Have we not being addressing the topic for 155 pages? But please just spell out the new and incisive contribution Maher has made here and of course we can debate it. — Baden

Have we? I must have missed it.

Maher spells out nothing new. He only reminds us of very obvious historical truths.

Seem to be a common tactic.. — schopenhauer1

Whatever you do, don't address the actual topic :wink:

:rofl: that's funny

Maher is on point there. Can't really argue with history. Best to argue by attacking the commentator for not being sufficiently comedic.

an ugly woman's paradise

I usually wear a veil. — frank

Not a niqab, predecessor to the Covid mask?

You're handing me a bucket of bullshit to sort through. No thanks. — frank

Getting ornery there, that is a typical veiled antisemitic response that I wouldn't expect from you. Easy big feller.

Westerners attack shit all the time. In fact, it's just something humans do. — frank

Yes, but there are general rules that the West expects players to observe when conducting warfare. It goes back to an event most people have never heard of called world war 2. Hamas does not give two Allah-fucking-damns about those rules. Israel does, and the entirety of Western civilization is watching them with the absolute expectation that they will comply.

How many civilian hostages did Hamas deliberately take from Israel on the 7th? Since then, how many civilian hostages has Israel taken from Gaza?

Which part of Hamas' attack represents something Westerners never do? — frank

All of it. The real question is: which part does not represent everything that is condemned by Western standards?

This conflict is over a territory, not any kind of generalised eastern vs western values thing. If it's east v west at all it is only because western colonial powers decided to confiscate and divvy up foreign countries again, cunts that we are. — bert1

Ok, ok, I'll make a real response. First of all, the contrast is Western vs non-Western, not East vs West. And in this case, if we are getting specific, the non-Western happens to be of the radical Islamist genre.

What the everloving fuck are you talking about? — frank

:lol: Just showing how the values of Hamas differ from the values of Israel, and that the values of Israel fall closer in line with Western Liberal values than the values of Hamas do. How in the everfucking love could you disagree with that?

This conflict is over a territory, not any kind of generalised eastern vs western values thing. If it's east v west at all it is only because western colonial powers decided to confiscate and divvy up foreign countries again, cunts that we are. — bert1

Yes you are correct. But it is a window into what the fuck are you talking about Dr. Woke?

Lol. Please, keep them coming. This is great. — Mikie

Thanks. I will

What is the connection between value system and quality of life? — bert1

By quality of life, I mean the material luxuries and comforts of modern living: like food in the grocery stores, cheap available transportation, air conditioning, electricity, reliable plumbing &c. But there are also nonmaterial qualities of life like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to peaceful assembly, freedom to do any deviant, wierd shit in the privacy of your own home, complete with right to privacy...&c, &c. These rights and liberties unquestionably enhance the quality of life for all people. . .the concept of a universal quality of life, is also a distinctly Western value.

The Israel/Hamas conflict is not west vs non-west. — frank

But it is. It is a living example of non-Western values clashing with Western values. Israel is trying to play by Western rules against an enemy that openly despises all Western values that do not fall strictly in line with their radical Islamist ideology. The outrage at Israel's current operation is myopic, just think of the true outrage that would be warranted if Israel went at Hamas by the rules of Hamas.

An oldie but goodie. — Mikie

Indeed, the truth is always good. After all, what other value system has delivered such widespread prosperity and quality of life?

Western values in the sense I do in fact hold them superior to others, but not superior to all. — Hanover

Taken as a whole, it is superior to all. What other value system has delivered such widespread prosperity and quality of life?

"Every way possible" should have been limited to those things along the lines of the examples given and not included things like height, athletic ability, sexual prowess, soccer skills, big game hunting, ability to navigate the high seas on a paddleboard, prettier hair styles, and everything else that would be included in the term "every way possible." — Hanover

Nevertheless, not untrue.

Don't do that. Leave your hair uncoiffed. — frank

You are a wise man...a fount of wisdom

Just leave your shoes untied — frank

:rofl: The nonconcientious objector would deeply oppose the fact that they were untied, but refuse to do anything to rectify it. I would trip

I think everyone who didn't want to get vaccinated just got a religious exemption. — frank

Conscientious objectors. I am torn over them. I admire the objector, but I loathe the conscientious

Of course there were those who just decided to let their children starve. So sad. — frank

:rofl: sorry for the insensitivity. You just have a comical way of saying things

Phase 1 takes a few months. — frank

Let's say it takes 2 years for the full process of clinical development of a drug. That is still a lot more than the six months it took for the covid vaccine to clear clinical development. The polio vaccine took 20 years to clear.

According to one study, over the past decade, the FDA approved 21 vaccines, mostly for flu or meningococcus. The median clinical development period (meaning from a Phase I trial to approval) was just over 8 years, including a median FDA review period of about a year. — Merkwurdichliebe

You know, you have a right to refuse any kind of medical intervention. It's a federal law. :cool: — frank

Join the big experiment or let your children starve. It's not the easiest choice to make when your job is on the line because of a mandate from your employer. But yes, you do have the right. Its pretty cool

Financial crook or senile elder? — jgill

Senile crook :joke:

my apologies, my math was off.

The 8 years is not the median duration for the full approval process, but only for phase I of the clinical development. In the full approval process it takes another 3-7 years to clear phases II &III.

I'm no mathematician, but according to my calculations, that amounts to 11-15 years for required clinical development. But im sure my math is off here as well. Ive read it can take anywhere from 5 to 17 years.

