VaporTrail

Yooo. I'm back. I will say I'm putting together a proposal for a study on outcomes of COVID patients in my field, but nothing more because of dox. Nothing pro-vax or anti-vax, just a retrospective study in this patient population. As for the recommendation from many experts - there were plenty of medical experts who on the record asserted (without evidence) that there was no way that this could have been a leaked bioweapon, however, with Trump out of the picture, that's been backpedaled on and is now an approved theory to hold. I will admit now that there are new studies that suggest the vaccine has lower rates of myocarditis versus the unvaccinated covid population. However, that comes with two caveats - first, the authors of these studies disclosed conflicts of interest with Moderna/Pfizer/BioNTech/J&J. Second, it's still really early in the research process. If the findings of those studies are reproducible in experiments run by independent researchers, I'll give them a lot more credence. However, when there is documented evidence of these companies publishing bogus trial data to cover up unethical experimental testing on Nigerians in the last 15 years (Source: Medicine sans Frontiers - https://www.msf.org/statement-pfizer-promoted-misleading-and-false-accusations-msfs-involvement-unethical-drug-trials), then I personally think it's unwise to give them the benefit of the doubt. The data in the studies does look good, but if it's shit data in, then it's shit data out. I'll wait for some independent studies before letting big pharma dictate that everyone needs the jab. Secondly, as powerful as these research studies are, it is still very early on in the research process for this virus. I'd consider all of the data we have so far preliminary. To give you an example - there was a trial that came out 10 years ago which suggested that a certain anti-depressant also improved recovery of motor function from stroke. This was a big deal in my field, and lots of people started giving this drug to stroke patients. Subsequent studies over the next 10 years showed that this effect was not reproducible. These were both RCTs, which are more powerful studies than these COVID ones, which tend to be retrospective cohort studies. The data on COVID will get better with time, but personally I don't think the data they have is strong enough to align with their recommendations. The biggest flaw with the retrospective data, and it's one that can't really be controlled for, is that there is no way to truly count asymptomatic infections, and by not counting them, you are increasing the rate of whatever COVID side effect by x amount - which will be a topic of debate for the next 10 years. Anecdotally, I also really question the specificity and sensitivity of our gold standard COVID testing especially with this last wave.

Take your time, brother. We all got irl commitments.

I would wager that it correlates to the expansion of mass media and the explosion of social media. /edit - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States

The burden of proof for their assertions falls on me? What kind of logic is that? If anyone wants to make an assertion, they have to provide evidence, as I did. When one expert (me), posts data that contradicts the advice that other experts (CDC, AAP) are recommending, you simply choose to trust them because of who they are and not any specific data they've presented. You have demonstrated the problem of the "trust the science" crowd. Science isn't something to be "trusted," it's something to be understood. I call it an appeal to authority because that's exactly what you've done.

Holy shit. I did not think they would pull that one off. Kudos to the defense.

Critiquing the opinion you've presented is not "whataboutism." The vast majority of gun violence is urban homicide and rural/suburban suicide. When you post graphs that show gun crime in the US compared to other nations in the context of a recent school shooting, and in reducing each of these individual problems into "the gun problem," you've invited yourself to the pushback you've received. Can you give specifics as to how that will be helpful? If you're going to assert that those insurgencies are irrelevant, then I would like to hear your argument as to why. As well as the answer to these questions I asked earlier: First, if you are for stricter regulations, then what segment of the American populace should have their 2nd amendment right revoked? Secondly, suppose that somehow those stricter regulations happen, what is your plan to keep these newly restricted people from getting their hands on one of the 500 million firearms circulating in the country?

You posted a reddit article a few months ago about Parkland, took it at face value, and expected everyone else to do the same. Thanks to their voting system, the discussion on that site is actually worse than 4chan. Go make a throwaway account and try posting, say, a pro-life opinion - hell it doesn't even have to be political, just go make a post about not liking Half Life or Halo and see what happens. Sorry, but that place is as bad of an echo chamber as exists on either side of the political spectrum - the people who post there just like to pretend that there is some sort of difference between themselves and the people on boomer email chains. I presented raw data. I pulled data from the CDC since that is an organization that you have repeatedly championed as doing the right thing and having done all the research necessary to prove that the vaccines aren't harmful. In my professional opinion, their conclusions and position statements aren't lining up with the data. As for your ask, I'd say that's a damn good question.

