Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
46 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

I've known needle freaks with better sense than him and brain fried waste cases that weren't opposed to getting proper medicine. He's so far up his own ass he needs a belly button window.

Foster Brooks’ comedy character would’ve been a better choice for the job.

 

IMG_6326.jpeg

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, scottsins said:

My wife had someone come in for their Covid shot. Ran her info, and insurer required a $60 co-pay. The customer then decided against getting the shot.

Yay.

that's a dumb fucking insurer.  

I'm actually surprised that insurance cos. don't mandate all vaccines.  Take the shot or get cancelled mofos. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
29 minutes ago, scottsins said:

My wife had someone come in for their Covid shot. Ran her info, and insurer required a $60 co-pay. The customer then decided against getting the shot.

Yay.

Medicare won't be covering it after the CDC pulled their recommendation.  Watch.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
On 8/31/2025 at 3:28 PM, RPM said:

I've checked a lot of titers. I'm sure one of them was called Varcella's.

A buddy of mine’s last name is extremely close to this. In fact if you have a certain accent you might even pronounce it like Varcella. 
 

csb

Posted
32 minutes ago, scottsins said:

My wife had someone come in for their Covid shot. Ran her info, and insurer required a $60 co-pay. The customer then decided against getting the shot.

Yay.

 

Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, scottsins said:

My wife had someone come in for their Covid shot. Ran her info, and insurer required a $60 co-pay. The customer then decided against getting the shot.

Yay.

Commercial plans are locked into their coverage until the plan year rolls over. Medicare (all will be basically eligible by age or disability) and Medicaid real time respond to ACIP guidance. So if their commercial plan kicked back a copay they either were not already covering COVID boosters or they got caught up in a combination of bad plan year roll over timing and bad decisions by P&T committee. 

Edited by Anastasis
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, tigol said:

Medicare won't be covering it after the CDC pulled their recommendation.  Watch.

I don't see it playing out where COVID vaccines aren't recommended for 65+ and high risk individuals (which comprises basically all of Medicare eligible beneficiaries). 

  • Fuck You 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

I don't see it playing out where COVID vaccines aren't recommended for 65+ and high risk individuals (which comprises basically all of Medicare eligible beneficiaries). 

You’re not really paying attention, are you?  RFK Jr has made it an obsession of his to get COVID and other vaccines shut down. He’s loading up various departments or boards with anti-vaccine types.  Shit, Florida is dropping all vaccine requirements for kids, and Texas will absolutely follow suit.  Not even the embarrassment over the measles outbreak will stop it.

We are absolutely going to bring back polio, measles, mumps, etc. among kids because we have dumb drunks who think RFK Jr knows what he’s doing.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 3
Posted
14 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

You’re not really paying attention, are you?  RFK Jr has made it an obsession of his to get COVID and other vaccines shut down. He’s loading up various departments or boards with anti-vaccine types.  Shit, Florida is dropping all vaccine requirements for kids, and Texas will absolutely follow suit.  Not even the embarrassment over the measles outbreak will stop it.

We are absolutely going to bring back polio, measles, mumps, etc. among kids because we have dumb drunks who think RFK Jr knows what he’s doing.

Hep B at birth will get pressure next round of ACIP, rightfully so imo. COVID vaccine among 65+ and those with risk factors not so much. Our COVID rec will start looking a lot like the european recs, IMO. 

  • Fuck You 1
Posted

COVID vaccination in particular has become a political dogma among some quarters in the the US. Not too unlike some other politically charged topics. While we wail and gnash the teeth other parts of the world take a more evidence based approach. 

  • Fuck You 2
Posted
10 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Just completely ignored the direct questions he's pretending to respond to.

You cannot identify a single direct question that I have evaded. 

  • Fuck You 2
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Foosters said:

Took Ani off of ignore for those three posts. Just completely ignored the direct questions he's pretending to respond to.

giphy(3).gif.91c45066b63ede8408dcdc1f48078c43.gif

Hilarious and pathetic 

I had to look.

I only have three on ignore and he's one of them.

Screenshot_20250905-065919.png

Yep, I'm good with my decision too.

Edited by cactusflinthead
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

If BCBS can't update their coding profile for the new C-19 vax within the next week I'm just going to pay for it out of pocket and seek reimbursement later if needed. When I attempted to get it last week (along w/ flu and TDAP) the tech at CVS did all she could to get approval from my insurer but no dice. I asked then what it would cost me if I just paid for it myself and she estimated "around $200." I've heard of at least six coworkers at satellite offices here in the city having contracted it in the last few weeks. And my sister (also in Austin; works in healthcare) had her 3rd bout with it 6 weeks ago. 

