5 5
gowlerk

covid-19

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, ryoder said:

Nebraska seeking to hire new nurses from the bottom of the barrel:

State draws backlash after advertising nursing jobs with 'no mandated COVID-19 vaccination'

Any nurse stupid enough to refuse the vaccine deserves to live and work in Nebraska. Nebraska has a lot of cows, and it’s close to Colorado so there is that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Any nurse stupid enough to refuse the vaccine deserves to live and work in Nebraska. Nebraska has a lot of cows, and it’s close to Colorado so there is that.

Hi Ken,

Re:  Nebraska has a lot of cows

Maybe she took the cow pills ( they are all the rage ) and she considers herself safe.

Jerry Baumchen

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone help me out here: If COVID-19 vaccinations are such a horrible imposition on our freedoms, then why has the anti-vax crowd not raised a big stink about the vaccination requirements to go to public school in the US?

(Scroll down to the bottom of the page to get the links to each state's requirements.)

State-by-State: Vaccinations Required for Public School Kindergarten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
3 hours ago, ryoder said:

Someone help me out here: If COVID-19 vaccinations are such a horrible imposition on our freedoms, then why has the anti-vax crowd not raised a big stink about the vaccination requirements to go to public school in the US?

(Scroll down to the bottom of the page to get the links to each state's requirements.)

State-by-State: Vaccinations Required for Public School Kindergarten

Pharma has had some pretty high profile controversies showing they are willing to kill 100s of thousands of people in the name of profit.  My two favorite: Vioxx and the Opioid Epidemic.  Remember safe and effective non addictive Oxycontin?  

When the Covid mRNA vaccine has been out a few decades like most of the vaccines on that list, maybe.  Assuming they work, which seems to be debatable [1].  Something like 300 kids have died from covid since the start of the pandemic.  About a thousand die of the flu every year--flu vaccines are not on that list.

Any 1.0 product has bugs.  Bugs in manufacture [2], dosing, environment.  Medicines in particular have populations of people that are more at risk/shouldn't take it.  Maybe you're excited to have children be a profit center and test bed for some Pfizer exec.  I'm not.

[1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/ultra-vaccinated-israels-debacle-is-a-dire-warning-to-america

[2] https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/japan-stops-use-of-1-63-million-moderna-doses-over-contamination-2518827

Edited by base698

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
12 hours ago, ryoder said:

That's one thing I dont really agree with. You cant just go deducting employees' pays for various miscellaneous reasons as you see fit for arbitrary reasons. That's flat out illegal. Denying future promotion opportunities, non-contractual bonuses or future pay raises? Sure, that's all fair game. But at the end of the day an employee was offered a certain pay (which is contractual) at the beginning of their employment and you cannot lower that post-employment. Either you have to fire them or pay them what you promised. So make it all or nothing. Either full pay or you get fired. Lowering pay sounds like some CFO saying 'hey, I have an idea of how we can improve profits AND make it look like we're trying to do good'.

Edited by Westerly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, base698 said:

Pharma has had some pretty high profile controversies showing they are willing to kill 100s of thousands of people in the name of profit.  My two favorite: Vioxx and the Opioid Epidemic.  Remember safe and effective non addictive Oxycontin?  

When the Covid mRNA vaccine has been out a few decades like most of the vaccines on that list, maybe.  Assuming they work, which seems to be debatable [1].  Something like 300 kids have died from covid since the start of the pandemic.  About a thousand die of the flu every year--flu vaccines are not on that list.

Any 1.0 product has bugs.  Bugs in manufacture [2], dosing, environment.  Medicines in particular have populations of people that are more at risk/shouldn't take it.  Maybe you're excited to have children be a profit center and test bed for some Pfizer exec.  I'm not.

[1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/ultra-vaccinated-israels-debacle-is-a-dire-warning-to-america

[2] https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/japan-stops-use-of-1-63-million-moderna-doses-over-contamination-2518827

Let me put it this way:
I agree that Big Pharma companies do not operate from idealism about making the world a better place. They are geared towards making long-term profit.

But please consider that the best way of generating long-term profit in that field is basically achieved by, you know, not killing your customers and instead providing products that strictly adhere to international regulations and oversight.

Another good way of keeping your profit is to not make your vaccine available to 3rd world countires, but that's a different can of worms.

Lastly, as has been previously stated many many times before, a vaccine is tested extensively before it's released (starting long before we ever hear of it). First in test tubes, later in animals, yet again later on healthy volunteers. Each of these steps is subject to extensive oversight and auditing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Baksteen said:

Let me put it this way:
I agree that Big Pharma companies do not operate from idealism about making the world a better place. They are geared towards making long-term profit.

But please consider that the best way of generating long-term profit in that field is basically achieved by, you know, not killing your customers and instead providing products that strictly adhere to international regulations and oversight.

Another good way of keeping your profit is to not make your vaccine available to 3rd world countires, but that's a different can of worms.

Lastly, as has been previously stated many many times before, a vaccine is tested extensively before it's released (starting long before we ever hear of it). First in test tubes, later in animals, yet again later on healthy volunteers. Each of these steps is subject to extensive oversight and auditing.

