🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@a7 Can't have daddy issues if you never even met him. Can't be mad at what you never had. It isnt really the same as having an absent father whom shows up every once in a while but otherwise isnt there. I literally never saw him in person a single time in my life.

Little known fact about me:

I grew up an only child. Only met my siblings when i was an adult, many I still havent met in person and only talk to. There are 7 total but we only found 3 so far including myself. We arent orphans or anything we just had a father who couldnt keep it in his pants, or keep a wife for very long. He was in the Military and then later the CIA, so he was a tough man for most of the women to keep in terms of both his personal issues as well as the time he spent away from home.

@namark Only time signed promotion should occur is when one type is signed and the other unsigned, therefore the result promotes to signed to encapsulate the signed result. Its the same reason to avoid overflow.

Do you hsome other example in mind that is different than this?

@funny
Stolen from @raucao

#Physics #QuantumMechanics #QM #Science

@hansw yea but are their bosses ok with them taking the time to work from home, and does it cut into their vacation time?

In the USA it depends on the job and the type of worker you are.

@hansw yea the dutch realllllly dont care much about spreading their cold... my room mate though he had the 'vid when it was new cause he had a particularly bad cold. He knew I was high risk due to my asthma, and he was still just walking around the house coughing on shit, standing a few feet away from me.. like it wasnt even a thought for him even after I pointed it out.

Americans do it too though, unless its a really bad cold most americans just go about their day as normal, including work.

@design_RG @arteteco @khird @Sphinx

I would like to nominate khird to moderator position to the server. Before I do id like to ask the moderators if they have any objections. I'd also like to confirm among the group he would be willing to take the position (I mentioned to him beforE).

@hansw If someone has the flu they should be rejected from any public setting too to be honest... If you have a cold, the flu, any sort of viral and contagious infection then you should not be allowed in public except for essentials and frankly its quite cruel and wrong that of the person morally to be out in public with the flu or a cold anyway IMO if they can at all help it..

I see people come to events and go about their day normally with a cold all the time and while some people dont have a choice generally i find it quite selfish and rude.

@John_Richmond World was still there after biden was vice president too. also presidents do not have the power to unilaterally nuke a country, there are checks in place for that.

@hansw I think there is a big diffrence between checking if someone is actively infections at the moment vs demanding verification as to whether someone too a medication against their will to be accepted into soceity.

I should point out that I'd argue that while screen to get in is ok I would oppose any recording of the screening data.. it would have to be done without records being taken and the identity of the person remain anonymous to protect their medical information. But yes if it can be shown you are actively shedding a virus I dont mind you being rejected from entry, but Id be opposed to saying "you must consume this drug to enter this building". To me it is clear why these are different things.

@hansw Oh and WRT tot he virus going away... In all liklihood it wont, even with a vaccine. It is hard to say for sure right now, and there is of course a chance what I'm about to say wont be the case. But in my opinion even if the vaccine does not turn out to be dangerous and provides some level of immunity as we have already seen, it is unlikely that it will be able to cause the virus to go away or even to be particularly effective in general. But we wont know for sure until a few years are up.

But based on the pattern of past attempts at vaccines of other viruses in the coronavirus class of viruses, as well as based on what we know of live coronavirus' that are well studied as well as covid-19 specifically, which is less well known, everything suggests a vaccine is likely going to be a mostly futile long term effort and will be pulled from normal use even if it doesnt prevent safety concerns.

The reason being the immune response we see to all coronavirus class viruses and which appears to be the case with covid-19 as well.

You see viruses of different classes provide very different immune responses where one will be immune once recovering for some range of time.

Consider a few different viruses from different virus classifications...

Chickenpox, of the class herpesvirus, behaves like all viruses of that class in that you have an initial outbreakm, of which you have lifetime immunity to having the initial outbreak again, but then will continue to get future outbreaks for life that are less severe or take on a slightly different quality (in this case shingles). Herd immunity here is impossible due to the early onset of disease and the fact that the vaccine is given at a late age

Flu are influenza class. Immunity to this lasts 1 year. The reason for this is not due to a reduced immune response per se but due to viral recombination. Regardless this are effective for ~1year max. Herd immunity is impossible here due to reduce immune period.

Tetanus Are bacterial class infectious agents, they have a 7 year immune period before reinfection is possible, no herd immunity possibe...

So as you can see we know most viruses we cant develop herd immunity and they are with us forever regardless. When we look at coronavirus then what pattern do we see? Well luckily there are a lot of viruses of the class with a lot of research. In short, immunity lasts depending on the severity of infection. Asymptomatic carriers are able to be reinfected in as little as 2 weeks. Severe clinical infections appear to remain immunity on the order of 1 - 2 years at most. In all experimental vaccines we have tried on viruses of this class (that I know of) the immune response was very weak meaning for most normal doses immunity only lasted a few months at best. Moreover upping the dose caused high risk from complications with only minimal improvement on the period in which people remain infected.

So in all likelihood the covid vaccine will fail for the same reason all the other coronavirus vaccines fail.. At any dosage that is safe for the patient the immunity is effective but only for a fairly short period, so short in fact that the vaccine is effectively useless. More importantly herd immunity is entirely impossible.

