Printable View
Hum.....guess the liberals won’t do the same fir the Jewish culture.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Georgia’s Dem Sen. Candidates Ossoff and Warnock Campaign with Democrat Congressman Who Called Jews ‘Termites’
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...jews-termites/
Excellent points!Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDawg
Thoughts?
Published 1 hour ago
Essential workers should get coronavirus vaccine before the elderly, experts tell NYT
Elderly are more White and can more easily keep social distances, essential workers are more diverse
As the debate rages on about who should be next in line to receive the coronavirus vaccine, some experts say that essential workers should be prioritized over the elderly.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/exp...eyre-too-white
What do you think?Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
right plan; wrong reason...Quote:
Originally Posted by turbodawg
The FoxNews post is a bit misleading. Ethics, including social justice, are and should be part of the discussion. Reading the article you wouldn’t understand that this is merely a consideration rather than some determinative factor.
All this time (since the vaccines were announced) I thought common sense and good ole' logic were the determining factors in the order of vaccines. Now we have idiots out there ranting about social justice being a determining factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
BTW, social justice, which is really a form of racism, has nothing to do with ethics.
Social justice is not THE determining factor, although I think that is what FoxNews was misleading you to believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
But what rules of logic would dictate who gets the vaccine first? Giving it to front line health care workers first is probably the most universally pragmatic choice. After that it gets a bit less clear, but given the horrible impact the disease has in long term care facilities, that is a logical first choice too. Those two are the group 1a. The foxnews article is about who is next? The next round requires value judgments that are much less universal, so you really do need to make sure that you are considering every aspect. Logic would dictate that.
From day one, it was...Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Front line workers then the elderly and this was based on logic. It's that simple.
Now you people feel the need to jump in and say, "well there are more black front line workers (CNAs) so they deserve the vaccine over the elderly.
The idiots are afraid the elderly might get the nod over the CNAs that are paid to take care of them in the facilities when that was NEVER even being discussed.
From a personal standpoint, I want the CNAs and other front line workers getting the vaccine first since they are the ones bringing the china virus into the facilities. Sorry that my personal feelings line up with logic.
No one is saying front line workers shouldn’t get it first. Foxnews was trying to mislead you.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
The main reason that front line workers get it first isn’t because they transmit it. We don’t have data that proves the vaccine stops you from spreading, although we believe that to be the case. The reason that we give it to front line health care workers first is that when they get sick the system loses capacity which causes greater problems.
FOX news is reporting the news. Unlike your guys at CNN they aren't giving opinions on the obvious racism injection of "social justice".Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I don’t even get my news from CNN, and I have known for months that they were considering all these factors in developing the recommendations for prioritization of groups.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
FoxNews just knows how to trigger you guys. It helps them sell ads.
CNN and the rest of the alphabets all report the exact same things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
"THEY" were considering "THESE" factors?
They = social justice warriors (idiots)
These = racial
I don’t follow news for entertainment. I really try to focus my news consumption to action-oriented news. For entertainment, I have much better options.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
“They” = ACIP, the CDC committee that was making the recommendations on priority groupings
“These” factors =
Goals for vaccination if supply is limited
ACIP set the following goals for recommending which groups should receive COVID-19 vaccines if supply is limited:
Decrease death and serious disease as much as possible
Preserve functioning of society
Reduce the extra burden the disease is having on people already facing disparities
Increase the chance for everyone to enjoy health and well-being
Ethical Considerations
ACIP identified four ethical principles to guide their decision-making process if supply is limited:
Maximize benefits and minimize harms — Respect and care for people using the best available data to promote public health and minimize death and severe illness.
Mitigate health inequities — Reduce health disparities in the burden of COVID-19 disease and death, and make sure everyone has the opportunity to be as healthy as possible.
Promote justice — Treat affected groups, populations, and communities fairly. Remove unfair, unjust, and avoidable barriers to COVID-19 vaccination.
Promote transparency — Make a decision that is clear, understandable, and open for review. Allow and seek public participation in the creation and review of the decision processes.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...s-process.html