May 17, 20214 yr Just now, IFB DOG said: Don't attend your kids' baseball games. An errant swing could lead to a skull fracture. I'm smart enough not to have children. I'm not some fat, poor loser with 2 kids living in Ohio while getting my only thrills from ranting incoherently on a sub-forum on a rebuilding football team's message board.
May 17, 20214 yr Just now, vikas83 said: I'm smart enough not to have children. I'm not some fat, poor loser with 2 kids living in Ohio while getting my only thrills from ranting incoherently on a sub-forum on a rebuilding football team's message board. Whoa, hitting a little close to home there, buddy.
May 17, 20214 yr 6 minutes ago, vikas83 said: I'll go help "my people" when you help yours. Go start a fund for the medical care for the obese graduates of 4th tier business schools, and I'll send a check for $10k to Indian relief efforts. Weird. Never hit obesity. And, as of today, I am no longer overweight. 166lbs. I'll post a picture when I get home for you. But you'll always be short. Guess you better save some of that $10K for some bigger boots. 6 minutes ago, vikas83 said: I'm smart enough not to have children. I'm not some fat, poor loser with 2 kids living in Ohio while getting my only thrills from ranting incoherently on a sub-forum on a rebuilding football team's message board. Smart enough to not have children??!?!?! Can't get it up, TINY?!
May 17, 20214 yr The most rational, sane thing one can do in this disastrous world is to not reproduce.
May 17, 20214 yr 3 minutes ago, IFB DOG said: I'll post a picture when I get home for you. IFB DOG and meatmcginley beef coming ?????
May 17, 20214 yr Just now, EaglesRocker97 said: The most rational, sane thing one can do in this disastrous world is to not reproduce. Stop stealing my sunshine!!
May 17, 20214 yr 1 minute ago, Joe Shades 73 said: Stop stealing my sunshine!! It's funny, I typically consider myself an extremely cynical person and one of the most cynical posters in here, but I think you ripped that title away from me. You da real MVP.
May 17, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said: I totally agree. I'm just saying that there are some adults and plenty of young teens in the middle of getting vaccinated because they followed protocol and waited until they opened it to all groups. I don't have kids, but from what I gather, this is making a lot parents feel uncomfortable about their kids now potentially being at a higher risk for exposure. WGB seemed to feel similarly. Thankfully, my school district said that we're sticking with masks through the end of the school year, but the governor seems to have passed the buck on this and stopped at simply "encouraging" schools to continue with masking policies. When my school announced that we were last night, the response seemed to be overwhelmingly in support. Yeah, sorry, I realize now that could've been misleading. I like the way you said it better. It does raise a lot of questions. I'd say that, if they're receiving government funding, then I think it can be reasoned that the government has greater interest/legitimacy in some kind of intervention. But, from what I understand, Pfizer did not take federal funds, so they would be on solid grounds to raise objections over this. 1) yes there are adults and teens not fully vaccinated yet and are in the process. They should continue to wear masks when indoors. 2) I have a son who’s about to turn 3. Haven’t taken him anywhere indoors where he’d be unmasked around potentially unvaccinated adults anyway during this time, and that will not change. 3) agreed, if a company took government money to develop the vaccine, I don’t think they should have the rights to the patent. It wasn’t their money. But for a company like Pfizer, I think it would be a very bad decision to not let them have their rightfully earned patent.
May 17, 20214 yr 21 minutes ago, IFB DOG said: Science denying????????? Science denying is telling people with a 0.005% chance of dying from COVID that they should get injected with a limited-studied vaccine to save themselves. I have a higher risk falling off a curb or getting in a car accident on my way to the vaccination appointment. Do you wear a seatbelt when you drive?
