Results 11,201 to 11,225 of 23206
-
09-03-2021, 12:02 AM #11201
-
09-03-2021, 12:05 AM #11202Banned
- Join Date
- Sep 2020
- Posts
- 626
-
09-03-2021, 04:27 AM #11203sick, spiteful, bad liver
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- underground
- Posts
- 935
oh, stop snivelling. It's a bit more nuanced than that. You want to invoke the ACLU to support your position, when in fact they're a bit more nuanced . . . but many of those who want to insist on vax passports can at the same time understand how demanding universal voter registration cards is undemocratic. Politics makes strange bedfellows and exposes multiple ironies. But if you want to feel persecuted, knock yourself out. No, really . . .
-
09-03-2021, 08:06 AM #11204
Yup, way more nuanced.
ACLU is not against vax passports. They are merely saying that vax passports should:
- Not be exclusively digital
- Be decentralized and open source
- not allow for tracking people or for creation/cross-reference to other databases
https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-te...ine-passports/
All reasonable ground rules IMO
They are in favor of the passport bill before the NY legislature
https://action.aclu.org/send-message...cine-passports
-
09-03-2021, 08:13 AM #11205
I’m not really sure that getting a PCR test for Covid at a private testing service qualifies as medical service. I guess you could make the argument technically, but she isn’t sick or injured and it didn’t have any effect on her health outcome. She suffered an inconvenience for her personal travel.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
-
09-03-2021, 08:18 AM #11206
People get denied non-emergency medical service all the time, for mundane reasons like inability to pay.
-
09-03-2021, 08:22 AM #11207
Yes, it’s not an EMTALA violation. Save your outrage altaslob.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
-
09-03-2021, 08:30 AM #11208
More on the different points of view: the purported 100% benefit people have been claiming for ivermectin as a cure-all for COVID-19 looks like it's mostly if not entirely built on falsified data.
While folks here already argued the early ivermectin studies were underpowered, jumped to unsupported conlusion and so on, but it turns out many of the studies might be entirely fake. As in they never happened:
"the regional government that manages the hospital that the main study was meant to have been conducted at says that they have no record of the study occurring. One of the hospitals at which the researchers say they recruited hundreds of participants claims that they didn’t participate, while two others never responded at all. The authors originally claimed that it had been a year since the study was done so the data wasn’t available, then that they couldn’t get it because some of the sites involved wouldn’t release the information, and finally they said that they’d release the data but only once the pandemic was over."
https://gidmk.medium.com/is-ivermect...3-5066aa6819b3
-
09-03-2021, 08:39 AM #11209
The evidence was always \weak. Small poor done studies, widely varied results, poorly done positive metaanalysis that didn't really do a good job of evaluating the studies in it (aeb this fraudulent study?). A much better done metanalysis that showed no benefit. It's like a mirror image of HCQ.
There are some good prospective RCTs in progress that will settle Ivermectin. I suspect it will lay it to rest as happened with HCQ.Originally Posted by blurred
-
09-03-2021, 08:43 AM #11210
Candace Owens claims the test site got public money and so they are in trouble.
But Candace claims she wasn't sick and was doing this for travel.
It gets messy now... if Candace was testing for a travel requirement, then our tax dollars aren't required to pay for that anyway. US requires testing to board an international flight to return to the US. Hawaii requires testing to board a flight to Hawaii. Many countries, airlines, tour operators, cruise ships, etc require a test. Candace probably won't be protected here.
If Candace can say this was a test out of fear that she was exposed and she was just trying to do the responsible thing before travel, then she probably has a valid complaint against a lab that took public money as that has been covering that sort of testing. In that case, the lab is in doo-doo. Of course, if that's Candace's claim, it does make Candace a hypocrite as her whole schtick is that COVID is no biggie, so why was she testing again if she wasn't even feeling sick?Originally Posted by blurred
-
09-03-2021, 08:44 AM #11211
A major study of Ivermectin is now complete and finds ‘no effect whatsoever.’ More sickening, a lot of the same people associated with the hydroxychloroquine fraud moved on to ivermectin. Including many of the 'Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance' group Joe Rogan has supported.
Their reprehensible promotions claim ivermectin is '99 percent effective' and 'the pandemic would end in a month' but there's a conspiracy to hide the truth about ivermectin to sell vaccines:
"In early June, Weinstein began to claim that ivermectin—a genuinely remarkable antiparasitic drug used to treat tropical diseases such as river blindness—could be applied to “eradicate” COVID-19. He invited physicians from a group called the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) to join him in what he called “an emergency podcast” to “save the world.” He began by explaining gravely that “something very serious is afoot, and the public is largely unaware that they have been placed into a kind of danger.” He and his guests offered the claim that ivermectin is “99 percent effective” in treating COVID-19; that it could be used as a prophylaxis against infection; and that were it widely used, the pandemic would end in “a month.” These truths, they suggested, had been suppressed by a conspiracy. They did not specify the mechanism by which the supposed conspiracy works, but they were clear about its object: selling COVID-19 vaccines."
https://quillette.com/2021/07/06/loo...lled-vaccines/
-
09-03-2021, 09:09 AM #11212
I had read that Quillette article several weeks ago and thought the author did very well. The FB commentary was depressing (shocking, I know). I tried to educate for a bit and gave up. Quillette does a good job much of the time at getting some pretty sensible long form analyses of culturalpolitical controversies and heterodox critiques with writers from across the spectrum. Of course the sad thing is that this topic is a culturalpolitical controversy, but I'm not saying anything new there.
