Fans back in the G1C soon?
- Thread starter Warhawk
- Start date
- Status
I'm talking about corporations about a whole and not just Vivek himself. He's just one of thousands.
It'll be sold as a liability play right now but you'll be wondering 10 years down the road while we still have to comply with all these newfound rules that impose on our freedoms when there is no pandemic in sight. Once we comply in letting them take our freedoms, they're seldom given back.
It'll be sold as a liability play right now but you'll be wondering 10 years down the road while we still have to comply with all these newfound rules that impose on our freedoms when there is no pandemic in sight. Once we comply in letting them take our freedoms, they're seldom given back.
Proven? That’s rich.
My wife works in the industry. As a research coordinator. She runs and administers clinical trials. Including covid.
I won’t go any deeper than that, but just to say that many trials run between 5-12 years. For good reason.
You‘re not going to have “proof” of anything from a trial that started just last June/July.
You are beyond naive if you believe otherwise.
FWIW, the Johnson&Johnson vaccine was put on hold yesterday and not even being administered in trials due to adverse affects in about a half dozen so far (blood clotting in the brain).
While the other studies have been more successful thus far, the long term results are still unknown.
That’s why these studies/trials aren’t conducted in a year or less (in non-emergency situations). That’s nowhere near enough time to realistically know how safe or unsafe (and effective) they really are.
Considering that, requiring this vaccine for travel or attending events is ludicrous. As others have pointed out, the influenza vaccine isn’t required and it has gone through the typical clinical trial processes, which initially began around the 1930’s.
My wife works in the industry. As a research coordinator. She runs and administers clinical trials. Including covid.
I won’t go any deeper than that, but just to say that many trials run between 5-12 years. For good reason.
You‘re not going to have “proof” of anything from a trial that started just last June/July.
You are beyond naive if you believe otherwise.
FWIW, the Johnson&Johnson vaccine was put on hold yesterday and not even being administered in trials due to adverse affects in about a half dozen so far (blood clotting in the brain).
While the other studies have been more successful thus far, the long term results are still unknown.
That’s why these studies/trials aren’t conducted in a year or less (in non-emergency situations). That’s nowhere near enough time to realistically know how safe or unsafe (and effective) they really are.
Considering that, requiring this vaccine for travel or attending events is ludicrous. As others have pointed out, the influenza vaccine isn’t required and it has gone through the typical clinical trial processes, which initially began around the 1930’s.
Last edited:
When I say proven to work, I mean that of the hundreds of millions of doses administered, those taking them are not being hospitalized with COVID or dying from it (and something like an 80% rate of not catching a mild form or being asymptomatic, IIRC). You know, the reason the vaccines are administered? To prevent COVID from hospitalizing or killing you. And the side effects are on the order of 1 in a million, VERY, VERY rare.
Have they completed long term trials? No. But in a pandemic that has already killed way over 1/2 million people in the USA alone in less than a year, the ability to keep hospitals from becoming overwhelmed and our medical system from collapsing upon itself is a significant achievement. So yes, they are proven to work.
Have they completed long term trials? No. But in a pandemic that has already killed way over 1/2 million people in the USA alone in less than a year, the ability to keep hospitals from becoming overwhelmed and our medical system from collapsing upon itself is a significant achievement. So yes, they are proven to work.
Back in while ago , I decided to do a crude little experiment with sample size of 1 to prior to getting the vaccine to see. I’ve been around hospitalized patient with covid since March of last year so I thought that maybe I may have gotten some exposure and may have a bit of immunity and may skip on the vaccine. I checked my antibodies level prior to getting the first Pfizer shot and it was undetectable so I went ahead and got the vaccine. Check my antibodies level again 2 weeks after my second Pfizer shot and antibodies level present.
Well, while I see where you're coming from, and certainly don't think it should be illegal to be a looney (unless breaking the law), there absolutely should be sanctions for companies spreading misinformation. People can be looneys all they want, but companies have a responsibility to prevent intentional misleading of the masses. It's sad that this is even a discussion, because ideally people would be capable of distinguishing good information from bad, but unfortunately that's not the case. We are in the age of facebook experts, and we are increasingly seeing how much of a threat it can be to actual progression - medically, socially, and many other ways.
I'm not saying make it illegal to be stupid, although it would be nice. But people or companies intentionally spreading misinformation (easily refuted misinformation, I'm not talking about bad opinions) should be reprimanded. Big tech companies don't have an incentive at the moment because it would drive users away. Besides, there are already laws in place restricting freedoms which are readily accepted because they make sense for the benefit of wider society, and indeed the individual, even if that individual doesn't realise it. This is no different. It's an evolving world.
Also, I don't see how this ties into the issue at hand, although it's an interesting topic.
I'm not saying make it illegal to be stupid, although it would be nice. But people or companies intentionally spreading misinformation (easily refuted misinformation, I'm not talking about bad opinions) should be reprimanded. Big tech companies don't have an incentive at the moment because it would drive users away. Besides, there are already laws in place restricting freedoms which are readily accepted because they make sense for the benefit of wider society, and indeed the individual, even if that individual doesn't realise it. This is no different. It's an evolving world.
