Jump to content

tantric superman

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    6441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by tantric superman

  1. 30 minutes ago, Born to Run said:

    It's a great way to raise more adults who are fearful of others they have no exposure to- browns, blacks, gays, Muslims etc.

    I just had a great conversations with two little white kids down the street who are home schooled, and taking a break.  They aren't scared of me, despite my meskiness. The are awesome kids.  

    I'm for propping up the public schools and not for demonizing home schooling. 

    Virtual learning is par for the course for home schoolers.  Virtual learning is "doable" for parochial and private schools.  Public schools have issues with virtual learning, and the more virtual learning they do, the worse they look.

    That's a cost that has to be factored in.

     

  2. 1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

    This is what I do. And I literally explained my reasoning in the post. Feel free to respond to the substance. 

    I posted that it was unlikely that such a law was passed, and yet you asked me what that law would do and on what basis it would be passed.  I did so, and then you said it had no utility, but admitted it might "clear things up a bit".  And then you argue that there is no way it would be passed, which is what I posited in the first place.

    It wasn't a particularly interesting exercise. 

    I'm an employment lawyer, and some clear federal direction that was quickly okayed by the courts would have made things much easier for companies like mine going forward, because we could have relied on such mandates as sound defenses in the face of the large number of employees who would have opposed the moves.

    I'll just accept your argument that all the angst of companies trying to deal with pandemic issues in the past couple of years was wasted time, that we could have been as absolutely over the top in our mandates in all 50 states with virtually no repercussions,  we can move on. 

     

  3. 26 minutes ago, DaysOff said:

    When we have an annual death total that resembles even a bad influenza year.

    Fine with me.  Although it's still important to understand the efficacy of vaccinations (vs. acquired immunity as well). 

    And for a political standpoint, I think government agencies would be well served to be thinking about the signposts that might cause them to alter their policy.  I think "annual death total" is a great measuring post. 

  4. 3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

    Have we ended vaccine mandates for other diseases prior to school? No? Ok, then, yes, I'm suggesting we treat Covid exactly the same and continue the vaccination requirements forever. We do that, and eventually we can stop worrying about any other sort of covid vaccine mandates or protections. 

    I don't know the trajectory of this disease.  However, at some point there should be a scientific determination that the risk to school children remains so great that we require the vaccine.  So somewhere between polio and flu?

    This debate would be much different if school age children were in an at risk group and if the vaccines have been approved quickly for all their age groups. 

  5. 1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

    Again, nothing stops businesses from doing this right now (other than state laws that now say they can't). They don't need to make religious accommodations, they aren't the government. I don't know what the ADA has to do with anything.

    This is a crazily uninformed post. 

    The primary concern any business would have in imposing a mandate on its employees without protection from government laws is crazy lawsuits by crazy employees and customers. That's why businesses have been frustrated by the federal mandates and the courts fucking with them.  Companies would love to the mandate so that they can rely on it to fend off lawsuits.  Without it, they face lots of loony constitutionally based lawsuits.

    Companies have to comply with the ADA.  Right now, companies are inundated with requests for accommodations based on COVID

    Companies have to make religious accommodations, including for those with people who have a sincere believe that the vaccines are  the mark of the devil or whatever sincere but hard to understand reason they have. 

  6. 25 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

    (1) He is talking about vaccinations. You are talking about testing. Those don't have the same cost/benefits analysis. 

    That's fair.  But both have a cost.  He wants to ignore the cost on vaccines.  I don't think that is an appropriate.

  7. 11 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

    I can't believe it's 2022 and we're still arguing about whether vaccine mandates are good.

    Are you suggesting that a COVID vaccine mandate is never going to end?  I doubt it. The question is at what point to we pivot to a more "flu like" protocol in regard to COVID.  

    I think it is completely fair for that discussion to begin now.

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. 16 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

    Uh, what? What would that legislation even look like? What exactly would the Constitutional hook be? Why would such a law even be necessary?  Businesses could already do this in absence of a law that says otherwise.

    Well, it would be a bill, which would then become law.

    The commerce clause. 

    Because we want(ed) people to get vaccinated.

    The law would outline how the businesses would be immune from lawsuit and outline any exemptions from ADA or religoius accommodation.

  9. 1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

    I’m fine with that. I just don’t think there is a good reason not to get vaccinated, even if you’ve been previously infected, and the only reason people are arguing against mandates is so they don’t have to get vaccinated. 