This insanity is going to continue. If I've gotta drop a couple hundred bucks then so be it. I also realize there are millions of at risk people in this country for whom that's not an option.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

@Dahobbs promoted the very public health strategies that undermined the credibility of the CDC and FDA and landed us with RFK, Jr. So I understand why he might be tripping. 

Goddammit.  Quit repeating this.

As stated elsewhere, there is no "public health strategy" that justifies this appointment.

And the people responsible for the appointment, from the voters on up, don't understand any of the errors the CDC/FDA may have made in hindsight.  Even if there is a kernel of truth to it, MAGAts don't understand it.

This is all based on a vengeful, galactically stupid president and his electorate.  Horse paste and bleach.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Goddammit.  Quit repeating this.

As stated elsewhere, there is no "public health strategy" that justifies this appointment.

And the people responsible for the appointment, from the voters on up, don't understand any of the errors the CDC/FDA may have made in hindsight.  Even if there is a kernel of truth to it, MAGAts don't understand it.

This is all based on a vengeful, galactically stupid president and his electorate.  Horse paste and bleach.

It isn’t justifying it. It’s explaining it so maybe people will get a

 

9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

 

better understanding. 
 

And voters definitely understood what happened during the pandemic. The CDC helped keep schools closed longer in significant parts of the country. They influenced the whole masking policy. They helped push COVID vaccine mandates. Walensky was all over TV constantly spouting all this stuff. You seem to be the one that doesn’t understand a la Seymour Skinner. 
 

9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

There’s several differences in vaccine policy between us and western countries. 
 

In the UK for example they’re  limiting Covid boosters to people over 75, nursing-home residents, and those with weakened immune systems.

Their current guidance states, “in the current era of high population immunity to Covid-19, additional Covid-19 doses provide very limited, if any, protection against infection and any subsequent onward transmission of infection.”

  • Fuck You 2
Posted
29 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

And the people responsible for the appointment, from the voters on up, don't understand any of the errors the CDC/FDA may have made in hindsight.  Even if there is a kernel of truth to it, MAGAts don't understand it.

This is all based on a vengeful, galactically stupid president and his electorate.  Horse paste and bleach.

And Florida getting rid of mandatory vaccinations for certain diseases for schoolchildren is the outcome of this. Make no mistake, Texas is considering ditching the requirements for schoolchildren to get certain vaccines as well, but from what I've heard, our little dustup with measles spooked some folks and/or embarrassed them. They did not like being mocked for making measles great again.

Part of the problem is, at least in the case of Florida, you have a bunch of gen-Xers making the call, and outside of chicken pox, none of us have really experienced any major preventable diseases in large numbers, before there were vaccines, and our one big outbreak, COVID-19, was mismanaged from the start and became politicized.  You would have thought though that it would have shaken up a lot of us - after all, it was our parents and aunts and uncles (and even grandparents/great aunts/uncles) or friends' parents/aunts/uncles that were dying from it, but team political bullshit and all. Things like polio - that was something that an older relative might have been affected by (or killed by) a decade or two before we were born, and we didn't experience it first-hand with classmates or cousins our age.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Laguna said:

It isn’t justifying it. It’s explaining it so maybe people will get a

 

better understanding. 
 

And voters definitely understood what happened during the pandemic. The CDC helped keep schools closed longer in significant parts of the country. They influenced the whole masking policy. They helped push COVID vaccine mandates. Walensky was all over TV constantly spouting all this stuff. You seem to be the one that doesn’t understand a la Seymour Skinner. 
 

There’s several differences in vaccine policy between us and western countries. 
 

In the UK for example they’re  limiting Covid boosters to people over 75, nursing-home residents, and those with weakened immune systems.

Their current guidance states, “in the current era of high population immunity to Covid-19, additional Covid-19 doses provide very limited, if any, protection against infection and any subsequent onward transmission of infection.”

This is all hindsight-biased nonsense.

As with everything Trump, it's the wrong answer to the right question.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Anastasis said:
@Dahobbs promoted the very public health strategies that undermined the credibility of the CDC and FDA and landed us with RFK, Jr. So I understand why he might be tripping. 


c9b180375d07ac15b709bdf80e70c1b5.jpg

Edited by Chuckie Finster
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

This is all hindsight-biased nonsense.

Even if you agree with that, which I don’t, if you fuck up your job repeatedly you and your processes and methods are in danger of being replaced. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Laguna said:

Even if you agree with that, which I don’t, if you fuck up your job repeatedly you and your processes and methods are in danger of being replaced. 

Or you get elected to a second term, four years later.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Laguna said:

Even if you agree with that, which I don’t, if you fuck up your job repeatedly you and your processes and methods are in danger of being replaced. 

Replacement of CDC/FDA personnel was pretty much inevitable with the change of administration.

