Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by AlanMexicali

  1. It was until what's his name had to butt in. 😊
  2. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/what-is-the-strategic-petroleum-reserve?cmpid=int_org=ngp::int_mc=website::int_src=ngp::int_cmp=amp::int_add=amp_readtherest What is the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? Prompted by a crippling oil embargo in the 1970s, the U.S. created the world’s largest oil reserve. But in a world shifting to renewables to combat climate change, its future is uncertain. BYAMY MCKEEVER PUBLISHED MARCH 16, 2022 7 MIN READ In late November 1973, the world was just beginning to feel the fallout from the Yom Kippur War, a conflict between Israel and its neighbors Egypt and Syria. To punish the United States and other western nations for supporting Israel during the war, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) cut off oil supplies—tripling the average price of imported crude oil. By November 25, the crisis had grown so dire that then-President Richard Nixon addressed the nation, asking citizens to lower their thermostats, refrain from driving on Sundays, and go easy on their Christmas light displays. In the years that followed, the U.S. pursued a policy of energy independence, to protect it from such crises in the future. One of the new policy’s initiatives was the creation of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), a stockpile of crude oil that the country could tap during emergencies. With a present-day capacity of more than 727 million barrels of oil, the reserve allows the country to respond to shortages—and attempt to prevent them. Most recently, the U.S. said it would release 30 million barrels to energy companies after Russia, one of the world’s top oil producers, once again invaded Ukraine in late February 2022. Coordinated with other world powers, the release was intended to stabilize volatile oil markets and ultimately reduce gas prices that were skyrocketing amid fears of a shortfall. But many environmental advocates argue that relying on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to manage shortages is only a stopgap measure. In light of the looming climate crisis, they argue, the U.S. should end its dependence on fossil fuels and pivot to green energy sources instead. How does the Strategic Petroleum Reserve work? The Strategic Petroleum Reserve was originally created for emergencies—to be used in the face of severe disruptions to the global oil supply. To date, the U.S. has only ordered three emergency releases from the reserve. In 1991, when war broke out in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, the U.S. released 17.2 million barrels of oil. In 2005, when Hurricane Katrina devastated oil production along the Gulf Coast, 20.8 million barrels were released. And in 2011, the U.S. and IEA jointly released 60 million barrels of oil when the civil war in Libya disrupted oil supplies. But global emergencies are not the only time the U.S. taps into its oil reserves. The U.S. also periodically conducts sales to private companies from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to test its readiness or raise revenue. And the country can also use the reserve to help private companies recover from smaller-scale disasters, such as extreme weather or shipping channel closures." I presume you must know of the war between Russia and the Ukraine. It can release oil if it needs to whenever the US federal government deems it necessary ( it appears Biden can use an executive order without US Lawmakers involvement ) according to reliable sources. What are your sources?
  3. https://news.yahoo.com/u-sell-45-million-bbls-203210454.html "U.S. to sell up to 45 million bbls oil from reserve as part of historic release Tue, June 14, 2022, 3:32 PM·1 min read Summary FILE PHOTO: The Bryan Mound Strategic Petroleum Reserve is seen in an aerial photograph over Freeport, Texas WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Energy on Tuesday said it was selling up to 45 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as part of the Biden administration's previously announced, largest-ever release from the stockpile. Deliveries of crude from the SPR sale would take place from Aug. 16 through Sept. 30, the Energy Department said. The Biden administration said in late March it would release a record 1 million barrels of oil per day of oil for six months from the SPR, held in a series hollowed-out salt caverns on the coasts of Louisiana and Texas."
  4. https://momentofinanciero.mx/subsidiar-la-importacion-de-gasolina-cuesta-al-gobierno-7-pesos-por-litro/ Google Translation: "Subsidizing gasoline costs the Mexican federal government 7 pesos per liter The price of importing gasoline from the US increases 121% and the federal government subsidy remains at 7 pesos per liter Posted by Diana Duran June 15, 2022 ECONOMY AND FINANCE Due to skyrocketing prices for gasoline in the US, the main supplier of that fuel to Mexico, the federal government subsidy is 7 pesos per liter. And it is that between January and the first fortnight of June 2022 the import price of our neighbor increased 121.4%"
  5. Wrong again. A person with a "big mouth" is not yelling. "big·mouth /ˈbiɡ ˌmouTH/ noun INFORMAL an indiscreet or boastful person. "I think Burke is a big mouth and a blowhard" a tendency to speak boastfully or indiscreetly. "my big mouth always gets me in trouble" "
  6. Wrong again. Pfizer had nothing to do with it. They have nothing to hide. They did an excellent job and should be congratulated. "shoes" ?
