Coronavirus Thread v.2

[King Postwhore]

Ben that's a given.  What you should look at is why they would take something they know nothing about which is the reason they say they don't want to take the vaccine?  Any sane person would question that.

[Stadler]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

And you're probably right; but why is that anyone's issue here?   We've been indoctrinated to accept that other people's thought processes are their own.   Why is it different now?   I know, I know "because it affects me!" but that's a shallow excuse unless you're in the same room with Cam Newton and/or Joe Rogan and they are breathing their cooties on you.   EVERYTHING we do has some impact on other people, it's just a matter of directness, proximity, and priorities.    We're so U.S./North American centric that we've lost sight of some of the magnitude of this stuff.   HALF the world is not vaccinated; we're at 70% here in the States.  If a pack of 1,000 or 10,000 or even 1,000,000 decide to not vaccinate, even if it's because aliens told them they'd grow a tail with a vaccine, the world isn't going to end as long as 3.7 BILLION people across the world don't even have vaccines on their radar.

[Ben_Jamin]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/01/joe-rogan-covid/

 

Rogan represents a fairly large slice of the problem. By taking everything under the sun we have no idea what helped, what hurt, and what was meaningless. That's a big part of the problem with Ivermectin. People are taking it on their own with no way of analyzing its efficacy other than "welp, they didn't die."

But it's important to point out, that's not "misplaced trust" or "conspiracy thinking", that's just bad scientific method. I can point to many examples of those smart, "right side of history"* people that have done the same thing and pointed to SUCCESS! with no idea how they got there.  Anyone who's ever worked on a car or diagnosed an electrical circuit knows you only mess with one variable at a time so you can track the impacts.


* And no, I'm not taking sides, I'm pointing out that it doesn't matter WHAT side you're on, there are more things in play here than just ideology or some arbitrary measure of "intelligence".

You do realize that a massive slice of America is taking sides, right? I don't like it any more than you do, and we both agree that it's a big problem, but it is the realityw. All I did was point out that to the people taking sides Rogan didn't help matters. Your car analogy is bang-on. He got better and there's zero indication that ivermectin had anything to do with it, but a whole lot of Americans are going to see his recovery as proof, and they're going to feed the conspiracy that the government is trying to keep us from taking a cheap and effective cure so we'll take the expensive and experimental cures.

I think I of all people understand a massive slice of America is taking sides.  It's what keeps me up at night. It is, in my opinion, the biggest issue facing America today.  Not healthcare, not global warming, not China, not Afghanistan... our divisiveness.  Because, in large part, our divisiveness will prevent us from ever truly getting any consensus or solution - even half-assed compromised solutions - for the rest of those issues.

But as to your point about people doing this stuff, sure, but it is what it is.  I don't agree that we don't talk about things just because someone MIGHT take it to heart.   Look what that's done for our national discussion on race; there is none.  You either buy in to whatever is put on the table, or your a racist, full stop.   I've seen it first hand. I've LIVED it first hand.  I don't accept things just because someone says it, or FEELS it, and as a result, here, I've been called a racist.  If someone is going to inject battery acid in their cock to solve COVID, they are going to do it whether Joe Rogan talks about it or not.   And - and I think you will align with this - if they do, well, they can live with the consequences of what happens. That's called "personal accountability".   And while we're not big on personal accountability in America - signing a student loan document is exactly the same as putting battery acid in your junk from a consequences standpoint - at some point we've got to draw the line.

It's like saying people are sheep and will just do as their told. Without any understanding that humans are capable of thinking for ourselves.

I would say that if these people are sheep for following Joe Rogan, than many people are sheep for following the news media and doing what they say to do.

Ben that's a given.  What you should look at is why they would take something they know nothing about which is the reason they say they don't want to take the vaccine?  Any sane person would question that.

I wouldn't know, but I am not confused about it or perplexed as to why. If I want to know I would go ask them, why they think this product that is at tractor supply co. is the same as the product used for treating malaria, and inform them that these two are vastly different things.

Why is there no moral blame on the workers whom are selling the product and likely know darn well what these people are gonna do with it?...Why wasn't there a concern about people buying these things, which the store could lock them up, and you have to ask them to get it for you, like with spray paint and art supplies you can huff?...

[jingle.boy]

Well bummer you need a subscription to read that WaPo article.

http://archive.is is your friend

he took so much shit he'll never know what worked. 

Or it could've been (vaccinated or not) just that he had a mild-ish case that subsided quickly, and nothing he took/did actually did anything.  The fact that he felt he needed to 'throw the kitchen sink at it' suggests to me that he's not vaccinated himself.

[Ben_Jamin]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

And you're probably right; but why is that anyone's issue here?   We've been indoctrinated to accept that other people's thought processes are their own.   Why is it different now?   I know, I know "because it affects me!" but that's a shallow excuse unless you're in the same room with Cam Newton and/or Joe Rogan and they are breathing their cooties on you.   EVERYTHING we do has some impact on other people, it's just a matter of directness, proximity, and priorities.    We're so U.S./North American centric that we've lost sight of some of the magnitude of this stuff.   HALF the world is not vaccinated; we're at 70% here in the States.  If a pack of 1,000 or 10,000 or even 1,000,000 decide to not vaccinate, even if it's because aliens told them they'd grow a tail with a vaccine, the world isn't going to end as long as 3.7 BILLION people across the world don't even have vaccines on their radar.

The world will continue to spin. Humans will be like to Dodo...extinct.

But that hasn't happened. So we are apparently doing things right to be able to be this thriving to deplete and destroy our very home ourselves.

It's why I feel understanding history helps us humans learn about our survival and the things we humans have gone through just to continue thriving and living in this Earth.

If you want to look at the grand scale of humanity and deaths. This pandemic is just a drop in the ocean compared to the past and the many obstacles and difficulties our ancestors had to endure to survive.

[El Barto]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/01/joe-rogan-covid/

 

Rogan represents a fairly large slice of the problem. By taking everything under the sun we have no idea what helped, what hurt, and what was meaningless. That's a big part of the problem with Ivermectin. People are taking it on their own with no way of analyzing its efficacy other than "welp, they didn't die."

But it's important to point out, that's not "misplaced trust" or "conspiracy thinking", that's just bad scientific method. I can point to many examples of those smart, "right side of history"* people that have done the same thing and pointed to SUCCESS! with no idea how they got there.  Anyone who's ever worked on a car or diagnosed an electrical circuit knows you only mess with one variable at a time so you can track the impacts.


* And no, I'm not taking sides, I'm pointing out that it doesn't matter WHAT side you're on, there are more things in play here than just ideology or some arbitrary measure of "intelligence".

You do realize that a massive slice of America is taking sides, right? I don't like it any more than you do, and we both agree that it's a big problem, but it is the realityw. All I did was point out that to the people taking sides Rogan didn't help matters. Your car analogy is bang-on. He got better and there's zero indication that ivermectin had anything to do with it, but a whole lot of Americans are going to see his recovery as proof, and they're going to feed the conspiracy that the government is trying to keep us from taking a cheap and effective cure so we'll take the expensive and experimental cures.

I think I of all people understand a massive slice of America is taking sides.  It's what keeps me up at night. It is, in my opinion, the biggest issue facing America today.  Not healthcare, not global warming, not China, not Afghanistan... our divisiveness.  Because, in large part, our divisiveness will prevent us from ever truly getting any consensus or solution - even half-assed compromised solutions - for the rest of those issues.

But as to your point about people doing this stuff, sure, but it is what it is.  I don't agree that we don't talk about things just because someone MIGHT take it to heart.   Look what that's done for our national discussion on race; there is none.  You either buy in to whatever is put on the table, or your a racist, full stop.   I've seen it first hand. I've LIVED it first hand.  I don't accept things just because someone says it, or FEELS it, and as a result, here, I've been called a racist.  If someone is going to inject battery acid in their cock to solve COVID, they are going to do it whether Joe Rogan talks about it or not.   And - and I think you will align with this - if they do, well, they can live with the consequences of what happens. That's called "personal accountability".   And while we're not big on personal accountability in America - signing a student loan document is exactly the same as putting battery acid in your junk from a consequences standpoint - at some point we've got to draw the line.