May 17, 20214 yr 17 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: 1) yes there are adults and teens not fully vaccinated yet and are in the process. They should continue to wear masks when indoors. 2) I have a son who’s about to turn 3. Haven’t taken him anywhere indoors where he’d be unmasked around potentially unvaccinated adults anyway during this time, and that will not change. 3) agreed, if a company took government money to develop the vaccine, I don’t think they should have the rights to the patent. It wasn’t their money. But for a company like Pfizer, I think it would be a very bad decision to not let them have their rightfully earned patent. I appreciate the response. While I understand that unvaccinated people should be relatively safe masking up, we do know that masks aren't perfect, so if you're in a crowded setting wearing a mask but surrounded by maskless, unvaccinated people, the risk of infection is still elevated. I think your position here is something akin to "Enough of the population has been vaccinated that the burden is now shifted to the individual to protect themselves." I think, at some point, we all have to get to this position, but where that point is is entirely subjective. Personally, I think we should wait a little longer. We're just over 1/3 fully vaccinated. 50% would seem like a reasonable point to me. I see where you're coming from, but I could also understand someone who's still waiting for their final dose kind of feeling like they got shafted because everyone else was able to go about their lives while waiting to get jabbed with the peace of mind that everyone was masked up in public. I tutor at a small learning center, and I'm wondering how they'll handle this. Their adherence to masking policies was already kind of questionable, and I now wonder if they're just going to totally roll it back. If I was a parent sending my kid to a small, often crowded building for a two-hour (or longer) tutoring session, I would not feel comfortable with the possibility that there could be an unmasked, unvaccinated kid sitting right next to him for the entire time.
May 17, 20214 yr 1 minute ago, EaglesRocker97 said: I tutor at a small learning center, and I'm wondering how they'll handle this. Their adherence to masking policies was already kind of questionable, and I now wonder if they're just going to totally roll it back. If I was a parent sending my kid to a small, often crowded building for a two-hour (or longer) tutoring session, I would not feel comfortable with the possibility that there could be an unmasked, unvaccinated kid sitting right next to him for the entire time. School districts are also facing this same dilemma. Do they allow vaccinated teachers and students to go maskless? What about when you have parents/families in the district that have been outspoken on social media that they have every intention on saying they're vaccinated but no intention to get the vaccine. Does or can the school require proof of vaccination? Do they monitor/patrol which students haven't been vaccinated (or who has been depending on numbers) to enforce the masking requirements?
May 17, 20214 yr 11 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: Do you wear a seatbelt when you drive? Yes - but, don't back out now. Let's play this all the way through. Sources: https://www.statepatrol.ohio.gov/statistics/statspage3.asp https://www.statepatrol.ohio.gov/links/Seat_Belt_Bulletin_2020_Nov.pdf 1,041 fatal accidents in 2019. 1155 deaths. Roughly 55% were not wearing a seat belt. If you can show me a death rate of 55% in my age, health, race and comorbidity categories, then I'll get the vaccine. And never post again. But... you can't. So STFU with your useless analogies.
May 17, 20214 yr 6 minutes ago, Imp81318 said: School districts are also facing this same dilemma. Do they allow vaccinated teachers and students to go maskless? What about when you have parents/families in the district that have been outspoken on social media that they have every intention on saying they're vaccinated but no intention to get the vaccine. Does or can the school require proof of vaccination? Do they monitor/patrol which students haven't been vaccinated (or who has been depending on numbers) to enforce the masking requirements? Yes, in general. I don't know about this, since it HASN'T BEEN FDA APPROVED. EMERGENCY use. OK to use it in EMERGENCY SITUATIONS. Feeling under the weather for four days is NOT an emergency!
May 17, 20214 yr 2 minutes ago, IFB DOG said: Yes, in general. I don't know about this, since it HASN'T BEEN FDA APPROVED. EMERGENCY use. OK to use it in EMERGENCY SITUATIONS. Feeling under the weather for four days is NOT an emergency! I wasn't asking about requiring proof of vaccination for the students to go to school though, just to go maskless. Don't want to get vaccinated or don't want to show proof that you did, fine, wear your mask. I don't know the legal boundaries there but it makes sense that they could require it for the students to go maskless.
May 17, 20214 yr 2 minutes ago, IFB DOG said: Yes - but, don't back out now. Let's play this all the way through. Sources: https://www.statepatrol.ohio.gov/statistics/statspage3.asp https://www.statepatrol.ohio.gov/links/Seat_Belt_Bulletin_2020_Nov.pdf 1,041 fatal accidents in 2019. 1155 deaths. Roughly 55% were not wearing a seat belt. If you can show me a death rate of 55% in my age, health, race and comorbidity categories, then I'll get the vaccine. And never post again. But... you can't. So STFU with your useless analogies. You’re not very good with statistics I see. There are roughly 6 million auto accidents in a given year in this country. Your chance of getting into a car accident are FAR less than your chance of contracting COVID. About 38,000 people die in auto accidents. Your chance of getting in a fatal car accident are FAR less than your chance of dying of COVID. So why are you wearing a seat belt? What, are you some kind of sheep or something? What, you scared?