Drug interactions are vastly complicated and realistically you can't test every case.  What people eat or drink could have an effect.  Their genetics.  Other medicines they are on.  Pollutants in the environment.  Age and time.

Their is a trade off at some point where they feel good enough and release to the public. That first year of release if it's popular is going to dwarf all testing ever done by orders of magnitude.  

Not just theoretical.  Look at all the drugs that have made it through trial and were later pulled.  The ones I mentioned above.  I'll add Acutane to the list.  There are dozens.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Westerly said:

That's one thing I dont really agree with. You cant just go deducting employees' pays for various miscellaneous reasons as you see fit for arbitrary reasons. That's flat out illegal. Denying future promotion opportunities, non-contractual bonuses or future pay raises? Sure, that's all fair game. But at the end of the day an employee was offered a certain pay (which is contractual) at the beginning of their employment and you cannot lower that post-employment. Either you have to fire them or pay them what you promised. So make it all or nothing. Either full pay or you get fired. Lowering pay sounds like some CFO saying 'hey, I have an idea of how we can improve profits AND make it look like we're trying to do good'.

Seriously.  Maybe we add exceptions for skydiving? Hook it in and your medical bills could be in the millions of dollars. Why should my insurance pay for your irresponsibility?

Next maybe we can do motorcycles. Anyone having fun outside of Disney approved centers doesn't get health insurance.  

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Westerly said:

That's one thing I dont really agree with. You cant just go deducting employees' pays for various miscellaneous reasons as you see fit for arbitrary reasons. That's flat out illegal. Denying future promotion opportunities, non-contractual bonuses or future pay raises? Sure, that's all fair game. But at the end of the day an employee was offered a certain pay (which is contractual) at the beginning of their employment and you cannot lower that post-employment. Either you have to fire them or pay them what you promised. So make it all or nothing. Either full pay or you get fired. Lowering pay sounds like some CFO saying 'hey, I have an idea of how we can improve profits AND make it look like we're trying to do good'.

Delta isn't lowering their pay, it's raising the health insurance premiums of unvaccinated employees.  I'm sure they have actuarial data to support doing this.

A fine distinction, but an important one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Westerly said:

That's one thing I dont really agree with. You cant just go deducting employees' pays for various miscellaneous reasons as you see fit for arbitrary reasons. That's flat out illegal. Denying future promotion opportunities, non-contractual bonuses or future pay raises? Sure, that's all fair game. But at the end of the day an employee was offered a certain pay (which is contractual) at the beginning of their employment and you cannot lower that post-employment. Either you have to fire them or pay them what you promised. So make it all or nothing. Either full pay or you get fired. Lowering pay sounds like some CFO saying 'hey, I have an idea of how we can improve profits AND make it look like we're trying to do good'.

It is quite legal to put a surcharge on health insurance premiums for behaviors that have a significant likelihood of raising health care costs.  At my work there is a $100/month surcharge for smokers.  You have to sign an affidavit that you do not use tobacco products (smoking, pipe, or chew) or you are automatically assessed the surcharge.  If you lie and are caught you immediately lose your health insurance coverage.

I suppose the same thing could be done regarding skydiving, but in reality so few people skydive that it would cost more to enforce the program than it would be worth.

Don

Share this post


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

It is quite legal to put a surcharge on health insurance premiums for behaviors that have a significant likelihood of raising health care costs.  At my work there is a $100/month surcharge for smokers.  You have to sign an affidavit that you do not use tobacco products (smoking, pipe, or chew) or you are automatically assessed the surcharge.  If you lie and are caught you immediately lose your health insurance coverage.

I suppose the same thing could be done regarding skydiving, but in reality so few people skydive that it would cost more to enforce the program than it would be worth.

Don

Bingo.

I somewhat doubt that there were over 600k people killed from skydiving in the last year and a half or so.

FWIW, my disability insurance denies coverage for a lot of stuff. Any general aviation accident is excluded (my understanding is that this isn't terribly unusual).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kallend said:

Delta isn't lowering their pay, it's raising the health insurance premiums of unvaccinated employees.  I'm sure they have actuarial data to support doing this.

A fine distinction, but an important one.

I’m surprised health insurance companies haven’t started doing this themselves.

Either refusing to insure someone unvaccinated or having zero liability for covid costs in the event you do get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, nwt said:

Decades.

The moment it hit the bodies of 160 million people it dwarfed any testing done in the previous years, decades or centuries.  Products exposed to the reality of launch with real customers encounter edge cases and issues testing doesn't uncover.  Reformulations occur over time, changes in manufacturing process.  They did not have supply lines, training up for these vaccines longer than maybe a year.  Those count too.  Not just the medical formulation.  Though that has an apparent bug as well.  

Note the numerous contamination that have happened--one posted above.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, base698 said:

The moment it hit the bodies of 160 million people it dwarfed any testing done in the previous years, decades or centuries.  Products exposed to the reality of launch with real customers encounter edge cases and issues testing doesn't uncover.  Reformulations occur over time, changes in manufacturing process.  They did not have supply lines, training up for these vaccines longer than maybe a year.  Those count too.  Not just the medical formulation.  Though that has an apparent bug as well.  