While I do align with it in general, I'm also more inclined to take a practical approach to it. We're not going to fix ourselves. This is the new reality, and we need to account for that. For one, there will be people who shoot battery acid into their dicks whether he tells them to or not, but there will be more if he does. Second, if those people wind up taking hospital beds that could be better used for people who didn't choose to injure themselves, it's no longer personal accountability. I'd say it's the opposite, in fact.

[Ben_Jamin]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/01/joe-rogan-covid/

 

Rogan represents a fairly large slice of the problem. By taking everything under the sun we have no idea what helped, what hurt, and what was meaningless. That's a big part of the problem with Ivermectin. People are taking it on their own with no way of analyzing its efficacy other than "welp, they didn't die."

But it's important to point out, that's not "misplaced trust" or "conspiracy thinking", that's just bad scientific method. I can point to many examples of those smart, "right side of history"* people that have done the same thing and pointed to SUCCESS! with no idea how they got there.  Anyone who's ever worked on a car or diagnosed an electrical circuit knows you only mess with one variable at a time so you can track the impacts.


* And no, I'm not taking sides, I'm pointing out that it doesn't matter WHAT side you're on, there are more things in play here than just ideology or some arbitrary measure of "intelligence".

You do realize that a massive slice of America is taking sides, right? I don't like it any more than you do, and we both agree that it's a big problem, but it is the realityw. All I did was point out that to the people taking sides Rogan didn't help matters. Your car analogy is bang-on. He got better and there's zero indication that ivermectin had anything to do with it, but a whole lot of Americans are going to see his recovery as proof, and they're going to feed the conspiracy that the government is trying to keep us from taking a cheap and effective cure so we'll take the expensive and experimental cures.

I think I of all people understand a massive slice of America is taking sides.  It's what keeps me up at night. It is, in my opinion, the biggest issue facing America today.  Not healthcare, not global warming, not China, not Afghanistan... our divisiveness.  Because, in large part, our divisiveness will prevent us from ever truly getting any consensus or solution - even half-assed compromised solutions - for the rest of those issues.

But as to your point about people doing this stuff, sure, but it is what it is.  I don't agree that we don't talk about things just because someone MIGHT take it to heart.   Look what that's done for our national discussion on race; there is none.  You either buy in to whatever is put on the table, or your a racist, full stop.   I've seen it first hand. I've LIVED it first hand.  I don't accept things just because someone says it, or FEELS it, and as a result, here, I've been called a racist.  If someone is going to inject battery acid in their cock to solve COVID, they are going to do it whether Joe Rogan talks about it or not.   And - and I think you will align with this - if they do, well, they can live with the consequences of what happens. That's called "personal accountability".   And while we're not big on personal accountability in America - signing a student loan document is exactly the same as putting battery acid in your junk from a consequences standpoint - at some point we've got to draw the line.

While I do align with it in general, I'm also more inclined to take a practical approach to it. We're not going to fix ourselves. This is the new reality, and we need to account for that. For one, there will be people who shoot battery acid into their dicks whether he tells them to or not, but there will be more if he does. Second, if those people wind up taking hospital beds that could be better used for people who didn't choose to injure themselves, it's no longer personal accountability. I'd say it's the opposite, in fact.

Okay, like those people that did the Tide Pod challenge. The people that end up with Alcohol Poisoning, the Drug addict overdosing in his room, the obese man who ate the inferno hot wing that clogged his arteries. All these people take up hospital beds that could be used for people that didn't injure themselves. Should we deny them access because they chose to be stupid and ignore the signs telling them not to do it or they will die or be seriously injured? So these people that injured themselves is not personal accountability?

[cramx3]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/01/joe-rogan-covid/

 

Saw this, he won't take the vaccine, but he trust the antibody cocktail and the ivermectin. We're doomed.

The article I read said he won't tell anyone if he has or hasn't taken the vaccine. Do you know for a fact he hasn't gotten it?  I know he's skeptical but that doesn't mean he didn't get it.  :cough: Abbott :cough:

Does he have to?....No, he does not. And it's fascinating because you then have people begin their crazy thoughts and assumptions and will then just assume Rogan took the vaccine because he isn't telling anybody he did not take the vaccine...

I am not assuming anything. He still got it and is recovered from it. That's all that should matter is he is not dead.

It matters because he has a voice that people listen to.  And it matters to form an honest and realistic opinion on the matter.  If he's hiding part of the equation, it muddies the water on whatever you or I think about him.  Of course he doesn't have to, but it's pretty odd for him to admit to all the other things but keep another hidden. 

[Ben_Jamin]

Hospitals are there to treat the seriously ill and the injured. No matter how much we what to hold people accountable for their actions and choices. A hospital should be there to treat you and should be there to make you better and send you off home to live life again.

Healthcare workers should be there for the patient and treat the patient with care to help the patient uplift their spirits so the patient can get better.

Sadly, hospitals do not work this way. They are judgement places, because the healthcare workers get upset at the amount of people that are in the hospital because of stupid choices. Choices that led to them being in the hospital where the healthcare workers have to treat them. Which is what has led to medical malpractice with the doctor and the nurse, as they instill their own thoughts and assumptions and judgements on the patient for their stupid decision to jump when the car was running full speed to see if running against the direction the car is driving will make you stop (Beavis and Butthead).

Some get upset when their patients keep going into hospitals because they don't listen to their doctors advice and continue doing what they do. Further using up beds and valuable resources that could be spent on someone who needs it.

[El Barto]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/01/joe-rogan-covid/

 

Rogan represents a fairly large slice of the problem. By taking everything under the sun we have no idea what helped, what hurt, and what was meaningless. That's a big part of the problem with Ivermectin. People are taking it on their own with no way of analyzing its efficacy other than "welp, they didn't die."

But it's important to point out, that's not "misplaced trust" or "conspiracy thinking", that's just bad scientific method. I can point to many examples of those smart, "right side of history"* people that have done the same thing and pointed to SUCCESS! with no idea how they got there.  Anyone who's ever worked on a car or diagnosed an electrical circuit knows you only mess with one variable at a time so you can track the impacts.


* And no, I'm not taking sides, I'm pointing out that it doesn't matter WHAT side you're on, there are more things in play here than just ideology or some arbitrary measure of "intelligence".

You do realize that a massive slice of America is taking sides, right? I don't like it any more than you do, and we both agree that it's a big problem, but it is the realityw. All I did was point out that to the people taking sides Rogan didn't help matters. Your car analogy is bang-on. He got better and there's zero indication that ivermectin had anything to do with it, but a whole lot of Americans are going to see his recovery as proof, and they're going to feed the conspiracy that the government is trying to keep us from taking a cheap and effective cure so we'll take the expensive and experimental cures.

I think I of all people understand a massive slice of America is taking sides.  It's what keeps me up at night. It is, in my opinion, the biggest issue facing America today.  Not healthcare, not global warming, not China, not Afghanistan... our divisiveness.  Because, in large part, our divisiveness will prevent us from ever truly getting any consensus or solution - even half-assed compromised solutions - for the rest of those issues.

But as to your point about people doing this stuff, sure, but it is what it is.  I don't agree that we don't talk about things just because someone MIGHT take it to heart.   Look what that's done for our national discussion on race; there is none.  You either buy in to whatever is put on the table, or your a racist, full stop.   I've seen it first hand. I've LIVED it first hand.  I don't accept things just because someone says it, or FEELS it, and as a result, here, I've been called a racist.  If someone is going to inject battery acid in their cock to solve COVID, they are going to do it whether Joe Rogan talks about it or not.   And - and I think you will align with this - if they do, well, they can live with the consequences of what happens. That's called "personal accountability".   And while we're not big on personal accountability in America - signing a student loan document is exactly the same as putting battery acid in your junk from a consequences standpoint - at some point we've got to draw the line.

While I do align with it in general, I'm also more inclined to take a practical approach to it. We're not going to fix ourselves. This is the new reality, and we need to account for that. For one, there will be people who shoot battery acid into their dicks whether he tells them to or not, but there will be more if he does. Second, if those people wind up taking hospital beds that could be better used for people who didn't choose to injure themselves, it's no longer personal accountability. I'd say it's the opposite, in fact.

