there's a script for transporting all your likes and playlists from Spotify to Tidal. Pretty smart idea, since inertia is the main thing keeping me on Spotify at the moment.

I haven't been on any of the music streaming platforms since Pandora like 10 years ago. I was actually thinking of joining one and Spotify was one I was going to look into, but not anymore. To be honest, I'm not really even sure I want to sign up for any of them. I'm still living in my MP3 collection from my college days and CDs and vinyl. If it's not broke ... yada yada yada

I hadn't heard of Tidal ... will definitely look into it though. I've seen others mostly suggesting Apple, Amazon, and Bandcamp (which is apparently much better for the artists).

I'm speaking with my dollars. This is capitalism at its finest.

That's a dumb analogy.

Curiosity, how many full plates of clams have you eaten?

EA... Vinyl you say... well, I wonder which Neil Young record I should spin this afternoon.

It's not about the podcast, it's about the platform paying enormous amounts of money to the podcast host who continues to spread misinformation and the platform choosing to let him run with it unchecked, rather than use its money to support artists who don't spread misinformation.

Archinect's advertisements don't make me buy whatever it is that pops up in the banner, but if they started popping misinformation up there, you could count on me pointing it out and boycotting the site if they did nothing about it.

Half of what Fauci has said has turned out to be 'misinformation'. Should he be silenced as well?

That's not misinformation but simply new insights that came to light, as is very normal and to be expected in science when confronted with a novel virus about which one learns continuously. It would be misinformation only when one refuses to update their information that has become outdated or incorrect ...

EA, it would be more troublesome if the platform would interfere with the content of certain podcasts in my opinion.

So it was OK to originally silence people who thought the leak came from a lab, but now they can be 'unsilenced' now that seems to be what happened.

no it's not ok to silence people

It is if they're spreading lies that harm others

You can not silence someone and also not pay them $100 million to lie.

Volunteer, how is HALF of what Fauci said turned out to be lies? His only misstep (and a lot of that can be attributed to the Trump administration's total lack of preparedness) was when he said that masks were not as effective to curb the virus.

You need to stop hearing Joe Rogaine's podcast.

Well, a letter from Lawrence A. Tabak of the National Institute of Health to Representative James Comer plainly says the NIH was funding gain of function research by "testing if spike proteins from naturally occurring bat coronaviruses circulating in China were capable of binding to the human ACE2 receptor in a mouse model."

That is the definition of 'gain of function'. Fauci denied that this happened. The story, including the letter, is in the New York October 21, 2021. 

I didn't realize Dr Fauci had a nine figure podcast deal with Spotify.

Volunteer - provide a list that quantifies half of what Fauci said about COVID was a lie. Also provide sources that back up your claims.

Don't take the bait. He's whatabouting.

Deplatforming is not censorship. No one is entitled to a platform.

"No one is getting de platformed." Yes but that's what I would like to change.

Well that's enough fun for this week. Back on ignore with you.

Garbage in, garbage out. I get it, joe has his character to upheld for all his blind followers. It’s empty but dangerous entertainment because too many take his shit seriously.

My friend put it well: "A neutral platform for a non-neutral selection of guests."

I don't take my medical advice from podcasting comedian martial arts fighting tv presenter actor entertainers but anyone should be free to do so...if people so badly want to win a darwin award, I'd say just let them.

I'm trying to have a society here, y'all.

what a society when surrounded with all that idiocy? embrace the purge!

e.g. my gut says that the same people that are so strongly antivax are voting RepubliQAnon, are anti-BLM, deny climate change, are anti-abortion flatearthers. Let them shoot themselves in the foot if they want to so badly. Might raise the average IQ and will bring down CO2 emissions at the same time!

.

It’s just stupid nationalism. They can’t stand that Spotify is European and better than Tidal, Google or Apple so they want it destroyed and use Rogan as an excuse, to replace the platform with something Merican they can better control and manipulate the sheeple with(!)