  7. Is it ever OK to call someone a Nazi? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/10618638.amp " "No-one can justify calling someone a Nazi simply because their views differ on matters of healthcare policy," he says. "When you get these glib comparisons you lose perspective on what made the Nazis and the Holocaust particularly terrible." Whether or not such comparisons have become more unpalatable, one expert debater says deploying the N word is just lazy arguing. "Any time you use an extremist term or insult, you lose both the moral high ground and the debate almost immediately," says Jason Vit of the English Speaking Union, which promotes exchange of ideas through debate. "Often people use the term because they think it will have a big impact but it's wasted because people focus on the word and not what's being said." Mr Vit says it is fine to describe an argument as ignorant, short-sighted or pointless - but never a person. "If you call someone 'ignorant' it means you're no longer listening to what they're saying because you've made a value judgement about them." And, he adds, it is always better to use words that get across the argument without carrying any "baggage". " Aren't you one to talk about using insults. Worst poster on the site!
  8. https://denvergazette.com/news/judge-scraps-75-year-fda-timeline-to-release-pfizer-vaccine-safety-data-giving-agency-eight/article_f007b8b4-ad66-59b4-a270-4709bc3e4814.html "Judge scraps 75-year FDA timeline to release Pfizer vaccine safety data, giving agency eight months Kaelan Deese, Washington Examiner Jan 7, 2022 The Food and Drug Administration won't have 75 years to release thousands of pages of documents it relied on to license its COVID-19 vaccine. Instead, the federal agency will have just over eight months to do so, per a federal judge's ruling. The timeline ordered Thursday by U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman radically shortens the timeline under which the FDA has to produce troves of documents. The order stems from a Freedom of Information Act document lawsuit by a coalition of doctors and scientists with the nonprofit Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency. The group seeks an estimated 450,000 pages of material about the vaccine-creation process during the COVID-19 pandemic, which came into full force in the United States in March 2020. Rather than producing 500 pages a month, the FDA's proposed timeline, Pittman ordered the agency to turn over 55,000 a month. That means all the Pfizer vaccine data should be public by the end of September rather than the year 2097, the deadline that the FDA wanted." Can you ever quote something about any aspect of the Covid-19 situation that is actually true?
  9. Your brain only believes the most right wing nonsense out there and you maliciously regurgitate it here. You could become unscrambled if you become more educated. Maybe one day you might become undelusional.
  10. https://fullfact.org/health/nhs-data-covid-vaccine-side-effects/US Military personal are not having adverse affects from being vaccinated. More right wing fake news as usual. Menu Donate HEALTH / CORONAVIRUS "False US military health data misrepresented as NHS figures 8 FEBRUARY 2022 WHAT WAS CLAIMED Incidences of heart attacks, Bell’s palsy, congenital malformations, female infertility, pulmonary embolisms, neurological abnormalities and cancers have increased dramatically, according to NHS data. OUR VERDICT The figures published in the social media post are based on false US military data, not NHS data. A post on Instagram claims that incidences of health conditions such as female infertility, neurological abnormalities and cancers have dramatically increased, citing figures claimed to have come from the NHS. It’s not clear what time period the post covers, but the inclusion of conditions such as Bell's palsy and myocardial infarction (a heart attack) mirrors other posts we’ve fact checked before making claims about links between these conditions and the Covid-19 vaccine roll out. There’s no evidence that any of the figures stated in the post are accurate, and we could find no trace of the statistics being published by the NHS. A search for these statistics online show that they have also been shared on Twitter, with links to an article on an American website headlined: “Whistleblowers share DOD [Department of Defense] medical data that blows vaccine safety debate wide open”. This article, which claims that US military personnel have seen a huge rise in a number of health conditions and explicitly ties these to Covid-19 vaccines, contains the exact figures listed in the Instagram post. It’s extremely likely that this article, or similar reporting, is in fact the data source in question—not the NHS. It has since been reported by fact checkers PolitiFact that these figures, extracted