Okay, like those people that did the Tide Pod challenge. The people that end up with Alcohol Poisoning, the Drug addict overdosing in his room, the obese man who ate the inferno hot wing that clogged his arteries. All these people take up hospital beds that could be used for people that didn't injure themselves. Should we deny them access because they chose to be stupid and ignore the signs telling them not to do it or they will die or be seriously injured? So these people that injured themselves is not personal accountability?

When hospitals are at 90% capacity because of people eating Tide pods? Fuck yeah. You're also skipping a different part of the problem which is that addiction and obesity aren't always voluntary. We regard those as illnesses. If the antivaxers want to classify themselves as suffering from a mental illness then perhaps I'll change my point of view, but of course, just being smarter than everybody else doesn't qualify you for the loony bin.

[Ben_Jamin]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/01/joe-rogan-covid/

 

Saw this, he won't take the vaccine, but he trust the antibody cocktail and the ivermectin. We're doomed.

The article I read said he won't tell anyone if he has or hasn't taken the vaccine. Do you know for a fact he hasn't gotten it?  I know he's skeptical but that doesn't mean he didn't get it.  :cough: Abbott :cough:

Does he have to?....No, he does not. And it's fascinating because you then have people begin their crazy thoughts and assumptions and will then just assume Rogan took the vaccine because he isn't telling anybody he did not take the vaccine...

I am not assuming anything. He still got it and is recovered from it. That's all that should matter is he is not dead.

It matters because he has a voice that people listen to.  And it matters to form an honest and realistic opinion on the matter.  If he's hiding part of the equation, it muddies the water on whatever you or I think about him.  Of course he doesn't have to, but it's pretty odd for him to admit to all the other things but keep another hidden.

It's still not his fault. That's like saying it's the video games fault for inciting violence because pikachu said "bomb the harbor". Or blaming Lil Nas X for making boys gay, or Cardi B for making girls whores by releasing "WAP".

They are influencers just the same as Joe Rogan. Yet, people surely did not have a problem with saying..."It's personal accountability if your child ends up being violent, or revealing he's gay, or gets into a stripping job, and not the influence of Lil Nas X's music or Cardi B's Thot WAP.

Basically, it's their own damn fault for following and listening to someone else without thinking for oneself and considering maybe that person I am listening to is saying his opinion and I should not take it as fact. This is the product and consequence of our education system not teaching children critical thinking skills and how to analyze.

[Stadler]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/01/joe-rogan-covid/

 

Rogan represents a fairly large slice of the problem. By taking everything under the sun we have no idea what helped, what hurt, and what was meaningless. That's a big part of the problem with Ivermectin. People are taking it on their own with no way of analyzing its efficacy other than "welp, they didn't die."

But it's important to point out, that's not "misplaced trust" or "conspiracy thinking", that's just bad scientific method. I can point to many examples of those smart, "right side of history"* people that have done the same thing and pointed to SUCCESS! with no idea how they got there.  Anyone who's ever worked on a car or diagnosed an electrical circuit knows you only mess with one variable at a time so you can track the impacts.


* And no, I'm not taking sides, I'm pointing out that it doesn't matter WHAT side you're on, there are more things in play here than just ideology or some arbitrary measure of "intelligence".

You do realize that a massive slice of America is taking sides, right? I don't like it any more than you do, and we both agree that it's a big problem, but it is the realityw. All I did was point out that to the people taking sides Rogan didn't help matters. Your car analogy is bang-on. He got better and there's zero indication that ivermectin had anything to do with it, but a whole lot of Americans are going to see his recovery as proof, and they're going to feed the conspiracy that the government is trying to keep us from taking a cheap and effective cure so we'll take the expensive and experimental cures.

I think I of all people understand a massive slice of America is taking sides.  It's what keeps me up at night. It is, in my opinion, the biggest issue facing America today.  Not healthcare, not global warming, not China, not Afghanistan... our divisiveness.  Because, in large part, our divisiveness will prevent us from ever truly getting any consensus or solution - even half-assed compromised solutions - for the rest of those issues.

But as to your point about people doing this stuff, sure, but it is what it is.  I don't agree that we don't talk about things just because someone MIGHT take it to heart.   Look what that's done for our national discussion on race; there is none.  You either buy in to whatever is put on the table, or your a racist, full stop.   I've seen it first hand. I've LIVED it first hand.  I don't accept things just because someone says it, or FEELS it, and as a result, here, I've been called a racist.  If someone is going to inject battery acid in their cock to solve COVID, they are going to do it whether Joe Rogan talks about it or not.   And - and I think you will align with this - if they do, well, they can live with the consequences of what happens. That's called "personal accountability".   And while we're not big on personal accountability in America - signing a student loan document is exactly the same as putting battery acid in your junk from a consequences standpoint - at some point we've got to draw the line.

While I do align with it in general, I'm also more inclined to take a practical approach to it. We're not going to fix ourselves. This is the new reality, and we need to account for that. For one, there will be people who shoot battery acid into their dicks whether he tells them to or not, but there will be more if he does. Second, if those people wind up taking hospital beds that could be better used for people who didn't choose to injure themselves, it's no longer personal accountability. I'd say it's the opposite, in fact.

And that's where I struggle.   I hear you, I fully understand you, and I'm not against the pragmatic (that's why I'm for single payer healthcare).   It's funny, because I swear to God, last night I got a call from my dad (82).  Mom (84) blood pressure was high so he called EMS; they came and checked her out and Dad asked if they would transport her for a more in-depth review, and their answer?  "Not on your life.  We have three people to a room with COVID; there's nothing here that is more life-threatening than if she gets COVID.  Stay home, call your primary doctor in the morning."   Now, that may have been his elevator speech to placate a worried husband, but still. 

Having said that, we've never denied resources from people before for stupid decisions.   42% of the American population is obese.  Not all of them are "ill".  That costs us about $150 BILLION a year.  Each obese person's healthcare is about $1500 more (on average) per year.   Yet, we worry about "fat shaming" and there are countless programs out there about how it's "normal" and to be tolerated.    Hell, there are people who's entire career is based on them being obese (Ashley Graham; Whitney Way Thore, who is on a reality TV show to show her "journey" to lose weight.  In seven years, from 2014 to now, seven seasons and 98 episodes, she's lost a grand total of 10 pounds, from 380 to 370.).  I get it; it's not a direct analogy, but the point is, we are all over the map on this.

If "influencers" mattered as much as people want us to believe, there would be no racism.  There would be no homophobia.   We've gone to great lengths to sterilize our discourse on this stuff, and yet it continues to exist, regardless.   We as a species are obsessed with making pat, trite connections to further our goal.   Race-crimes increased after Trump came into office....  must be Trump as a racist indoctrinating his followers.   Oh, wait, what?  They were increasing in the tail end of Obama's presidency?....  must be because Obama is black and it's a reaction to that.   Well, that's not "influencing", but let's not quibble!  We have our rationale (note: the rationale that is NOT us, that has no accountability for our marginalizing and rejecting these people and making them more and more desperate to be heard). Forget about all the other factors that have been PROVEN, by science, to contribute to racism - insecurity, maringalization, ostracization, all things that have been increasing in our society for the better part of two decades.  No WONDER racism is a hotbutton issue.  But there's no cute shortcut to increasing our mental and intellectual well-being, unlike the endlessly hilarious "tRump" and "Drumpf" and "The Orange One" tweets (aside:  whenever I see one of those I hear the Richard Rawlings "Wooooo!" in my head, because I can imagine the person writing it thinking they just scored a huge blow against Trump). 

I know that was a tangent, that's why it's small, but even if we can't fix ourselves - and I believe, with a will there's a way - we can at least do our part to make sure we don't make the problem worse.   "Influencers" are a scapegoat, and a way to pass blame, IMO.

[hunnus2000]

Well bummer you need a subscription to read that WaPo article.

Joe Rogan is a mystery to me. He has some wonderful guests and was one of the first to get ahead of this COVID by interviewing Michael Olsterholm back at the beginning of this mess so he comes across as a man of science and rational. But when he has more controversial guests on, he can easily waffle to the side of his crazier guests. What's ironic is he has talked up building up your immune system so he eats right, exercises and doesn't really drink much alcohol and yet he still gets COVID and as someone wrote earlier, he took so much shit he'll never know what worked. 