Replacement of CDC/FDA personnel with these assclowns was only inevitable with Trump and MAGA and their throne of lies.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, scottsins said:


I’m curious. If you don’t meet those criteria, can you still get the shot? If so, is there a cost? I know little about their health care/insurance system.

From the link: 

Individuals who are not targeted by the recommendation as per the definition above, but have advanced illness or conditions that impair their health in a way that puts them at risk of severe COVID-19, may be prescribed vaccination by their doctor. Examples of such illnesses may include severe lung disease or pronounced frailty due to extensive comorbidities.

 

Here is the UK's rec: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-spring-booster-resources/a-guide-to-the-covid-19-spring-booster-2023

Spring 2025 vaccine eligibility

COVID-19 is more serious in older people and in people with certain underlying health conditions. For these reasons, people aged 75 years and over, those in care homes, and those aged 6 months and over with a weakened immune system are being offered a spring dose of COVID-19 vaccine.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Deej said:

GIF by Justin

 

1 minute ago, Foosters said:

You made us wear a facemask during a global pandemic that killed millions so the only logical answer is to elect a conspiracy theory peddling drug addict with no medical experience to oversee the HHS, slash funding to all medical research, drive medical innovation out of the country, undoe decades of solid research on vaccines, peddle dangerous misinformation about communicable diseases and mental health medication, and attack vaccines as the cause of autism.

 I guess it kinda makes sense.

Their kids masking recommendations were clearly harmful. They also worked with teacher unions to help keep schools closed. Again, clearly harmful. And was pointed out in real time. Not hindsight.
 

Parents called it out in real time. And many moved their families across the country to change things. 
 

But it’s the kids that were wrong, Seymour. @TwiceHorn

  • Fuck You 10
  • Drool 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Foosters said:

You made us wear a facemask during a global pandemic that killed millions so the only logical answer is to elect a conspiracy theory peddling drug addict with no medical experience to oversee the HHS, slash funding to all medical research, drive medical innovation out of the country, undoe decades of solid research on vaccines, peddle dangerous misinformation about communicable diseases and mental health medication, and attack vaccines as the cause of autism.

 I guess it kinda makes sense.

In this timeline, it absolutely makes sense that a former heroin junkie who literally had a worm living in his brain because the motherfucker couldn't pass up bushmeat is trying to undo decades of work that eradicated a lot of horrible diseases.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, Laguna said:

Even if you agree with that, which I don’t, if you fuck up your job repeatedly you and your processes and methods are in danger of being replaced. 

Lets take a look at your one kind of objective assertion, that the UK, in 2025, five years after the pandemic commenced, has different vaccine recommendations than the US did five years ago.

Our understanding of the virus, the virus itself, and the vaccines have all improved or at least changed in the last five years.

There's no clearer example of hindsight bias I can really think of.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
48 minutes ago, Laguna said:

It isn’t justifying it. It’s explaining it so maybe people will get a

 

better understanding. 
 

And voters definitely understood what happened during the pandemic. The CDC helped keep schools closed longer in significant parts of the country. They influenced the whole masking policy. They helped push COVID vaccine mandates. Walensky was all over TV constantly spouting all this stuff. You seem to be the one that doesn’t understand a la Seymour Skinner. 
 

There’s several differences in vaccine policy between us and western countries. 
 

In the UK for example they’re  limiting Covid boosters to people over 75, nursing-home residents, and those with weakened immune systems.

Their current guidance states, “in the current era of high population immunity to Covid-19, additional Covid-19 doses provide very limited, if any, protection against infection and any subsequent onward transmission of infection.”

Mask use was effective at slowing the spread of Covid. So were lockdowns. If you are criticizing the CDC for their policies at that time, it appears you draw the wrong conclusions from fact.

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/fact-check-studies-do-show-face-masks-and-lockdowns-slow-the-spread-of-covid-19-idUSKCN2AT3JJ/

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, Laguna said:

 

Their kids masking recommendations were clearly harmful. They also worked with teacher unions to help keep schools closed. Again, clearly harmful. And was pointed out in real time. Not hindsight.
 

Parents called it out in real time. And many moved their families across the country to change things. 
 

But it’s the kids that were wrong, Seymour. @TwiceHorn

It was complained about in real time, but no one knew with any certainty who was right and who was wrong.  It was a balancing of one harm against another.  No one knew for sure whether schools would turn into virus incubators.  And people would have absolutely shit themselves if a couple dozen kids got real sick or died.

And how, pray tell, were mask recommendations harmful?  At worst, they were ineffective and inconvenient.

These were all judgment calls made in the heat of battle.  One side really didn't like them, but not because of any superior knowledge or judgment.  Over time, it may have been shown that there may have been more validity to their complaints than was known.  At the time it was nothing but "my freedumb."

 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...