Wuhan Coronavirus: Megathread - Got too big
- Thread starter JosephStalin
- Start date
- Status
Super-Chevy454
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
In other words, that would bring lots of dead people voting democrat. Btw, since when blacks vote Republican?
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2018
It's suspected that 20% of black men voted for Trump in 2020, which would be a several decade high.In other words, that would bring lots of dead people voting democrat. Btw, since when blacks vote Republican?
The funny thing is, for all the four-five years of talk about how Trump was racist, if we assume exit polls are accurate, Trump GAINED in every minority vote and Biden won the election because his share of white male voters went from 31% to 38% over Hillary.
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2020
I'm guessing by Mu they really mean ADE and this will be the variant to finally and truly make us all nigger cattle.
Went out with friends. They were talking about a new high school under construction has issues re: crowding and stuff, especially while the old school is right up against it and being demolished. And of course the main concern isn't unpleasant environment or fire safety. It's "OMG they WANT these kids to get the ligma variant!!!"
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2018
I know the kind of white male who developed nevertrump opinions during his presidency because of the media.
Several people I know who religiously started watching 24 hour news media just to catch the latest leak from the Trump Whitehouse. By 2020 they would just keep repeating that the adults need to be back in charge.
I asked one of them if it felt like the adults are back in charge now that americans were abandoned in Afghanistan. That triggered a severe angry outburst where I was told that there was nothing that could have been done better, and that if there was it was Trump's fault.
They're also the same kind of people who bought the media narrative on covid, hook line and sinker
Rei is shit
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2017
HONK HONK HONK HONK HONK HONK
Want to Enhance Civil Liberties? Embrace Vaccine Mandates. - ACLU
Opinion | We Work at the A.C.L.U. Here’s What We Think About Vaccine Mandates.
They protect the most vulnerable among us.
Opinion | Want to Enhance Civil Liberties? Embrace Vaccine Mandates. …
archived 2 Sep 2021 10:26:51 UTC
Do vaccine mandates violate civil liberties? Some who have refused vaccination claim as much.
We disagree.
At the A.C.L.U., we are not shy about defending civil liberties, even when they are very unpopular. But we see no civil liberties problem with requiring Covid-19 vaccines in most circumstances.
While the permissibility of requiring vaccines for particular diseases depends on several factors, when it comes to Covid-19, all considerations point in the same direction. The disease is highly transmissible, serious and often lethal; the vaccines are safe and effective; and crucially there is no equally effective alternative available to protect public health.
In fact, far from compromising civil liberties, vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties. They protect the most vulnerable among us, including people with disabilities and fragile immune systems, children too young to be vaccinated and communities of color hit hard by the disease.
Vaccine requirements also safeguard those whose work involves regular exposure to the public, like teachers, doctors and nurses, bus drivers and grocery store employees. And by inoculating people from the disease’s worst effects, the vaccines offer the promise of restoring to all of us our most basic liberties, eventually allowing us to return safely to life as we knew it, in schools and at houses of worship and political meetings, not to mention at restaurants, bars, and gatherings with family and friends.
Opinion Conversation Questions surrounding the Covid-19 vaccine and its rollout.
Vaccines are a justifiable intrusion on autonomy and bodily integrity. That may sound ominous, because we all have the fundamental right to bodily integrity and to make our own health care decisions. But these rights are not absolute. They do not include the right to inflict harm on others.
While vaccine mandates are not always permissible, they rarely run afoul of civil liberties when they involve highly infectious and devastating diseases like Covid-19. Although this disease is novel, vaccine mandates are not. Schools, health care facilities, the U.S. military and many other institutions have long required vaccination for contagious diseases like mumps and measles that pose far less risk than the coronavirus does today.
In the United States alone, more than 39 million people have been infected with Covid-19 and more than 600,000 people have died. People with intellectual and physical disabilities are more likely to contract Covid-19, and they have much higher rates of hospitalization and death. Children’s hospitals in Georgia, Louisiana and other states are reporting high admissions of infected patients, and many are running out of beds.
Continue reading the main story
Even though the F.D.A. and independent medical experts have found Covid-19 vaccines to be extremely safe and highly effective, a sizable portion of the eligible population has chosen not to be vaccinated. In this context, Covid-19 vaccine mandates — much like mask mandates — are public health measures necessary to protect people from severe illness and death. They are therefore permissible in many settings where the unvaccinated pose a risk to others, including schools and universities, hospitals, restaurants and bars, workplaces and businesses open to the public.
