Covfefe-19 The 12th Part: The Only Thing Worse Than This New Board Is TrumpVirus2020

[The Sicatoka]

There have got to be fewer phd candidates than all those other pools- was the data adjusted for that?

Like I noted: not reviewed.

[ScoobyDoo]

Like I noted: not reviewed.

Sure. Just go ahead and mislead everyone.

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

I mean I can point out that domestic abuse in Wisconsin rises when cheese consumption goes up too, but it doesn’t mean anything.

this is why studies need to be reviewed.

[ScoobyDoo]

I mean I can point out that domestic abuse in Wisconsin rises when cheese consumption goes up too, but it doesn’t mean anything.

this is why studies need to be reviewed.

It's a good thing we have many of us here who prevent this place from turning into ****ing Facebook. Cause that's where **** like that spreads like wildfire.

[The Sicatoka]

What is the hold up with companies requiring the vaccine? Are they hesitant to do so? If so, why?

Admittedly an outlier hypothetical scenario but ... say you have the unicorn --> unique skills, only one potential employer in country. (I'm trying to get the "get different job" retort out of play for a hypothetical; please bear with me.)

Coerced by employer to take. Take or don't have income. Get shot and immediately go into anaphylaxis. Death ensues. Family calls attorney. <-- That yes, admittedly unicorn, scenario could make corporate lawyers take pause.

"We strongly encourage, and if you don't it's mask and test weekly" is non-invasive. "You must" is invasive. I'm pretty sure which path the corporate lawyers would rather defend.

[J.D.]

It's a good thing we have many of us here who prevent this place from turning into ****ing Facebook. Cause that's where **** like that spreads like wildfire.

Thank you for your service.

[J.D.]

Admittedly an outlier hypothetical scenario but ... say you have the unicorn --> unique skills, only one potential employer in country. (I'm trying to get the "get different job" retort out of play for a hypothetical; please bear with me.)

Coerced by employer to take. Take or don't have income. Get shot and immediately go into anaphylaxis. Death ensues. Family calls attorney. <-- That yes, admittedly unicorn, scenario could make corporate lawyers take pause.

"We strongly encourage, and if you don't it's mask and test weekly" is non-invasive. "You must" is invasive. I'm pretty sure which path the corporate lawyers would rather defend.

OK but are there reports of people dying as a result of the vaccine? Or even severe side effects linked to it?

[The Sicatoka]

Sure. Just go ahead and mislead everyone.

I started that post with "Good/Bad". Yes, I led with caveat emptor. I led with "unreviewed work by Carnegie Mellon and U of Pittsburgh".

I'm sorry that misled you.

[The Sicatoka]

OK but are there reports of people dying as a result of the vaccine? Or even severe side effects linked to it?

Anaphylactic reactions can occur with any vaccine, but are usually extremely rare—about one per 1 million doses.

However, anaphylactic reactions do not mean death follows. (Possible, but definitely not probable.)

Science article from January.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020...rgic-reactions


Lawyers manage risk. Why some companies mandate and others do not more than likely involves the perceived risks through the eyes of corporate counsel.

[Handyman]

I have a friend who is a physician with the Mayo Clinic, and we were talking about this on Monday. He said that more than 20% of the employees in their system have refused the vaccine. It's the Mayo farking Clinic.

But, he expects that may change. Mayo just implemented a new rule. No vaccine, no eligibility for their disability plans if the employee is off work due to Covid. Extend that to general health coverage and they may be on to something.

That doesn't go far enough. It is one thing if Jimbob at Dominos doesn't want to get the vaccine but if health care workers dont want it you take them away from all patients. They can do remote work filling prescriptions for antibiotics whenever someone gets the sniffles.

You cannot allow the unvaxed to deal with patients the risk is just too damned high.

[Handyman]

I started that post with "Good/Bad". Yes, I led with caveat emptor. I led with "unreviewed work by Carnegie Mellon and U of Pittsburgh".

I'm sorry that misled you.

Maybe it would be best not to post non-reviewed data.

[J.D.]

However, anaphylactic reactions do not mean death follows. (Possible, but definitely not probable.)

Science article from January.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020...rgic-reactions


Lawyers manage risk. Why some companies mandate and others do not more than likely involves the perceived risks through the eyes of corporate counsel.

Do you know what separates a college from a business? Because at least in MA, many schools are requiring the vaccine. Or is there no separation and it just depends on how your lawyers are interpreting the law?

[rufus]

Maybe it would be best not to post non-reviewed data.

But then how would he be able to play "gotcha"?

[The Sicatoka]

Maybe it would be best not to post non-reviewed data.

Or post it with clear statement of its unreviewed status. Like I did.

[The Sicatoka]

But then how would he be able to play "gotcha"?

I thought this sophisticated group would understand "not reviewed" and as I also said take the Carnegie/UPitt data "with a grain of salt".