Originally Posted by blurred
-
09-03-2021, 09:13 AM #11213Banned
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Location
- Sandy, Utah
- Posts
- 14,410
-
09-03-2021, 09:15 AM #11214
-
09-03-2021, 09:16 AM #11215Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Posts
- 2,040
We don't have a walgreens or other big corporate big box stores in Aspen as some cityslickers have mentioned. Its either this one private lab, or go to the county testing center and good luck getting your result in a timely manner. This last point is important because...
Jazz Aspen Snowmass is this weekend, and requires a negative test or proof of vaccination for entry.
Methinks this backfires big time on SJW testing lady, race card and all.
-
09-03-2021, 09:19 AM #11216Banned
- Join Date
- Sep 2020
- Posts
- 626
-
09-03-2021, 09:44 AM #11217
Heh, the hottest trend in America is being aggrieved in public.
-
09-03-2021, 09:49 AM #11218
I never argued it was illegal. The Supreme Court lets you deny wedding cakes to gay people, which is also bullshit. Denying customers service because you disagree with them on some issue is now a thing. And I stand by my outrage to that. It's different than some corporation taking a stance or pulling a contract (like Patagonia pulling their contract with Jackson Hole over Marjorie Taylor Greene support). Denying service to a customer is an ultimate fuck you. It is personal, and it is to their face. It is done with political intentions and to invoke a reaction. The lab wanted to start a fight with Owens (they had to assume Owens would post that email online).
The lab says Owens asked for the test under their concierge service (they go to your hotel room). “We stand behind our staff and we’re not sending them to someone’s hotel room when they don’t feel safe,” Lee (the lab) told The Aspen Times. As far as I know, this lab never asks for a person's vaccination status when booking the appointment. Owens said she booked the appointment under her maiden name. The lab did research on their customer, and singled out Owens. I am sure the lab has gone to hotel rooms in Aspen and tested other, non-vaccinated persons. And if going to the hotel room was the issue, why not inform Owens of that and make her come to the lab. If the lab wanted to impose a blanket policy where they only test vaccinated persons for the safety of their staff, that is fine. But that's not the situation. They did not deny Owens for the safety of their staff, but now are pushing that bogus narrative.
The owners of the lab claim their testing business is strictly private and hasn’t received any public dollars at the local, state or federal levels. Owens claims this is not true (she says federal and state money). To me, it is irrelevant. COVID testing sites shouldn't be denying anyone unless it is for specific health and safety or triage reasons. For what it's worth, the lab bills itself as the "only CLIA Certified High Complexity laboratory capable of resulting Covid-19 PCR and antigen tests in the Roaring Fork Valley."
-
09-03-2021, 09:54 AM #11219
The US vaccination rate is 19 points lower than Spain, 15 points lower than Canada, 9 points lower than France. We are experiencing a public health catastrophe of our own making thanks in no small part to people like Candace Owens.
-
09-03-2021, 10:02 AM #11220
-
09-03-2021, 10:06 AM #11221
-
09-03-2021, 10:08 AM #11222
Candace Backs Down - Private Lab Did Not Receive Public Funds
https://www.aspentimes.com/news/aspe...tive-activist/
Some exerpts:
Lee and Flanagan said their testing business is strictly private and hasn’t received any public dollars at the local, state or federal levels. Pitkin County Manager Jon Peacock confirmed Aspen COVID Testing receives no local or state funding.
“She is a private business owner,” Owens said. “She does have a right to decline to give me service, and that’s not what the issue is here. I want that to be very clear. Assuming that she has not accepted any state or federal funding, assuming that she truly is a private-business owner, then she has every right to discriminate against who she serves."
Owens also had sought the test through the company’s concierge service (hotel room service testing)Originally Posted by blurred
-
09-03-2021, 10:08 AM #11223Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Posts
- 522
sorry, bub
that cunt owens has given most of the population an in your face fuck you for months. she is the one that acts with political intentions, wants to invoke reactions and is starting the fight with the sane majority of this country. not just starting a fight or expressing different views, but promoting misinformation and actions which undermine the (our) public health
the aspen clinic is taking her up on that provocation, not starting it.
but , you keep bending over like that and soon your self-rimming fantasy will become a reality
-
09-03-2021, 10:18 AM #11224
-
09-03-2021, 10:20 AM #11225
Sounds like the TGR collective thinks it is perfectly ok to not serve someone at a restaurant because of their political views and who they are (again, this is now a thing). While this may be legal, it is not moral. And not the country I want to live in. Should COVID testing sites deny tests to child rapists? Climate change deniers? Politicians who have undermined the vaccine like Rand Paul? When someone asks where we should draw the line, it is simple, there is no line. A true liberal would know this. TGR bourgeoisie, not so much. Carry on.
Bookmarks