While limited exceptions are necessary, most people can be required to be vaccinated. Any vaccination mandate should have exceptions for those for whom the vaccine is medically contraindicated, such as people who have allergies to it. The absence of such exceptions would directly undermine the public health goals of a mandate, although other mandatory precautions, like masking, social distancing, regular testing or working remotely, may be appropriate. Where a vaccine is not medically contraindicated, however, avoiding a deadly threat to the public health typically outweighs personal autonomy and individual freedom.
What about those who object to vaccination on religious grounds? Like personal autonomy, religious freedom is an essential right, but not an unfettered license to inflict harm on others. As the Supreme Court explained more than 75 years ago in Prince v. Massachusetts: “The right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill health or death.”
In the employment context, federal law requires religious accommodations in some circumstances, but not if they would cause an “undue hardship” to the employer. Refusing a Covid-19 vaccination poses a direct threat to the health and safety of others in the workplace, and likely amounts to an undue hardship unless the employer can devise some other accommodation for the employee, such as working from home.
Some have objected that in practice, vaccine mandates may have disparate effects on disadvantaged communities or individuals. Such concerns need to be taken seriously. But they don’t justify refusals to be vaccinated.
Every effort should be made to ensure that vaccines are equally available to all without obstacles posed by cost, race, immigration status, geography or job responsibilities. Some undocumented people reportedly have been turned away from vaccination sites because they lack a government ID, for instance, while others have confronted obstacles related to cost, transportation or additional requirements imposed by vaccination clinics.
Public health officials should take concrete steps to counter vaccine hesitancy among communities of color whose past discriminatory treatment has understandably sown mistrust. Employers imposing mandates should afford workers paid time off as needed to obtain a vaccine and to manage potential side effects. And people should be permitted to offer written proof of vaccination rather than requiring proof via a smartphone app, so as not to disadvantage those who can’t afford a smartphone.
But where vaccines are widely available, equity concerns actually argue in favor of vaccine mandates, precisely because disadvantaged communities have been disproportionately harmed by this disease. These are reasons to make the vaccine easier to get, not for opposing vaccine mandates altogether.
The real threat to civil liberties comes from states banning vaccine and mask mandates. Even though most Covid-19 vaccine mandates do not infringe civil liberties, several states, including Florida, Iowa, South Carolina and Texas, have banned vaccine mandates or mask mandates — and sometimes both — in the name of freedom. But these bans directly endanger the public health and make more deaths from the disease inevitable. They trample the rights of the most vulnerable, who want to participate in society without putting their health at grave risk.
We care deeply about civil liberties and civil rights for all — which is precisely why we support vaccine mandates.
We disagree.
At the A.C.L.U., we are not shy about defending civil liberties, even when they are very unpopular. But we see no civil liberties problem with requiring Covid-19 vaccines in most circumstances.
While the permissibility of requiring vaccines for particular diseases depends on several factors, when it comes to Covid-19, all considerations point in the same direction. The disease is highly transmissible, serious and often lethal; the vaccines are safe and effective; and crucially there is no equally effective alternative available to protect public health.
In fact, far from compromising civil liberties, vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties. They protect the most vulnerable among us, including people with disabilities and fragile immune systems, children too young to be vaccinated and communities of color hit hard by the disease.
Vaccine requirements also safeguard those whose work involves regular exposure to the public, like teachers, doctors and nurses, bus drivers and grocery store employees. And by inoculating people from the disease’s worst effects, the vaccines offer the promise of restoring to all of us our most basic liberties, eventually allowing us to return safely to life as we knew it, in schools and at houses of worship and political meetings, not to mention at restaurants, bars, and gatherings with family and friends.
Opinion Conversation Questions surrounding the Covid-19 vaccine and its rollout.
- Is the pandemic getting worse again?
Aaron E. Carroll, the chief health officer for Indiana University, writes that the answer depends on whether you are vaccinated. - Are new mask mandates a good idea?
Jennifer B. Nuzzo and Beth Blauer, health experts at Johns Hopkins, examine three important questions about masking rules. - What do you say to a friend who doesn't want the vaccine?
Our chatbot, developed with experts, tackles this thorny conversation. - Will masking in schools have negative effects on learning?
Judith Danovitch, a research psychologist, explains why there’s little reason to worry, and why face coverings may even offer unexpected benefits.
Vaccines are a justifiable intrusion on autonomy and bodily integrity. That may sound ominous, because we all have the fundamental right to bodily integrity and to make our own health care decisions. But these rights are not absolute. They do not include the right to inflict harm on others.
While vaccine mandates are not always permissible, they rarely run afoul of civil liberties when they involve highly infectious and devastating diseases like Covid-19. Although this disease is novel, vaccine mandates are not. Schools, health care facilities, the U.S. military and many other institutions have long required vaccination for contagious diseases like mumps and measles that pose far less risk than the coronavirus does today.
