U.S. to close..

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by SalingSue

.......

Also per roaches, I don’t need the silly state for that, no one does, I see a roach, or my food is off, I ain’t coming back, not many people would, and no customers, no income, no business.

However, if they rely on the passing trade they will stay in business. You are quite happy for them to carry on trading... all the while giving punters serious gastric events.....?

Interesting....

So what are your views on Typhoid Mary? The dumping of raw sewage into local streams?

[SalingSue]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

However, if they rely on the passing trade they will stay in business. You are quite happy for them to carry on trading... all the while giving punters serious gastric events.....?

Interesting....

So what are your views on Typhoid Mary? The dumping of raw sewage into local streams?

To a certain point we need safeguards, just as I would be OK with the police arresting someone who was infected with anything and knew this and was knowingly passing it on.

But no, the food industry already is hard to survive even if you run a good ship, if you’re getting people sick and have roaches running around, you ain’t going to survive, I have also been to places with little government (we are clean) licensee in the window and got sick.

I just don’t take the state as my lord and savior.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by SalingSue

. . . . You do not have the right to force a medical procedure on other people.. . .

Just FYI, Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905). When I first studied this case in law school, I thought it was wrongly decided, and used to enjoy teaching it, as it always generated interesting discussions in class, but the case hasn't been overturned in 115 years and remains valid law. So the state CAN force a medical procedure on you, at least a vaccination. I think it's a bad idea for today, and I'm glad forced vaccination is not on the table, but no, you do NOT have any right, not to be forced to be vaccinated, if the state decides it's necessary for the sake of public health.

There is also a broad consensus of legal scholars that a state can force you to wear a mask in public, if it's deemed necessary for public health.

The federal government has no power to do either of these things -- only state governments.

What about lockdowns? Are they constitutional? I think there are good arguments that they are not (as they are not constitutional in most Nordic countries), but in the U.S., these arguments have found almost zero resonance in the courts. See: https://www.cato.org/publications/co...constitutional. Even very conservative, Federalist Society judges, are consistently rejecting those arguments. In our system, the federal government has quite limited powers, but the states' power is really broad, particularly what concerns what is called the "police power", which is the general power of the states to act against individual rights in the name of the common good -- following the ancient principle of salus populi suprema lex esto. We Americans, who consider ourselves to be so free, actually have very few and very limited rights in the face of the police power of the states. It is really interesting that the contours of the police power were largely developed in cases concerning epidemics and public health, going back into the 18th century. The very first free exercise of religion case, for example, concerned quarantine measures during an epidemic, in the early 19th century -- whether the state could regulate how funerals were conducted. More than 200 years of Supreme Court cases say that the states can do almost anything to you, in an epidemic.

Many Europeans have many, many stronger individual rights than we do, particularly in Northern Europe, where many of the pandemic measures widely used elsewhere, are not constitutionally possible.

[UFO]

Originally Posted by Singularity

Supposing in 2020 that there was no healthcare, what do you think the fatality rate of Covid would be? I mean if we only had 1918 technology/treatment (i.e. "hopes and prayers"...rarely even supplemental oxygen to give). If not a fatality rate, what do you think the death count would be now for people who died with an active Covid infection going on in their body?

And supposing the (US) govt did nothing for Covid from day 1....if the govt had done nothing about closing borders, rolling lockdowns, closing restaurants/gyms...and no medical treatment was given...what would the US death count be?

And suppose there is a lethal respiratory pandemic in the future.....where do you place the threshold (in terms of fatality rate...or whatever metric you can define) where the govt should, for example, mandate masks close schools, close bars/restaurants/gyms/churches/biker rallies/sporting events/etc? Does it need to be at the "Ebola level" or what?

What if we lived in a land with fairies and pixies? We do not live in 1918 so that's an irrelevant statement.


When have I ever said let it rip and do nothing, so yet again another irrelevant statement.


I was talking about the enforcing of vaccinations through coercion and not any of the other measures - Those other measures have been discussed many many times in various threads. Like the full lockdown was a blanket approach the mass vaccination of everyone is another blanket approach, whereas vaccinations should be targeted for those in need and for those who work in environments where it is essential that they do not pass it on - health care etc.



The rest of us should have the freedom of choice without being coerced or mocked or segregated for our choice not to inject something which may or may not work and may or may not be harmful to us in the short and/or long term - If you believe that vaccines are harmless, then when you get yours take the standard indemnity letter with you that they're are 100% safe and try and get the Doctor or Company making them to sign it. If they would sign it then many more people would be happy to take it.



