Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Let's be clear what that article says. The writers opinion is that Washington's law requiring flu and pertussis shots for foster parents of children under 2 years old is wrong. He supports that, in part, by noting that some nurses associations oppose mandatory flu shots for themselves and that many doctors don't get flu shots.

To turn that into "Hey look, doctors and nurses are against this" is a bit disingenuous. I would argue this proves one thing, doctors and nurses can be selfish and/or lazy just like the rest of the population.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

I thought we were supposed to listen to what doctors and nurses, the pros, had to say about this stuff.

Ahem.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Ahem.

Our web filter doesn't allow me to view whatever you linked there. I'll assume it somehow looks down on doctors and nurses who support freedom and don't want to get a flu shot and force everyone else to do so.

 

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

It is also important to note some of the reasons behind mandatory influenza vaccinations for health care workers. The evidence shows that a high influenza vaccination rate does lead to lower incidence of patients getting influenza.

Health care workers are given a lot of privileges working with the sick. With that, they also bear significant responsibility and thus, must give up some "freedom." I think every health care worker should have to wash their hands (or equivalent) prior to and after examining a patient. Is that infringing on their freedom?

 

[St. Clown]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Our web filter doesn't allow me to view whatever you linked there. I'll assume it somehow looks down on doctors and nurses who support freedom and don't want to get a flu shot and force everyone else to do so.

It was a screen capture of Professor Frink (The Simpsons) reading the output from his Sarcasm Detector invention.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

The CDC info cited in the other "article" indicate only 40 percent of doctors got the flu shot. Are the 60 percent, a significant majority, just all crazy irresponsible people or what? Seems like there's more to the story (as there pretty much always is).

 

[burd]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Our web filter doesn't allow me to view whatever you linked there. I'll assume it somehow looks down on doctors and nurses who support freedom and don't want to get a flu shot and force everyone else to do so.

It was nothing but a simple, entirely appropriate for any age or occasion, cartoon explaining what the word "sarcasm" means, Bob. Not surprised your filter blocked it.

But you probably have a filter just like all republicans have which prevents anyone from ever saying anything they disagree with or it attacks them. Sigh. It's a wonder Democrats are allowed to eat.

 

[MissThundercat]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

YMMV, but I finally gave FF the ignore finger after trying for months to have an honest conversation with him. You're dealing with a James O'Keefe wanna-be; don't expect candor.

Speaking of James O'Keefe, he seems to have a stick lodged in his rectum about running. He's got studies out saying running too much, too fast, or too long will kill you, when other data doesn't support it.

 

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

The CDC info cited in the other "article" indicate only 40 percent of doctors got the flu shot. Are the 60 percent, a significant majority, just all crazy irresponsible people or what? Seems like there's more to the story (as there pretty much always is).

Would you rather be treated at a hospital that requires influenza vaccination for employees or one that does not?

 

[JF_Gophers]

Would you rather be treated at a hospital that requires influenza vaccination for employees or one that does not?

It's not a question anyone would even ask or check on before going to a hospital.

 

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

It's not a question anyone would even ask or check on before going to a hospital.

How does that prevent one from answering the question?

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Some folks joke that Islam is about 500 years behind ...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ric-tells-students-Earth-does-not-rotate.html

Kepler is spinning in his grave ... no, not that Kepler.

 

[johnnypohlfan]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

It was nothing but a simple, entirely appropriate for any age or occasion, cartoon explaining what the word "sarcasm" means, Bob. Not surprised your filter blocked it.

But you probably have a filter just like all republicans have which prevents anyone from ever saying anything they disagree with or it attacks them. Sigh. It's a wonder Democrats are allowed to eat.

Generalize hastily, much?

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

It was nothing but a simple, entirely appropriate for any age or occasion, cartoon explaining what the word "sarcasm" means, Bob. Not surprised your filter blocked it.

But you probably have a filter just like all republicans have which prevents anyone from ever saying anything they disagree with or it attacks them. Sigh. It's a wonder Democrats are allowed to eat.

It's not my filter. Drama much! Sheesh!

 

[unofan]

It was a screen capture of Professor Frink (The Simpsons) reading the output from his Sarcasm Detector invention.

Bob still won't get it. I think he's far below the Mendoza Line when it comes to recognizing pop culture references.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Would you rather be treated at a hospital that requires influenza vaccination for employees or one that does not?

As already noted, that's not something I'd ever think to ask. If it did ever occur to me to ask and they would tell me their vaccination stats, it wouldn't matter much one way or another. I doubt they'd have that info readily available and want to share that, but that's just my guess.

Do you only think doctors (and nurses) who get a flu shot are reasonable and rational and should be allowed to practice medicine?




And the usual unofan following me around from thread to thread happens yet again.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Some folks joke that Islam is about 500 years behind ...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ric-tells-students-Earth-does-not-rotate.html

Kepler is spinning in his grave ... no, not that Kepler.

But he's spinning in an ellipse...

In all honesty, this mullah is no dumber than the nine GOP presidential candidates who all denied evolution.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

And the usual unofan following me around from thread to thread happens yet again.

Actually, he was responding to me.

Even if unofan annoys you, and especially since you've placed him on the Ignore List, you could just genuinely ignore his responses to threads and not post something to announce your assumption that the reply is about you.

Based upon how you've been responding so defensively to broad-based posts pertaining to how some Xtian people have behaved in the past and now this assumption about unofan's reply to me, you really are earning that hyper-sensitive label today.

 

[burd]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Generalize hastily, much?

I'm glad you get the point, johnny. Bob didn't.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Actually, he was responding to me.

Even if unofan annoys you, and especially since you've placed him on the Ignore List, you could just genuinely ignore his responses to threads and not post something to announce your assumption that the reply is about you.

Based upon how you've been responding so defensively to broad-based posts pertaining to how some Xtian people have behaved in the past and now this assumption about unofan's reply to me, you really are earning that hyper-sensitive label today.

I took the time to look at what unofan posted this time, given your representation. He was commenting about me. My comment about him following me around stands.

Oh, and I haven't said anything about Christians in the past today, but don't let that stop you from making another unfounded assumption about me. If you're referring to the stuff about Obama's inappropriate prayer breakfast comments, you need to keep up with the conversation, as that discussion died off awhile back.