Note the numerous contamination that have happened--one posted above.  

All I see here is incoherent rambling.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I’m surprised health insurance companies haven’t started doing this themselves.

Either refusing to insure someone unvaccinated or having zero liability for covid costs in the event you do get it.

Either their insurance premium goes up or yours does. Good for me that I'm on Medicare with a great supplement. Best insurance I've had in memory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, nwt said:

All I see here is incoherent rambling.

Clinical trials have thousands of people.  Even if you had clinical trials for say 2 decades.  The number of people exposed to the vaccine (assuming no large changes) would be very small compared to 160 million people.  People are very different: some abuse tylenol, alcohol, avocado.  Some live in areas with higher air pollutants.  Some have abnormal genetics like missing chromosomes.  Some have skydiving injuries with unusual hardware.  Trials cannot by sheer numbers test all of these things.

In addition to the ingredients of the medication, a supply line for materials has to be created to supply the product to the nurses and doctors giving it.  Supply lines can have contamination or other quality issues involving the ingredients (there are at least 2 of these issues with the current vaccines).

You've also got processes around administering the drug.  The mRNA vaccines require cold storage for example which is different.  New processes require training.  Mistakes can be made in the beginning.

Bugs exist for any product.  Errors in manufacture, transport, and administering are going to happen in higher quantities for something just hitting the market.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, kallend said:

Delta isn't lowering their pay, it's raising the health insurance premiums of unvaccinated employees.  I'm sure they have actuarial data to support doing this.

A fine distinction, but an important one.

Hi John,

Re:  Delta isn't lowering their pay

And, one more way to get into their money:  Oregon says people fired for refusing vaccines generally can’t collect jobless benefits - oregonlive.com

'Ya pays ya money and ya takes ya chances.'

Jerry Baumchen

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, base698 said:

Clinical trials have thousands of people.  Even if you had clinical trials for say 2 decades.  The number of people exposed to the vaccine (assuming no large changes) would be very small compared to 160 million people.  People are very different: some abuse tylenol, alcohol, avocado.  Some live in areas with higher air pollutants.  Some have abnormal genetics like missing chromosomes.  Some have skydiving injuries with unusual hardware.  Trials cannot by sheer numbers test all of these things.

In addition to the ingredients of the medication, a supply line for materials has to be created to supply the product to the nurses and doctors giving it.  Supply lines can have contamination or other quality issues involving the ingredients (there are at least 2 of these issues with the current vaccines).

You've also got processes around administering the drug.  The mRNA vaccines require cold storage for example which is different.  New processes require training.  Mistakes can be made in the beginning.

Bugs exist for any product.  Errors in manufacture, transport, and administering are going to happen in higher quantities for something just hitting the market.  

I wonder if you have ever jumped a new exit?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, base698 said:

Clinical trials have thousands of people.  Even if you had clinical trials for say 2 decades.  The number of people exposed to the vaccine (assuming no large changes) would be very small compared to 160 million people.  People are very different: some abuse tylenol, alcohol, avocado.  Some live in areas with higher air pollutants.  Some have abnormal genetics like missing chromosomes.  Some have skydiving injuries with unusual hardware.  Trials cannot by sheer numbers test all of these things.

In addition to the ingredients of the medication, a supply line for materials has to be created to supply the product to the nurses and doctors giving it.  Supply lines can have contamination or other quality issues involving the ingredients (there are at least 2 of these issues with the current vaccines).

You've also got processes around administering the drug.  The mRNA vaccines require cold storage for example which is different.  New processes require training.  Mistakes can be made in the beginning.

Bugs exist for any product.  Errors in manufacture, transport, and administering are going to happen in higher quantities for something just hitting the market.  

And at the end of the day, considering all these facts, it's stupid and irresponsible to not get the vaccine.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, base698 said:

Clinical trials have thousands of people.  Even if you had clinical trials for say 2 decades.  The number of people exposed to the vaccine (assuming no large changes) would be very small compared to 160 million people.  People are very different: some abuse tylenol, alcohol, avocado.  Some live in areas with higher air pollutants.  Some have abnormal genetics like missing chromosomes.  Some have skydiving injuries with unusual hardware.  Trials cannot by sheer numbers test all of these things. bla bla bla...

What you are doing here is an old tactic called "making perfect the enemy of the good".

You can raise an almost infinite series of "what if" stories to justify never ever approving any drug, vaccine, or whatever.  Is a side effect that impacts literally one in a million people worse than a disease that has killed a minimum of 4 or 5 million in a little over one year, and destroyed the long-term health of several times that number?  For a long time after drugs are approved they continue to be monitored for those infrequent side effects, so that treatments can be developed or people likely to experience the side effect can be identified and excluded from taking the drug.

If your standard is that not one person, ever, has an adverse reaction then that is the end, no-one will ever develop a new method to treat or prevent any disease. 

Don

  • Like 5

Share this post


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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

5 5