Jump to content

CR: COVID-19 --Political Talk

Mrs Whiggins

By Mrs Whiggins
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 52.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Anastasis

    2588

  • jimmyjazz

    1665

  • 4th&Five

    1305

  • Mrs Whiggins

    1226

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

safe sex
safe sex

I'd just like to point out that neither myself nor any of my fellow nurses, fellow advanced nurse practitioners, and other healthcare providers ever swore an oath that we would lay down our lives for

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

Welp, it finally happened. I snapped in public today. I went into work for a bit this morning because I’m trying to figure out the safest way to host physicians we are recruiting given our CV-19 sit

safe sex
safe sex

I don't really know what to say anymore tbh. What happened last night is hard to put into words for anyone who hasn't worked in a hospital healthcare setting. Just unreal. Everyone is getting fucked.

Posted Images

We’reTexas

We’reTexas 1,469

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, achooloco said:

Well fuck me. Mea culpa. You meant the actual fucking Canadians. Negged retracted, I apologize. 

I have not seen the videos but have seen headline excerpts that the protests were peaceful (very Canadian stereotype if you will) but I have not heard of any southern/nazi flags; that said, the flags were singular? Not sure what that means. 

All I can think about is a bunch of these guys in maple leaf hats. 
0E86A69E-1925-4233-8C56-37553D8F68FE.thumb.jpeg.33dfbb72a8e11e45fa778093db1cbdaf.jpeg

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patron

Patron 230

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, workswithseed said:

Fuck off, people are tired. You got Canada out on the streets in below freezing weather to scare their Prime Minister to play sick, even though he doesn't have to. You have countries getting rid of mandates, and states as well. You have people who play scared go out twice to defy Thier own laws. This is over. 

 

spacer.png

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
956 Worldwide

956 Worldwide 34,444

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

The easiest thing in the world is to plant some Fed with a flag and play it as look at all these racists like Trudeau did. Who wears a mask at an anti mandate rally? Come on. 
 

What’s the angle here if it’s real? Why are white supremacists and nazis so against vaccine mandates that they want to rep themselves at a protest?

So for people who believe in literal false flags at protest rallies, help me understand how it goes down.  Is this the conversation at Mountie HQ?

Inspector: Sergeant Banks, there's going to be a big trucker protest, guy.  We need to you to go infiltrate it, buddy.

Sergeant:  Sure thing, friend.  So, get into the crowd, blend in, and watch out for any chance it may turn violent? Be the early warning?

Inspector:  No, guy.  We need you to make the anti-vax truckers look bad, pal!

Sergeant:  Ok, now I see what this aboot, friend. How do I do that?

Inspector:  You wave a flag, buddy.  Maybe you wear a Trump-style hat.  Ha, that will sure make these guys look bad, guy!

Sergeant:  Yes sir, Inspector Buddy!  Maybe a Nazi flag?

Inspector:  No, friend, Sergeant Johnson is waving a Nazi flag.  You'll be waving a confederate flag, buddy!  With a truck on it!

Sergeant:  I'll go check one out from equipment, guy! 

Inspector:  Make sure you get caught on lots of cameras, pal!  This doesn't work unless our secret agents get caught on lots of TV cameras!

Edited by 956 Worldwide
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nicole44

Nicole44 22,027

Posted
Posted (edited)

Neg away!  So basically, the virus that was unleashed by China (please go live there fuck all of you that want socialism. Please take your kids and leave!!!) we are somehow blaming people for the spread. It was a lab created virus and if you don’t believe that  fuck you and the horse you road in on. I got my two shots and  got appointment on my booster. I doubt go out much and wear my mask when I soon: question about eye sites issues. I am going to an eye doctor, is this also a thing? I got the Covid bc after my two shots. I’m freakin  out bc eye site stuff. Even to type this I have issues with seeing  everything is blurry.

My eyesight is bad off. It’s freaking me out. Is that a part of it? 

Edited by Nicole44
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29,258

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Incredulity said:

Ahhh…the all too predictable leftist pivoting to claims of anti-semitism when it’s politically expedient.

“That’s just like you fucking lying leftists to accuse ordinary people of being antisemites just because they’re waving nazi flags!”

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29,258

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Good rule of thumb is that if people around you are protesting what you're protesting, and they're waving a Nazi flag or hammer and sickle, then you're on the wrong side. 