Any letter, and I mean any, signed by Gym Jordan, is suspect. Any ideas referencing such letter, should be treated accordingly; slammed to the mat, and taken to the showers.

Both Cruz and Cotton have cited the NIH letter to assert that Fauci lied to Congress. Cruz even told Attorney General Merrick Garland that Fauci should be prosecuted. The issue is important because of speculation that the virus that caused the coronavirus pandemic might have been created in a lab. But the NIH letter does not say what they claim — and, in fact, the NIH letter appears to have inaccuracies.

You've got to love this site. It reads like a 9/11 truther map.

The majority of signatories from one country, care to guess?

Yep.

In other news, Mercator projection maps are stupid. Check out how big Canada looks in that map compared to S. America. Then look at how they actually compare when not all distorted.

"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you will start treating all your problems like a nail.”

These words are much too big for the people that need to understand it.

it would've made almost as much sense to me then as it does now.

Do you not have Wordle or Omicron over there, or a rash of sourdough breadmaking early in the pandemic?

There was a yeast and flour shortage indeed, which was annoying but didn’t know wordle was so big.

pick your poison here.. i don't touch anything involved with amazon with a 39 and a half foot pole.

NY owns about 50% of his music. Sony (I believe) voluntarily aggreed with the Spotify thing. Would not be surprised if it's them switching ships. Still, Joe is trash and empty intelectualism. Neil is Neil Fucking Young. QED.

"simply moved his catalogue to Amazon" is in no way an accurate description of what happened.

Jeff Bezos may be Dr. Evil, but he HAS NOT propounded vaccine misinformation to Joe Rogaine bros.

at the very least young did promote amazon - i would argue amazon is as harmful if not more than joe rogan (though of course in very different ways, a little bit of a blunt comparison).

https://www.wsj.com/articles/n...

regardless, you have to see the irony in leaving spotify for a cause and then promoting amazon on the other side..

that's my poetic license...still think it's silly over a guy having conversations with people he doesn't always agrees with, some even scientists themselves, but that's just me I guess. In the spirit of Art Spiegelman might even tune into his podcast for the first time ever.

JR is a grifter. Blood money podcast. NY is a polio survivor. 60% of his streaming income came from S*****.

"a guy having conversations with people he doesn't always agrees with" similarly inaccurate description of reality.

It would be interesting to see some meta-analysis of all of Rogan's guests and how they break down across different ideologies, especially if that's changed over time in one direction or the other. Someone with more time than me should take that on.

Did he not have real scientist in his early days? I think I recall Dawkins, Plait, NDTyson as guests.

i think one of the really hard parts for JR being "a guy having conversations with people he doesn't always agree with" is that our left leaning friends typically don't listen to talk radio for half their working day, and joe rogan is talk radio that fills half your working day. he's competing in rush limbaugh and glenn beck's space. it would be better if he could get better people to kill a day with, but who has time for that?

curtkram, he put out 1 or 2 a week, anywhere from 1.5 to 2.5 hours each. Not exactly filling up half of a workday, every day. But that's just me being picky. Combat sports are one of my passions so I used to listen to him from time to time, but not for about a year and a half now. It was getting repetitive and exhausting listening to this guy with an IQ of a slug speak for hours with snake oil salesmen

I enjoyed his Miley Cyrus interview. That ran about three hours. She's tougher than him outside of free weights though, which is hard to do when you have conservative guests. I think the alien guests are fun too.

Ain't getting my click. Fuck that guy.

That’ll show him!

More effectively than anything you do.

If you want to counter arguments, the least you can do is be aware of their arguments. Sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting lalala might seem effective, but is it?

I do not need to hear from a murderer to know I disagree with them. I do not need to hear from a snake oil salesman to know I disagree with them. I do not need to know about Bitcoin to know I disagree with it.

Might be handy to know what you’re actually disagreeing with, not saying participate in a round table at the flatearther convention. But science is not static, it evolves, points of view can change based on new available information. That evolution doesn’t happen when hiding behind your dogmas. Or something…your loss.

