New Covid medicine reduces hospitalizations and death by almost half among unvaccinated!

[Spy Car]

30 minutes ago, KSera said:

Did you read my post? I said right in the post that you quoted, "I agree that people don't have the right to decide for others that death isn't something they should fear," so your reply makes no sense. I'm pretty sure there's not anyone else here who reads my posts who has ever gotten the idea that I think death is no big deal and that imposing it on someone else is part of one's individual freedom. That's pretty much diametrically opposed to all my covid posts (many of which you have "liked" fwiw).

 

Honestly, this comment really is funny 🤣.

Your posts are becoming trollish. Please stop.

Bill

[Bootsie]

2 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

Huh? That isn't what I stated, but thanks for attempting to shift the argument.

The government is the only force capable of constraining the massive power of corporations for the average citizen. The fact that deregulation in the US has allowed corporations to increase their control of government doesn't change that fact, it merely renders the gov't less effective in any kind of oversight role. Which was the entire point of planting the narrative that government is always bad and can never be trusted (but businesses can).

I could go into the various chemicals and substances that are banned from many other countries (including China & Russia, BTW...not exactly hotbeds of liberalism) that are currently allowed to be used freely in the US, etc, as just one example of what a weak government allows, but it doesn't matter, because I'm tired of arguing.

Part of my frustration is that I've seen this shift in narrative (the rising veneration of corporations & corresponding denigration of all things gov't) firsthand. DH worked for the federal gov't for years, doing his best to ensure that the work completed was protecting the public on the projects he directed. Yes, there were some problem employees (there's just as many in the corporate world, BTW) and he watched as more and more got "privatized" and he lived through the "cutting for efficiency" and "justifying every expenditure" until he burnt out & his department was eliminated due to "outsourcing" (cuz corporations can do the gov't's job, only better!).

Now he works for a gov't contractor, making ~3 times (not including bonuses) what he did, doing pretty much the same job he did, with the contractor charging the gov't roughly umpteen times what it cost the gov't to originally do with it's own employees, while completing less work (everything has to "pencil" you see, so cutbacks are necessary in the scope of the project, lost benefits to the public be damned). The entire executive branch of this contractor are all billionaires, with annual bonuses in the millions (each), even when performance targets are missed. They have a huge fund for lobbying, which helps to ensure that the gov't money is always flowing.

But somehow the narrative hasn't changed. Government is still seen as bad (always), and corporations are still seen as more efficient and doing more for 'Murica.

 

 

If the argument is that business is bad because people are motivated by something other than compassion and integrity then it seems to me to follow that for another entity to be an improvement the people in that entity should be motivated by compassion and integrity and not something else.  

[Happy2BaMom]

10 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

If the argument is that business is bad because people are motivated by something other than compassion and integrity then it seems to me to follow that for another entity to be an improvement the people in that entity should be motivated by compassion and integrity and not something else.  

They're not motivated by greed, since the government is not driven by profit (or didn't use to be). This meant that *many* people who joined public service were able to be free to focus on what might really be beneficial for members of the public. This was a tremendous motivator for my husband and many of the people he used to work for/with.

Businesses by design are solely profit-motivated, with the entire point being to maximize the money taken home by the owners. Nothing else.

But obviously you don't believe anything I write, so continue on with your corporate worship.

 

Edited October 5, 2021 by Happy2BaMom

[Bootsie]

Just now, Happy2BaMom said:

They're not motivated by greed, since the government is not driven by profit (or didn't use to be). This meant that *many* people who (used to) join public service were able to be free to focus on what might really be beneficial for members of the public. This was a tremendous motivator for my husband and many of the people he used to work for/with.

Businesses by design are solely profit-motivated, with the entire point of the organizations being to maximize the money taken home by the owners. Nothing else.

But obviously you don't believe anything I write, so continue on with your corporate worship.

 

I am not sure what corporate worship you think I do.  No, I don't simply believe your opinion is fact.  When you express an opinion I do not agree with, I may ask about it.  I might offer a differing opinion.  We might explore to see if there is evidence on which to base an opinion.    

There is a difference in what a government or a corporation may be motivated by and what the people who make the decision are motivated by.  I personally do not believe that politicians and people who work for the government check their greed and desire for power at the door and I have seen no evidence that that is the case.  If you have evidence that it is I would be happy to consider it.  