Maybe, just maybe, that's an "open mind".    I don't know what you're thinking here, but it's hard to read that paragraph without my thinking you just assume he HAS to reject them as morons or not even have them on the show to begin with.  Not slapping them with a stick is what debate/discussion is.   "Silence is not consent"; we can talk about controversial topics without it being a de facto acceptance or endorsement.   I don't listen to Joe Rogan (though not out of dislike for him; more due to time) but he strikes me as a curious guy who is interested in information, not just information that conforms to his (individual, subjective) worldview.

This is why I keep going back to 'wants'; it's all about what you WANT, and that's irrelevant.   We're worried that one person (or a few, or 1,000; it matters not how many) will hear this nonsense and inject battery acid in their cock to fight COVID.  But just as many people hear "Oh, vaccine solves everything!" and gets the vaccine with the same level of thought - that is to say, NONE - as the "crazies".  You're okay with that lack of scrutiny because they did what you want them to do. For someone like me, who is worried about HOW we get there, it's just as much of a problem.

I think you "want" to read something into my post that's not there. I am a regular listener of Rogan and he can surely waffle on subjects. He has had Elon Musk and NDTyson and rave about science and then the next week he questions the vaccines and says that teenagers should not get the vaccine. That was so extreme that he backpedaled the next week. Maybe you should listen to his broadcast and see what I am talking about.

[Ben_Jamin]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/01/joe-rogan-covid/

 

Rogan represents a fairly large slice of the problem. By taking everything under the sun we have no idea what helped, what hurt, and what was meaningless. That's a big part of the problem with Ivermectin. People are taking it on their own with no way of analyzing its efficacy other than "welp, they didn't die."

But it's important to point out, that's not "misplaced trust" or "conspiracy thinking", that's just bad scientific method. I can point to many examples of those smart, "right side of history"* people that have done the same thing and pointed to SUCCESS! with no idea how they got there.  Anyone who's ever worked on a car or diagnosed an electrical circuit knows you only mess with one variable at a time so you can track the impacts.


* And no, I'm not taking sides, I'm pointing out that it doesn't matter WHAT side you're on, there are more things in play here than just ideology or some arbitrary measure of "intelligence".

You do realize that a massive slice of America is taking sides, right? I don't like it any more than you do, and we both agree that it's a big problem, but it is the realityw. All I did was point out that to the people taking sides Rogan didn't help matters. Your car analogy is bang-on. He got better and there's zero indication that ivermectin had anything to do with it, but a whole lot of Americans are going to see his recovery as proof, and they're going to feed the conspiracy that the government is trying to keep us from taking a cheap and effective cure so we'll take the expensive and experimental cures.

I think I of all people understand a massive slice of America is taking sides.  It's what keeps me up at night. It is, in my opinion, the biggest issue facing America today.  Not healthcare, not global warming, not China, not Afghanistan... our divisiveness.  Because, in large part, our divisiveness will prevent us from ever truly getting any consensus or solution - even half-assed compromised solutions - for the rest of those issues.

But as to your point about people doing this stuff, sure, but it is what it is.  I don't agree that we don't talk about things just because someone MIGHT take it to heart.   Look what that's done for our national discussion on race; there is none.  You either buy in to whatever is put on the table, or your a racist, full stop.   I've seen it first hand. I've LIVED it first hand.  I don't accept things just because someone says it, or FEELS it, and as a result, here, I've been called a racist.  If someone is going to inject battery acid in their cock to solve COVID, they are going to do it whether Joe Rogan talks about it or not.   And - and I think you will align with this - if they do, well, they can live with the consequences of what happens. That's called "personal accountability".   And while we're not big on personal accountability in America - signing a student loan document is exactly the same as putting battery acid in your junk from a consequences standpoint - at some point we've got to draw the line.

While I do align with it in general, I'm also more inclined to take a practical approach to it. We're not going to fix ourselves. This is the new reality, and we need to account for that. For one, there will be people who shoot battery acid into their dicks whether he tells them to or not, but there will be more if he does. Second, if those people wind up taking hospital beds that could be better used for people who didn't choose to injure themselves, it's no longer personal accountability. I'd say it's the opposite, in fact.

Okay, like those people that did the Tide Pod challenge. The people that end up with Alcohol Poisoning, the Drug addict overdosing in his room, the obese man who ate the inferno hot wing that clogged his arteries. All these people take up hospital beds that could be used for people that didn't injure themselves. Should we deny them access because they chose to be stupid and ignore the signs telling them not to do it or they will die or be seriously injured? So these people that injured themselves is not personal accountability?

When hospitals are at 90% capacity because of people eating Tide pods? Fuck yeah. You're also skipping a different part of the problem which is that addiction and obesity aren't always voluntary. We regard those as illnesses. If the antivaxers want to classify themselves as suffering from a mental illness then perhaps I'll change my point of view, but of course, just being smarter than everybody else doesn't qualify you for the loony bin.

The odd thing about mental illness. Is that the data shows that a lot of people suffer from some sort of mental illness. Depression and anxiety are mental illness, and these pandemic lockdowns has caused some peoples depression and anxiety to heighten to the point where they committed suicide.

It would be interesting to weigh these Covid-19 deaths with the other deaths.

But it's all a death numbers game that is playing on the human emotion of fear and concern for oneself. The ignorance of the masses in not understanding their own body. And the desperate need of humans to do what is good.

We are living in the Covid-19 play. And if you don't abide by these rules of the game, you can not play and can not pass go and collect $200.


I would only like to know if Joe Rogan is vaccinated or not to show us whether.. unvaccinated people can get mild symptoms, or if we was lying to the masses and he did get vaccinated, hence why his symptoms were mild. That is all. But I also, am not getting all up in arms upset because he is not disclosing that information. It's his health and he doesn't have to tell the public anything. The same as how a band doesn't have to tell us the reasons why so and so left the band.

[lonestar]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

Especially since the opinion of the overwhelming majority of the medical community, the people who study and know this more than anyone, especially an NFL qb or a talk show host, suggest the simple path of vaccination.

[Stadler]

Well bummer you need a subscription to read that WaPo article.

Joe Rogan is a mystery to me. He has some wonderful guests and was one of the first to get ahead of this COVID by interviewing Michael Olsterholm back at the beginning of this mess so he comes across as a man of science and rational. But when he has more controversial guests on, he can easily waffle to the side of his crazier guests. What's ironic is he has talked up building up your immune system so he eats right, exercises and doesn't really drink much alcohol and yet he still gets COVID and as someone wrote earlier, he took so much shit he'll never know what worked. 

Maybe, just maybe, that's an "open mind".    I don't know what you're thinking here, but it's hard to read that paragraph without my thinking you just assume he HAS to reject them as morons or not even have them on the show to begin with.  Not slapping them with a stick is what debate/discussion is.   "Silence is not consent"; we can talk about controversial topics without it being a de facto acceptance or endorsement.   I don't listen to Joe Rogan (though not out of dislike for him; more due to time) but he strikes me as a curious guy who is interested in information, not just information that conforms to his (individual, subjective) worldview.

This is why I keep going back to 'wants'; it's all about what you WANT, and that's irrelevant.   We're worried that one person (or a few, or 1,000; it matters not how many) will hear this nonsense and inject battery acid in their cock to fight COVID.  But just as many people hear "Oh, vaccine solves everything!" and gets the vaccine with the same level of thought - that is to say, NONE - as the "crazies".  You're okay with that lack of scrutiny because they did what you want them to do. For someone like me, who is worried about HOW we get there, it's just as much of a problem.

I think you "want" to read something into my post that's not there. I am a regular listener of Rogan and he can surely waffle on subjects. He has had Elon Musk and NDTyson and rave about science and then the next week he questions the vaccines and says that teenagers should not get the vaccine. That was so extreme that he backpedaled the next week. Maybe you should listen to his broadcast and see what I am talking about.