This particular virus to 99.9+% of the worlds populace is not fatal, so yes pushing such medical interventions on those who do not want them for such a MINUSCULE minority is totally out of proportion to the threat. If you are that concerned about that very small % then perhaps everyone should also be forced to have the flu jab every year and how about this, there is an massive bigger % that die of starvation every year, perhaps everyone should be taxed extra to ensure that we eradicate starvation off the planet - There is a simple vaccine for that and its called good food and water which the planet has in abundance, but we don't distribute to where its needed.



So rolling down the line now you have given Governments the mandate by your acquiescence to their draconian measures, they decide that really there is a population issue and now we have everyone used to injecting mrna tech every year, lets just give a good % of them a jab that makes them infertile - Would you be OK with that? Especially taking into account that doing so may save a minuscule % of the populace each year for x amount of years - But hay it's for the greater good or should I say like this jab the minuscule good.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by UFO

. . . . This particular virus to 99.9+% of the worlds populace is not fatal,

I think it's perfectly reasonable to think about the odds. However, just be sure you're working with the right numbers:




https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/11/18...-and-age-15163


And for certain pre-existing conditions, including ones which are pretty common, the risk is far higher.

Originally Posted by UFO

. . .so yes pushing such medical interventions on those who do not want them for such a MINUSCULE minority is totally out of proportion to the threat. . .

The numbers above assume epidemics which are not so out of control that health care systems get overwhelmed. If the virus spreads so fast that hospitals can't cope, then the numbers get far worse. Have you not read about what was happening in Bergamo in the Spring? It's awful. It is NOT a "minuscule minority", when it gets to that point.

Originally Posted by UFO

. . . and how about this, there is an massive bigger % that die of starvation every year, perhaps everyone should be taxed extra to ensure that we eradicate starvation off the planet - There is a simple vaccine for that and its called good food and water which the planet has in abundance, but we don't distribute to where its needed.

You have a good point here on a couple of different levels. 8.5 million people (according to this: https://www.theworldcounts.com/chall...ach-year/story) people have already died from hunger this year, including 3.1 million children.

We have to be careful not to freak out so much about one world crisis, that we forget about all the other ones, and end up making all the other ones worse. "Freaking out" in general is the wrong approach to any policy question, no matter how calamitous. Calm, rational, and logical is always the right approach.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by UFO

... Anaphylactic shock is one of the biggest issues with vaccines and is known to occur across a wide range of vaccines and is the biggest cause of damage to people and no doubt consumes the biggest potion of the payouts...

By far, the most common side effect (adverse event) of vaccines is local swelling, redness or pain at the injection site.

Anaphylaxis is a serious, potentially life-threatening, allergic reaction to foreign antigens; it has been proven to be causally associated with vaccines with an estimated frequency of 1.3 episodes per million doses of vaccine administered.

Anaphylaxis is preventable, in many cases, and treatable (/W IM EPINEPHrine) in all. It should be anticipated in every vaccinee.
Most instances of anaphylaxis to a vaccine begin within 30 minutes, after administration of vaccine. Therefore, vaccine recipients should be kept under observation, for at least 15 minutes after immunization; 30 minutes is a safer interval, when there is a specific concern about possible vaccine allergy.

I'm very sorry to learn that your daughter had a very severe adverse reaction (it must have been frightening), but pleased that she, like most, was successfully treated.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by SalingSue

But let’s be honest with each other at least, it’s NOT the business who said “you must wear a fashion mask” or whatever, it’s not freedom when the government threatened the livelihood or safety of the shop owner, if he/she doesn’t enforce THE GOVERNMENTS dictates. .

If a shop has a stupid policy, or practices that I don’t like, I don’t shop there, that’s free market and very much fine with me.

With how much pushback there is for this mask nonsense, if a establishment could say we are a “mask free zone” they’d be slammed with business. You are OK with that too right?

Most of the mask wearing around here is advice , most people seem comfortably agreeing to follow the advice

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by SalingSue

Actually it’s not their right.

If you’re concerned with a virus, get a shot, if that shot works you’ll be fine, no need to try to live others lives.

You do not have the right to force a medical procedure on other people.

If you think you do have that right, will you be the first in line to stack up on someone’s front door to kick it down and try to enforce your will onto them?

Actually it is their “ right “ most countries have a considerable body of law that allows them to control people with serious or contagious diseases. ( see Typhoid Mary ) if they are deemed a threat to public health or safety

Remember your rights stop at my nose

[GordMay]

U.S. National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) Statistics
According to the CDC, from 2006 to 2018 over 3.7 billion doses of covered vaccines were distributed in the U.S. For petitions filed in this time period, 7,565 petitions were adjudicated by the Court, and of those 5,297 were compensated. This means for every 1 million doses of vaccine that were distributed, approximately 1 individual was compensated.
This site doesn’t specify exact adverse event (anaphylaxis, whatever)
More ➥ https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/f...ics-report.pdf

[UFO]

Originally Posted by GordMay

U.S. National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) Statistics
According to the CDC, from 2006 to 2018 over 3.7 billion doses of covered vaccines were distributed in the U.S. For petitions filed in this time period, 7,565 petitions were adjudicated by the Court, and of those 5,297 were compensated. This means for every 1 million doses of vaccine that were distributed, approximately 1 individual was compensated.
This site doesn’t specify exact adverse event (anaphylaxis, whatever)
More ➥ https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/f...ics-report.pdf

So a 1 in a Million chance of an issue - Hey who wants to be one in a million Or to be a tad more precise than approximate 1 in 698508 based on USA figures.