Covid vaccine went through all three phases in only six months. That has to be the world record.

The quote from Yalemedicine is not in disagreement with what I said. — frank

Compared to the usual 8 or so years it takes for fda vaccine approval, it took virtually no time to release the covid vaccine to the public - 15 months according to the study. I'm no mathematician, but that is over a 6.5 year difference. But im sure it went through all the rigor of normal testing to ensure its safety for public use.

The FDA's approval process is mostly paperwork. — frank

Yes, it's mostly paperwork, except for the majority of the process that isn't paperwork. You really think they are spending 8 years on "mostly paperwork" to approve vaccines?

From Yalemedicine.org:

"According to one study, over the past decade, the FDA approved 21 vaccines, mostly for flu or meningococcus. The median clinical development period (meaning from a Phase I trial to approval) was just over 8 years, including a median FDA review period of about a year. 

"For comparison, the COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer-BioNTech, which was the first to receive an EUA, was under clinical development for six months before it submitted its EUA. An EUA was granted in less than a month; full approval was issued eight months later."

They actually did go through the whole standard testing procedure. — frank

FDA Takes Key Action in Fight Against COVID-19 By Issuing Emergency Use Authorization for First COVID-19 Vaccine — fda.org

An EUA is most definitely not the same as the the normal full approval process.

I think you've probably been trusting the FDA all your life. How many medications are you on right now? — frank

Rhetorical question :wink: Probably. Even to this day. However, they have have certains ways of doing things that seem trustworthy, and those that are suspect...for example, the full approval process versus emergency use authorization for vaccines.

I've pointed out before in this thread this is just a heuristic with little value as an actual argument in specific cases. — Benkei

Obviously. This is tpf. But it is always fun to generalize. I just have a hard time trusting any of those classic institutions of oppression. The slightest critique reveals just how mendacious they can be. What has big pharma done to earn your non-critical trust?

In a conversation about the relative ethical standards of the pharmaceutical industry to other industries, the FDA isn't evaluated against how good it might have been, it's evaluated against other (lobbyist prone) agencies and against no regulation whatsoever (in certain industries). — LuckyR

Not a very high standard. But fair point.

the aids doc. Incredible stuff there

Who said I am? — jorndoe

You insinuated you were. :joke:

Maybe neither should ↑ this — jorndoe

Why are you so quick to defend big pharma. Does your grandmother receive her pension from them?

Watching it now but without watching it I already now pharma is not to be trusted. — Benkei

None of it should be trusted. Not big pharma, not government, not mass media, not the church, &c, &c. They all should be groveling at our feet to prove their trustworthiness. But they have a record of doing nearly everything to shatter our trust followed by excuse after excuse for why we should continue trusting them. The big question is why there are so many people that continue to so easily trust all the obvious bullshit after endless betrayal?

awesome video. Must watch for anyone who has posted to this thread.

Actually the fact that there is some governmental oversight (the FDA) actually separates Big Pharma from most other industries, in a good way. — LuckyR

The FDA has a questionable history of its own. It would be foolish to think it is a reliable source of protection against possible malfeasance by big pharma. After all, there is no question that the big pharma lobby is capable of influencing the presidential appointment of FDA officials. Don't be so certain that the FDA doesn't have greater interests that far outweigh the health concerns of American citizens.

going to be looking it up. Thanks for the reference.

Apparently more fuckery being exposed that is pretty relevant to this thread. Turns out SV40 is a key ingredient in the covid vaccine.

Pfizer-BioNTech’s vaccine was found to contain a Simian Virus 40 (SV40) DNA sequence, not disclosed to the public. — Lawyer: Pfizer COVID-Related Lawsuits Allege ‘Willful Misconduct’

Combined with an isolated study from Clinical Microbiology Reviews:

Persuasive evidence now indicates that SV40 is causing infections in humans today and represents an emerging pathogen.

Mounting evidence indicates that SV40 is a human pathogen, and current molecular biology, pathology, and clinical data, taken together, show that SV40 is significantly associated with and may be functionally important in the development of some human malignancies.  — Emergent Human Pathogen Simian Virus 40 and Its Role in Cancer

But they ensure us that it's completely harmless. Everything is totally fine. We can all rest easy.

No evidence has been found to suggest DNA fragments used in the development of the coronavirus vaccine -- such as a portion of SV40’s DNA sequence -- are causing health problems in people who have received the COVID-19 vaccine. — No evidence that DNA sequence used in Pfizer shot leads to cancer and other health issues

None of the vaccine makers have made any claims with respect to transmission, only the reduction in severity — Benkei

Vaccine makers may not have, but the government and media certainly did. Slowing transmission was certainly the excuse wherever we saw vaccine mandates.

I would like mass lawsuits to provide justice, but I doubt it.

The industry has covered itself, and will not take responsibility for off label use. To whatever degree states will take responsibility - guess with whose tax money they will be paying the damages?

Ideally, the politicians who for whatever reason chose to completely ignore medical guidelines in both a narrow sense (the vaccines) and broad sense (our general knowledge of epidemics and immunity) should be tried seperately. But I guess the chances of that happening are almost zero. — Tzeentch

Unfortunately, you are most likely correct. When have we ever seen accountability for anything. It is always a bunch of cover-ups, persecution of undesirable voices, and covering-up the cover-ups.

I would like to see one, tiny, isolated lawsuit. Don't know if that is possible though