Those are not mutually exclusive, except in messaging.   I am a licensed professional engineer; I have an MBA in international finance, and have over twenty years experience in remediating contaminated property (not to mention a law degree).  I would consider myself a man of science.   

I have questions about the vaccine (though I opted to get it done) and I am personally undecided as to whether teenager SHOULD or SHOULD NOT get the vaccine (the one child I am responsible for is 20 and made the decision - yes - for herself).  Are you suggesting I'm extreme?  You better check your gauge then.  Having honest questions is not "extreme" and in fact ought to be more widely accepted.   How do we learn if we don't question?  How do we expand our intellectual horizons without curiosity? 

[King Postwhore]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

And you're probably right; but why is that anyone's issue here?   We've been indoctrinated to accept that other people's thought processes are their own.   Why is it different now?   I know, I know "because it affects me!" but that's a shallow excuse unless you're in the same room with Cam Newton and/or Joe Rogan and they are breathing their cooties on you.   EVERYTHING we do has some impact on other people, it's just a matter of directness, proximity, and priorities.    We're so U.S./North American centric that we've lost sight of some of the magnitude of this stuff.   HALF the world is not vaccinated; we're at 70% here in the States.  If a pack of 1,000 or 10,000 or even 1,000,000 decide to not vaccinate, even if it's because aliens told them they'd grow a tail with a vaccine, the world isn't going to end as long as 3.7 BILLION people across the world don't even have vaccines on their radar.

I would answer that a pandemic is bigger than what they perceive as lost freedoms.  This isn't something that people will force decades to come.  Like the flu shot.  How many people talk about people's right with the flu shot these days?

[Ben_Jamin]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

Especially since the opinion of the overwhelming majority of the medical community, the people who study and know this more than anyone, especially an NFL qb or a talk show host, suggest the simple path of vaccination.

It's a trust issue. As people here in America do not trust certain doctors as much either. Some see certain doctors as pill pushers and in it for the money.

Which is how the mindset of the world is...focused on monetary worth more so than the worth of human life and care. Stads posted the cost of obese people being in the billions a year. That says a lot. How can we place monetary value and base our actions and decision of health without that interfering with our survival?

It's interfering in the hospitals not being able to handle the vast amount of unhealthy people, or more the people needing medical care.

If we want medical care for all. That means accepting everyone, regardless of how or the stupid decision that made them need medical care. It's could be done out of the kindness of people's hearts. But this world relies on monetary values, so the healthcare worker needs to be paid first. And would one care for a person if they weren't making that amount of money. My answer is a big, "hell no." Just look at how travel nurses upped their prices so a hospital can have enough workers to handle the amount of people needing medical care.


People want to talk about ethics and caring for others, fine...let's talk about how Heathcare Workers demand more money in a time of need and health care. If they were moral ethical people, they wouldn't care about the money and would care for people out of the kindness of their hearts and passion for health care.

It's why I find mentioning and screaming about ethics and morals does not help at all during these times.

[Ben_Jamin]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

And you're probably right; but why is that anyone's issue here?   We've been indoctrinated to accept that other people's thought processes are their own.   Why is it different now?   I know, I know "because it affects me!" but that's a shallow excuse unless you're in the same room with Cam Newton and/or Joe Rogan and they are breathing their cooties on you.   EVERYTHING we do has some impact on other people, it's just a matter of directness, proximity, and priorities.    We're so U.S./North American centric that we've lost sight of some of the magnitude of this stuff.   HALF the world is not vaccinated; we're at 70% here in the States.  If a pack of 1,000 or 10,000 or even 1,000,000 decide to not vaccinate, even if it's because aliens told them they'd grow a tail with a vaccine, the world isn't going to end as long as 3.7 BILLION people across the world don't even have vaccines on their radar.

I would answer that a pandemic is bigger than what they perceive as lost freedoms.  This isn't something that people will force decades to come.  Like the flu shot.  How many people talk about people's right with the flu shot these days?

They didn't coerce people into taking that flu vaccine either. That's the issue at hand here. The coercion involved in getting people to take their products. Don't forget, these vaccines are still considered products that have monetary value. Why are we not allowed to get the other forms of the vaccines from other countries? Supply, and Pfizer is one of the biggest suppliers of drugs in the pharmaceutical market. So they easily could handle the demand for supply.

The issue people have is the way these pharmaceutical companies have had issues with their past products before. For them, they don't trust these companies.

Now, if these things cost money, these vaccines are not free? Who is paying for these supposed "free vaccines" that are easily available? If the government bought a certain amount of supply, then I could see why they're so adamant about getting people to take the vaccine as they do not want to lose out on the money they played to these pharmaceutical companies. If they did not, then how is it being paid for?


That's one issue and question I have about these vaccine rollouts.

[Stadler]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

And you're probably right; but why is that anyone's issue here?   We've been indoctrinated to accept that other people's thought processes are their own.   Why is it different now?   I know, I know "because it affects me!" but that's a shallow excuse unless you're in the same room with Cam Newton and/or Joe Rogan and they are breathing their cooties on you.   EVERYTHING we do has some impact on other people, it's just a matter of directness, proximity, and priorities.    We're so U.S./North American centric that we've lost sight of some of the magnitude of this stuff.   HALF the world is not vaccinated; we're at 70% here in the States.  If a pack of 1,000 or 10,000 or even 1,000,000 decide to not vaccinate, even if it's because aliens told them they'd grow a tail with a vaccine, the world isn't going to end as long as 3.7 BILLION people across the world don't even have vaccines on their radar.

I would answer that a pandemic is bigger than what they perceive as lost freedoms.  This isn't something that people will force decades to come.  Like the flu shot.  How many people talk about people's right with the flu shot these days?

I don't disagree.  But there's a saying. I forgot what that saying was - - but the gist is, it's easy to stick to your principles when there's nothing at stake. It's hard when there is more at stake.  Think back to the Patriot Act; it's a similar discussion.   Was the threat of Al Qaeda bigger than lost freedoms?  To some it was, to others it wasn't.  And that was the debate at the time.   I don't think I'm violating my personal prohibition on stereotyping if I point out that it's a reasonable guess that the sides on this debate have switched.

That doesn't tell me one side is right, it tells me that we have competing priorities we HAVE to account for in a democracy. 

[hunnus2000]

Well bummer you need a subscription to read that WaPo article.

Joe Rogan is a mystery to me. He has some wonderful guests and was one of the first to get ahead of this COVID by interviewing Michael Olsterholm back at the beginning of this mess so he comes across as a man of science and rational. But when he has more controversial guests on, he can easily waffle to the side of his crazier guests. What's ironic is he has talked up building up your immune system so he eats right, exercises and doesn't really drink much alcohol and yet he still gets COVID and as someone wrote earlier, he took so much shit he'll never know what worked. 

Maybe, just maybe, that's an "open mind".    I don't know what you're thinking here, but it's hard to read that paragraph without my thinking you just assume he HAS to reject them as morons or not even have them on the show to begin with.  Not slapping them with a stick is what debate/discussion is.   "Silence is not consent"; we can talk about controversial topics without it being a de facto acceptance or endorsement.   I don't listen to Joe Rogan (though not out of dislike for him; more due to time) but he strikes me as a curious guy who is interested in information, not just information that conforms to his (individual, subjective) worldview.

This is why I keep going back to 'wants'; it's all about what you WANT, and that's irrelevant.   We're worried that one person (or a few, or 1,000; it matters not how many) will hear this nonsense and inject battery acid in their cock to fight COVID.  But just as many people hear "Oh, vaccine solves everything!" and gets the vaccine with the same level of thought - that is to say, NONE - as the "crazies".  You're okay with that lack of scrutiny because they did what you want them to do. For someone like me, who is worried about HOW we get there, it's just as much of a problem.

I think you "want" to read something into my post that's not there. I am a regular listener of Rogan and he can surely waffle on subjects. He has had Elon Musk and NDTyson and rave about science and then the next week he questions the vaccines and says that teenagers should not get the vaccine. That was so extreme that he backpedaled the next week. Maybe you should listen to his broadcast and see what I am talking about.

Those are not mutually exclusive, except in messaging.   I am a licensed professional engineer; I have an MBA in international finance, and have over twenty years experience in remediating contaminated property (not to mention a law degree).  I would consider myself a man of science.   

