(05-12-2024, 10:03 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2024, 03:46 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You need to be honest with yourself about your level of academic rigor. You didn't post that site because you frequent TechARP by Dr. Adrian Wong from Malasia. You went out and looked for a rebuttal to that study because you're intellectually lazy. You expect me to do the heavy lifting in this debate while you post [BLEEP], then cling to the one point that he made that was scholarly, while conveniently ignoring that his other 4 points are not relevant. Literally everything about what's right or wrong about that article is in the original studies posted and the rebuttal, and you read exactly neither.
You're right. I didn't waste my time reading the scholarly tweets dissecting the study, because it wasn't really about defending Americus's point, but attacking you personally for your hypocrisy. I had an hour of extra free time this afternoon, and I can either waste it breaking down a critique I don't care about, or I could watch that new Colin Quinn special I wanted to watch.
Btw, since I always have to do the heavy lifting in these conversations (which is why my predictions have been more accurate than your cucked answers), I looked through the "scholarly" tweets and one of the responses was Dr. Peter Parry offering to go through the criticisms of Friedemann Weber, but no response, of course. The only "charlatans" in your world are the ones willing to openly discuss their ideas. Real men of science already know the truth, am I rite?
Lol. Bloviate.
Right, you like to write a bunch of words about stuff you know a little bit about and pretend that everyone else doesn't meet your standards. So go ahead and bloviate away, no skin off my nose.
It's strange to me that you can't see your own hypocrisy.. like I said you're antiestablishment unless it's your establishment.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, doctors and scientists are led by the money. It's thanks to the few doctors and scientists that are led by the actual science that correct the awful mistakes made by the money. Leaded fuel is probably the biggest one in recent history. Then sugar.
Where there's smoke there's fire. But you go ahead and trust the medical and pharmaceutical industry without question. If a PhD made people intelligent we wouldn't have indoctrination camps instead of universities, unfortunately you don't have to be smart to get one. But hey just stick your head in the sand and pretend that the degree means they are above reproach.
(05-12-2024, 11:13 AM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2024, 10:03 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Right, you like to write a bunch of words about stuff you know a little bit about and pretend that everyone else doesn't meet your standards. So go ahead and bloviate away, no skin off my nose.
It's strange to me that you can't see your own hypocrisy.. like I said you're antiestablishment unless it's your establishment.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, doctors and scientists are led by the money. It's thanks to the few doctors and scientists that are led by the actual science that correct the awful mistakes made by the money. Leaded fuel is probably the biggest one in recent history. Then sugar.
Where there's smoke there's fire. But you go ahead and trust the medical and pharmaceutical industry without question. If a PhD made people intelligent we wouldn't have indoctrination camps instead of universities, unfortunately you don't have to be smart to get one. But hey just stick your head in the sand and pretend that the degree means they are above reproach.
It's strange that you think I care what you think. I don't know you, you haven't been in this thread for the last four years, who are you that you matter? I at least have some respect for L2L even though he has that irritating personality defect trying to always turn this into a "who's more righter" measuring contest. You have no cred here. That you even say I "trust without question" means you have no clue what you're talking about in this discussion.
The more righter comes into play when you suggest this is a subject I know little about. I was more righter because I studied the literature from multiple sources. I followed it insanely closely until I lost interest and the powers-that-be stopped being tyrannical. I chime in when I consider your posting to be intellectually lazy or hypocritical, which you have done in this thread frequently.
I have a higher standard for people with authority, and you are part of a group that is dropping the ball massively. It is hurting Americans. That is not to take away from the good things hospitals do well, but healthcare leadership is failing us. The almighty dollar is steering the ship, and too many of you are ok with status quo.
Btw, on the subject of more righter, let's look at what I've actually said about the vaccine:
I said it was a good vaccine for at risk demographics and recommended it for people 65+ or with immune problems. I said it was not clear how much it was helping young, healthy people. I said it probably was causing myocarditis in young men. I said it wasn't stopping transmission. I did the math to show how, even though it did reduce transmission slightly, it wasn't by a large enough amount to mandate vaccination among the healthy population. I said it was stupid to fire people for not wanting to take it, which has been vindicated by almost every employer reversing their knee-jerk reactions after realizing that natural immunity was sufficient. I said it would take about 5 years to find out the true health impacts of the vaccine. I said our policy was largely being influenced by money. All of those things are right.