[Happy2BaMom]

23 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

I am not sure what corporate worship you think I do.  No, I don't simply believe your opinion is fact.  When you express an opinion I do not agree with, I may ask about it.  I might offer a differing opinion.  We might explore to see if there is evidence on which to base an opinion.    

There is a difference in what a government or a corporation may be motivated by and what the people who make the decision are motivated by.  I personally do not believe that politicians and people who work for the government check their greed and desire for power at the door and I have seen no evidence that that is the case.  If you have evidence that it is I would be happy to consider it.  

I just gave you evidence of what my family is living right now and has been living for the last 20 years. That is not "opinion". If you don't believe that, then try doing a little reading of what private contractors charge the government for basic goods and services. Or what their executives are paid. Or the amount of toxins businesses dump on the land and water when allowed. All easily available via Google.

 I'm curious: what - specifically - do you propose to keep the power of corporations in check, if gov't isn't involved? Or do you believe that corporations should have no checks?

 

Edited October 5, 2021 by Happy2BaMom

[Bootsie]

8 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

I just gave you evidence of what my family is living right now and has been living for the last 20 years. That is not "opinion". If you don't believe that, then try doing a little reading of what private contractors charge the government for basic goods and services. Or what their executives are paid. Or the amount of toxins businesses dump on the land and water when allowed. All easily available via Google.

 I'm curious: what - specifically - do you propose to keep the power of corporations in check? Or do you believe that corporations should have no checks?

 

I can also provide personal examples of government employees who have stolen from taxpayers or who have abused the people under them for their own personal gain.  There ae some government contractors receiving payments from the government so that they can pay bribes to the government employees that granted them those contracts.  I see evidence that some humans in governments and humans in businesses make decisions based upon greed, power, and other self-centered motivations.  I do not see evidence that overall it happens in one of those entities more than the other because I think the humans in those organizations are fairly much the same. 

As far as toxins and pollutions, I have not personally been to China, but from the reports I have received from people who have been, I think I would prefer to the toxins and pollutions in the US to the level of those in China.   

[KSera]

7 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

As far as toxins and pollutions, I have not personally been to China, but from the reports I have received from people who have been, I think I would prefer to the toxins and pollutions in the US to the level of those in China.   

Definitely. We have regulations to thank for that, though. They’re not perfect, and we still allow a lot of things that I don’t think we should, but it’s better than it would be without any regulation.

[Bootsie]

17 minutes ago, KSera said:

Definitely. We have regulations to thank for that, though. They’re not perfect, and we still allow a lot of things that I don’t think we should, but it’s better than it would be without any regulation.

I was specifically addressing this comment:

I could go into the various chemicals and substances that are banned from many other countries (including China & Russia, BTW...not exactly hotbeds of liberalism) that are currently allowed to be used freely in the US, etc, as just one example of what a weak government allows, but it doesn't matter, because I'm tired of arguing.

 

[KSera]

14 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

I was specifically addressing this comment:

I could go into the various chemicals and substances that are banned from many other countries (including China & Russia, BTW...not exactly hotbeds of liberalism) that are currently allowed to be used freely in the US, etc, as just one example of what a weak government allows, but it doesn't matter, because I'm tired of arguing.

 

Ah. Yeah. I would’ve used other countries as examples for that, though I don’t doubt that there are some harmful chemicals that are still allowed in the US that are banned in China. Overall, hands down I take our regulation of harmful substances over China’s, though. Doesn’t mean the US doesn’t have farther to go on this though. We’ve gotten very far a field of the molnupiravir announcement 😬. 
 

[Happy2BaMom]

9 hours ago, Bootsie said:

I can also provide personal examples of government employees who have stolen from taxpayers or who have abused the people under them for their own personal gain.  There ae some government contractors receiving payments from the government so that they can pay bribes to the government employees that granted them those contracts.  I see evidence that some humans in governments and humans in businesses make decisions based upon greed, power, and other self-centered motivations.  I do not see evidence that overall it happens in one of those entities more than the other because I think the humans in those organizations are fairly much the same. 

As far as toxins and pollutions, I have not personally been to China, but from the reports I have received from people who have been, I think I would prefer to the toxins and pollutions in the US to the level of those in China.   

You didn’t answer my questions.
What - specifically - do you propose to keep the power of corporations in check, if government isn’t involved? Or do you believe that corporations should have no checks? 

Interesting that you mention government contractors, since I described that exact corruption occurring (in my 2nd post) as a result of privatization of gov’t services.  

Regardless, this will be my last post, since we’re now going in circles and are off-topic to boot, so I’ll wrap where I started:

“Government oversight programs are unwieldy and inefficient, but I have yet to see anyone offer a realistic alternative.” 

Edited October 6, 2021 by Happy2BaMom

[SKL]

15 hours ago, Happy2BaMom said:

They're not motivated by greed, since the government is not driven by profit (or didn't use to be). This meant that *many* people who joined public service were able to be free to focus on what might really be beneficial for members of the public. This was a tremendous motivator for my husband and many of the people he used to work for/with.

Businesses by design are solely profit-motivated, with the entire point being to maximize the money taken home by the owners. Nothing else.

But obviously you don't believe anything I write, so continue on with your corporate worship.

 

The government is a bureaucracy and has pretty much always been motivated by money - often by corrupt enrichment, sometimes by tax-funded bleeding hearts trying to run things they don't understand.  Government bureaucracy has much more power to ruin lives than the current brand of US capitalism has.  Both are also capable of doing good, but it's pretty naive to think a government entity or employee can be blindly trusted while business should be feared, as you seem to imply.

[WildflowerMom]

Idk.   Govt can be trusted if there's reliable checks & balances.   At least with govt, we can vote them out.   With business owners, we're kind of stuck with what we got, ykwim?    
 

 

[Bootsie]

7 hours ago, Happy2BaMom said:

You didn’t answer my questions.
What - specifically - do you propose to keep the power of corporations in check, if government isn’t involved? Or do you believe that corporations should have no checks? 

Interesting that you mention government contractors, since I described that exact corruption occurring (in my 2nd post) as a result of privatization of gov’t services.  

Regardless, this will be my last post, since we’re now going in circles and are off-topic to boot, so I’ll wrap where I started:

“Government oversight programs are unwieldy and inefficient, but I have yet to see anyone offer a realistic alternative.” 

No, I do not believe that corporations should have no checks.  I do not know that I have implied that there is no role for government; that is definitely not what I think.  In fact, I have concerns over some of the other threads when people talk about private businesses developing vaccine passports.  

Perhaps I am wrong, but I read your posts as people in business are motivated by greed, not compassion and integrity; people in government are motivated by compassion and integrity, not greed.  If I have misunderstood, I apologize, but I do not think people in business and people in government are that different.

As for as corruption with government contractors, that can take place only if someone in government is participating in the corruption.  A private business cannot MAKE the government purchase items from them.  

[Fritz]

On 10/5/2021 at 11:22 AM, BlsdMama said:

This. I will grant I’m the outlier, but I wonder if I’d be eligible for a waiver. It’s irrelevant because I’m “too sick” to work and they can’t really punish me through social services (ineligible for disability) but so little is understood about the glycine receptor antibody that it would fall to one of my doctors. As there is no clear decision/indication, likely it wold be a personal call rather than strictly professional. I suspect one would sign off and one would not. I cannot be the only person for whom the medical exemption is not clear cut. 

You are not the only one. At one point I had my primary care doctor and neurologist each pointing to the other to make the decision for vaccination for me. In the end (with the influence of Delta) they both decided I should get it. As you said it could have been one saying yes, and the other saying no, so maybe waiver, maybe not.

[SKL]

24 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:

Idk.   Govt can be trusted if there's reliable checks & balances.   At least with govt, we can vote them out.   With business owners, we're kind of stuck with what we got, ykwim?   

There's a lot of choice involved in what businesses we deal with and how.

Sometimes I get lazy and fail to vote with my pocketbook, but that's on me.

[Fritz]

On 10/4/2021 at 11:16 PM, Spy Car said:

Doctors and nurses are begging people to get vaccinated to break the cycle of hospitalizations and death.

You are entirely off base.

Bill

Bill, I'm a nurse. I'm not begging anybody to do anything. Yes, I would like for everyone that is able to get the vaccine to choose to do so. I do not agree with mandating a new vaccine to anyone. 

[Spy Car]

1 hour ago, Fritz said:

Bill, I'm a nurse. I'm not begging anybody to do anything. Yes, I would like for everyone that is able to get the vaccine to choose to do so. I do not agree with mandating a new vaccine to anyone. 

That's nutz.