In the United States alone, more than 39 million people have been infected with Covid-19 and more than 600,000 people have died. People with intellectual and physical disabilities are more likely to contract Covid-19, and they have much higher rates of hospitalization and death. Children’s hospitals in Georgia, Louisiana and other states are reporting high admissions of infected patients, and many are running out of beds.
Editors’ Picks
She’s the Investor Guru for Online Creators
The Shy Sisters Behind Austin’s Breakout Breakfast Tacos
‘Want to Join My Crossword Group Chat?’
Continue reading the main story
Even though the F.D.A. and independent medical experts have found Covid-19 vaccines to be extremely safe and highly effective, a sizable portion of the eligible population has chosen not to be vaccinated. In this context, Covid-19 vaccine mandates — much like mask mandates — are public health measures necessary to protect people from severe illness and death. They are therefore permissible in many settings where the unvaccinated pose a risk to others, including schools and universities, hospitals, restaurants and bars, workplaces and businesses open to the public.
While limited exceptions are necessary, most people can be required to be vaccinated. Any vaccination mandate should have exceptions for those for whom the vaccine is medically contraindicated, such as people who have allergies to it. The absence of such exceptions would directly undermine the public health goals of a mandate, although other mandatory precautions, like masking, social distancing, regular testing or working remotely, may be appropriate. Where a vaccine is not medically contraindicated, however, avoiding a deadly threat to the public health typically outweighs personal autonomy and individual freedom.
What about those who object to vaccination on religious grounds? Like personal autonomy, religious freedom is an essential right, but not an unfettered license to inflict harm on others. As the Supreme Court explained more than 75 years ago in Prince v. Massachusetts: “The right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill health or death.”
In the employment context, federal law requires religious accommodations in some circumstances, but not if they would cause an “undue hardship” to the employer. Refusing a Covid-19 vaccination poses a direct threat to the health and safety of others in the workplace, and likely amounts to an undue hardship unless the employer can devise some other accommodation for the employee, such as working from home.
Some have objected that in practice, vaccine mandates may have disparate effects on disadvantaged communities or individuals. Such concerns need to be taken seriously. But they don’t justify refusals to be vaccinated.
Every effort should be made to ensure that vaccines are equally available to all without obstacles posed by cost, race, immigration status, geography or job responsibilities. Some undocumented people reportedly have been turned away from vaccination sites because they lack a government ID, for instance, while others have confronted obstacles related to cost, transportation or additional requirements imposed by vaccination clinics.
Public health officials should take concrete steps to counter vaccine hesitancy among communities of color whose past discriminatory treatment has understandably sown mistrust. Employers imposing mandates should afford workers paid time off as needed to obtain a vaccine and to manage potential side effects. And people should be permitted to offer written proof of vaccination rather than requiring proof via a smartphone app, so as not to disadvantage those who can’t afford a smartphone.
But where vaccines are widely available, equity concerns actually argue in favor of vaccine mandates, precisely because disadvantaged communities have been disproportionately harmed by this disease. These are reasons to make the vaccine easier to get, not for opposing vaccine mandates altogether.
The real threat to civil liberties comes from states banning vaccine and mask mandates. Even though most Covid-19 vaccine mandates do not infringe civil liberties, several states, including Florida, Iowa, South Carolina and Texas, have banned vaccine mandates or mask mandates — and sometimes both — in the name of freedom. But these bans directly endanger the public health and make more deaths from the disease inevitable. They trample the rights of the most vulnerable, who want to participate in society without putting their health at grave risk.
We care deeply about civil liberties and civil rights for all — which is precisely why we support vaccine mandates.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2018
Candace Owens denied service at COVID test site for spreading misinformation
Conservative personality Candace Owens was trending on Twitter Wednesday after a private COVID-19 testing service denied her service for spreading […] The post Candace Owens denied service at COVID test site for spreading misinformation appeared first on TheGrio.
Not sure if this is true or a publicity stunt, but Candice Owens is claiming that a COVID testing center refused to test her for COVID because she spread misinformation.
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2019
Ivermectin, ‘Wonder drug’ from Japan: the human use perspective
archived 31 Aug 2021 19:41:35 UTC
Super-Chevy454
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
It could be interesting to see what they classified as misinformation.
Candace Owens denied service at COVID test site for spreading misinformation
Conservative personality Candace Owens was trending on Twitter Wednesday after a private COVID-19 testing service denied her service for spreading […] The post Candace Owens denied service at COVID test site for spreading misinformation appeared first on TheGrio.www.yahoo.com
Not sure if this is true or a publicity stunt, but Candice Owens is claiming that a COVID testing center refused to test her for COVID because she spread misinformation.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2018
Not demanding everyone get the jab immediately or you're putting lives at risk.