from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), were a result of a glitch in the database. The data had been cited by an Ohio lawyer, representing three “whistleblowers” during a panel discussion on Covid-19 vaccines on 24 January. Peter Graves, spokesperson for the Defense Health Agency’s Armed Forces Surveillance Division, told PolitiFact that "in response to concerns mentioned in news reports" the division reviewed data in the DMED "and found that the data was incorrect for the years 2016-2020." The error in the data was the result of the correct 2021 figures on the incidence of health conditions being compared to an inaccurate five-year average, which “represented only a small fraction of actual medical diagnoses” and so gave the false impression of a significant increase in 2021. Mr Graves told Politifact that the DMED system had been taken offline to “identify and correct the root-cause of the data corruption." "
  11. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/12/scicheck-article-makes-unfounded-claims-linking-athletes-injuries-deaths-to-vaccines/ Athletes are not having adverse affects from being vaccinated. Simply right wing fake news made up lies, as usual. "Article Makes Unfounded Claims Linking Athletes’ Injuries, Deaths to Vaccines By Eugene Kiely, Saranac Hale Spencer, Brea Jones and Tess Hancock Posted on December 17, 2021 THIS ARTICLE IS AVAILABLE IN BOTH ENGLISH AND ESPAÑOL English Español SciCheck Digest Many U.S. athletes have been vaccinated against COVID-19 without any adverse effects. But a conservative outlet has cited a list of supposedly vaccine-injured athletes to claim “there may be something wrong with the vaccine.” There’s no proof that the listed athletes — most of them are actually retired — were harmed by the vaccines. How do we know vaccines are safe? What side effects should you expect if you get a COVID-19 vaccine? Full Story Professional athletes in some of America’s most popular leagues are, for the most part, vaccinated against COVID-19: 94.4% of players in the NFL are vaccinated, about 95% in the NBA, and more than 99% in the NHL. Like the more than 200 million Americans who have been fully vaccinated, most athletes didn’t report serious side effects. But a bogus claim has been circulating on social media that a rash of athletes have either been injured or died from the vaccines. Reuters wrote about a version of this claim that centered on soccer players. We’ll focus on a claim from the conservative outlet Gateway Pundit, which featured a list of athletes, compiled by goodsciencing.com, who supposedly suffered vaccine-related injuries or death. Good Sciencing, a website that is run anonymously, claims to track instances of “young athletes who had major medical issues in 2021 after receiving one or more COVID vaccines.” According to the Gateway Pundit, the list “shows that there may be something wrong with the vaccine if the world’s greatest athletes suffer or die after taking the vaccines.” More than 300 athletes — including students, professionals, amateurs and retirees — from around the world were included. We reviewed publicly available information for each of the 19 professional athletes who either came from or played in the U.S. We found no proof of a causal relationship in any of the cases between the vaccines and the injuries or deaths. We also found: Despite the description of them as “athletes,” 13 of the 19 were retired from their sport. Although Good Sciencing claims COVID-19 vaccines were to blame for the deaths or injuries, the website provides no evidence in most cases — 16 of the 19 — that the athletes and former athletes were even vaccinated. While in most cases the cause of death or injury remains unknown, we found several cases in which the men or their families point to other causes, such as medical histories. In one case, a former hockey player had been struggling with a drug addiction and died of an overdose, not from a vaccine. There were two cases in which athletes claimed that they had suffered an adverse reaction to a COVID-19 vaccine, but in one of those cases the athlete retracted his claim."
  12. No one issues orders to us obviously; we chose what we believe is right and humanitarian. You on the other hand try very hard to decieve us with lies and when they are debunked you start a long series of name calling us which all your posts today include and most of your previous posts, except a few, which is childish and us seeing you acting very goofy. Believe all the critical comments describing your behavior here and know absolutely for sure they all are accurate and correct.
  13. Easy. Because it is/was real. You don't believe it because reality escapes you. You believe in fantasies called conspiracy theories and right wing propaganda. Your reality is irrational and goofy which you have shown us clearly over and over and over again.