Bill

[whitestavern]

Article on the politics around Merck's new drug. Upsetting. I'm a subscriber, but I believe anyone can "try" an article for free. 

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/did-political-and-media-bias-stall?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxODg0MzcwMiwicG9zdF9pZCI6NDIxOTk1NDQsIl8iOiJ2RXZleCIsImlhdCI6MTYzMzU0MjI3NCwiZXhwIjoxNjMzNTQ1ODc0LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMTA0MiIsInN1YiI6InBvc3QtcmVhY3Rpb24ifQ.ZYkcvtTZuayQBOfBJ8PZKuuPAzEfcFsi8YWvdALNLIg

 

[Matryoshka]

22 hours ago, KSera said:

Why is it okay to say those that don't want to get sick may need to find a different job but not that those who don't care if they get sick or get other sick may need to find a different job?

THIS.  I am so sick of 'if you don't want to be exposed to unvaxxed people, just find another job or stay home'.  But if we tell unvaxed people to find another job or stay home, OH NO OPRESSION and SECOND COMING OF HITLER!

Someone's gonna have to adjust.  

Edited October 6, 2021 by Matryoshka

[Faith-manor]

10 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

THIS.  I am so sick of 'if you don't want to be exposed to unvaxxed people, just find another job or stay home'.  But if we tell unvaxed people to find another job or stay home, OH NO OPRESSION and SECOND COMING OF HITLER!

Someone's gonna have to adjust.  

100% this!!!

[SKL]

On 10/5/2021 at 4:25 PM, KSera said:

Why is it okay to say those that don't want to get sick may need to find a different job but not that those who don't care if they get sick or get other sick may need to find a different job?

That's a very distorted version of what I said.  There are a number of options for people to avoid getting sick with Covid.  People who are pro-vax and pro-mask can get a lot of protection for themselves by masking and vaxing.  If those steps leave them still unwilling to accept any risk of working with someone who may have Covid, then seeking a job situation that doesn't involve human contact is also an option.

Also let's be honest - a person who is unwilling to accept any risk of possibly being exposed to Covid is going to have the same issue whether or not his coworkers are vaccinated.  We all know that vaccinated people can spread Covid.

It is disingenuous to argue that a vaccinated person, who is not unusually high-risk, is in serious danger from being exposed to an unvaccinated person.

My kids go to school every day in a population that is only about 50% vaccinated.  I am not concerned about it because my kids and I are vaccinated.  We continue to stay away from people at high risk, because we know that even as vaccinated people, we have a chance of spreading Covid.  Personally I don't feel any difference being around vaccinated or unvaccinated people.  Either of them could have Covid or not have Covid.

[KSera]

4 minutes ago, SKL said:

My kids go to school every day in a population that is only about 50% vaccinated.  I am not concerned about it because my kids and I are vaccinated.  We continue to stay away from people at high risk, because we know that even as vaccinated people, we have a chance of spreading Covid.  Personally I don't feel any difference being around vaccinated or unvaccinated people.  Either of them could have Covid or not have Covid.

Well, at this point the data shows that the unvaccinated one is far more likely to pass Covid on. And you and your kids may have the option to stay away from anyone who is at high risk, but not everyone has that option. Lots and lots of the population lives with people too young to be vaccinated or who are elderly or otherwise high risk. Again goes back to if it seems reasonable to you to suggest that maybe people should get a different job due to this, it doesn't make sense to at the same time think it's not reasonable to suggest people get a different job if they don't want to get vaccinated. Why would the preference of someone who is not vaccinated take precedence over that of someone who is?

[SKL]

13 minutes ago, KSera said:

Well, at this point the data shows that the unvaccinated one is far more likely to pass Covid on. And you and your kids may have the option to stay away from anyone who is at high risk, but not everyone has that option. Lots and lots of the population lives with people too young to be vaccinated or who are elderly or otherwise high risk. Again goes back to if it seems reasonable to you to suggest that maybe people should get a different job due to this, it doesn't make sense to at the same time think it's not reasonable to suggest people get a different job if they don't want to get vaccinated. Why would the preference of someone who is not vaccinated take precedence over that of someone who is?

I think you are actually putting words in my mouth.  I think I talked about how it's hard for employers whose unvaccinated employees will all quit over a mandate.  I don't think it's great for society to have everyone in the unvaccinated populations out of a job.  I wish and hope they'd get vaccinated (unless they have natural immunity already).