I have questions about the vaccine (though I opted to get it done) and I am personally undecided as to whether teenager SHOULD or SHOULD NOT get the vaccine (the one child I am responsible for is 20 and made the decision - yes - for herself). Are you suggesting I'm extreme?  You better check your gauge then.  Having honest questions is not "extreme" and in fact ought to be more widely accepted.   How do we learn if we don't question?  How do we expand our intellectual horizons without curiosity?

I am not suggesting your anything. Where did you get that in my post? You're just "wanting" to find "something to argue about". Check my gauge? Check your reading comprehension. This has nothing to do with what you said but with what Rogan said. Geez.....

[King Postwhore]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

And you're probably right; but why is that anyone's issue here?   We've been indoctrinated to accept that other people's thought processes are their own.   Why is it different now?   I know, I know "because it affects me!" but that's a shallow excuse unless you're in the same room with Cam Newton and/or Joe Rogan and they are breathing their cooties on you.   EVERYTHING we do has some impact on other people, it's just a matter of directness, proximity, and priorities.    We're so U.S./North American centric that we've lost sight of some of the magnitude of this stuff.   HALF the world is not vaccinated; we're at 70% here in the States.  If a pack of 1,000 or 10,000 or even 1,000,000 decide to not vaccinate, even if it's because aliens told them they'd grow a tail with a vaccine, the world isn't going to end as long as 3.7 BILLION people across the world don't even have vaccines on their radar.

I would answer that a pandemic is bigger than what they perceive as lost freedoms.  This isn't something that people will force decades to come.  Like the flu shot.  How many people talk about people's right with the flu shot these days?

I don't disagree.  But there's a saying. I forgot what that saying was - - but the gist is, it's easy to stick to your principles when there's nothing at stake. It's hard when there is more at stake.  Think back to the Patriot Act; it's a similar discussion.   Was the threat of Al Qaeda bigger than lost freedoms?  To some it was, to others it wasn't.  And that was the debate at the time.   I don't think I'm violating my personal prohibition on stereotyping if I point out that it's a reasonable guess that the sides on this debate have switched.

That doesn't tell me one side is right, it tells me that we have competing priorities we HAVE to account for in a democracy.

I have friends who completely against the vaccine.  Hell, my sister in law, her 3 children who are adults and have children as well.  Not my place to tell them what to do or not todo.  Their choice.  I just worry about consequences if one of their children get sick.  Still, not my place even though I disagree.

[Ben_Jamin]

https://law.shu.edu/news/covid-19-vaccines-who-will-pay-for-them.cfm

Healthcare industry attorney Maria D. Garcia predicts private health insurance companies will cover a COVID-19 vaccine just as they have covered COVID-19 testing. Garcia explains private companies will likely face public and government pressure to cover a vaccine, and if private companies choose not to cover a vaccine, Garcia anticipates they will experience a publicity “nightmare.”

Medicaid programs, unlike Medicare or private health insurance plans, offer no such assurances. The House of Representatives passed the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act to mandate Medicaid cover a COVID-19 vaccine without charging beneficiaries cost-sharing amounts. The HEROES Act would also cover a vaccine for uninsured patients. The Senate has not voted on the Act. In the absence of federal regulations, states have broad discretion to determine the availability and cost-sharing amount to Medicaid beneficiaries.

Unlike cost-sharing, which would give some of the vaccine’s costs to beneficiaries through payments like deductibles or copayments, vaccine price controls would determine a maximum price pharmaceutical companies can charge public and private insurers for a COVID-19 vaccine. Though Congress has not set any price controls, the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act declared the Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary has the authority to ensure a COVID-19 vaccine “will be affordable in the commercial market.” The current HHS Secretary, Alex Azar, however, said he cannot guarantee price controls for a COVID-19 vaccine, meaning he cannot guarantee how much pharmaceutical companies will bill insurers, because “we need the private sector to invest” in vaccine development. Since pharmaceutical companies price drugs based on “benefits rather than production costs,” LA Times business writer David Lazarus predicts pharmaceutical companies could price a COVID-19 vaccine astronomically high.

Without price controls, the New York Times compared the potentially high price of a COVID-19 vaccine to the unaffordable, and consequently inaccessible, $10,000 per year AZT drug used to treat the virus that causes AIDS.

Even if fully insured private health insurance plans cover the cost of a vaccine, they may pass these absorbed costs onto beneficiaries in the form of higher premiums. Self-funded group health plans, where employers establish a trust fund to pay employee claims, may face economic hardship from paying these exorbitant costs too.

If patients go to a clinic that is out of their insurance network, they will have to front the cost of a vaccine and seek reimbursement from their insurer. As unemployment rates rise, the number of people who have lost their health insurance also likely rose. Uninsured patients will have to fund the cost of a vaccine independently. High vaccine prices may discourage patients from getting vaccinated and prove to be a significant barrier.

Found this interesting article discussing who's paying for the vaccines. Time to see if that is still the prediction of Healthcare Industry attorney Maria D Garcia.



Edit: Didn't have to go far and it didn't take long....

https://www.wavy.com/covid-19-vaccine/dose-of-clarity-who-is-paying-for-the-covid-19-vaccine/

Here’s how vaccine funding works. The federal government prohibits providers from billing patients for the vaccine or administering it. That’s because federal funding from the CARES Act is paying for the vaccine itself. But that’s not the only cost involved.

Whether you get your shot at a doctor’s office, pharmacy or health clinic – administering the vaccine is an expense for the provider. How that is covered depends on your insurance. If you have private insurance, the company is on the hook for that cost. Medicare will cover people on its plan. The Federal government funds will cover those who are uninsured.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/no-cost.html

COVID-19 vaccines are available for everyone at no cost.
Vaccines were paid for with taxpayer dollars and will be given to all people living in the United States, regardless of insurance or immigration status.

I love how it says, at no cost, yet goes on to state it's payed for with taxpayer dollars.

So they're available at the cost of the taxpayers? and if people don't take these vaccines than the taxpayers would have wasted that amount of money as they expire? So if not many people ended up taking the vaccine than they'd have wasted taxpayer money?

If all you care about is money, and most people do, then I am sorry but that is just hilarious.

[Stadler]

Well bummer you need a subscription to read that WaPo article.

Joe Rogan is a mystery to me. He has some wonderful guests and was one of the first to get ahead of this COVID by interviewing Michael Olsterholm back at the beginning of this mess so he comes across as a man of science and rational. But when he has more controversial guests on, he can easily waffle to the side of his crazier guests. What's ironic is he has talked up building up your immune system so he eats right, exercises and doesn't really drink much alcohol and yet he still gets COVID and as someone wrote earlier, he took so much shit he'll never know what worked. 

Maybe, just maybe, that's an "open mind".    I don't know what you're thinking here, but it's hard to read that paragraph without my thinking you just assume he HAS to reject them as morons or not even have them on the show to begin with.  Not slapping them with a stick is what debate/discussion is.   "Silence is not consent"; we can talk about controversial topics without it being a de facto acceptance or endorsement.   I don't listen to Joe Rogan (though not out of dislike for him; more due to time) but he strikes me as a curious guy who is interested in information, not just information that conforms to his (individual, subjective) worldview.

This is why I keep going back to 'wants'; it's all about what you WANT, and that's irrelevant.   We're worried that one person (or a few, or 1,000; it matters not how many) will hear this nonsense and inject battery acid in their cock to fight COVID.  But just as many people hear "Oh, vaccine solves everything!" and gets the vaccine with the same level of thought - that is to say, NONE - as the "crazies".  You're okay with that lack of scrutiny because they did what you want them to do. For someone like me, who is worried about HOW we get there, it's just as much of a problem.

I think you "want" to read something into my post that's not there. I am a regular listener of Rogan and he can surely waffle on subjects. He has had Elon Musk and NDTyson and rave about science and then the next week he questions the vaccines and says that teenagers should not get the vaccine. That was so extreme that he backpedaled the next week. Maybe you should listen to his broadcast and see what I am talking about.

Those are not mutually exclusive, except in messaging.   I am a licensed professional engineer; I have an MBA in international finance, and have over twenty years experience in remediating contaminated property (not to mention a law degree).  I would consider myself a man of science.   