  14. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-25/donald-trump-inject-disinfectant-coronavirus-sarcastic-covid-19/12184508 All your right wing leaders are mostly goofy BSers including yourself. Your rant, in reality, is describing your ilk, not mine. You really haven't the slightest clue to what is happening/happened in regards to the Worldwide Covid-19 pandemic - do you? Too bad you went down the rabbit hole. Maybe you will wake up one day. https://rollcall.com/2022/03/30/republicans-pandemic-deaths-pollsters/ HEARD ON THE HILL "More Republicans have died of COVID-19. Does that mean the polls are off? ‘It’s a fair question,’ pollsters say A man dressed as Uncle Sam with a syringe through his head marches with anti-vaccine mandate protesters in Washington on Jan. 23. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call file photo) By Jim Saksa Posted March 30, 2022 at 5:00am Doctors and demographers recently noticed another tragic example of how polarization shapes America: The pandemic has killed more people in the nation’s Republican enclaves than its Democratic strongholds. They explain the gap by pointing to Republican resistance to vaccines and the GOP’s more cavalier approach to combating the virus in general. Those findings suggest many more Republicans — tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands — have died of COVID-19 than Democrats..." https://www.npr.org/2022/05/19/1098543849/pro-trump-counties-continue-to-suffer-far-higher-covid-death-tolls DONATE Untangling Disinformation "Pro-Trump counties continue to suffer far higher COVID death tolls May 19, 20225:00 AM ET DANIEL WOOD Twitter GEOFF BRUMFIEL FacebookTwitterInstagram People who identify with the political right are less likely to be vaccinated and more likely to believe misinformation about vaccines. Ted S. Warren/AP Even with widely available vaccines and newly effective treatments, residents of counties that went heavily for Donald Trump in the last presidential election are more than twice as likely to die from COVID-19 than those that live in areas that went for President Biden. That's according to a newly-updated analysis from NPR, examining how partisanship and misinformation are shaping the pandemic. NPR examined COVID deaths per 100,000 people in roughly 3,000 counties across the U.S. from May 2021, the point at which most Americans could find a vaccine if they wanted one. Those living in counties that voted 60% or higher for Trump in November 2020 had 2.26 times the death rate of those that went by the same margin for Biden. Counties with a higher share of Trump votes had even higher mortality rates. The scale of the preventable loss of life is staggering. According to a recent analysis by Brown University, nearly 320,000 lives nationwide could have been saved if more people had chosen to get vaccinated. The Brown analysis also shows a partisan split in how those preventable deaths are distributed. States that went most heavily for Trump – including Wyoming and West Virginia – have among the highest rates of preventable deaths, while states that voted heavily for Biden – such as Massachusetts and Vermont – had among the lowest. That likely was mostly down to the Omicron variant, according to William Hanage, an epidemiologist at Harvard University. Hanage says that Omicron is much more effective at evading masks and other measures to prevent infection. "Before Omicron, actions that people were taking, like masks in schools, would have a really significant impact," he says. "After Omicron they have far less."
  15. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7 Download PDF Article Open Access Published: 24 September 2020 "Efficacy of masks and face coverings in controlling outward aerosol particle emission from expiratory activities Sima Asadi, Christopher D. Cappa, … William D. Ristenpart Show authors Scientific Reports volume 10, Article number: 15665 (2020) Cite this article 588k Accesses 146 Citations 3397 Altmetric Metricsdetails Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a surge in demand for facemasks to protect against disease transmission. In response to shortages, many public health authorities have recommended homemade masks as acceptable alternatives to surgical masks and N95 respirators. Although mask wearing is intended, in part, to protect others from exhaled, virus-containing particles, few studies have examined particle emission by mask-wearers into the surrounding air. Here, we measured outward emissions of micron-scale aerosol particles by healthy humans performing various expiratory activities while wearing different types of medical-grade or homemade masks. Both surgical masks and unvented KN95 respirators, even without fit-testing, reduce the outward particle emission rates by 90% and 74% on average during speaking and coughing, respectively, compared to wearing no mask, corroborating their effectiveness at reducing outward emission. These masks similarly decreased the outward particle emission of a coughing superemitter, who for unclear reasons emitted up to two orders of magnitude more expiratory particles via coughing than average. In contrast, shedding of non-expiratory micron-scale particulates from friable cellulosic fibers