Relax, I think that idea mostly resides inside your own head ;-)

I would say you're remarkably stupid, but then again I don't want to speak for everyone. You're the tool citing "real scientists".

Katrine Wallace, an epidemiologist at the University of Illinois Chicago school of public health, calling Rogan “a menace to public health” for airing anti-vaccine ideology.

Katrine Wallace, an epidemiologist at the University of Illinois Chicago's School of Public Health, who signed the letter. She is part of a community of experts who debunk medical misinformation on social media, and she says she received hundreds of messages from followers about Rogan's Malone interview.

"Their friends and family were sending it to them as evidence that the vaccines are dangerous and that they shouldn't get it," she said. "It provides a sense of false balance, like there's two sides to the scientific evidence when, really, there is not. The overwhelming evidence is that the vaccines are safe and that they're effective."

All those items you cited were from the previous administration.

archfamous, oh my mistake, a viral pandemic didn't mind the words coming out of the scientists mouths. I'm guessing that you need to have the word "novel" coronavirus defined for you too?

B3ta, nobody says “that because Rogaine has on scientists, they're supposed experts in everything”…that’s just you projecting.

And yet, here's your dumb ass,.sharing a video of Rogaine providing a moral equivalent of just that. With your dipshit narrative of "real scientists". You. Are. A. Dumb. Ass.

"I too agree it is very important to never question the experts." No one is saying this.

It would seem to me, all things equal, that the people who feel the need to wildly rephrase statements to align with whatever point they're trying to make are the ones with the weaker point.

Interesting, there is a law in there somewhere. The trapezoidal point maybe.

Kind of a mis-application of reductio ad absurdum, I think.

I have great hair, thank you very much.

Right up until it affects other people. Your stupid decision to drink and drive has consequences beyond just you. Smoking in a public place affects the health of others. The only way your theory works is if you isolate your decision making to avoid others. Don't want to wear a mask or get the vaccine--more power to you--but don't think you get to hang out at a bar, concert, movie theatre, or sports venue with other decent human beings who have collectively said, 'I care enough to do the right thing for all of us.'

As the old saying goes, your freedom to swing your fist ends at my face.

Private health insurance makes this a really complicated problem, but it's private industry making a small amount of people fabulously wealthy, so let's just not talk about it. Capitalism, y'all! Let the plebes fight in the thunderdome!

Can’t force or mandate people to take a vaccine to protect others…not being vaccinated doesn’t equal to having covid.

What a ridiculous statement. Various vaccinations are required to attend schools.

"Can’t force or mandate people to take a vaccine to protect others" 

We can, and have, and still do. This was extremely uncontroversial until 2020. I wonder why?

If the vaccine works why does it matter to you that others don’t want to get it? Before 2020 we were not in a global pandemic and were dealing mostly with preventable diseases where vaccines provided full and permanent protection.

I have this apparently rare condition where I care about other people.

We've already been over this.

“I have this apparently rare condition where I care about other people.”

You care so much about them that you want to stick needles in them against their will, even when that doesn’t guarantee anything except violating their bodily integrity…

Copy pasting this from gibbost's post above because apparently it's already getting misrepresented even though it was posted only hours ago.

"Don't want to wear a mask or get the vaccine--more power to you--but don't think you get to hang out at a bar, concert, movie theatre, or sports venue with other decent human beings who have collectively said, 'I care enough to do the right thing for all of us.'"

I'm not sure how that turned into sticking needles in people against their will, but trolls gonna troll I guess

People are free to do many things but they are not free from the consequences that arise from the things they choose to do. Seems a whole cohort has forgotten this.

Why do the 'free thinkers' who 'question the establishment' always seem to use the same identical rhetoric?

