Vaccine

The Lancet study and commentary.....peakloads for vaxxed and unvaxxed were similar but vaxxed clearances were shorter (doesn't help if you live or work with someone)....breakthroughs mild....editorial states vaccine effect on reducing transmission is minimal but does exist....protection from infection lasts only 2-3 months. Current vaccines are therefore unlikely in and of themselves (at least without natural immunity) to make COVID go away


 
I said I was a Republican until Nixon (and I recognized that error).
First of all, call it what you want; Secondly, who gives a damn; Lastly, you're a grown-ass "man" freakishly lurking in a kids soccer forum without kids playing who turned into a weak-ass bedwetting schoolgirl over an elected US President.

I'd say Nixon is the least of your mental issues.

BTW, stuff the coocoo response.
 
Breakthrough infections on fully vaxxed people seem to provide as much protection as Moderna booster
 
The Lancet study and commentary.....peakloads for vaxxed and unvaxxed were similar but vaxxed clearances were shorter (doesn't help if you live or work with someone)....breakthroughs mild....editorial states vaccine effect on reducing transmission is minimal but does exist....protection from infection lasts only 2-3 months. Current vaccines are therefore unlikely in and of themselves (at least without natural immunity) to make COVID go away


Last sentence comes from Grace, not the article.

The article notes that one implication of the study is that we need higher vax rates. Grace decided to omit that part, assert the opposite herself, and pretend that her conclusion somehow came from Lancet.

Would you stop this? You repeatedly mix your own personal opinion in, as though it came from the actual scientists. It's either amazingly sloppy writing, or a deliberate attempt to pretend that your opinion has more support than it really does.
 

I feel well refuted by an article dated after the Charges had moved that states they don’t have to sell an interest in the team due to estate taxes. Thanks.
 
Last sentence comes from Grace, not the article.

The article notes that one implication of the study is that we need higher vax rates. Grace decided to omit that part, assert the opposite herself, and pretend that her conclusion somehow came from Lancet.

Would you stop this? You repeatedly mix your own personal opinion in, as though it came from the actual scientists. It's either amazingly sloppy writing, or a deliberate attempt to pretend that your opinion has more support than it really does.
A. No
B. I post the article you can read it and make up your own minds
C. Yes it’s sloppy. Don’t have time to spoon feed you. Doing a ton of things simultaneously. This forum is occupying maybe 10% of my attention. There is a period there for a reason.
D. I agree we need higher vax rates. Whether we can get them is another story as is whether we should do what we need to do to get them.
 
I feel well refuted by an article dated after the Charges had moved that states they don’t have to sell an interest in the team due to estate taxes. Thanks.

Alex Spanos practiced smart estate planning by transferring majority interest to his children and putting the rest of his stake into a trust for them. The siblings have offered to buy out the malcontent, but she could probably get more money in a bidding war with Jeff Bezos as one of the participants.

And this isn't one of those family businesses situations where the asset in question constitutes the bulk of the family's wealth. Alex had plenty of money before he bought the Chargers, and he kept on making money in his traditional real-estate holdings (the largest apartment builder in the country at one time). Dean and his sister are now engaged in a contest of selfishness. Unfortunately, I don't see a way where they could both lose in this. Someone should gather up a baggie of the concrete dust remaining from the destruction of San Diego Stadium and mail it to him.

My theory when Alex first bought the Chargers was that he planned to move the team to Stockton where he owned large plots of agricultural land close to freeways. That makes even more sense now that the Raiders have moved out again.
 
A. No
B. I post the article you can read it and make up your own minds
C. Yes it’s sloppy. Don’t have time to spoon feed you. Doing a ton of things simultaneously. This forum is occupying maybe 10% of my attention. There is a period there for a reason.
D. I agree we need higher vax rates. Whether we can get them is another story as is whether we should do what we need to do to get them.

Why do you bother to post these bullshit articles? Is it so that you can refer back to them later ("articles posted earlier in this thread") as if they had been legitimized?
 
Why do you bother to post these bullshit articles? Is it so that you can refer back to them later ("articles posted earlier in this thread") as if they had been legitimized?
It’s a study dumb dumb in the lancet and the accompanying article is the official commentary
 
A. No
B. I post the article you can read it and make up your own minds
C. Yes it’s sloppy. Don’t have time to spoon feed you. Doing a ton of things simultaneously. This forum is occupying maybe 10% of my attention. There is a period there for a reason.
D. I agree we need higher vax rates. Whether we can get them is another story as is whether we should do what we need to do to get them.
Spoon feed? Bull crap. This is about you being deliberately misleading, yet again. You toss your opinion in alongside the Lancet opinion, making absolutely no distinction between the two.

How hard is it to start a new paragraph that uses the usual clarifiers like “I think” or “in my view”?
 
Why do you bother to post these bullshit articles? Is it so that you can refer back to them later ("articles posted earlier in this thread") as if they had been legitimized?
The article itself is good. The bull shit comes in when Grace misrepresents their contents.
 
Back
Top