My position is nuanced, which is lost in our polar society. I don't hate the vaccine. I have never said people who wanted to take it shouldn't. I have never said it was killing people. My position is not radical. It simply attacks big pharma, government, and corporations for being greedy and/or complicit in said greed. More importantly, at the crux of my argument is a push back against totalitarian approaches to healthcare. I expect healthcare professionals to be able to state these basic positions because the data was widely available. People like me shouldn't have to be a voice of reason.
(05-12-2024, 09:53 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Btw, on the subject of more righter, let's look at what I've actually said about the vaccine:
I said it was a good vaccine for at risk demographics and recommended it for people 65+ or with immune problems. I said it was not clear how much it was helping young, healthy people. I said it probably was causing myocarditis in young men. I said it wasn't stopping transmission. I did the math to show how, even though it did reduce transmission slightly, it wasn't by a large enough amount to mandate vaccination among the healthy population. I said it was stupid to fire people for not wanting to take it, which has been vindicated by almost every employer reversing their knee-jerk reactions after realizing that natural immunity was sufficient. I said it would take about 5 years to find out the true health impacts of the vaccine. I said our policy was largely being influenced by money. All of those things are right.
My position is nuanced, which is lost in our polar society. I don't hate the vaccine. I have never said people who wanted to take it shouldn't. I have never said it was killing people. My position is not radical. It simply attacks big pharma, government, and corporations for being greedy and/or complicit in said greed. More importantly, at the crux of my argument is a push back against totalitarian approaches to healthcare. I expect healthcare professionals to be able to state these basic positions because the data was widely available. People like me shouldn't have to be a voice of reason.
That's right, that's what sticks in your craw. I believe that employers have the right to require vaccination and you don't. That's pretty much the whole reason you so adamantly oppose literally everything I post on the topic. Nothing really about the science or the policy, you're still pissed that I believe in Employer Rights and you don't.
(05-12-2024, 10:04 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2024, 09:53 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Btw, on the subject of more righter, let's look at what I've actually said about the vaccine:
I said it was a good vaccine for at risk demographics and recommended it for people 65+ or with immune problems. I said it was not clear how much it was helping young, healthy people. I said it probably was causing myocarditis in young men. I said it wasn't stopping transmission. I did the math to show how, even though it did reduce transmission slightly, it wasn't by a large enough amount to mandate vaccination among the healthy population. I said it was stupid to fire people for not wanting to take it, which has been vindicated by almost every employer reversing their knee-jerk reactions after realizing that natural immunity was sufficient. I said it would take about 5 years to find out the true health impacts of the vaccine. I said our policy was largely being influenced by money. All of those things are right.
My position is nuanced, which is lost in our polar society. I don't hate the vaccine. I have never said people who wanted to take it shouldn't. I have never said it was killing people. My position is not radical. It simply attacks big pharma, government, and corporations for being greedy and/or complicit in said greed. More importantly, at the crux of my argument is a push back against totalitarian approaches to healthcare. I expect healthcare professionals to be able to state these basic positions because the data was widely available. People like me shouldn't have to be a voice of reason.
That's right, that's what sticks in your craw. I believe that employers have the right to require vaccination and you don't. That's pretty much the whole reason you so adamantly oppose literally everything I post on the topic. Nothing really about the science or the policy, you're still pissed that I believe in Employer Rights and you don't.
What if employers are mandating vaccination based on false information provided by the federal government and your industry in particular? Any difference?
You would have made Hitler proud in the 40's. "Just following orders".
(05-13-2024, 08:42 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2024, 10:04 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That's right, that's what sticks in your craw. I believe that employers have the right to require vaccination and you don't. That's pretty much the whole reason you so adamantly oppose literally everything I post on the topic. Nothing really about the science or the policy, you're still pissed that I believe in Employer Rights and you don't.
What if employers are mandating vaccination based on false information provided by the federal government and your industry in particular? Any difference?
You would have made Hitler proud in the 40's. "Just following orders".
I don't care what the reasons are why someone else chooses to employ or not employ a person. That's their right.
And if you think I'm a Nazi you have no [BLEEP] idea what that means, so stop with the halfwit insults.
(05-13-2024, 08:42 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2024, 10:04 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That's right, that's what sticks in your craw. I believe that employers have the right to require vaccination and you don't. That's pretty much the whole reason you so adamantly oppose literally everything I post on the topic. Nothing really about the science or the policy, you're still pissed that I believe in Employer Rights and you don't.
What if employers are mandating vaccination based on false information provided by the federal government and your industry in particular? Any difference?
You would have made Hitler proud in the 40's. "Just following orders".
What a garbage thing to say.
Glad you're back!
(05-13-2024, 08:58 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2024, 08:42 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]What if employers are mandating vaccination based on false information provided by the federal government and your industry in particular? Any difference?
You would have made Hitler proud in the 40's. "Just following orders".
I don't care what the reasons are why someone else chooses to employ or not employ a person. That's their right.
And if you think I'm a Nazi you have no [BLEEP] idea what that means, so stop with the halfwit insults.
Curious where your line in the sand on employer rights is. Forcing someone to choose between injecting an untested and unproven vaccine in order to feed their families puts you in pretty bad company.
(05-13-2024, 09:23 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-13-2024, 08:58 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care what the reasons are why someone else chooses to employ or not employ a person. That's their right.
And if you think I'm a Nazi you have no [BLEEP] idea what that means, so stop with the halfwit insults.
Curious where your line in the sand on employer rights is. Forcing someone to choose between injecting an untested and unproven vaccine in order to feed their families puts you in pretty bad company.
My line is the employer's rights to do with their company as they wish. Don't want to hire redheads? Ok. Don't want to hire men? Ok. Don't wanna hire Democrats, Baptists, Free Masons, Elk, Shriners, or anything else? Ok. No one is entitled to tell an owner what they must do with their property IMO. Always been that way, always will be that way. As for your second sentence, your misunderstanding of reality is misinforming your position, so you thinking I'm in bad company is just a matter of your own ignorance.
(05-12-2024, 10:04 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2024, 09:53 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Btw, on the subject of more righter, let's look at what I've actually said about the vaccine:
I said it was a good vaccine for at risk demographics and recommended it for people 65+ or with immune problems. I said it was not clear how much it was helping young, healthy people. I said it probably was causing myocarditis in young men. I said it wasn't stopping transmission. I did the math to show how, even though it did reduce transmission slightly, it wasn't by a large enough amount to mandate vaccination among the healthy population. I said it was stupid to fire people for not wanting to take it, which has been vindicated by almost every employer reversing their knee-jerk reactions after realizing that natural immunity was sufficient. I said it would take about 5 years to find out the true health impacts of the vaccine. I said our policy was largely being influenced by money. All of those things are right.
My position is nuanced, which is lost in our polar society. I don't hate the vaccine. I have never said people who wanted to take it shouldn't. I have never said it was killing people. My position is not radical. It simply attacks big pharma, government, and corporations for being greedy and/or complicit in said greed. More importantly, at the crux of my argument is a push back against totalitarian approaches to healthcare. I expect healthcare professionals to be able to state these basic positions because the data was widely available. People like me shouldn't have to be a voice of reason.
That's right, that's what sticks in your craw. I believe that employers have the right to require vaccination and you don't. That's pretty much the whole reason you so adamantly oppose literally everything I post on the topic. Nothing really about the science or the policy, you're still pissed that I believe in Employer Rights and you don't.