Scientifically speaking, the people most at risk in an office with both vaxed and unvaxed [and not previously infected] people are the unvaxed people.  The unvaxed people are more likely to catch a serious case of Covid from vaxed people than the other way around.  And forgetting the stupidity we read on facebook, people who haven't gotten vaxed have their reasons.  And frankly, their reasons are none of our business.

[KSera]

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

I think you are actually putting words in my mouth.

On 10/5/2021 at 10:16 AM, SKL said:

Those who don't want to get sick have many personal options.  (1) get the vaccine; (2) mask and social distance to the extent possible at work; (3) keep up their individual health in ways that are known to correlate with low Covid risk; (4) find a different job or different work arrangement that involves less exposure.

It sounds like maybe I misunderstood you. I thought your number (4) here was suggesting that rather than people who don't want to get vaccinated as a condition of employment finding a different job, people who don't want to get sick should find a different job.

5 minutes ago, SKL said:

And forgetting the stupidity we read on facebook, people who haven't gotten vaxed have their reasons.

I'd love to see a MUCH lower number of people who have reasons other than the stupidity they read on Facebook as a reason for not getting vaccinated. Unfortunately, those are still the primary reasons I hear. I only rarely hear people cite a reason that isn't related to lies they've been fed by other people. It's really sad because it means that most of the ~200,000 people who have died in the US due to lack of vaccination died because they believed in misinformation other people shared with them. If people had accurate information, most of those people would still be alive.

[SKL]

6 minutes ago, KSera said:

It sounds like maybe I misunderstood you. I thought your number (4) here was suggesting that rather than people who don't want to get vaccinated as a condition of employment finding a different job, people who don't want to get sick should find a different job.

The fuller context below ... someone asked what were the choices of employees who'd rather not get sick, so I listed 4 general areas of options.  Personally I think the ability to get vaxed is a very very good option, which is why I put it first.  My second paragraph talks about the dilemma for employers whose unvaxed employees would likely all quit in the face of a mandate.  I would add that having all of my unvaxed employees quit would not really help any of my employees who may be vaxed.  (I don't know who is or isn't, but I do know that those who would remain employed would have a heck of a lot more work to do, or we'd have to close down, because finding new employees is hard enough right now without a vax mandate.)

On 10/5/2021 at 12:54 PM, Not_a_Number said:

Of course, it's not really the businesses who take the consequences. It's the workers. 

We keep talking about people not having choices... well, if an employer chooses not to care whether the employees are vaccinated, where's the choice of the employees who'd rather not get sick? Is their choice to go to a place where they are likely to be exposed or lose their job? That also seems rather unfair, no? 

My previous answer to the above quote:

Those who don't want to get sick have many personal options.  (1) get the vaccine; (2) mask and social distance to the extent possible at work; (3) keep up their individual health in ways that are known to correlate with low Covid risk; (4) find a different job or different work arrangement that involves less exposure.

As an employer, I'd love for my employees to all be vaccinated if they do not have contraindications.  But the majority of my unvaxed employees are highly likely to quit if I impose a mandate.  They are all working-class and many are African-American.  Am I really doing society a favor if I fire them for not getting vaxed?  My company doesn't fall under the prez's mandate, so it's a business decision for us at the moment.  Little by little, people are coming around to deciding to vax ... or they are catching Covid, recovering, and coming back to work with antibodies.  AFAIK none of those who have been sick had the vax.

[goldberry]

On 10/5/2021 at 2:25 PM, KSera said:

 

Why is it okay to say those that don't want to get sick may need to find a different job but not that those who don't care if they get sick or get other sick may need to find a different job?

 

Quote for truth

First it was if you don't like people not wearing masks then stay home.  What about, if you don't want to wear a mask then stay home?  

[kbutton]

1 hour ago, goldberry said:

Quote for truth

First it was if you don't like people not wearing masks then stay home.  What about, if you don't want to wear a mask then stay home?  

Our church said if you don't want to wear a mask, we have an online service for you. Guess what happened? The selfish people went to church, and we stayed home. It's no longer our church because the TPTB didn't address the violation of the rules they posted by either asking people to leave one of services for masked folks or enforcing their original rule.

I am so sick of the selfishness and downplaying of every facet of the pandemic. I think this will absolutely spill over into risk assessment of all kinds later, and I just hope we're not plunged back into rampant preventable disease as a result.