I have questions about the vaccine (though I opted to get it done) and I am personally undecided as to whether teenager SHOULD or SHOULD NOT get the vaccine (the one child I am responsible for is 20 and made the decision - yes - for herself). Are you suggesting I'm extreme?  You better check your gauge then.  Having honest questions is not "extreme" and in fact ought to be more widely accepted.   How do we learn if we don't question?  How do we expand our intellectual horizons without curiosity?

I am not suggesting your anything. Where did you get that in my post? You're just "wanting" to find "something to argue about". Check my gauge? Check your reading comprehension. This has nothing to do with what you said but with what Rogan said. Geez.....

I'm not "looking" for anything.  There are plenty of things I can argue with that I'm actively walking away from (in P/R).  Here and now, I'm involved in a discussion about the merits of Joe Rogan and the position he's taken. Unless you tell me otherwise, I can only go by your words.  What you wrote (and the fact that you've consistently erred on the side of public health versus personal freedoms) lends me to what I said.  If I'm wrong, feel free to point it out, but shots aren't necessary. 

I'm taking you at your words. You said:  "he questions the vaccines and says that teenagers should not get the vaccine. That was so extreme...."   I have questions about the vaccines, and whether teenagers should or should not get the vaccine.  Isn't it logical to assume that would be extreme as well?

[Ben_Jamin]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

And you're probably right; but why is that anyone's issue here?   We've been indoctrinated to accept that other people's thought processes are their own.   Why is it different now?   I know, I know "because it affects me!" but that's a shallow excuse unless you're in the same room with Cam Newton and/or Joe Rogan and they are breathing their cooties on you.   EVERYTHING we do has some impact on other people, it's just a matter of directness, proximity, and priorities.    We're so U.S./North American centric that we've lost sight of some of the magnitude of this stuff.   HALF the world is not vaccinated; we're at 70% here in the States.  If a pack of 1,000 or 10,000 or even 1,000,000 decide to not vaccinate, even if it's because aliens told them they'd grow a tail with a vaccine, the world isn't going to end as long as 3.7 BILLION people across the world don't even have vaccines on their radar.

I would answer that a pandemic is bigger than what they perceive as lost freedoms.  This isn't something that people will force decades to come.  Like the flu shot.  How many people talk about people's right with the flu shot these days?

I don't disagree.  But there's a saying. I forgot what that saying was - - but the gist is, it's easy to stick to your principles when there's nothing at stake. It's hard when there is more at stake.  Think back to the Patriot Act; it's a similar discussion.   Was the threat of Al Qaeda bigger than lost freedoms?  To some it was, to others it wasn't.  And that was the debate at the time.   I don't think I'm violating my personal prohibition on stereotyping if I point out that it's a reasonable guess that the sides on this debate have switched.

That doesn't tell me one side is right, it tells me that we have competing priorities we HAVE to account for in a democracy.

I have friends who completely against the vaccine.  Hell, my sister in law, her 3 children who are adults and have children as well.  Not my place to tell them what to do or not todo.  Their choice.  I just worry about consequences if one of their children get sick.  Still, not my place even though I disagree.

And me personally. I worry about consequences that can have an affect on the future generations...my grand-children's grand-children. I see those consequences way more of a concern than this pandemic, personally, as even if we were to get this pandemic under control, these other consequences are still here and still getting worse. Which is the issue that is called "climate change". But, I myself like to term it...Environmental Impacts of our Human Choices. Meaning the impacts the decisions we humans have made that contributed to the current environment that is of concern for us humans and our survival. This is why to me, The pandemic is just a little blip in the entire vastness of our human life in relation to great whole, the bigger picture of the pale blue dot.

Even if we do get a handle on this pandemic, it is a sort of hilarity that these other issues can possibly soon be risen to the levels of panic that is similar to the covid-19 pandemic level of concern and worry.

In turn, the public health issue won't be covid-19 anymore. It'll change to one of these other issues that would be considered a public health issue. It is what China is doing and a huge factor for the reason they have been wearing masks before the pandemic, as their pollution is so bad that it is determined to be a public health issue.

[lonestar]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

And you're probably right; but why is that anyone's issue here?   We've been indoctrinated to accept that other people's thought processes are their own.   Why is it different now?   I know, I know "because it affects me!" but that's a shallow excuse unless you're in the same room with Cam Newton and/or Joe Rogan and they are breathing their cooties on you.   EVERYTHING we do has some impact on other people, it's just a matter of directness, proximity, and priorities.    We're so U.S./North American centric that we've lost sight of some of the magnitude of this stuff.   HALF the world is not vaccinated; we're at 70% here in the States.  If a pack of 1,000 or 10,000 or even 1,000,000 decide to not vaccinate, even if it's because aliens told them they'd grow a tail with a vaccine, the world isn't going to end as long as 3.7 BILLION people across the world don't even have vaccines on their radar.

I would answer that a pandemic is bigger than what they perceive as lost freedoms.  This isn't something that people will force decades to come.  Like the flu shot.  How many people talk about people's right with the flu shot these days?

I don't disagree.  But there's a saying. I forgot what that saying was - - but the gist is, it's easy to stick to your principles when there's nothing at stake. It's hard when there is more at stake.  Think back to the Patriot Act; it's a similar discussion.   Was the threat of Al Qaeda bigger than lost freedoms?  To some it was, to others it wasn't.  And that was the debate at the time.   I don't think I'm violating my personal prohibition on stereotyping if I point out that it's a reasonable guess that the sides on this debate have switched.

That doesn't tell me one side is right, it tells me that we have competing priorities we HAVE to account for in a democracy.

I have friends who completely against the vaccine.  Hell, my sister in law, her 3 children who are adults and have children as well.  Not my place to tell them what to do or not todo.  Their choice.  I just worry about consequences if one of their children get sick.  Still, not my place even though I disagree.

Mostly agree, though I do lessen my view of them due to their inherent selfishness. Again, vaccination is a social responsibility.

[King Postwhore]

Ben if you don't take care of the issues down the line, maybe you don't have the future generations. They had a vaccine for the flu.  Imagine if have the country said no to it?  Maybe you and I are not here?

RJ, I do tell them why I think it's a good idea but I have a feeling it's on deaf ears. 

[Stadler]

I think people see someone like Joe Rogan and Cam Newton who take care of themselves and watch what they put in their bodies not willing to take the vaccine but put everything else under the sun into their bodies to avoid taking the vaccine and that makes no sense.  If anyone has ever watched the drug commercials you see all the possible crazy side affects.


That's why people question because they are confused to their thought process.

And you're probably right; but why is that anyone's issue here?   We've been indoctrinated to accept that other people's thought processes are their own.   Why is it different now?   I know, I know "because it affects me!" but that's a shallow excuse unless you're in the same room with Cam Newton and/or Joe Rogan and they are breathing their cooties on you.   EVERYTHING we do has some impact on other people, it's just a matter of directness, proximity, and priorities.    We're so U.S./North American centric that we've lost sight of some of the magnitude of this stuff.   HALF the world is not vaccinated; we're at 70% here in the States.  If a pack of 1,000 or 10,000 or even 1,000,000 decide to not vaccinate, even if it's because aliens told them they'd grow a tail with a vaccine, the world isn't going to end as long as 3.7 BILLION people across the world don't even have vaccines on their radar.

I would answer that a pandemic is bigger than what they perceive as lost freedoms.  This isn't something that people will force decades to come.  Like the flu shot.  How many people talk about people's right with the flu shot these days?

I don't disagree.  But there's a saying. I forgot what that saying was - - but the gist is, it's easy to stick to your principles when there's nothing at stake. It's hard when there is more at stake.  Think back to the Patriot Act; it's a similar discussion.   Was the threat of Al Qaeda bigger than lost freedoms?  To some it was, to others it wasn't.  And that was the debate at the time.   I don't think I'm violating my personal prohibition on stereotyping if I point out that it's a reasonable guess that the sides on this debate have switched.

That doesn't tell me one side is right, it tells me that we have competing priorities we HAVE to account for in a democracy.