It's been my experience that the same people claiming that needles in arms violates 'body integrity' are out smoking a pack a day, choking down fast-food, and popping every manufactured pharmaceutical they can get their hands on. This was never about 'my body, my choice'. If it was they might think about reframing their argument for abortion. This was always about 'Don't Tread on Me' . . . 'Liberty or Death'. The misinformation campaign has fooled these people into thinking that standing up to the government on this makes them a patriot. In reality it just makes them an asshole. For all the reasons tduds points out, it's about doing the right thing for humanity. Mandates only become necessary when enough people stop considering others. Just like every other law or rule. Speed limits aren't necessary until the minute you think, 'fuck it, i'm late and in a goddam hurry. get out of my way.'

They just regurgitate whatever they hear that justifies what they already wanted to do. Ass-backwards logic.

Vaccine hesitancy is quite understandable among a number of groups in America, notably those who have a history of oppressive and non-consensual medical experimentation. This is absolutely a failure on the part of the government to work on outreach to build trust in these communities and provide better access to public health information and care. I'm not doubting these groups have legitimate reasons, but I'm also not pretending they in any way represent the vast majority of people who are out there protesting against vaccines and masks. And frankly it's kind of insulting to use those groups as cover for groups who have no excuse and know it.

Is that what your audiobook is about? I didn't listen but it's pretty plainly known to anyone who's read much about American history.

"notably those who have a history of oppressive and non-consensual medical experimentation" 

tduds, but isn't it weird that the vaccine hesitancy is actually amongst the group of people that haven't really been oppressed that much? On a recent trip in the south, to a state that, lets say is quite vaccine hesitant - most folks of color at restaurants and other public places were the only ones that were masked. It just seems that the "'Murica" types are using oppression as a reason, while they are actually the people who are historically the oppressors. 

Sorry if this ruflles some feathers

Yes, that's my point. It's disingenuous to use a very small group with a real justification for skepticism to paper over the existence of a much larger group with no excuse.

Getting vaccinated doesn’t prevent people from getting covid, and it doesn’t prevent people from spreading covid yet it is being treated as the Multipass ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"Prevention" is not a possible thing in this or any medicine. Reduction is the goal and it is working.

Vaccinated people are the biggest group of covid spreaders, they think they are protected with all those jabs and counting and go about their day spreading covid, like some antivaxxer Karen until they test positive and are genuinely surprised about the havoc they’ve caused. What IS working is that the virus is reducing in strength, it makes people less sick than earlier variants (but is more infectious).

Citation needed on all of the above.

Do your own research!

Show your work!

% positive tests in the Netherlands in January for the unvaccinated was 11.29% with over 89% of people having received at least 1 jab. Over half a million positive tests here last week but ICU nrs are still dropping (from 252 to 206) ever since omicron became dominant…so yes the virus is getting weaker but more infectious.

Getting vaccinated doesn’t prevent people from getting covid, and it doesn’t prevent people from spreading covid yet it is being treated as the Multipass

sure (although a nuanced analysis shows the rate of spread to be much lower than among the unvaccinated...), but it does prevent people from dying at a far higher rate. 20x in fact. do your vaccine ethics not take clear and simple bit of evidence into account?

per usual you are talking in slippery circles, saying many things, but avoiding making any articulate point.

“sure”

I told you so!

xoxo

found the covidiot.

It won't, the cunts with the trucks don't have shit to back up their nonsense.

It’s like 2c outside. They racists fucks will be fine outside.

No one is censoring anyone. We’re just calling out nonsense and empty jive. Not our fault you fell for their empty hooks.

I think we censored the Nazis pretty good, actually.

Maybe not good enough, though. *looks at Canadian truck rally*

Just what I thought all along. Displaced anger over losing the election. Don't tell me the rioters were patriots.

Oh no! Putting a disclaimer, or actually vetting what a failed comedian purports to be reasoned science is awfecting my feels...clown. The government isn't drone striking Joe Rogaine's studio, dummy.