in homemade cotton-fabric masks confounded explicit determination of their efficacy at reducing expiratory particle emission. Audio analysis of the speech and coughing intensity confirmed that people speak more loudly, but do not cough more loudly, when wearing a mask. Further work is needed to establish the efficacy of cloth masks at blocking expiratory particles for speech and coughing at varied intensity and to assess whether virus-contaminated fabrics can generate aerosolized fomites, but the results strongly corroborate the efficacy of medical-grade masks and highlight the importance of regular washing of homemade masks." https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7 I understand scientific jargon is hard for you and some others. This scientific study is not a conspiracy theory type of study that you only link to. I found it interesting as I always figured aerosals - spit, snot, mucus, and spittle - infected with Covid-19 micro virus particles would be mostly absorbed in my mask and if any virus particles escaped not trapped in my bodily fluids but dry, so to speak, they would float a short distance in no wind, fall to the ground or on my shirt, pants or shoes and not float 1 1/2 meters into someone's air hole because they were not mixed in any aerosal I expelled. Social distancing, masking up and antibacterial gel and retail and other commercial establements temperature scanning and not allowing anti-maskers to enter did a good job protecting vunerable people from exposure. Those who did were good citizens [compassionate human beings]. Those who didn't were not. Those that spew/spewed disinformation about all aspects of this 2 1/2 year Covid-19 Worldwide pandemic are malicious liars trying to potentially harm others. Shame on them! IMO
  16. https://wap.business-standard.com/article/health/omicron-infection-turbo-charges-vaccinated-people-s-covid-immunity-study-122051500638_1.html E- "Omicron infection turbo-charges vaccinated people's Covid immunity: Study Findings match up evidence for an immune boost from exposure to different virus variants via vaccination and infection. Topics Coronavirus | Coronavirus Tests | Coronavirus Vaccine Naomi Kresge | Bloomberg | | Last Updated at May 15 2022 18:14 IST People who are vaccinated and then get infected with omicron may be primed to overcome a broad range of coronavirus variants, early research suggests. A pair of studies showed that infection produced even better immune responses than a booster shot in vaccinated patients. Teams from Covid-19 vaccine maker BioNTech SE and the University of Washington posted the results on preprint server bioRxiv in recent weeks. The findings offer a reassuring sign that the millions of vaccinated people who’ve caught omicron probably won’t become seriously ill from another variant soon -- even though the research needs to be confirmed, especially by real-world evidence. “We should think about breakthrough infections as essentially equivalent to another dose of vaccine,” said John Wherry, a professor and director of the Institute for Immunology at the University of Pennsylvania who wasn’t involved in the research but reviewed the BioNTech study. That could mean that if someone had Covid recently, they could wait before getting another booster shot, according to Wherry. Alexandra Walls, a principal scientist at the University of Washington who authored one of the studies, cautioned that people shouldn’t seek out infections in response to the findings. The data comes as omicron continue to fuel outbreaks around the world, most notably in China, where residents of Shanghai have endured almost six weeks of lockdown. Waves of new variants are coming more quickly in part because omicron is so transmissible, giving it ample opportunity to spread and mutate as countries drop restrictions, said Sam Fazeli, an analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence. Meanwhile, regulators are weighing whether Covid vaccines should be updated to target omicron. BioNTech’s team argued that the data indicate that offering people an omicron-adapted booster shot may be more beneficial than multiple ones with the original vaccines. The Washington research, conducted together with Vir Biotechnology Inc., looked at blood samples from people who had been infected, then had two or three doses of vaccine, as well as those who’d caught the delta and omicron variants after two or three doses; others still had been vaccinated and boosted but never caught Covid. A final group had only been infected with omicron and never vaccinated. One part of the study zeroed in on antibodies, the protective proteins tailored to recognize and neutralize invaders. It showed vaccinated people who’d caught omicron had antibodies that outperformed the others. They were even capable of recognizing and attacking the very different delta variant. “That indicates that we are at the point where we may want to consider having a different vaccine to boost people,” said David Veesler, an assistant professor at the University of Washington, who led the research. The scientists were also able to identify antibodies in the nasal mucous of these patients, which could help them neutralize the virus as soon as it enters the body."