Anyone that thinks people have the right to not get vaccinated is spreading misinformation at this point.
By the way, NBA players on the Knicks, Nets, and Lakers have been told that they need to get the jab in order to play home games. Surprisingly for some reason, the visiting team doesn't need to be jabbed to play.
Unvaccinated NBA players in cities with local requirements (NYC, SF) will not play in home games
NBA players who are unvaccinated and play in San Francisco or New York will not be able to play in home games due to local city regulations.
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2016
Because of the Unvaccinated.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2021
https://archive.md/rCtAx
WAKE ME UP INSIDE
(I can't wake up)
TL;DR - sinovac isn't recognized so Turkish citizens who want to travel to Europe either have to get a third shot of inactivated virus or get two mRNA shots.
WAKE ME UP INSIDE
(I can't wake up)
TL;DR - sinovac isn't recognized so Turkish citizens who want to travel to Europe either have to get a third shot of inactivated virus or get two mRNA shots.
Gorilla Tessellator
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2017
It's well known that psychotherapy goal is to get you adjusted to your environment. What if the society you live in went batshit crazy? well, no matter what the therapist will encourage conformism. That's just what these whorish professionals do.
News of a reported Mu variant makes me wonder if this is the latest happening to keep everyone in a heightened stae of fear uncertainly and doubt. Even soem of the doomers I know are starting to feel as if they wish the oculd get off the clown world ride.
I am sure it's the big part of the plan. Keep you on the edge at all times. I feel the impact of it on myself. The future seems to be more uncertain than ever. And then I remember two things:
1. the future is ALWAYS uncertain. One day a person is healthy and happy, next week he is diagnosed with cancer
2. the powers that be are no more in control of the future than we are. They have only an illusion of control. Yes, they have armies, propaganda and shit ton of money, but unpredictable events that will humble their hubris are going to pop up every time.
I think that Ivermectin was one of these unpredictable events. They didn't expect that some honest doctors will figure out a cure for the virus so quickly. It definitely diminishes the potential of scaring people with COVID. I also suspect that Ivermectin can to some extent diminish the negative impact of vax, but I wouldn't count on it.
Looking at Australia, as they want to deanonymize the internet and to tie everything to a passport based on boosters, I presume, it's clear that this was the plan all along. But the narrative is frail at the edges, as the remedies exists, and there is no point to push the vax.
In the end they will surely fail, as all the tyrants of the past did. It's a certainty. We just don't know if we will see it or even if our children will see their fall.
Super-Chevy454
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
Sorry if it been already mentionned on this thread or elsewhere on KF. But I saw that vlog from the Hill who talked of a CEO who got his share of criticism because he called out the role of obesity with corona-chan and was called fatphobic.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2018
@Gorilla Tessellator It doesn't help when therapists are so far left-leaning that they are outright telling white people that they are bad.
That probably doesn't help a super vulnerable person to hear they are evil oppressor for being born white.
ddw
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2021
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2021
That’s been my problem with trying to have therapy during this time. It was bad enough I had been in pretty much recovery from OCD for a while before this happened . Instead of listening to valid concerns I had about covid, about the vaccine and past medical trauma etc. the therapist just kept telling me the vaccines were the answer and things would be completely fine after that. I gave up in January . Unless you find a really old school and non woke therapist, they’ll all keep saying the same things. [\SPOILER]
I read a post on IG last night written by a psychologist about coercive vaccination and the way it might be affecting people who have experienced bodily trauma, abuse and other things. And said that while we are in a pandemic blah blah that there should be some compassion for people uncomfortable getting the vaccine under all this pressure and shame. And of course the comments illustrated the point perfectly. People were like oh no one cares, get over it. You don’t have the right to murder people because of your past trauma! And all the same talking points and calling for shunning of the unvaccinated..
I read a post on IG last night written by a psychologist about coercive vaccination and the way it might be affecting people who have experienced bodily trauma, abuse and other things. And said that while we are in a pandemic blah blah that there should be some compassion for people uncomfortable getting the vaccine under all this pressure and shame. And of course the comments illustrated the point perfectly. People were like oh no one cares, get over it. You don’t have the right to murder people because of your past trauma! And all the same talking points and calling for shunning of the unvaccinated..
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2020
"My body my choice" and "respect victims" unless it's something the Democrats want you to do lol.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2013
found on /r/walkaway
nationalfile.com
Pfizer To 'Require' Twice-Per-Day COVID Pill Alongside Vaccines
Pfizer is so confident the pill will be approved and likely mandated that it has started production before the end of clinical trials
nationalfile.com
- Status