You know, you really should stop demonstrating just how stupid, and how ineffective you are at this game.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/02/01/reuters-ivermectin-treatment-omicron-correction/

From the article;

"The difference between the two versions couldn’t be more dramatic: The mistaken version claimed that ivermectin was effective against omicron in humans; the corrected version claimed that ivermectin showed “antiviral” capabilities against omicron in test tubes. Reuters attributed the news to Kowa Co. Ltd., a Japanese pharmaceutical company.

The antiviral capabilities of ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2 in a test-tube environment are not a matter of breaking news: Research dating to 2020 showed that “a single dose of ivermectin was able to reduce the replication of an Australian isolate of SARS-CoV-2 in Vero/hSLAM cells by 5000-fold.” There were many reasons, however, for skepticism about how that finding would carry over into real-life treatment."

So just to be clear, your citation, of a MSM source, should be believed, and not the WaPo article, because...America? The science in the quote I pulled was infinitely more informative than the Reuters one, the one with the incorrect information...

They forgot to add the category “Arguing on the internet with complete strangers”

for some, it's part of primary job.

random, I consider that childcare. You okay puddums, or do you need Joe Rogaine to buck you up?

Childcare, I giggled…it indeed feels like that sometimes.

WFH has been the single best way to undermine the capitalistic work place.. i don't understand people who are working more, feels easier than ever to have boundaries.

I'm working more at home but that's because we're busy as fuck.

Jon Hopkins is a great musician, Johns Hopkins is a great institution.

But things don’t stay the same that old arguments can simply be pulled off the shelf again, we now have a variant that breaks through double jabbed and boosted people with ease, for example…CDC’s or equivalent also update their advices etc. so the same questions now might have different outcomes/answers. If it is that exhausting, just don’t participate and save your energy for other things. Or maybe best is to nuke this entire thread, nobody here is a virologist or a medical professional and simply have a link to the CDC as the one and only comment and delete the rest.

Disallowing the discussion of Vaccines and other topics that attract trolls like shit attracts flies would sit fine with me, but that's because I don't actively misapply the Blessed First Amendment Holy Be Its Miconception.

It's someone's alter-ego account... likely just to troll out nonsense for lols... can't imagine someone is really that dumb to believe that jive.

60 million hours less commuting means more time for Duolingo! Or it is someone that’s blocked here and tried to pass themselves off as someone else by changing their command of the English language…any recent blocks with a particular interest in COVID?

draconian lockdowns and such without data to support

anytime you see the phrase "draconian lockdowns," you know it's xlax.

ya'll fell for it, yet again.

some other favorite hits:

What risks lives is not recommended vitamin d supplements.
Deficiency has been correlated to worse outcome and no risk from supplementation. 

(health and wellness over scientific consensuses)

White and black are grossly reductive categories. Often imposed. I think that’s what they were try to say. Race is not so black and white.

(emphasis on colorblindness over "wokeness".. also "grossly reductive" is pretty advanced language in such a short amount of time. impressive!)

My goodness this really is religious. JP is an interesting intellectual, very misunderstood but that’s beside the point, because the audio isn’t by JP for the 100th time.

(fan of Jordan Peterson.. what a coincidence!)

I think he has several aliases including archfamous. Good grief.

Ban him.

imagine being so desperate to argue about covid on an online architecture forum that you would make multiple alias accounts and fake an english language deficiency.

"anytime you see the phrase "draconian lockdowns," you know it's xlax." 

The thing is, you kinda can't. People with the opinions that jlax brings to this forum often use the same phrasing and the same catch-words, because they get their opinions from the same place(s). There's an astonishing overlap in very specific language among folks pushing certain opinions, and you can tell from the level of adherence to talking points whether they've bothered to form their own opinion or are just parroting whatever grool lights up their dopamine sensors.

edit: and to pre-empt the inevitable comment "bUt tEh lEfT DoEs iT ToO!!" Sure, there's idiocy on all sides. But pointing out others' idiocy does not excuse your own.

something was once said about planks and motes?

too many coincidences - we've seen plenty of others who agree ideologically with xlax, but the word for word same language, syntax, post occurrence etc is uncanny.

time to nuke the thread, I think.