I have friends who completely against the vaccine.  Hell, my sister in law, her 3 children who are adults and have children as well.  Not my place to tell them what to do or not todo.  Their choice.  I just worry about consequences if one of their children get sick.  Still, not my place even though I disagree.

On that, we're 1000% in agreement.  And I share your worry, despite all that I've written.  My head's not in the sand on the risk, I just have a different (maybe broader?) perspective then some.

[Ben_Jamin]

Ben if you don't take care of the issues down the line, maybe you don't have the future generations. They had a vaccine for the flu.  Imagine if have the country said no to it?  Maybe you and I are not here?

RJ, I do tell them why I think it's a good idea but I have a feeling it's on deaf ears.

We could go futher down and say that about the humans that didn't have supposed vaccines and remedies available to them. We did have those things, and would still have been using those things, but that knowledge and understanding of how to utilize them for their health benefits was destroyed and "conquered". So here we are having to depend on their product that they destroyed our products for, to give to us to use and be healthy people.

We had ways of healing and remedying. And when what we could do didn't work we said, it's out of our control and we have to accept the consequences that nature has in store for us. But they also didn't force people. If they did, then people either left the village, or gave in to their demands to be a part of that society and not become the outcast. That's how coercion works and it's pretty messed up when you have to resort to it in order for the people to obey your demands, even if they are for the better good of the people. It says a lot about the leadership when the people disregard them and end up destroying the entire structure of the society itself. The consequence of losing the trust with your people is you see the empire crumble and fall.

[lonestar]

RJ, I do tell them why I think it's a good idea but I have a feeling it's on deaf ears.

Unfortunately, it usually does.

[King Postwhore]

Ben if you don't take care of the issues down the line, maybe you don't have the future generations. They had a vaccine for the flu.  Imagine if have the country said no to it?  Maybe you and I are not here?

RJ, I do tell them why I think it's a good idea but I have a feeling it's on deaf ears.

We could go futher down and say that about the humans that didn't have supposed vaccines and remedies available to them. We did have those things, and would still have been using those things, but that knowledge and understanding of how to utilize them for their health benefits was destroyed and "conquered". So here we are having to depend on their product that they destroyed our products for, to give to us to use and be healthy people.

We had ways of healing and remedying. And when what we could do didn't work we said, it's out of our control and we have to accept the consequences that nature has in store for us. But they also didn't force people. If they did, then people either left the village, or gave in to their demands to be a part of that society and not become the outcast. That's how coercion works and it's pretty messed up when you have to resort to it in order for the people to obey your demands, even if they are for the better good of the people. It says a lot about the leadership when the people disregard them and end up destroying the entire structure of the society itself. The consequence of losing the trust with your people is you see the empire crumble and fall.

Sure, that was in the 1800's and early 1900's.  With the advances today, Id rather go with science when it comes to a pandemic.  For me, it's common sense.

[vtgrad]

I listen to/watch JRE as well when he has guests that I think are interesting... he's like a mirror during most of his shows I think.  His responses/questions/general demeanor reflect those of the guest sitting across from him.  Watch him with Dr. Peterson, with the virologist mentioned earlier (had him on in the early stages of COVID), with Elon, etc... then watch him when Brendan Schaub and The Kid are on and compare the two versions of Joe that you see.  I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that mindset, I'm just saying that's how Joe is on the show.  My wife and I were just talking about this last night.

Another thing to mention is Joe's health; he's very healthy by all standards and his internal/biological age is likely much younger than his physical age.  Cam's likely in the same category.  JRE might have "thrown the sink" at COVID, but the fact that his general health is so well maintained was likely a major contributing factor to his recovery and the likelihood of a mild case.

Sun Cannon    I had to Google that...

[cramx3]

Another thing to mention is Joe's health; he's very healthy by all standards and his internal/biological age is likely much younger than his physical age.  Cam's likely in the same category.  JRE might have "thrown the sink" at COVID, but the fact that his general health is so well maintained was likely a major contributing factor to his recovery and the likelihood of a mild case.

He also had a live show that he needed to reschedule and wanted to get back to doing his stand ups sooner than later so he had more reason to recover as quickly as possible than most people who will just ride it out and not spend the money or take anything that is questionable. 

[hunnus2000]

I'm not "looking" for anything.  There are plenty of things I can argue with that I'm actively walking away from (in P/R).  Here and now, I'm involved in a discussion about the merits of Joe Rogan and the position he's taken. Unless you tell me otherwise, I can only go by your words. What you wrote (and the fact that you've consistently erred on the side of public health versus personal freedoms) lends me to what I said.  If I'm wrong, feel free to point it out, but shots aren't necessary. 

I'm taking you at your words. You said:  "he questions the vaccines and says that teenagers should not get the vaccine. That was so extreme...."   I have questions about the vaccines, and whether teenagers should or should not get the vaccine.  Isn't it logical to assume that would be extreme as well?

Ahh yes - Public Health - because it's a thing. I will always side with the dangers of second hand smoke, the usefulness of traffic lights, the punishment of those who choose to murder others. Isn't this how a civilized society chooses to live? Does anyone argue for typhoid Mary and her right to freedoms?

And stay away from the Argument from Authority. I don't care how many degrees you have and if you're a lawyer, you should be able to argue points without bringing that up.

[Stadler]

I'm not "looking" for anything.  There are plenty of things I can argue with that I'm actively walking away from (in P/R).  Here and now, I'm involved in a discussion about the merits of Joe Rogan and the position he's taken. Unless you tell me otherwise, I can only go by your words. What you wrote (and the fact that you've consistently erred on the side of public health versus personal freedoms) lends me to what I said.  If I'm wrong, feel free to point it out, but shots aren't necessary. 

I'm taking you at your words. You said:  "he questions the vaccines and says that teenagers should not get the vaccine. That was so extreme...."   I have questions about the vaccines, and whether teenagers should or should not get the vaccine.  Isn't it logical to assume that would be extreme as well?

Ahh yes - Public Health - because it's a thing. I will always side with the dangers of second hand smoke, the usefulness of traffic lights, the punishment of those who choose to murder others. Isn't this how a civilized society chooses to live? Does anyone argue for typhoid Mary and her right to freedoms?

Those aren't all equal though.  We don't punish murder for "public health" reasons; we punish murder because it is a fundamental violation of the victim's fundamental right to life.   And we balance that fundamental right when there are extenuating circumstances, like self-defense or capital punishment.

Of course "public health" is a thing; it's just not THE ONLY thing.  There are multiple variables to be contemplated and evaluated.  Rightly or wrongly, we CLEARLY do not take an "even one is too many" approach to life when evaluating those things that impact our public health.  If we did there would be no cigarettes, diet soda, no one would be able to live within a mile of the coast, we would not be able to drive, and we'd be spending a lot more time on our suicide problem than we do. 

And if the answer to "Typohoid Mary" was to chain her to her basement, yes we would argue for her right to freedoms.

And you know the VERY BEST THING about the United States?    WE GET TO DISAGREE.   You can - and SHOULD - believe whatever you want.   I get to do the same thing. If you want to prioritize "public health" number one, with no consideration of any other variable (pragmatism, rights, cost, etc.) I not only support you but ENCOURAGE you to do so.  I'm never going to call you deplorable, or selfish (whether I think it or not), or narrow-minded (whether I think it or not), or ignorant (whether I think it or not) because that's the beauty of living in a free society.  And our elected representatives are tasked with finding a solution that balances all of the 330 million opinions in the country.  Not JUST the Democrat opinions, or the "smart" opinions, or the opinions that agree with you. ALL OF THEM.  The smart ones, the racist ones, the stupid ones, the woke ones, the Democrat ones, the Republican ones, the vaccinated ones, the unvaccinated ones, the Mangini-fan ones, the Portnoy-fan ones, all of them.

And stay away from the Argument from Authority. I don't care how many degrees you have and if you're a lawyer, you should be able to argue points without bringing that up.

It's not about "authority".  It's about this FALSE presumption that everyone that doesn't think like you do is a fucking moron who just hasn't listened to reason or done the right research.   The point was only that I know how to do research, I know how to read scientific journals, I have an inherent curiosity and so have done so, and yet, I don't come to the same conclusions you do.