Yeah, there’s a very easy way for a crowd of people to demonstrate that they don’t tolerate Nazis when one shows up to protest with them: they can kick the shit out of him. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ouflak

ouflak 60

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

If you work for the NHS, you should be vaccinated.

Agree.

Quote

It is a stupid policy to end those mandates.

Even well before the pandemic, the system has been extremely - in some areas desperately - experiencing shortages. It's an issue that's been exacerbating for years, especially in care homes. There were already prognostications that our shortages would even be in the realm of 100,000 short of staff for NHS within a decade, a similar number for the social care sector. And that's every position; nurses, doctors, PA's, med techs. These shortages are already responsible for the rampant burn out, often resulting in people leaving the medical field altogether, and a decreasing quality of care at all levels. Then the pandemic hit, which only accelerated the cull of talent out ofthe NHS and social care services.

 

Against that backdrop, they want to lose 75,000 more professionals, along with the 40,000 they've already let go in the social care side? In what reality is that in any way practical and beneficial to the NHS or to the people who have to depend on it? I could maybe see an argument if the field was instead growing and meeting demand over the last decade and could reasonably foresee a future where they could perhaps replace these losses, even if it hurt for only a short time. But we're already hurting. Far fewer and fewer are even going into the medical field, and it's been that way for a couple of decades now.

Sorry, but at some point, you've got find a real-world balance that makes sense.

Quote

People that don’t believe in science have zero business working for or with the NHS.

I wish we could get away from this extreme posturing and pidgeon-holing. It's dampening every opportunity to have a proper constructive discussion. Does it really seem reasonable that 75,000 doctors, nurses, PA's, med techs, etc... all 'don't believe in science'? C'mon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Homercles

Homercles 10,205

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Nivek said:

I was reading about some engineers who were looking at the Saturn V, and in particular they were looking at the F-1 engine in order to reverse engineer it, because so much of it was customized, but not optimized.  In the example they were looking at, the fuel injector plate, which was drilled by hand, has a mistake in it where the guy stopped, and adjusted the spot and drilled again.   They didn't have the ability to model everything and optimize each piece.  They built the world's most powerful engine with 'good enough' work.   That was America.  That was ~55 years ago.   

Today's maga crowd has the fortitude of the Afghan National Army.   

 

A fellow Ars reader!  This is the stuff that makes the Internet great, along with talking to you assholes…it kills me to see it being used to spread FUD during a pandemic.  
 

I hadn’t read that article before, thanks for sharing.  Buddy of mine goes to a different MLB park every year and I occasionally tag along, when it was ‘Stros time we did the NASA tour and just seeing the size of one of those F1s is insane let alone five of them.  All done with slide rules, incredibly skilled hand welds and tons of trial/error.  Great read, that.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17,447

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, ouflak said:

I wish we could get away from this extreme posturing and pidgeon-holing. It's dampening every opportunity to have a proper constructive discussion. Does it really seem reasonable that 75,000 doctors, nurses, PA's, med techs, etc... all 'don't believe in science'? C'mon.

Look, it isn't 75,000 doctors. It is 75,000 people of varying education levels that happen to work for a healthcare entity. The vast majority of them have essentially no scientific training. So, yes, it is entirely believable that 10% or less of the NHS workforce doesn't really believe in or understand the science. And the reality is that if those individuals did believe in the science, they would get vaccinated. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17,447

Posted
Posted

Also, mandates work:

Quote

Since the proposal for mandatory vaccinations was first consulted on, she said the “proportion of NHS trust healthcare workers who have been vaccinated with a first dose has increased from 92% to 94%, an increase of 75,000

https://www.nursingtimes.net/news/workforce/former-cno-backs-calls-to-delay-mandatory-covid-19-vaccines-21-01-2022/

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Sam Beckett

Doc Sam Beckett 5,784

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Nicole44 said:

Neg away!  So basically, the virus that was unleashed by China (please go live there fuck all of you that want socialism. Please take your kids and leave!!!) we are somehow blaming people for the spread. It was a lab created virus and if you don’t believe that  fuck you and the horse you road in on. I got my two shots and  got appointment on my booster. I doubt go out much and wear my mask when I soon: question about eye sites issues. I am going to an eye doctor, is this also a thing? I got the Covid bc after my two shots. I’m freakin  out bc eye site stuff. Even to type this I have issues with seeing  everything is blurry.

My eyesight is bad off. It’s freaking me out. Is that a part of it? 