  17. Some reliable facts today instead of conspiracy theories disinformation for a change. YALE MEDICINE NEWS SITE [Originally published: Feb. 24, 2021; updated: June 8, 2022] https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/covid-19-vaccine-comparison "As the COVID-19 pandemic enters its third year, the Omicron variant and its subvariant BA.2 have been driving an uptick in cases in the United States primarily among people who are unvaccinated, and it is even causing infections in some vaccinated people. The good news is that COVID-19 vaccines are still expected to be effective at preventing severe disease, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19. And in the U.S., most people ages 5 and older should be vaccinated and boosted—and some groups should receive a second booster, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). As the SARS-CoV-2 virus mutates and new variants emerge, it’s important to keep up with how well the vaccines are performing, but it’s also a daunting task, given the flood of information (and misinformation) coming at us from so many directions. We mapped out a comparison of the most prominent COVID-19 vaccines. The three vaccines in use in the U.S. Pfizer-BioNTech How well it works against variants: Scientists are still learning about how effective the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is against Omicron, which is the predominant variant in the U.S. Early this year, the CDC published data that showed the mRNA booster shots provide significant protection against hospitalization from Omicron, and can reduce the risk of going to the emergency room or urgent care clinic. Additional data from the CDC in February suggested that mRNA booster effectiveness against hospitalization and visits to emergency room or urgent care centers wanes after about four months. Recent data from the CDC and a study (not yet peer-reviewed) from the New York State Health Department showed that protection from coronavirus infection in children 5- to 11-years old waned over time, although the vaccine continued to offer protection against hospitalization and death, even during the Omicron surge. How it works: It uses mRNA technology, which is a new type of vaccine. It works by sending instructions to host cells in the body for making copies of a spike protein (like the spikes you see sticking out of the coronavirus in pictures). But our cells recognize that this protein doesn’t belong, and the immune system reacts by activating immune cells and producing antibodies. This will prompt the body to recognize and attack the real SARS CoV-2 spike protein if you become exposed to the actual virus. Moderna How well it works on virus variants: Scientists are still learning about how effective the Moderna vaccine is against Omicron. Early this year, the CDC has published data that showed the mRNA booster shots provided significant protection against hospitalization from Omicron, and can reduce the risk of going to the emergency room or urgent care clinic. Additional data from the CDC in February suggested that mRNA booster effectiveness against hospitalization and visits to emergency room or urgent care centers wanes after about four months. Johnson & Johnson How well it works on virus variants: At the end of 2021, J&J announced that preliminary study results from South Africa showed a J&J booster to be 85% effective against hospitalization at a time when Omicron was the dominant variant in that country. More data on the vaccine’s effectiveness against Omicron is forthcoming. How it works: This is a carrier vaccine, which uses a different approach than the mRNA vaccines to instruct human cells to make the SARS CoV-2 spike protein. Scientists engineer a harmless adenovirus (a common virus that, when not inactivated, can cause colds, bronchitis, and other illnesses) as a shell to carry genetic code on the spike proteins to the cells (similar to a Trojan Horse). The shell and the code can’t make you sick, but once the code is inside the cells, the cells produce a spike protein to train the body’s immune system, which creates antibodies and memory cells to protect against an actual SARS-CoV-2 infection. Other vaccines: Oxford-AstraZeneca This Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, which is currently being distributed in the United Kingdom and other countries (Mexico), is distinguished from some of its competitors by its lower cost—it’s cheaper to make per dose, and while some of the other vaccines must be stored frozen, this one can be stored in normal refrigeration for at least six months, making it easier to distribute. Oxford-AstraZeneca is currently studying the efficacy of a booster shoot. Status: Not available in the U.S., authorized for emergency use in other countries, including in the European Union (under the name Vaxzevria) and the United Kingdom. How well it works on virus variants: Scientists are still learning about how effective the vaccine is against the Omicron variant. Researchers in Israel are testing a fourth dose of this vaccine against Omicron. How it works: Similar to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, this is a carrier vaccine. Scientists engineer a harmless adenovirus as a shell to carry genetic code on the spike proteins to the cells. Once the code is inside the cells, the cells produce a spike protein to train the body’s immune system, which creates antibodies and memory cells to protect against an actual SARS-CoV-2 infection. Note: None of the COVID-19 vaccines change—or interact with—a recipient’s DNA. " Visit Yale Medicine's Vaccine Content Center for more stories on COVID-19 vaccines
  18. Maybe you should not have opted for early retirement and kept working if you were doing so well then? This might have kept you mentally heathier. Now I presume it is too late. "Some studies have linked retirement to poorer health and a decline in cognitive functioning — at times resulting in as much as double the rate of cognitive aging. This leaves people at a greater risk of developing various types of dementia, such as Alzheimer's disease." https://ideas.ted.com › think-retirem... Think retirement is smooth sailing? A look at its potential effects on thebrain.