Also, I don't see how this ties into the issue at hand, although it's an interesting topic.
Misinformation can also be seen as oppressing opposing viewpoints. That can be done either by outright banning from platforms or tweaking algorithms to create a system induced bias. But reality is somewhere in the gray zone, how dark depends on one's own perception.
It was reported awhile back (years) that there was a business that requires a chip insertion for it's employees. Thinking Montana but not certain. Apparently it was a highly desirable place of employment. Now they supposedly have a chip for health status. Those are scary propositions. Far fetched? Not too long ago there was a cartoon strip that had watches that you could talk to someone on. If you are old enough to remember the old Dick Tracy strip and think about how that tech was viewed then ......
It was reported awhile back (years) that there was a business that requires a chip insertion for it's employees. Thinking Montana but not certain. Apparently it was a highly desirable place of employment. Now they supposedly have a chip for health status. Those are scary propositions. Far fetched? Not too long ago there was a cartoon strip that had watches that you could talk to someone on. If you are old enough to remember the old Dick Tracy strip and think about how that tech was viewed then ......
i dont understand people using the words "freedom" and "rights" when it pertains to private property/companies. Flying on someones airplane isnt a right. Going into someones arena isnt a right. They have their rules and you must follow their rules if you want to use their stuff. The only "freedom" you have is the choice not to use them if you dont want to follow their rules.
Edit: leaving in the last sentence because it was quoted and didnt want to cause confusion but i did mispeak/mistype. I wrote the last sentence assuming that "their rules" were legal but it has been interpreted as their rules can supercede laws which wasnt my intent.
Edit: leaving in the last sentence because it was quoted and didnt want to cause confusion but i did mispeak/mistype. I wrote the last sentence assuming that "their rules" were legal but it has been interpreted as their rules can supercede laws which wasnt my intent.
Last edited:
You still have rights when it pertains to private property and companies it's just not every right like freedom of speech is protected in the same manner. It's not a right to enter the arena but you still have rights once you enter the arena. They aren't allowed to just make you do as they please in whatever manner they want because you're on their property.
The point is that as soon as people give the privacy of their medical records up just to walk into places, that's the end of the privacy of your medical record. 20 years ago people were having discussions about privacy and the peanut gallery was chiming in with tin foil hat jokes back then as well and look at where we are now? Privacy is gone and never coming back. People will give up all their contacts and pictures just to use a flashlight app on their phones. It's craziness. To think that a brick and mortar store will start requiring the same and more at some point isn't out of line with the way things are going. They're using the pandemic as a convenient reason to gain access to your privacy and once you let them do that, you can never get that privacy back.
Our phone conversations are recorded, our internet activity is tracked, there's cameras on every street corner, there's license plate readers on vehicles that track your movements and if you carry your phone you are being tracked. Now they're after your medical records. Say all this to someone in 1960 and they'll hand you a tin foil hat and call you a loon but it's now the norm and people are glad to give up even more for what, convenience? I don't care if the Kings are in game 7 of the finals, my privacy is more important than a stupid basketball game.
The point is that as soon as people give the privacy of their medical records up just to walk into places, that's the end of the privacy of your medical record. 20 years ago people were having discussions about privacy and the peanut gallery was chiming in with tin foil hat jokes back then as well and look at where we are now? Privacy is gone and never coming back. People will give up all their contacts and pictures just to use a flashlight app on their phones. It's craziness. To think that a brick and mortar store will start requiring the same and more at some point isn't out of line with the way things are going. They're using the pandemic as a convenient reason to gain access to your privacy and once you let them do that, you can never get that privacy back.
Our phone conversations are recorded, our internet activity is tracked, there's cameras on every street corner, there's license plate readers on vehicles that track your movements and if you carry your phone you are being tracked. Now they're after your medical records. Say all this to someone in 1960 and they'll hand you a tin foil hat and call you a loon but it's now the norm and people are glad to give up even more for what, convenience? I don't care if the Kings are in game 7 of the finals, my privacy is more important than a stupid basketball game.
Denying because of skin color is illegal. Not being able to yell fire in a crowded theater is also illegal, that is why you cant do it whether it is in a public or private building. Not being discriminated based on the color of you skin, your sex, religion etc is a right. That is a freedom. They cant deny you based on those protected classes. Telling someone you need to wear a shirt, shoes, or a mask to enter is not illegal and up to the private company. Telling someone they cant enter without a club membership, or proof they arent carrying a contagious disease. That is their right. There is nothing illegal with a private company ensuring the safety of their staff and other customers. So your rights end when they intrude of the rights of others. Just because you dont agree with a perfectly legal rule that a private company has established doesnt mean they are taking away your "rights" or "freedoms"
Last edited:
You are correct, you do have legal rights to enter a private establishment or when you are in a private establishment. My initial comment wasnt clear as i did not mean just because they are a private business, they can overrule any legal rights. I just meant using the terms "rights" and "freedom" are misused all the time and some of those rights end at the door of a private establishment as long as their rules are legal. Thank you for pointing it out
- Status