If your chance of dying is .02 and someone else's is 2.5, who should get dibs when the initial supply is severely limited? You or the person with 100 times more risk?I have a death chance too, and I might want to have an equal shot at it.
Well, how was mask wearing handled?If your chance of dying is .02 and someone else's is 2.5, who should get dibs when the initial supply is severely limited? You or the person with 100 times more risk?
Okay so I am following you, and I see your point, but I can also see the point of the people who settled on the seeming compromise of, we'll try to vaccinate people generally who 1) are most likely to get AND spread it [healthcare workers], and 2) are most likely to suffer badly from it [elderly]only FIVE are actually prioritizing the most vulnerable. The others are slicing and dicing based on how important you are (hence Congress gets vaccinated) or how likely you are to be exposed (first responders). The "science" indicates that the people who are most likely to die are the ones who should get vaccinated first. If a young, healthy first responder gets COVID, they will almost certainly recover fully in a couple of days and their symptoms probably won't be worse than a mild flu.
In CT, I'm a distant third out of 4. I'm way too old and I have asthma but that doesn't matter because our governor goes with the "science" whatever that means today.The rest of us are coming distant second.
Yikes, that does sound bad. And odd. I mean the way your state is doing it.In CT, I'm a distant third out of 4. I'm way too old and I have asthma but that doesn't matter because our governor goes with the "science" whatever that means today.
Ma. prisons are part of phase 2 in Ma. Ct. Prisons are part of 1b in Ct. 1b is the same as our phase 2. We're just not afraid of saying prisons are congregate settings as are homeless shelters.Our state is very woke. Not as woke as Mass though where they are prioritizing criminals.
I know that. But thanks for the "fact check".She's part of the group with the Demon Semon Doctor - Dr Stella Immanuel.
That's awesome Doc - I'm glad for you. Eagerly awaiting my turn but it will probably be another month or twoFWIW, our primary care doctor's office notified us that we would be able to schedule our doses for COVID-19 vaccine, so we are now on their calendar - first dose in Feb/21, second does in Mar/21
AmenBig Pharma can't make money off of hydroxychloroquine so they have to down-play it with false "technical" articles that are actually shill pieces from folks whose funding comes from Big Pharma. Follow the money.
Amen and amenThe claims about the ineffectiveness of hydroxycholorquine are MONEY-driven.
A bit extreme and I sincerely hope not. It would be very hard to pull that off in this day and age I suspect.She compares the current suggestion to inoculate blacks first to the Tuskegee experiment
I agree, Doc - there are studies going in all different directions on H.C. Big Pharma hits anything that doesn't make them money HARD.Moke, I'm getting VERY tired of your negativity. I have seen studies going each way on hydroxychloroquine. Political (and other) issues have infiltrated the medical community because of their fear of a cutoff of federal funding. Step down off your high horse and recognize this old rule of science: You can take all the experts in the world for a given topic, lay them end-to-end, and STILL not reach a conclusion. You are trying to undercut what I see as a legitimate dispute among experts for which the origin of the dispute isn't completely scientific. This is climate science all over again - where you have to look at the funding of both sides of the argument.
Shall I tell you how I interpret the dispute? Here it is, pure plain and simple: Big Pharma can't make money off of hydroxychloroquine so they have to down-play it with false "technical" articles that are actually shill pieces from folks whose funding comes from Big Pharma. Follow the money.
Do you have an MD? You have not indicated that you do. I don't claim to have an MD but I absolutely DO claim to know how to recognize a scientific dispute when I see one. I very rarely like to pull out the advanced degree, but I'll tell you that your attitude is exactly WHY so many people have serious reluctance to take the actual vaccines. This argument is NOT BEING MANAGED TECHNICALLY. The claims about the ineffectiveness of hydroxycholorquine are MONEY-driven. There are enough positive results reported that it is worth further study, and there is a 20-year-plus history of safe usage in African countries.
You have consistently been posting STRICTLY along knee-jerk liberal party lines rather than considering the possibility of merit in the argument. I say that, not as a moderator, but as a member with an advanced degree who recognizes technical foolishness when I see it. Your post was purely an argumentum ad hominem attack on Dr. Gold. If you know your logic, you know that when you can't legitimately counter an argument, you have to attack the arguer. Well, that tactic works both ways. I dispute the integrity of the nay-sayers. They have been bought off.
NG, a sincere question, the fact that you possess the covid antibodies will that satisfy the government? Will you be able to enter buildings or fly without a vaccine document in the future. Thanks.Amen
Amen and amen
My own Dr has told me that the anti-bodies I have developed when I contracted COVID are better than any vaccine. Logic: There will be no vaccine for me.