  19. You critiqued the article. Shows you thought is was serious. "The definition of simple-minded is someone who is unsophisticated, foolish or mentally impaired. An example of someone who would be described as simple-minded is a person who cannot understand or grasp most concepts and who is lacking in insight. Lacking subtlety or sophistication." https://www.yourdictionary.com › si... Best 10 Definitions of Simple-minded - YourDictionary
  20. Ihttps://tigerpapers.net/2012/05/31/the-techniques-of-propaganda/ The Techniques of Propaganda "Ad hominem A Latin phrase that has come to mean attacking one’s opponent, as opposed to attacking their arguments. Ad nauseam This argument approach uses tireless repetition of an idea. An idea, especially a simple slogan, that is repeated enough times, may begin to be taken as the truth. This approach works best when media sources are limited or controlled by the propagator. Appeal to fear Appeals to fear and seeks to build support by instilling anxieties and panic in the general population, for example, Joseph Goebbels exploited Theodore Kaufman’s Germany Must Perish! to claim that the Allies sought the extermination of the German people. Appeal to prejudice Using loaded or emotive terms to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition. Used in biased or misleading ways. Big Lie The repeated articulation of a complex of events that justify subsequent action. The descriptions of these events have elements of truth, and the “big lie” generalizations merge and eventually supplant the public’s accurate perception of the underlying events. After World War I the German Stab in the Back explanation of the cause of their defeat became a justification for Nazi re-militarization and revanchist aggression.. Fear, uncertainty and doubt An attempt to influence public perception by disseminating negative and dubious/false information designed to undermine the credibility of their beliefs. Flag-waving An attempt to justify an action on the grounds that doing so will make one more patriotic, or in some way benefit a country, group or idea the targeted audience supports. Labelling A euphemism is used when the propagandist attempts to increase the perceived quality, credibility, or credence of a particular ideal. A Dysphemism is used when the intent of the propagandist is to discredit, diminish the perceived quality, or hurt the perceived righteousness of the Mark. By creating a “label” or “category” or “faction” of a population, it is much easier to make an example of these larger bodies, because they can uplift or defame the Mark without actually incurring legal-defamation. Example: “Liberal” is a dysphemism intended to diminish the perceived credibility of a particular Mark. By taking a displeasing argument presented by a Mark, the propagandist can quote that person, and then attack “liberals” in an attempt to both (1) create a political battle-ax of unaccountable aggression and (2) diminish the quality of the Mark. If the propagandist uses the label on too-many perceivably credible individuals, muddying up the word can be done by broadcasting bad-examples of “liberals” into the media. Labeling can be thought of as a sub-set of Guilt by association, another logical fallacy. Lying and deception Lying and deception can be the basis of many propaganda techniques including Ad Homimen arguments, Big-Lie, Defamation, Door-in-the-Face, Half-truth, Name-calling or any other technique that is based on dishonesty or deception. For example, many politicians have been found to frequently stretch or break the truth. Name-calling Propagandists use the name-calling technique to start fears and arouse prejudices in their hearers in the intent that the bad names will cause hearers to construct a negative opinion about a group or set of beliefs or ideas that the propagandist wants hearers to denounce. The method is intended to provoke conclusions about a matter apart from impartial examinations of facts. Name-calling is thus a substitute for rational, fact-based arguments against the an idea or belief on its own merits. Oversimplification Favorable generalities are used to provide simple answers to complex social, political, economic, or military problems. Scapegoating Assigning blame to an individual or group, thus alleviating feelings of guilt from responsible parties and/or distracting attention from the need to fix the problem for which blame is being assigned. Stereotyping This technique attempts to arouse prejudices in an audience by labeling the object of the propaganda campaign as something the target audience fears, hates, loathes, or finds undesirable. For instance, reporting on a foreign country or social group may focus on the stereotypical traits that the reader expects, even though they are far from being representative of the whole country or group; such reporting often focuses on the anecdotal. In graphic hpropaganda, including war posters, this might include portraying enemies with stereotyped racial features." You keep repeating this rant of your's (possibly 10Xs now) as if nobody knows that it is your own version of propaganda and that all propagandists use the same well know techniques to con their audiences into believing they are not malicious liars but their opponents are trash or even worse Nazis. Get real. You are fooling no one. You are so far out of your element here as you have always been trying unsuccessfully to do battle with educated baby boomers who know your agenda so name calling is all you have left to make yourself feel powerful and important. News flash: You are not. You are a simple minded conspiracy theorist.
  21. Why you don't know hardly anyone: You've managed to alienate the vast majority of posters here by posting 30 to 40 bogus links and BSing beyond any reasonable level for an anti-vaxxer and anti-masker and insulting many of them and only a few even like you, the rest can't stand you so in real life possibly only a few might like you and the rest can't stand you.
  • Create New...