Will do. I hope In retrospect it turns out to be bunch of interesting facts rather than a guide to the apocalypse!
6 Likes
Good advice.
6 Likes
Ah, but our vaccine is only going to be available for us!
(Sigh)
6 Likes
Can we trust a vaccine that hasnât been tested on Americans? /s
6 Likes
I have no idea if it applies to the Moderna vaccine. I know that other vaccines in development are following the path of accelerating the parts that are safe to accelerate.
4 Likes
The dissenting opinion was a real piece of work.
17 Likes
âContractual obligationsâ should override public safety?
MkayâŚ
16 Likes
8 Likes
eta: The story might be an unverifiable moral panic scare story. Might beâŚ
Thatâs what those movies were missing: Zombie parties.
18 Likes
More WDKSâŚ
This thing is a wrecking ball to the body.
24 Likes
Not sure if previously posted but
Goddammit
18 Likes
@LutherBlisset, this would be the original article, courtesy of @anon48584343
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17436-6
The technical article is actually pretty frightening. Infant presented like viral encephalitis (which it certainly looks like on scan) Now this is a single report, which makes it tough to figure out how much to worry, but certainly adds another complication to a disease that seems to have no end to them.
14 Likes
Itâs always a signal a justice is stretching when they start quoting the law dictionary. But this one. Sigh.
First, the force-majeure clause contemplates that an âoccurrenceâ take place. By its very
nature, an âoccurrenceâ is a distinct, objective event. Thus, to invoke the clause, a party needs to be able to point to a distinct, objective event that triggers the clauseâs applicability . . . Looking at Houston Firstâs invocation of the clause in this context, itâs unclear what specific event it relies on. The coronavirus pandemic has been an ongoing public-health concern. For purposes of the force-majeure clause, it has not beenâand cannot beâboxed in as a single, distinct occurrence.
A reasonable reader of this force-majeure clause would thus be puzzled on how to follow
the seven-daysâ notice requirement if one cannot pin down the occurrence to a specific calendar day. Applied here, when should have Houston First given notice of its cancelation âafter the
occurrence of the cause relied uponâ? Once Houston had 100 confirmed cases? 200? 10,000? Itâs impossible to know how to comply with the contract given how the clause is written.
Being vague is kind of the entire point of a force majeure clause. Itâs there to account for unpredictable major events⌠like a huge pandemic and no ICU beds! Justice whats-his-name says he canât find a triggering event in the cityâs brief. But I doubt the cityâs attorneys thought it wise to include âwe were forced to trigger the force majeure clause because the Texas GOP is so goddamned stupid they wanted a multi-day in person convention without mask mandates, much less enforcement, in a city with nearly the highest rates of coronavirus infection in the US and an alarming lack of ICU beds.â
The triggering event was the mayor sucking it up and doing what needed doing instead of playing politics.
ETA: sorry for the weird formatting in the quote. Having trouble fixing it.
12 Likes
Did they just call her Karen?
Why yes, yes they did.
16 Likes
For some of us who arenât opposed to socialized medicine or treatments from other countries, thatâs a valid question. The answer to that question is usually no. Weâve had too many cases of illness and death because groups with different risk factors for disease arenât included in the testing for treatments.
Given the medical establishmentâs history with groups particularly hard hit by coronavirus in the US, getting volunteers for testing a vaccine will not be easy.
13 Likes
True and true
27 Likes
It almost sounds like a Third Amendment issue. 
4 Likes
And everyone knows a hurricane strikes instantly then is gone. /s
8 Likes
Something conservatives and libertarians agree on.
âWeâre not doing oppo on Fauci!â
More on âCARESâ Act bullshit.
12 Likes