@hansw I agree with you about medical staff. I think they should be the one group required to disclose if they arent vaccinated and if so patients should have the option not to see them and clinics should have the option not to hire them. Also clinics should be required to disclose if their staff is not vaccinated. Only as a special case though, outside of that setting id strongly oppose that being legal to do (medical history privacy in my eyes is a sacred right).

The thing about people who refuse to get vaccinated for covid and what to do with them... to me their choice is a responsible one and I dont feel we should do anything with them, nor should we have the legal right to try to. In fact I 'd go the opposite side and say that it should be illegal to require a medical history probe (such as asking if someone is vaccinated) in order to get into an event with the only exception being private-only events specifically targeted require immunocompromised people to be there as part of the event, which isnt most events.

So yea I'd say the answer is, nothing, and you should be legally obligated to not be able to do anything about them. The only way you could respond to that happenstance would be:

1) get vaccinated yourself if you can

2) Avoid large group settings if you cant get vaccinated

3) Develop technology that can effectively actively detect infected individuals in real time without the need to take blood or other invasive processes.

4) do screenings (which are limited in effectiveness) at the door to check temperatures or signs of sickness as a way to reduce risk.

Beyond that I feel you just need to accept their legal (should be) and moral right to both their own medical anonymity and the right to bodily autonomy.

@John_Richmond I agree, problem is that is true of Trump too. So unless they decide to pick some 3rd party person they really dont have any alternatives that are any better.

@MutoShack You wont regret it, they make great pets!

@hansw I beleive that is the question i answered.. if you dont feel I answered your question please elaborate how and i will try to.

My simple answer is, no one should have any right to force any other person to take a drug in order to have access to society. The one exception where I could find this acceptable is if the group setting is of a topic or situation that specifically hosts immunocompromised individuals. Like if they required people to have a full set of vaccines in order to get into the acancer ward of a hospital, or to visit a friend with a weak immune system, then by all means I think it is reasonable in those sorts of private settings to have restrictions out of medical necessity.

however if we are talking general group settings, then...

I am opposed to any law or societal norm that requested any medical information about me of any kind or requires that i take some drug regardless of my personal opinion about it

The issue here is two fold

1) I have an absolute right to complete confidentiality of my medical history and decisions

2) I should not be forced to take a drug in order to gain full access to society in general. That violates the principle of bodily autonomy.

@hansw I am not a anti-vaxxer, I have all my vaccines and in general support most vaccines and feel it is stupid not to get a vaccine.

However in this case it is special. We rushed the vaccines through the normal regulatory safety checked, we did this purposefully and this isnt disputed. While normally vaccines are tested in small groups for years and only released after enough data is know to ensure its safety, that is not the case here. They did what safety checks they could in a very reduced time frame and released a medication that normally would not be considered safe or ethical to allow mass consumption.

Vaccines and medications that do go through the proper safety checks are usually safe and for most people it would be stupid not to get them. But in this case it is akin to medical testing en masse and throwing the bulk of the safety out of the window. To assume someone who wont get the vaccine is an anti-vaxxer seems ignorant of the situation to me. The idea taht society would apply society and even legal pressure to force people to take a drug that hasnt went through the proper safety checks is even more alarming and is a pattern that should be pushed back against.

To give you an idea the average time to market from the initial proof-of-concept for a vaccine to release is 10 to 15 years. 5 to 10 years of that is narrowing down the 100s of inert viral candidates, and another 5 to 10 years of clinical trials to ensure safety... we are talking a 6 month safety trial as opposed to the 5 year minimum here....

As such my answer is, no I wont get the vaccine not untilit has been out in the general public for many years and I can be assures there are no long term health effects. While most vaccines are safe that is **only** because they were tested for so long on small populations and long term effects (5 year+) are already known. I will not sacrifice that.

I am not anti-vaxxer, I am anti vaccine without clinical safety trials. Since I feel uit is morally wrong for a society to put social pressure on people to take a potentially unsafe drug in order to function in society I would do everything in my power to ensure such questions by a group are not considered acceptable. I am not sure i would do any of your answers though. I would likely do my best to try to find a way not to answer, or answer in a way that is misleading.. like "Who in their right mind WOULDNT get the vaccine", and then after the even publicly announce the true answer so people know where I stand and why i oppose the criteria in the first place. Though I wouldnt be comfortable with straight up lying if i could at all prevent it, but if push came to shove I might in a group setting, though less likely in a one on one setting.. Not sure, my ethics about honesty on this one are hard to judge.

@hansw@mastodon.social

Not sure I've been in philly lately for work related reasons due to the 'vid

@stux

@hansw@mastodon.social

Well once I get there I will stick around for a while for sure. I'm usually there for 6 months to a year in one go

@stux

@valleyforge I never liked them. I would suck out allt he flavor in like 10 seconds and then be left with flavorless ice :) Only way to make a half decent one is to freeze the flavor into the water, but then its water ice not a snow cone :)