[UFO]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I think it's perfectly reasonable to think about the odds. However, just be sure you're working with the right numbers:



Attachment 228449
https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/11/18...-and-age-15163


And for certain pre-existing conditions, including ones which are pretty common, the risk is far higher.






The numbers above assume epidemics which are not so out of control that health care systems get overwhelmed. If the virus spreads so fast that hospitals can't cope, then the numbers get far worse. Have you not read about what was happening in Bergamo in the Spring? It's awful. It is NOT a "minuscule minority", when it gets to that point.





You have a good point here on a couple of different levels. 8.5 million people (according to this: https://www.theworldcounts.com/chall...ach-year/story) people have already died from hunger this year, including 3.1 million children.

We have to be careful not to freak out so much about one world crisis, that we forget about all the other ones, and end up making all the other ones worse. "Freaking out" in general is the wrong approach to any policy question, no matter how calamitous. Calm, rational, and logical is always the right approach.

I am not saying do not vaccinate or do not take care of those in the at risk categories or even for those not so at risk, I am saying that there needs to be a managed and proportional response based on the level of threat to the individual, Yet due to the Media frenzy we seem to stumble from one "Freak Out" to the Next and planning to vaccinate the whole planet with an experimental vaccine (you can not deny in anyway that it is an experimental vaccine) is a major Freak Out not even taking into account the coercion that will be used to enforce it.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by UFO

I am not saying do not vaccinate or do not take care of those in the at risk categories or even for those not so at risk, I am saying that there needs to be a managed and proportional response based on the level of threat to the individual, Yet due to the Media frenzy we seem to stumble from one "Freak Out" to the Next and planning to vaccinate the whole planet with an experimental vaccine (you can not deny in anyway that it is an experimental vaccine) is a major Freak Out not even taking into account the coercion that will be used to enforce it.

The coercion will come from social peer group pressure not the Gov.

You think it will be socially acceptable next summer to stand in a crowded room and announce you refused to vaccinate !! Yep anti vaxxers keeping quiet as mouses more likely

[UFO]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The coercion will come from social peer group pressure not the Gov.

You think it will be socially acceptable next summer to stand in a crowded room and announce you refused to vaccinate !! Yep anti vaxxers keeping quiet as mouses more likely

No the government will put pressure on Corporations and this will filter down to small business. Also who do you think will be imposing entry restrictions to countries?



Why would I keep quiet - It's not anti-vax its Pro Choice - Hey you want to stick what ever prick into you that's your choice - Knock yourself out it does not bother me one iota.


Socially acceptable - Hmmm Just goes to show the intolerance and the fear based irrational thinking in the world, but fortunately not every one is a brain dead bigot on the planet.


What I do find offensive is the gloating of various individuals about the removal of freedoms if you do not conform - Man that is some serious warped mindsets.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by UFO

...and how about this, there is an massive bigger % that die of starvation every year, perhaps everyone should be taxed extra to ensure that we eradicate starvation off the planet - There is a simple vaccine for that and its called good food and water which the planet has in abundance, but we don't distribute to where its needed.

The main reason that most people starve in this day and age is greed and a wealth imbalance. There's enough food and water to go around. So, yeah, we should be doing better on that score. A topic for another thread.

Funny/sad to be getting all this push back on Covid measures from people whose wealth and situation affords them the freedom to isolate securely without financial harm. And who will get the Trump-grade treatments if they do catch it. It matters little that its others most in need of the protections from lockdowns or vaccines, amirite?

[UFO]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

The main reason that most people starve in this day and age is greed and a wealth imbalance. There's enough food and water to go around. So, yeah, we should be doing better on that score. A topic for another thread.

Funny/sad to be getting all this push back on Covid measures from people whose wealth and situation affords them the freedom to isolate securely without financial harm. And who will get the Trump-grade treatments if they do catch it. It matters little that its others most in need of the protections from lockdowns or vaccines, amirite?

To me it appears that it is the west and our ageing, unfit and chronically ill populations that are most in need of protection and as you say are the ones who are probably giving the most push-back - Maybe its something to do with growing up in a ruthless capitalist society where family and social cohesion has been slowly eroded over the years.