May 17, 20214 yr The position that vaccines cannot be mandated by employers because of EUA status is dubious. Quote One argument against mandates is that individuals cannot be required to get a vaccine that is being distributed under an EUA, as opposed to a full license, an argument made in a recent First Opinion. That would potentially delay Covid-19 vaccine mandates until the FDA approved the first vaccine under a biologics license application (BLA) — and so far the timing of that is unknown. Important nuances lead us to a very different conclusion: There are few to no legal barriers to employers or schools requiring vaccines being distributed under EUAs. A little context to begin: This is new ground. The FDA has never before granted an EUA for a vaccine for the entire population, so there is no perfect precedent here. Employers, especially health care entities, and universities have, however, historically mandated vaccines. These mandates, which are designed to increase safety, stand on solid legal ground, though accommodations may be legally required for those with disabilities or religious beliefs. Among those who believe that EUA vaccines cannot be mandated, the best two arguments are a legal argument and a policy one. The legal argument is that the law setting out the requirements for emergency use authorization contains language requiring the Secretary of Health and Human Services to ensure that people know they can refuse or accept the vaccine. The same language requires the informational materials accompanying EUA vaccines to tell people that "It is your choice to receive” the relevant vaccine. The policy argument against mandates is that the standards for emergency use authorization are lower than the standards for full approval, that the vaccines are "experimental” and not enough is known about them, and it is therefore unfair to mandate them. Two lawsuits have already been filed making both the legal and policy arguments, one by a corrections officer in New Mexico, and one by employees of the Los Angeles United School District. There are good reasons to reject both of these arguments, though. On the legal side, the EUA statute says nothing directed at employers or universities. Instead, it addresses the actions of federal officials, such as the HHS secretary and the president — not private actors. Private employees are generally "at will,” meaning they can be terminated for any reason that is not explicitly illegal. Those arguing that the EUA statute prohibits mandates by at-will employers are claiming that this federal law is changing existing state employment law on the topic by mere implication. They are reading in a broad prohibition covering all employers and universities in the U.S. that is not, in fact, in the statute. Such broad preemption would require, at a minimum, clearer language. During the pandemic, employers and universities have already required Covid-19 tests, many of which are being provided under emergency use authorization, for their in-person employees and returning students. If mandating products like tests under an EUA is unlawful, then every employer or university requiring the use of those tests has been flagrantly violating the law. Before the pandemic, the general position of the relevant federal agencies, such as the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was that vaccines provided under emergency use authorization cannot be mandated. But that guidance was not binding. When confronted with pandemic realities, the federal government took the position that “[w]hether an employer may require or mandate Covid-19 vaccination is a matter of state or other applicable law.” Legally, there is nothing to prevent such a reasonable position shift. Critics of mandating Covid-19 vaccines often cite their "experimental” nature and EUA status. It is true that, formally, the emergency use authorization requires substantially less evidence than does approval of a biologics license application. But Covid-19 vaccines were held to a high standard, which the FDA has described as EUA-plus. These emergency use authorizations were issued based on data from clinical trials including tens of thousands of people — as comprehensive as the data generally submitted for licensed vaccines. Further, the data supporting their use are extremely strong. mRNA vaccines are more than 90% effective. Not only did the trials not raise safety concerns but now, with tens of millions of doses given in what is probably the most closely observed vaccination effort in the United States, the vaccines’ safety record is very strong. mRNA vaccines do cause higher rates of allergic reactions than routine vaccines, but even those are rare — 2 to 11 per million doses. Other than that, no serious harms have been convincingly linked to the Covid-19 vaccines authorized in the United States. The federal government has traditionally regulated employers and universities in two ways. It has used regulations to increase safety in the workplace. The federal government generally does not intervene to prohibit safety measures or, in other words, to decrease safety. It also regulates employers and universities to prevent some types of discrimination against those with disabilities or based on religion. Along those lines, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has made it clear that employers may exclude from the workplace employees who refuse to be vaccinated, but should not discriminate against those who cannot receive Covid-19 vaccines because of an underlying disability or religious belief. A vaccine requirement is a safety measure, in that it is meant to protect the health of employees, clients, students, and others in workplaces or schools. Employment in the U.S. is largely at will, allowing employers wide latitude in setting workplace rules. Without clear indications that requiring Covid-19 vaccination is legally forbidden, employers and universities should be allowed to do that — which isn’t to say a vaccine mandate is the right choice for a university or employer. That is a more complex question that will depend on expectations of how many employees or students will get vaccinated without a mandate and the effect of mandates on vaccine hesitancy. But it is likely a legal choice, despite the EUA status of these vaccines. https://www.statnews.com/2021/04/05/authorization-status-covid-19-vaccine-red-herring-mandating-vaccination/ Regardless, I expect the mRNA vaccines to be fully approved at some point this summer.
