Coronavirus

Once long ago ( for the most part)
That’s long since gone

now you can only get along if you go along with the prevailing orthodoxy
, sign on with the clique you get the idea

outside ideas and opinions aren’t welcome forget on the boards not even in the lounge

not going along is so much more fun anyway
 
Just got this from my travel agent:

"The cruise industry just received the best news we have heard in more than a year, and we're thrilled to share it with you today.

In a letter to industry leaders Wednesday night, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said cruises could resume sailing from U.S. ports in mid-July.

The CDC will require that ships guarantee that at least 98% of crew and 95% of passengers are fully vaccinated. This rule is in keeping with decisions already made by many other countries to require proof of vaccination in order for cruise ships to operate again.

A vaccine requirement is not favored by all travelers but the cruise lines have no choice in the matter, they will not be allowed to operate otherwise.

Faced with this reality, cruise lines have been rolling out new sailings for vaccinated passengers and crew that will depart from ports outside the U.S. starting in June. We'll soon see similar announcements about sailings departing from U.S. ports, eliminating international flights for many eager cruisers.
 
Ummm....maybe you're woke. Pregnant people?
OMG, if I poorly written headlines regarding science gave me agita, I'd need a 55 gallon barrel of Brioschi.
I wonder if the barrel would be the proper shade of blue...

1619904443772.webp
 
WHAT DID i MISS?
Not much... Either the wording of "pregnant people" instead of "pregnant women" has got jpd hot under the collar OR he thinks the article is total BS.

I checked the root article in NEJM and it looks fine, and additionally, the physiological mechanism of the mRNA vaccines are totally independent of the physiology of pregnancy so this result is expected.
 
Last edited:
Would not be bad if it was just poorly worded
But it’s not

the wording is intentional and jpd is correct
Your so indoctrinated you don’t see it and don’t realize it

it’s possible the guy that wrote it didn’t even realize he did it

sad state of affairs
 
Would not be bad if it was just poorly worded
But it’s not

the wording is intentional and jpd is correct
Your so indoctrinated you don’t see it and don’t realize it

it’s possible the guy that wrote it didn’t even realize he did it

sad state of affairs
Well I guess that makes two who haven't taken advanced protein synthesis or the physiology of pregnancy...

I've utilized the former and helped millions from being transfused with HIV, HCV, HTLVI and HTLVII infected blood products, and taught the latter. What'd ya got?
 
Well I guess that makes two who haven't taken advanced protein synthesis or the physiology of pregnancy...

I've utilized the former and helped millions from being transfused with HIV, HCV, HTLVI and HTLVII infected blood products, and taught the latter. What'd ya got?

Dip$#it... It's the non-gender agenda of the author. Being that gender is a social construct, apparently the author believes men can be pregnant too.

For fark's sake. :rolleyes:
 
Dip$#it... It's the non-gender agenda of the author. Being that gender is a social construct, apparently the author believes men can be pregnant too.

For fark's sake. :rolleyes:

It's exactly as the published in NEJM. I agree that folks are way too PC minded, saying that poorly written titles are the least of our worries, and pointed that out early in the diatribes.

Of course that point was ignored, so one couldn't be sure if that was the issue or folks who are vaccine adverse were just trying to discredit the use of the vaccine on pregnant females.

1619920984075.webp
 
📱 Fish Smarter with the NYAngler App!
Launch Now

Members online

No members online now.

Fishing Reports

Latest articles

Back
Top