I did play GTA3 as a kid. Since then, I've chopped off a couple of people's legs. COULD VIDEO GAMES BE THE CULPRIT? Find out next time on your favorite news channel. Alright, I'll play ball. My problem with the gun control crowd is that they have not brought up a single plausible way of doing what they suggest. First, if you are for stricter regulations, then what segment of the American populace should have their 2nd amendment right revoked? Secondly, suppose that somehow those stricter regulations happen, what is your plan to keep these newly restricted people from getting their hands on one of the 500 million firearms circulating in the country? I'm happy to hear any thoughts you have, but what you're asking is a Sisyphean task. You are focusing on the statistical anomaly of school shootings, instead of the vast majority of gun violence being rural suicides or urban homicides. The argument you present isn't really much different from those who were asking for the Patriot Act after 9/11.

*ting* *ting* *ting* Ahem. Fuck the SEC.

Because you too are a victim of the polarized media and have been conditioned to dehumanize them and downplay any opinion that differs from their talking points. I have posted data straight from the CDC that suggests that maybe kids shouldn't get it, and your initial response was iirc, "If that data is true," followed by an appeal to authority. So, if there's data coming from official sources that you aren't comfortable with, then surely you could see how people who have a lower IQ than you would struggle with crazy amount of scientific data that's been published since this started. People like JAFBF are not representative of the average person I see in clinic who is scared of the vaccine. His caricature makes you angry, but really, people like him are not the root of the problem, much as it'd be easier to believe that was the case.

The heart is made of permanent tissue. If any of it dies from a myocarditis or pericarditis flare, it's dead for the rest of their life. I'd like to see their definition of "temporarily." The only related data that I've seen has shown that hospitalization is transient (big surprise), but nothing about ejection fractions or mvo2 after discharge. But good businessmen. They knew that they would lose the game of chicken with the unvaccinated workers if they straight up fired them lol. Same story at most every hospital across the US.

There are legitimate reasons to be wary of being the first to get a new vaccine, particularly this one. It's insane to me that so many educated people are placing so much blame for the pandemic on the shoulders of people with less education. The complete inability to empathize with their fear of what they do not understand will make "populist versus elite" the driving political force in the next 5-10 years. Biden calling it "the pandemic of the unvaccinated" is the biggest error of his presidency. And some people thought the polarization was going to end once Trump was out.

Hey, we agree on something!

bye week came too late

Ok, Emily.

Piss off. I don't want Stefanski fired, but he really needs to get his shit together.

How does a team line up with 12 guys before and after a timeout? How does a team get penalized on lining up for a kick return? There's literally a tv timeout between every PAT and kickoff. The number of preventable penalties at this point has got to be as bad, if not worse than, the year with Freddie. Why can't we have Hunt and Chubb on the field at the same time? Why does a fullback get carries when those two are your running backs? When he was asked if he'd consider a QB change after the bye, he basically asked the reporter "Why would you want a qb change?" He's completely mishandled the Baker injury since week 2. Baker is clearly too fucking injured to play competently, and yet he keeps throwing him out there. Clean it up for fucks sake.

His best is not good enough. He is so rattled from his injuries that he looks like Charlie fucking Frye out there when he realizes his first read isn't open. My suggestion was to shut him down after his week 2 injury so that he wouldn't get more injured.

He was trash tonight, again. Looking forward to hearing the weekly Baker apology.

They're both at fault. Stefanski takes most of the blame, but it's also Baker's responsibility to call his own number when he knows he is hurting the team because he can't play to his potential. Unless we manage to sign Rodgers in the offseason, Baker is getting franchise tagged.

I'm going to lose my mind if Baker is starting against the Ravens.

I did not know that.

If you don't think the first guy was a threat, then this is something we won't ever agree on. Kyle did not shoot first. Someone behind the first guy fired his weapon in the air shortly before Kyle got rushed between the cars. If this dude would have done that to a cop, I'm quite sure the outcome would be similar.