    It's too late at this point because the Repubs will do anything to make Dem legislation fail, but the Biden admin should have seen from the outset that the way to maximize vaccines would have been to pass legislation that allowed all businesses to determine for themselves whether they would require their employees and customers to be vaccinated. They could have thus been on the side of individual choice for both individuals and businesses.  They could have let the states and localities fight the battle of local mandates. 

    If the Repubs fought those mandates the Dems could have at least been seen as being on the side of "liberty" - which might have appealed to some swing voters.

  10. 48 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

    I personally don’t care if getting a vaccine causes one social or psychological effects. It doesn’t cost them monetarily at all. We shouldn’t base public policy on the fears of the ignorant, but on protecting the public. 

    I simply think that is not true, and this is why we have such political divisions. The "free testing" costs someone money.  I've had four.  President Biden wants 500 million.  So ultimately, let's just agree that my little grandson is going to be paying for this in terms of reduced educational opportunity or reduced social security benefits, just like he'll be paying for all of the various expenses that we don't properly fund with current taxes. 

    I'm willing to wait on the final tally of the negative implications of school closures/falling behind in school, but there will be real consequences. 

    I think it's imperative that we make sure we define what "protecting the public" means in our discussions, because when we use it too broadly its hard to discuss the issue. (I'm thinking we need to focus on "protecting those vulnerable to serious illness or death from COVID" -- and we need to stay focused on that.)   Whoever fails to focus on that definition and frankly, whoever continues to perpetrate solutions that don't fit the current situation and whoever doesn't admit that prior steps may not have been that effective, is going to face some pretty bad consequences in future elections. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  11. 1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

    You can dispute it, but you don’t have any evidence to back up your dispute. If you do, please provide. Your statement is factually incorrect.
    https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20211031/covid-vax-5-times-more-protective-than-natural-immunity

    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6947a2.htm

    Vaccine immunity lasts significantly longer than acquired immunity

    Again, vaccines provide greater protection than natural immunity and considering it is in the public interest to protect people, it is the public interest to mandate vaccines. 

    But if prior infection means that you are as protected from "serious illness" as the vaccine, that's a different question, and calls into question the whole issue of booster mandates and testing mandates. 

    In other words, is it reasonable to be concerned about serious illness and being put on a ventilator, but NOT being particularly concerned about getting reinfected?  I think so, given the fact that we are going to have access to great medicines to treat COVID over the next weeks, then then its very reasonable to measure the $$$ and social and psychological costs of mandates against their value - which seems to be decreasing rapidly. (One of the more interesting arguments in the podcast is that we shouldn't be doing so much testing. If someone is at risk and a doctor recommends a test, great.  If not, we shouldn't all be testing if we've been vaccinated and just have a cold.  I have taken four negative tests to date when I had a mild virus.)

    https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-natural-immunity-what-you-need-to-know

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00676-9/fulltext

    Although longer follow-up studies are needed, clinicians should remain optimistic regarding the protective effect of recovery from previous infection. Community immunity to control the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic can be reached with the acquired immunity due to either previous infection or vaccination. Acquired immunity from vaccination is certainly much safer and preferred. Given the evidence of immunity from previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, however, policy makers should consider recovery from previous SARS-CoV-2 infection equal to immunity from vaccination for purposes related to entry to public events, businesses, and the workplace, or travel requirements.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  12. 34 minutes ago, Don Johnson said:

    "Natural immunity" became such a political hot potato that it became taboo for some to discuss it.

    Yep, that's part of the point of the podcast.  Many of us got locked in early on in this thing.  I've been pissed for a while at kids in laws who are trumpy and none of them got their vaccines, and all have had COVID at least one or two times, and they all have been fine.

    At some point I may need to admit that they didn't necessarily pose a greater risk to my family's health. If that's the case, then, I need to admit that all my beefs aren't "my good science v. your bad science".

    • Hook 'Em 3
  13. 28 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

    But I don't get the criticism for taking a more conservative approach focused on our population and not the world at large (because, really, we can't even get ourselves vaccinated, how the fuck are we going to really help the rest of the world?). 

    These are doctors on the podcast so they aren't afraid in pointing out mistakes that were made along the way.  They admit themselves that they were cautious in the beginning, taking their kids out of school before anyone was doing so, but the point is what we do now, going forward. 

