Why 5 years? Why not 1? Why not 50? What's so special to people about 5 years? I keep hearing people say "it hasn't been tested long enough" followed by "I'd take it in about 5 to 10 years" which is a HUGE difference. Is it just that "time has passed", because a year has passed since the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was first given to test subjects. But I guess it's up to people - their body, their choice.
Even though we live in what is commonly referred to as a "society". We agree to live by certain rules and norms that allow us to coexist. There is a faction of fools out there who resist being a part of society, but claim all of its privileges. These are sub-human individuals who just seek some form of control over others. That has to stop.
There are reports of Lee, or one of his contacts, offering admin roles for money basically to allow for paid harassment. Whether that is true or not isn't clear to me, but that would be a big issue if true.
Some people really don't like Trump, myself included. Some people find opportunity to stick it to him - so what? I find it funny that a man who so values his notoriety is then defended for his notoriety by those same people who value that man. There are so many walking contradictions in folks who "admire" Trump.
Censorship, by a company? On their own platform? How is that possible? As far as I know, only government cannot abridge your right to speech. A platform, like a store, has the right to remove those that use their platform to promote speech counter to the owner of the platform.
"a bit rude" in whose opinion? Yours? I'm glad that's settled because I was wondering how the rest of us should see it. I mean, since your opinion of what happened is de facto and all.
So, his cancelling of individuals outweighs that of others is what you're saying? Since he started the FSF, we should pay homage and allow his behavior to go unpunished? Celebrate his achievements but separate them from the man?
Cancel culture only exists because a bunch of whiney babies can't handle that their views are unpopular with a majority of people. They want their arcane or eccentric views to define them and be acceptable to the masses. When someone acts against the ideals of a majority of people they aren't being cancelled - they are rightfully being ignored.
Did you read the article? The point of the study is to say that statistically this doesn't add up. Well, Covid is a once in every 100 years pandemic. Heart disease, influenza, and pneumonia occur every year. Trying to use statistical analysis is the wrong approach. To those who think this is your proof that covid was overblown, you haven't read the article.
Why is it suspect? When someone dies of influenza in a year, but has heart disease, do we say they died of heart disease or influenza? I suspect influenza is the cause of death. Statistically, over the past 100 years we haven't HAD a pandemic, but wow here we are with one and everyone is fast to say "ignore the covid numbers, the real data is heart disease because it's been that way forever." Well, forever just got pushed outta the way.
Why would the American Left need to? Look, it's obvious how easy this is to manipulate. Tell people that every year people die at higher rates of these four causes, but in 2020 we don't see that happen but the Covid numbers are where we saw the increase. So covid is really just no big deal and Trump was always right." Am I getting the gist of where you're going with this? That the American right was always correct? Laughable.
What this says is that in 2020 they didn't see the same numbers that they've always seen. Heart disease death counts aren't as high as they've always been. But wow, take a look at covid - those numbers are WAY up. To the observer who wants to say that covid isn't bad and is just the left's fever dream, this is the proof in the pudding.
To the intelligent, highly educated left, this says "Covid is the biggest cause of death in 2020. The right is just looking for something else to point at because Trump said so."
I believe the article is saying something, but it's not saying the right thing. Covid, in 2020, has been the biggest killer. Trying to identify an alternative cause is just wishful thinking.
The title seems misleading to me. Does the fact that "...blood samples from a cohort of more than 2,000 clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers..." might seem to indicate a near-constant exposure to SARS-cov-2? That might increase the chance that the individual is re-exposed and thus his or her immune system has continual "boosts". It seems noteworthy and something worth investigating. Would this apply to the population at large who do not risk continuous exposure?
The first thing that struck me was "what about drugs that have little-to-no bioavailability after being ingested?" Would it make it possible to give drugs that are rejected for other reasons?