While I think it was cowardly of your employer to fire 400 employees for not wanting take a novel vaccine that didn't show to significantly stop the spread among the healthy populace (within 2 months of rollout, that was clear), and while I do think you are complicit in that cowardice, this has nothing to do with employer rights. If this illness were killing 1 in 10 people like advertised and if the vaccine stopped the spread as advertised, there would at least be a case for making that kind of decision. You guys made rash decisions on bad data that I believe was motivated fear and/or greed. That's what sticks in my craw.
Doctors and hospital administrators are supposed to be a bulwark against corporate greed. Patients first. Hippocratic oath and all that [BLEEP]. You guys don't protect your patients. Not wholly at least. If it's going to get you mired in phone calls to fight the system or draw attention to your hospital for not being compliant or cause your investors to spook, you guys fold like origami. Your entire industry has caved. It's status quo. That's what sticks in my craw.
If I'm playing internet psychologist, I think it's you who defends this position to justify displacing workers on bad data. You need your position to be right for your own conscience. But, hey... that's just a theory... a film theory.
(05-14-2024, 04:10 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Never forget what these scum did.
https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/...LlHoQ&s=19
I will never forget. The company I work for is a government contractor. Their position was personal choice however to keep the contract they had to comply with the government mandate. At my age and salary I was coerced into making a decision I vehemently disagreed with. As much as my buddy FSG will defend the mandates, it was a [BLEEP] position to put hard working people into, and on any other topic he would agree.
(05-14-2024, 07:07 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2024, 04:10 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Never forget what these scum did.
https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/...LlHoQ&s=19
I will never forget. The company I work for is a government contractor. Their position was personal choice however to keep the contract they had to comply with the government mandate. At my age and salary I was coerced into making a decision I vehemently disagreed with. As much as my buddy FSG will defend the mandates, it was a [BLEEP] position to put hard working people into, and on any other topic he would agree.
Employer rights should never enter into the equation.
Akin to telling a pregnant woman to get an abortion or lose their job.
(05-14-2024, 07:20 PM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2024, 07:07 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I will never forget. The company I work for is a government contractor. Their position was personal choice however to keep the contract they had to comply with the government mandate. At my age and salary I was coerced into making a decision I vehemently disagreed with. As much as my buddy FSG will defend the mandates, it was a [BLEEP] position to put hard working people into, and on any other topic he would agree.
Employer rights should never enter into the equation.
Akin to telling a pregnant woman to get an abortion or lose their job.
I'm ok with that too. Employer Rights ARE the equation because you don't have a RIGHT to employment at MY company. If you don't agree with my terms then you are free to leave. I know that's hard for people to grasp, but private property is the foundation of our entire society, and when others can mandate the terms by which you employ free people then they are exerting Ownership Rights on something they don't own. I vehemently oppose that.
(05-15-2024, 09:20 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2024, 07:20 PM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote: [ -> ]Employer rights should never enter into the equation.
Akin to telling a pregnant woman to get an abortion or lose their job.
I'm ok with that too. Employer Rights ARE the equation because you don't have a RIGHT to employment at MY company. If you don't agree with my terms then you are free to leave. I know that's hard for people to grasp, but private property is the foundation of our entire society, and when others can mandate the terms by which you employ free people then they are exerting Ownership Rights on something they don't own. I vehemently oppose that.
Even if your "terms" killed perfectly healthy people. You should vehemently oppose that.
(05-15-2024, 01:08 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-15-2024, 09:20 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I'm ok with that too. Employer Rights ARE the equation because you don't have a RIGHT to employment at MY company. If you don't agree with my terms then you are free to leave. I know that's hard for people to grasp, but private property is the foundation of our entire society, and when others can mandate the terms by which you employ free people then they are exerting Ownership Rights on something they don't own. I vehemently oppose that.
Even if your "terms" killed perfectly healthy people. You should vehemently oppose that.
Your body, your choice. My business, also my choice. Did you know that over 3,000 people die each year because they took Aspirin? Your problem is that you have a false understanding of medicine and how it works. I can't help you see your problem, you'll have to manage on your own. Best wishes.
![[Image: 441462858-451309957548795-1526648790288860679-n.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/QNBVdh9K/441462858-451309957548795-1526648790288860679-n.jpg)