    In terms of getting ourselves vaccinated, again, these are doctors, so they know patients won't get vaccinated, or lose weight, or exercise when it's clear they should, so ultimately, with their being a limited number of persons who truly are at risk, they ultimately don't have time to fret about dumbshits who won't get vaccinated.   If they die, they die, and we should be worried about people who are at risk who ARE doing everything they can to stay safe.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  14. Just now, jimmyjazz said:

    'd like to see the data that back this up, because it doesn't align with many things I've read.  We know vaccine effectiveness wanes over time, so a booster sufficiently after full vaccination (6 months?  8 months?) helps rebuild immunity.

    If it's all just related to the angle that most healthy Americans are going to be fine either way, then that's one thing, but I don't think there is science out there that says boosters are ineffective when properly administered.  If there is, like I said, I'd sure like to see it.

    The issue is effective for what?  These doctors seem to be arguing that vaccines reduce the chance of virtually all people dying to zero.  You can't do better than zero, so not only should we have shifted the vaccines to poor countries, we should admit what happens to a vaccinated person who gets COVID.  They have a bad cold and they can transmit the disease.  Boosters give them a less bad cold and they can still transmit the disease.  The particular podcast is not afraid of getting into the weeds and citing studies. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
  15. 53 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    For those of us who don't have time to listen to a 2 hr podcast....what are the key points you heard that lead you to that conclusion?  I'm not asking that as a challenge to you, I am genuinely curious to hear them.

    Initial vaccines, and prior survived exposure, protect virtually everyone from death.

    Booster provides almost no extra protection, the fact that healthy people are getting boosters rather than us focusing on countries that haven't got their initial vaccines, is terrible and many have died because of it.  First vaccine is critical. Boosters don't do much, and booster mandates for kids returning to school is just politics based on bad science.  Advantages of keeping any healthy kid out of school because of any mandate at this point are simply outweighed by social and psycological hazards. 

    Having the second shot so soon after the initial shot was bad science.

    Given the new therapies, the only people who are in danger, are those with underlying health issues and the morbidly obese. 

    Netted out, no doubt about the value of vaccines to individual help.  Vaccines and booster of very questionable utility in "protecting others" and thus policies that do so are of questionable and potentially negative consequences.

    Bottom line - we were all super cautious, but the science points to us admitting that this is a virus that is a true danger to a very limited number of people and our policies need to quickly shift to focusing on them.

    Also, I had not heard the term omnicold.

    Not quite finished with it. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  16. Putting this here as a PSA.  I thought this was one of the best even keeled discussions regarding vaccines, boosters and the current state of affairs.  I'll admit to being a fanboy of this particular podcast and especially the guests he has on.

    https://peterattiamd.com/covid-19-current-state-omicron/

    From a political standpoint, makes me think the Dems need to pivot as fast as they can, as science permits, to treating this like the flu.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  17. On 12/22/2021 at 4:30 PM, luke duke said:

    Thanks for sharing the name of the place in Richardson.

    So I usually get mine from La Popular but it's getting more and more iffy -- picked them up from The Garden Cafe this year.

    In any case, I was thinking of going to get mine at La Tamaleria Neuvo Leon in Richardson this year if La Popular effed it up. 

    Is that the place in Richardson you are talking about?

  18. 9 hours ago, Reynolds Woodcock said:

    The Lost Daughter is Maggie Gyllenhaal's directorial debut, based on a 2006 novel. I think classified as a psychological thriller (though that may be a bit misleading), it explores the tensions that seem inherent in motherhood (I would assume). I thought it was really, really excellent. Olivia Coleman and Jessie Buckley were phenomenal. Some of the "omens" were a bit heavy handed, and I just can't really buy Dakota Johnson, but overall a great watch.

    I;ll buy Dakota, and put her in the beach chair next to me for the duration of my Greek vacation.

    I'll accept that the acting was excellent. Buckley is always good and so is Colman, but it was an actors' movie and it was great that Maggie got her say, but on the whole it was a beating.

    Good job, A for effort, etc.  Kudos all around.  But not memorable and not worth spending the unpleasant time with this unpleasant lot.

       

  19. 1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

    fucking Daniel introduces Miguel to Chicago and uses the Peter cetera lead shit instead of terry kath?  Now I hope terry beats his ass. 

    Ha ha.  My thoughts exactly.  I was willing to give Daniel San just a smidgen of respect until the Pete Cetera=great Chicago shit.

    That being said, when Peter Cetera was second fiddle things were okay by me.

     

×
×
  • Create New...