Messaging between the Houses

[Homesteaded]

Originally Posted by Gravydoo II [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Its not based on race... The only people saying its based on race are the people saying "I declined the vaccine for a long time and now I cant get one!"

The CDC policy says:
CDC Is Committed to Vaccine Equity for Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups
CDC is paving the way in vaccine equity efforts with national, state, tribal, territorial, local, and community partners to ensure that Black or African American people and Hispanic or Latino people have fair and just access to COVID-19 vaccination. To support vaccine equity, CDC continues to communicate with and listen to all communities affected by COVID-19. CDC is working to build trust, increase collaboration, and create tools and resources to respond to the concerns and feedback from all communities affected by COVID-19, especially those disproportionately impacted. These activities, along with messages supported by science, can help to increase COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and make it easier to get vaccinated.

Meaning that the previous distribution was not fair. It has not been distributed evenly. Now, they are saying they are committed to making sure that poor POC get it, thats STEALING from white people. Look how fucking entitled you are.. Its disgusting.

You guys didnt want the vaccine and now you're crying because the CDC wants to be sure everyone can get it. Oh my god that means they are stealing from whites!!

You're always the victims. We get it. I guess this is one way to trick you idiots into getting vaccinated. "If you dont take it the black and brown people will get it!" LOLOL

It's the monoclonal antibodies that are being prioritized by race. Spin again you wigger.

[Gravydoo II]

Yeah please name all the people you know who havent been able to get the vaccine because they were "too white". Just like tucker said.. hilarious.

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by Gravydoo II [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yeah please name all the people you know who havent been able to get the vaccine because they were "too white". Just like tucker said.. hilarious.

The equity meme shows them getting an extra box. I want more box too. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[unsunghero]

Prioritizing treatments is just effed up in general, because in a sense when dealing with people’s lives you are saying this life has more value than the other. But with limited treatment quantities it has to be done I guess

It’s also a thing for the “death councils” insurances/hospitals have to decide who gets transplants I believe

[Jibartik]

[Ooloo]

It's not being dispensed based on race! Except where it is.

Hint: I'm talking about the places it is. Like in NYC, for example. And the biden admin openly stating that it intended to ration monoclonal antibodies based on "equity", which is code for "white people last". Which is retarded, racist, ideological policy. Not sensible policy.

[Ooloo]

Here I'll make my point extremely easy to understand:

Distributing medical treatment based on anything other than the specific person in question and their specific medical needs is bound to be terrible policy.

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Here I'll make my point extremely easy to understand:

Distributing medical treatment based on anything other than the specific person in question and their specific medical needs is bound to be terrible policy.

That's why I don't like ivermectin. It's an anti-parasite not an anti-viral.

Poorer countries are 'seeming' to have success with it because they can't even afford to test and don't have have mortality boards, so their numbers are lower.

It's like that British helmet thing wot Lune talked about a bit ago.

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by Reiwa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's why I don't like ivermectin. It's an anti-parasite not an anti-viral.

Poorer countries are 'seeming' to have success with it because they can't even afford to test and don't have have mortality boards, so their numbers are lower.

It's like that British helmet thing wot Lune talked about a bit ago.

Ivermectin's efficacy is really kind of irrelevant, because for one thing it's really extremely safe for humans, at normal human doses. Yes it's primary effect is anti-parasitic, but it has also shown antiviral properties under certain conditions for certain people. So why oppose it? Why ridicule and chastise people who want to explore it's possible applications? And when people say "horse paste" they're just talking about a formulation for horses that is way higher than a human dose, because horses weigh more than humans. We already give tons and tons of different drugs to both humans and animals. I'm sure there's something on the market called like "Equiprin" or something which is just a huge dose of aspirin for horses. And yet when people take aspirin for a headache we don't say they're taking "horse medicine".

So if there's any evidence at all that it's effective as a theraputic, and essentially zero evidence that it's dangerous at theraputic levels, why oppose it at all?

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ivermectin's efficacy is really kind of irrelevant, because for one thing it's really extremely safe for humans, at normal human doses. Yes it's primary effect is anti-parasitic, but it has also shown antiviral properties under certain conditions for certain people. So why oppose it? Why ridicule and chastise people who want to explore it's possible applications? And when people say "horse paste" they're just talking about a formulation for horses that is way higher than a human dose, because horses weigh more than humans. We already give tons and tons of different drugs to both humans and animals.

So if there's any evidence at all that it's effective as a theraputic, and essentially zero evidence that it's dangerous at theraputic levels, why oppose it at all?

Why aren't you demanding years of peer-reviewed study for it for covid like you are the mRNA technology invented in 2003? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]