Stern said it’s 97% today on ESPN
Wrt the NFL -I’m not sure if the powers that be have announced it officially, but the NFL has stopped testing every player, because too many were testing positive! What they’re doing now is only testing players who have “symptoms”, and are “randomly” testing the others.
add: my bro-science take? -all the positive tests are resulting in players with no adverse symptoms unable to play, and jeopardizing the NFL money machine for no reason…LOL -again, my purely bro-science reading of the tea leaves
TBH, I have forgotten what it was. Is that why you haven’t answered mine?
Do you believe the unvaccinated should be removed from society?
Studied science but not this one. I think we all hope that this virus will mutate to be less deadly and become childhood sniffles. But I’m not sure that’s the way they all go otherwise Delta would have been less deadly and we wouldn’t have multi generational viruses. We are only just getting rid of HPV and that caused cancer for generations. We vaccinate for it now quite early on.
Found this, seems it can go either way and lots of debate still ongoing.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-0690-4
Edit: I’d forgotten that some can become so deadly that they kill the host before they pass on.
1 Like
Before I can answer, you’ll have to define what you mean by removed and society.
Fun fact: Cole Beasley, NFL player, was loudly anti-vaxx, but has been Covid free all season…until now!!!, under the new “random” testing policy LOL. Get my tin foil hat!
I don’t understand why clear language can’t be used to defend some of these government policies. There are really only a few in play right now.
Are you in favor of vaccine development with tax dollars during a pandemic? I am.
Are you in favor of a form of regulatory fast-tracking for a COVID vaccine? I am.
Are you in favor of government cooperating with businesses to distribute a COVID vaccine? I am.
Are you in favor of putting the humans who’ve not had a COVID shot out of work? I am not.
Are you in favor of requiring COVID vaccination to engage in normal business and congregate normally with other people? I am not.
Are you in favor of selectively forcing certain businesses and churches to shut down because of their COVID policies, or lack thereof? I am not.
Are you in favor of forcing people into COVID camps as presently implemented in places like Australia? I am not.
I could have more respect for the positions that don’t align with mine if they’d come right out and say what they mean. There are nuances underneath these positions, but they are rather simple at their core.
Do we need to re-implement a two-tier society enforced by law in the USA after a good run of 58 years, back when it seemed like the Democrat’s generations-long policy priorities of a two-tiered society were finally snuffed out legislatively?
Apparently a lot of people are on-board with that notion, which is no surprise. The Democrats have, after all, remained a viable political party with a two-tier society at the core of their policy since 1828. Blaming an out-group will never go out of fashion, it seems.
#putthemoutofwork
#shunyourunvaccinatedfamily
#putthemincamps
2 Likes
Yes, and those viruses do not have vaccines produced at “warpspeed”. There’s still no vaccine for HIV right?, only treatment.
Science backs the vaccine(s).
“Science” does not back some of the policies you’ve listed. That’s why Fauci only preaches to his choir of CNN, MSNBC, etc. He’s preaching policy, not science. And his admittedly sound resume of science fades in the current screeching back and forth because Fauci is now a politician with a science background, not a scientist who is being consulted on policy.
Yesterday you indicated in a post on this thread…that there is precedent of removing individuals from society if they pose threat to public health
My question was geared toward your post that included that statement
Therefore I cannot give you a definition of your own words
You lost any credibility you had as a serious/sincere discussant right here.
1 Like
I was speaking with my retired anesthesiologist aunt about Fauci. I casually joked that her husband, also a retired physician, would have been a lot better than Fauci at this job. Partly because nobody wants to reflexively punch my Uncle Joe when he opens his mouth, but mostly because he’s a much better communicator.
She went on to explain how impressive his C.V. was and how he wrote many of the books that both she and my uncle used to shape their medical practices.
Great, but everyone who knows that about Fauci doesn’t need convincing. The federal government could employ Mike “The Situation” from the Jersey Shore in Fauci’s role and it wouldn’t change how people like her analyze the situation.
Do you know who I think would have been a much better Fauci, as most of the American public has come to know Fauci in his public health messenger role?
Mike Rowe.
That’s because it is the truth.
Ya see, the key words there are “my [referring to you] question.” It’s your question, so you have to define the terms.
Unless you’re not really asking a question so much as trying to play ‘Gotcha.’
Then you believe that unvaccinated should be removed from society?
It’s an easy yes or no question
Is my history incorrect? You’re from the south, aren’t you? The Civil Rights Act of 1964 certainly put the brakes on a great deal of long-standing Democrat policy and rhetoric. It even resulted in almost 50 years of kinda sane Democrat policy. Or maybe you’re reading different sources than I am…
Is my take on the present situation incorrect? Has Michelle Wu, for instance, not just taken significant steps to institute a two-tier society? Has Joe Biden not put forth contract conditions that resulted in people I know getting forced out of work?
Or perhaps you object to my characterization of ostensible public health measures as creating a two-tier society. If so, you might want to read up on how other two tier societies have been implemented in the past. Public health is not a new banner for segregationists to hide under.
People seem to get wrapped up in superficial intent, without taking a step back to look at what’s actually happening right now. I know you’re a good guy, but you seem to recoil at plain-language conversation of politics and policies.
1 Like
You think people wouldn’t be forced to run/seek cover, even if the shooter didn’t hit someone? That hurts them. Like how assault doesn’t begin at the point of physical contact.
The big problem with drunk driving laws is that the punishment usually does more harm than the crime. It’s not so much removing the drunk from the road.
Sorry, you’ve lost me. I get warpspeed was a trump term for taking trials out of vaccine development but I’m in the UK so not getting your point, or what you want me to answer?
I don’t play gotcha games…don’t answer the question if you don’t want to
Yeah, I am. Your history’s not incorrect, it’s just irrelevant. You seem not to have noticed the South now comprises a Red Wall. The point being, the people with segregationist impulses–the ones of a mind to do the things the Dems did back in the day–well, those people have all switched parties.
Your characterization is inane. By your logic, anything that separates some individuals from the rest of us is ‘producing a two-tier society.’ Criminal codes that result in incarceration? Two-tiered society. Emergency hold on the psychiatrically unstable? Two-tiered society. Etc.
Reasonable people can disagree on whether this or that public health policy is unnecessarily intrusive or restrictive. But your attempt to trace out a historical thread demonstrating that Dems are acting on some sort of innate compulsion to consign certain individuals to a second tier is too absurd for words.
Nah, I recoil at naked political advocacy, and conspiracy-mongering, masquerading as ‘plain language conversation.’