 

spacer.png

 

Are you saying that you got your two vaccine shots, got covid after being vaccinated, and now are experiencing problems with your eyes? Trying to follow

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Fresh Breath

MC Fresh Breath 4,074

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Nicole44 said:

Neg away!  So basically, the virus that was unleashed by China (please go live there fuck all of you that want socialism. Please take your kids and leave!!!) 

Really sorry about your eye problems.  But just so you know you should tell those of us who “want socialism” to fuck off to the hellscapes of Sweden, Denmark, Norway, e.t.c.  Then you could go ahead and protest Fire Fighters and Libraries.  Even then, there is no purely Socialist country just as there is no purely communist country. 

If I recall correctly you are a nice person (although telling people to fuck off due to misunderstanding political theories belies that a tad) so don’t take this as insulting you or being insensitive to your pains.  Some much less nice people than you get these terms mixed up all the time and never learn.  
 

https://www.history.com/news/socialism-communism-differences
 

Again, truly sorry for your pains.  Understand though that the main purpose of the vaccine was to prevent you from needlessly dying in the hospital.  Seems it has done that.

As to the people spreading.  Some of us get upset that many folks won’t do the bare minimum and act as if wearing a mask is somehow an authoritarian infringement on their freedoms.  “Authoritarian” is another term they don’t seem to understand too well.

 

Edited by MC Fresh Breath
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14,410

Posted
Posted

This is my first, and possibly last cloak room post.  @Nicole44, I hope  you get the eye issues resolved.  My wife developed some serious weirdness (super bloodshot) in one eye and is feeling a little off.  Eye doc was closed yesterday.  Thanks, Nixon!  She hasn't tested yet, and I think she may have just left her contacts in too long.  If we find out it's covid, I'll post a follow up.  If not, I'll return to lurking in CR.  As for all the political vitriol and COVID origin theories, I'll leave that to the cloak room regulars.  Talking about politics is a drag.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nicole44

Nicole44 22,027

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, dcbc said:

This is my first, and possibly last cloak room post.  @Nicole44, I hope  you get the eye issues resolved.  My wife developed some serious weirdness (super bloodshot) in one eye and is feeling a little off.  Eye doc was closed yesterday.  Thanks, Nixon!  She hasn't tested yet, and I think she may have just left her contacts in too long.  If we find out it's covid, I'll post a follow up.  If not, I'll return to lurking in CR.  As for all the political vitriol and COVID origin theories, I'll leave that to the cloak room regulars.  Talking about politics is a drag.

Talking about politics is a drag. I was just asking if people had eye issues or it was just me and being older. I already had a full blood panel test.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19,092

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Nicole44 said:

Neg away!  So basically, the virus that was unleashed by China (please go live there fuck all of you that want socialism. Please take your kids and leave!!!) we are somehow blaming people for the spread. It was a lab created virus and if you don’t believe that  fuck you and the horse you road in on. I got my two shots and  got appointment on my booster. I doubt go out much and wear my mask when I soon: question about eye sites issues. I am going to an eye doctor, is this also a thing? I got the Covid bc after my two shots. I’m freakin  out bc eye site stuff. Even to type this I have issues with seeing  everything is blurry.

My eyesight is bad off. It’s freaking me out. Is that a part of it? 

Crazy going to crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16,861

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Homercles said:

A fellow Ars reader!  This is the stuff that makes the Internet great, along with talking to you assholes…it kills me to see it being used to spread FUD during a pandemic.  
 

I hadn’t read that article before, thanks for sharing.  Buddy of mine goes to a different MLB park every year and I occasionally tag along, when it was ‘Stros time we did the NASA tour and just seeing the size of one of those F1s is insane let alone five of them.  All done with slide rules, incredibly skilled hand welds and tons of trial/error.  Great read, that.  

Sidebar:  It really sticks out how they managed to build so many of them, with 5000+ parts in each F1 engine that all had to work together and be fitted.   Those were the best and brightest.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11,555

Posted
Posted

https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf

 

This systematic review and meta-analysis are designed to determine whether there is empirical
evidence to support the belief that “lockdowns” reduce COVID-19 mortality. Lockdowns are
defined as the imposition of at least one compulsory, non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI).
NPIs are any government mandate that directly restrict peoples’ possibilities, such as policies that
limit internal movement, close schools and businesses, and ban international travel. This study
employed a systematic search and screening procedure in which 18,590 studies are identified
that could potentially address the belief posed. After three levels of screening, 34 studies
ultimately qualified. Of those 34 eligible studies, 24 qualified for inclusion in the meta-analysis.
They were separated into three groups: lockdown stringency index studies, shelter-in-placeorder (SIPO) studies, and specific NPI studies. An analysis of each of these three groups support
the conclusion that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality. More
specifically, stringency index studies find that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only
reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average. SIPOs were also ineffective, only reducing
COVID-19 mortality by 2.9% on average. Specific NPI studies also find no broad-based evidence
of noticeable effects on COVID-19 mortality.
While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects,
they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In
consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy
instrument.
 

