Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,607
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

Spring Banter


Baroclinic Zone
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, WhitinsvilleWX said:

Probably should have been rolled out by age only. It's pretty clear by now who is the most vulnerable to severe illness and death. Once they went down the "identity" distribution rabbit hole, it was open season for every interest group to try and make the case for why they should be next. .

Of course the White Gov got his

Civil Rights Act of 1964:

No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program...receiving Federal financial assistance.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, dryslot said:

I would think so if it has your name on it instead of laminating it with a lanyard around your neck..............:lol:

Staff at the vaccine site this AM said that laminating the vaccination records card would wreck it, black out the data.  Maybe folks here already knew that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Of course the White Gov got his

Civil Rights Act of 1964:

No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program...receiving Federal financial assistance.

 

But no one seemed to flinch when the initial vaccines went to med staff, 1st responders and LTC residents.  (As it should have, IMO.)  Must be some caveats in CRA-1964 to cover things like that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What will be widely accepted as fact first?The vaccine “is not effective against new strains which are now more widespread. New Vaccine roll-out needed...new restrictions/restrictions remain in place.” Or “short to long term side effects of an (experimental) vaccine are worse than the direct risks from the virus itself —to low risk/healthy individuals. 
 

I’ll wait. :popcorn:

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What will be widely accepted as fact first?The vaccine “is not effective against new strains which are now more widespread. New Vaccine roll-out needed...new restrictions/restrictions remain in place.” Or “short to long term side effects of an (experimental) vaccine are worse than the direct risks from the virus itself —to low risk/healthy individuals. 

 

I’ll wait. default_popcorn.gif

So you're not getting the vax i take it

 

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, jbenedet said:

What will be widely accepted as fact first?The vaccine “is not effective against new strains which are now more widespread. New Vaccine roll-out needed...new restrictions/restrictions remain in place.” Or “short to long term side effects of an (experimental) vaccine are worse than the direct risks from the virus itself —to low risk/healthy individuals. 
 

I’ll wait. :popcorn:

Definitely wait. Vaccines are such an unproven medical endeavor. What's next, pills that kill bacteria? 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, jbenedet said:

What will be widely accepted as fact first?The vaccine “is not effective against new strains which are now more widespread. New Vaccine roll-out needed...new restrictions/restrictions remain in place.” Or “short to long term side effects of an (experimental) vaccine are worse than the direct risks from the virus itself —to low risk/healthy individuals. 
 

I’ll wait. :popcorn:

Sir, this is a Wendy's. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, jbenedet said:

What will be widely accepted as fact first?The vaccine “is not effective against new strains which are now more widespread. New Vaccine roll-out needed...new restrictions/restrictions remain in place.” Or “short to long term side effects of an (experimental) vaccine are worse than the direct risks from the virus itself —to low risk/healthy individuals. 
 

I’ll wait. :popcorn:

Beer

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SouthCoastMA said:

Its looking like between 10-15% of those with Covid, including mild cases, seem to have lingering or even long term effects. Probably best to just get the shot. 

To me the inflammation and the mental fog are the most concerning long term symptoms. 

The myriad of possible long term symptoms reminds me of Lyme disease.

Heh' can you imagine if Lyme was an airborne transmissible disease? That's horror movie stuff right there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alex said:

Definitely wait. Vaccines are such an unproven medical endeavor. What's next, pills that kill bacteria? 

I have worked in US manufacturing for over 10 years — over half of those years were spent in quality control, pharma R&D and performing high level quality investigations at a top biologics manufacturer. It goes without saying that all vaccines are not equal. This joke is on you.

Cheers.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, weathafella said:

Maybe because there are 6 people of color I the state of VT....

That doesn’t change anything. It also doesn’t matter if they are handing out free grilled cheese sandwiches instead of vaccines. The govt should not prioritize services based on race, gender/sex, disability status, etc. It’s a really bad idea to go backwards on this stuff. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

That doesn’t change anything. It also doesn’t matter if they are handing out free grilled cheese sandwiches instead of vaccines. The govt should not prioritize services based on race, gender/sex, disability status, etc. It’s a really bad idea to go backwards on this stuff. 

