General > General Technical Chat

Dilbert loses newspapers, publishers, distributor, and possibly its website

<< < (140/222) > >>

Nominal Animal:

--- Quote from: ebastler on March 12, 2023, 08:28:29 pm ---A 28-page circle jerk
--- End quote ---
Hmm.  You considering posts referencing research published in Nature a 'circle jerk' explains a lot.


--- Quote from: ebastler on March 12, 2023, 08:28:29 pm ---5% getting shot down or insulted when they speak up
--- End quote ---
Well, if they are wrong, they deserve to be shot down.  None of the 5% you refer to have backed up their opinions with anything (except their own beliefs).

Insulted, no.  But when they start demanding evidence without providing any themselves, they do deserve to be insulted.  Not cancelled, mind you, but definitely insulted.


--- Quote from: ebastler on March 12, 2023, 08:28:29 pm ---Being part of this back-patting circle may be comforting
--- End quote ---
I don't care.  I want a rational discussion, not one where your objection is "I don't think so" or "I don't believe you" or "you need to prove yourself if you dare disagree with me".  I've provided the basis (not complete, but via examples) for all the statements I've made in this thread.  Yes, you disagree.  That is not sufficient to demand that the discussion is stopped or "moved to a regular's table at the bar".

I hope you see the irony in your own response.

Zero999:

--- Quote from: Kim Christensen on March 12, 2023, 08:29:21 pm ---
--- Quote ---Then why were people who had never been infected and more vulnerable, put before those with natural immunity?
--- End quote ---
Because it was very early in the pandemic. There was no widespread easy way to test people for natural immunity. Logistically, it was simply easier to base it on age and overall health status than trying to triage people of unknown status.
--- End quote ---
There were plenty of people who had already been tested and known to to have previously had the infection, yet were still vaccinated before those who hadn't, simply because they were a bit older.


--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---There has been no randomised, placebo-controlled trial into whether vaccines provide any benefit in those who have natural immunity. None whatsoever.
--- End quote ---
Not sure how you would slip an antivaxxer a "placebo" but here you go:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2119497

--- End quote ---
Of course an anti-vaxer wouldn't enrol in a vaccine trial, so I don't see how that comment is relevant. There would have been plenty of people who would have enrolled in such a trial. I believe I probably had it in March 2020 and if an antibody test proved it, would have precipitated in a vaccine trial, given the chance.

Even taking it at face value proves the Canadian policy of giving everyone two doses is retarded, as there was no difference between one vs two doses. Those wasted doses could have been used for those who needed them.

But, that study still doesn't prove a positive risk-vs-benefit.

It's not a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. More importantly, it just looks at re-infection, rather than severe disease and death and doesn't even deal with adverse events. So what if the second infection just causes a cold? What if the rate of myocarditis is higher from post-infection vaccination, than reinfection? Remember Moderna was proven to have higher rates of myocarditis and AstraZeneca and J&J had a greater risk of blood clots under 40s, so one can't assume the vaccine is always safer.

Not taking natural immunity into account is stupid and has no doubt cost many lives. There will have been many who needed the vaccine but didn't get it who've died and a some who didn't need it, yet suffered injury or death.

nctnico:

--- Quote from: Zero999 on March 12, 2023, 09:09:11 pm ---
--- Quote from: Kim Christensen on March 12, 2023, 08:29:21 pm ---
--- Quote ---Then why were people who had never been infected and more vulnerable, put before those with natural immunity?
--- End quote ---
Because it was very early in the pandemic. There was no widespread easy way to test people for natural immunity. Logistically, it was simply easier to base it on age and overall health status than trying to triage people of unknown status.
--- End quote ---
There were plenty of people who had already been tested and known to to have previously had the infection, yet were still vaccinated before those who hadn't, simply because they were a bit older.

--- End quote ---
I agree with Kim here: Given the number of people that needed to be vaccinated, you need to streamline the process and base it on simple rules. As older people are more vulnerable, they where called in first.

Also, protection against flu like virusses (Rhino, Influenza, Corona, etc) wears off pretty quickly (*) and these group of virusses mutate a lot as well. So there is an additional benefit of vaccinating people with a vaccine that targets a wider range of mutations compared to the (single) mutation they have already been subjected to.

* I don't know how things are at your end, but over here there has been quite a big flu pandemic because people didn't got the flu for a while due to all the Covid restrictions and their immunity declined. That is also why older & vulnerable people get a flu vaccination every year. Having read a bit into it, I strongly doubt there ever will be a vaccine that cures the flu 100%. The best is to get infected a couple of times per year so your immune system remains up to date and well trained.

Bud:
Everything else aside, i never understood the apeal of Dilbert cartoons. They always seemed to me stating the obvious and often being silly and borderline stupid. Kind of same as Mr Bin, never found him funny, just plain idiotic. Wish the author the best though, as he did/does have his audience.

james_s:

--- Quote from: BrianHG on March 12, 2023, 07:40:59 pm ---Thanks to the attached video clips, I was mistaken to say 'Bleach', it was 'Disinfectant'.

--- End quote ---

Injecting a person with a "disinfectant" is not an entirely idiotic thing to speculate, at least on the surface if we assume they lack medical expertise. By "disinfectant" I am assuming they mean a substance that kills the virus but somehow doesn't harm the host, not an off the shelf disinfecting cleaner such as Lysol. Now I'm not suggesting this is actually possible, but in the right context is is far from the dumbest thing I've heard a person say, and I still don't think it was a suggestion of something a person should go out and do.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod