If you want to see a real MILF, look up South Dakota's governor.
Printable View
If you lived in an Ebola endemic area, and agreeing to this was a way to get an Ebola vaccine months or years before you could otherwise, you might volunteer for this.
I don’t think this proves anything about the virus Itself, one way or another. I’m sure you could round up a few thousand people to do all sorts of dumb, dangerous, and pointless shit voluntarily. Especially if you did it on TV.
That said, I do agree that for young, healthy volunteers, this is low risk. It will be interesting to see what the FDA says, and what the IRBs day.
OK, so it will work on the self selected sheep. There plenty of people who would take an attempt to shame them as a badge of honor. Like me.
Also, and I mean no disrespect to you by this, but you are thinking like a city guy. What you describe would be too difficult to pull off with any degree of effectiveness in rural areas. Even with the self selected sheep.
I took that as him being facetious.
I agree about the rural areas. Here in Seattle and in many places west of the cascades, Inslee has a lot of support- enough to get him elected. I am hoping the eastern part of our state stands strong on this.
Let me clear here. These closures were originally couched as part of the CV response. It didn't take long to pivot to permanent.
Yeah, well, I thought that about Robert O'Rourke, too, when he was out-right saying, "Hell YEAH we're gonna take your guns!" And here we are...
I think these people are likely to get relegated to the dust bin of history after being voted out of office before that happens, but who knows? The times, they are a-changin'...
Wow! A second summoning of the Candyman.
I dunno about the Apocalypse, all that 666 and the Mark of the Beast (see what I did there?) stuff. As far as I am concerned not wearing a mask has become a statement in it's own right. I finally acquiesced to putting one on this morning when I went to the bone cracker for a spinal tune up. I had anticipated this and while I think it is excessive, the close quarters required for an adjustment does have some pretense of plausibility.
But wearing one in a store? NOPE. As I have said earlier in this thread, the Walmarts here won't admonish you to put one on, and I understand the local Kroger and Schnucks will. So until they pull their heads out their asses, I am not going to either one for anything.
As for getting braced for tracing or testing? I won't cooperate. If they come to my door they will be summarily ordered off my property. I have no idea what the consequences might be, but I do know that Jackson County doesn't have enough deputies to spare for such nonsense. Nor does District 13 of the Illinois State Police. I don't live in a town, rather out in the rurals and the Local Yokels and the County Mounties with badges would rather die than get the ISP involved.
For the serology fans - YT
I won't pretend that I understood much of it, but I heard some interesting stuff about potential for reinfection from about 33 minutes in.
You're right, and I should have been clearer in what I was saying. Instead, I just wanted to get a post out. Thank you for the measured response.
My issue is with headlines. Right under the title of that article is a sentence saying scientists are treating men with female sex hormones. The remainder of the article isn't relevant; the headline and first sentence are what get shared, read, hyped up, and shared again. In this case, it could easily be boiled down to "Look! Testosterone is toxic! Science!".
Which leads me down the rabbit hole of motives. Why write about this specific topic at all in the New York Times? Why edit the piece to have the title crafted as such? Are they just going for clicks, or is there a PR campaign afoot? Or am I paranoid?