May 17, 20214 yr 4 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: You’re not very good with statistics I see. There are roughly 6 million auto accidents in a given year in this country. Your chance of getting into a car accident are FAR less than your chance of contracting COVID. About 38,000 people die in auto accidents. Your chance of getting in a fatal car accident are FAR less than your chance of dying of COVID. So why are you wearing a seat belt? What, are you some kind of sheep or something? What, you scared?
May 17, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, IFB DOG said: Bill, you gotta be full in on this. You cannot start giving justifications to manipulating data for control. There is NEVER a justification for it. If there is a reason that the data is indicative of control measures becoming necessary, then the data need not be manipulated. If the data need be manipulated to initiate control, then the control was the goal in the first place. This was never as deadly TO HEALTHY, NON-OBESE, NON-HYPERTENSIVE, NON-ELDERLY populations. And, as we've found out now, less deadly to white people too. I don't want to use THAT statistic as a "gotcha", but it does lower my family's risk too. So, again, personal decisions. The fact that this is now widely accepted and others in here are rushing off to vaccinate their kids F'ing BLOWS MY MIND. To others: Are you afraid for yourself, or your kids? Is it because you're high risk that you're concerned for your kids getting sick? Are you not going to let them go to school? They are literally more likely to die in the car on the way to school than they are to die from COVID. Guess you better start homeschooling, or you're a hypocrite. See this is the difference between people like you and people like me. I have the ability to not go full in on anything like a maniac and use logic and reason and my own thoughts to form opinions on a case by case basis. Seems like you're a little high strung, relax and have a cigarette or something.
May 17, 20214 yr With regard to the issue of privacy vs. vaccination for students and staff, I suspect that in the end, proof of vaccination will likely be required for schools. Might also be required for travel, and at indoor entertainment venues (gentlemen's' clubs maybe notwithstanding you pervs, lol). There are health and safety exceptions to other areas of privacy in our society, and this will likely fall under that mantle. JMO of course.
May 17, 20214 yr 2 minutes ago, PoconoDon said: With regard to the issue of privacy vs. vaccination for students and staff, I suspect that in the end, proof of vaccination will likely be required for schools. Might also be required for travel, and at indoor entertainment venues (gentlemen's' clubs maybe notwithstanding you pervs, lol). There are health and safety exceptions to other areas of privacy in our society, and this will likely fall under that mantle. JMO of course. Private venues and businesses should be able to do as they please. If the Eagles say you can only attend games if you can show proof of vaccination, there's nothing illegal about that. Schools already require vaccinations so I think that case has been settled. There is some question about EUA vs. fully approved that is murky at best. But private schools can clearly do whatever they want. We looked into the ability to mandate vaccinations among employees, but luckily, we don't employ morons so everyone voluntarily got the vaccine.
May 17, 20214 yr 6 minutes ago, PoconoDon said: With regard to the issue of privacy vs. vaccination for students and staff, I suspect that in the end, proof of vaccination will likely be required for schools. Might also be required for travel, and at indoor entertainment venues (gentlemen's' clubs maybe notwithstanding you pervs, lol). There are health and safety exceptions to other areas of privacy in our society, and this will likely fall under that mantle. JMO of course. It’ll be like when there were smoking and non smoking sections of restaurants. I’ll only stay at non-covid hotels and only eat on the vaccinated sections of Applebee’s.
May 17, 20214 yr 25 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: You’re not very good with statistics I see. There are roughly 6 million auto accidents in a given year in this country. Your chance of getting into a car accident are FAR less than your chance of contracting COVID. About 38,000 people die in auto accidents. Your chance of getting in a fatal car accident are FAR less than your chance of dying of COVID. So why are you wearing a seat belt? What, are you some kind of sheep or something? What, you scared? You are so full of crap. You just used whole-population deaths of COVID. You're misrepresenting MY risk. Car accidents don't care about your AGE. Your HEALTH. Your WEIGHT. Your RACE. COVID does. And MY PERSONAL RISK OF DEATH is significantly lower than the whole-population risk that YOU just used. So, no, I understand statistics fully. YOU don't.
Create an account or sign in to comment