How about age?   That seemed like a good idea

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

How about age?   That seemed like a good idea

Yeah... I don’t know how else you would have done it outside of age for the most part. The statistics showed severity increased steadily with age.

If it had been a free for all, you would have had a bunch of 20 somethings bowling over granny to get their vaccines first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

How about age?   That seemed like a good idea

Age is strongly correlated to the “vulnerability” standard with COVID, as are other factors such as weight and other health ailments. I am OK with a more-encompassing vulnerability metric. That’s not what the VT tweet said, however. It was strictly race.

An 18 year old African American should not be jumping the line over anyone in the 50 and up bracket with existing health issues. Doing so is simply silly pandering. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

That doesn’t change anything. It also doesn’t matter if they are handing out free grilled cheese sandwiches instead of vaccines. The govt should not prioritize services based on race, gender/sex, disability status, etc. It’s a really bad idea to go backwards on this stuff. 

So I don’t know how VT decisions were made.  However, it is possible that some of the groups have higher risk and prevalence increasing the likelihood of spread.   We stratify by race in health care all the time based on known risk.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, weathafella said:

So I don’t know how VT decisions were made.  However, it is possible that some of the groups have higher risk and prevalence increasing the likelihood of spread.   We stratify by race in health care all the time based on known risk.

The tweet in question didn't stratify based on anything but "self-identifying" as a BIPOC, and even said if just one person in your family identifies as such, the whole family can come down for the vaccine and jump the appointment line. I totally understand your point from a medical professional standpoint, but that is not what is happening here. There is no rigor behind this, clearly. It's dangerous racist pandering.

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, weathafella said:

So I don’t know how VT decisions were made.  However, it is possible that some of the groups have higher risk and prevalence increasing the likelihood of spread.   We stratify by race in health care all the time based on known risk.

A 20 year old healthy POC has basically zero risk now do a comorbid 45 yr old white person and stratify

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Age is strongly correlated to the “vulnerability” standard with COVID, as are other factors such as weight and other health ailments. I am OK with a more-encompassing vulnerability metric. That’s not what the VT tweet said, however. It was strictly race.

An 18 year old African American should not be jumping the line over anyone in the 50 and up bracket with existing health issues. Doing so is simply silly pandering. 

I posted a link showing POC were more vulnerable.  Vaccine distribution has also been unevenly distributed based on  race.    

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

I posted a link showing POC were more vulnerable.  

But all POC are not more vulnerable than cormorbid white or Asian. CT did it right. First LTC, first responders  Health Care workers, also over 75 then over 65 and teachers, then over 55, now over 16. Employed mobile vaccine sites in poorer  neighborhoods, which in fact , of any color are the most vulnerable group. I salute the CT Dept of Health 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ginx snewx said:

But all POC are not more vulnerable than cormorbid white or Asian. CT did it right. First LTC, first responders  Helath Care also over 75 then over 65 and teachers then over 55 now over 16. Employed mobile vaccine sites in poorer  neighborhoods, which in fact , of any color are the most vulnerable group. I salute the CT Dept of Health 

I agree that it has been done very well in CT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

I posted a link showing POC were more vulnerable.  Vaccine distribution has also been unevenly distributed based on  race.    

Vulnerable people are vulnerable. Plenty of people from other races are far more vulnerable than healthy, fit African Americans.

Prioritize based on real risk, not just race.

I mean, I get what you are trying to say, but this is the exact same logic used to justify racial profiling by the police and airport screeners, for example. It could also be used to justify racism in plenty of other domains, such as college admissions and sports scholarships. There is a reason tons of blood, sweat, and tears were spent over the centuries to address this and get protections against it codified in law...

It's crazy to me how fast we went from mandating people not see race when making decisions to mandating people see nothing BUT race in decision-making...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...