 

Season 7 Oops GIF by Workaholics

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19,092

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Incredulity said:

https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf

 

This systematic review and meta-analysis are designed to determine whether there is empirical
evidence to support the belief that “lockdowns” reduce COVID-19 mortality. Lockdowns are
defined as the imposition of at least one compulsory, non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI).
NPIs are any government mandate that directly restrict peoples’ possibilities, such as policies that
limit internal movement, close schools and businesses, and ban international travel. This study
employed a systematic search and screening procedure in which 18,590 studies are identified
that could potentially address the belief posed. After three levels of screening, 34 studies
ultimately qualified. Of those 34 eligible studies, 24 qualified for inclusion in the meta-analysis.
They were separated into three groups: lockdown stringency index studies, shelter-in-placeorder (SIPO) studies, and specific NPI studies. An analysis of each of these three groups support
the conclusion that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality. More
specifically, stringency index studies find that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only
reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average. SIPOs were also ineffective, only reducing
COVID-19 mortality by 2.9% on average. Specific NPI studies also find no broad-based evidence
of noticeable effects on COVID-19 mortality.
While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects,
they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In
consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy
instrument.
 

 

Season 7 Oops GIF by Workaholics

1.  Meta Analysis, which is pretty garbage.

2.  Hanke has an agenda.  When the words Cato Institute are part of his credentials, it is pretty obvious.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys

OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys 2,059

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf

 

This systematic review and meta-analysis are designed to determine whether there is empirical
evidence to support the belief that “lockdowns” reduce COVID-19 mortality. Lockdowns are
defined as the imposition of at least one compulsory, non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI).
NPIs are any government mandate that directly restrict peoples’ possibilities, such as policies that
limit internal movement, close schools and businesses, and ban international travel. This study
employed a systematic search and screening procedure in which 18,590 studies are identified
that could potentially address the belief posed. After three levels of screening, 34 studies
ultimately qualified. Of those 34 eligible studies, 24 qualified for inclusion in the meta-analysis.
They were separated into three groups: lockdown stringency index studies, shelter-in-placeorder (SIPO) studies, and specific NPI studies. An analysis of each of these three groups support
the conclusion that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality. More
specifically, stringency index studies find that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only
reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average. SIPOs were also ineffective, only reducing
COVID-19 mortality by 2.9% on average. Specific NPI studies also find no broad-based evidence
of noticeable effects on COVID-19 mortality.
While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects,
they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In
consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy
instrument.
 

 

Season 7 Oops GIF by Workaholics

Singapore has had 800 people die total. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16,861

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, ouflak said:

Agree.

Even well before the pandemic, the system has been extremely - in some areas desperately - experiencing shortages. It's an issue that's been exacerbating for years, especially in care homes. There were already prognostications that our shortages would even be in the realm of 100,000 short of staff for NHS within a decade, a similar number for the social care sector. And that's every position; nurses, doctors, PA's, med techs. These shortages are already responsible for the rampant burn out, often resulting in people leaving the medical field altogether, and a decreasing quality of care at all levels. Then the pandemic hit, which only accelerated the cull of talent out ofthe NHS and social care services.

 

Against that backdrop, they want to lose 75,000 more professionals, along with the 40,000 they've already let go in the social care side? In what reality is that in any way practical and beneficial to the NHS or to the people who have to depend on it? I could maybe see an argument if the field was instead growing and meeting demand over the last decade and could reasonably foresee a future where they could perhaps replace these losses, even if it hurt for only a short time. But we're already hurting. Far fewer and fewer are even going into the medical field, and it's been that way for a couple of decades now.

Sorry, but at some point, you've got find a real-world balance that makes sense.

I wish we could get away from this extreme posturing and pidgeon-holing. It's dampening every opportunity to have a proper constructive discussion. Does it really seem reasonable that 75,000 doctors, nurses, PA's, med techs, etc... all 'don't believe in science'? C'mon.

There is no discussion or compromise with people who lie or deny facts.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...