I’ll take your word for it, but I definitely don’t think it’s a slam dunk. I imagine it is easy for anti-vaxxer jurors to overlook details like that in the service of their agenda.
you can’t spell malarky without makary
3 Likes
Omicron says this guys a moron.
Natural immunity is not something to rely on with a virus that has shown strong ability to throw new mutants with regularity.
2 Likes
Beat me to it and much more clever than what I was going to post.
The virus continues to laugh at the WSJ.
No jury trial ever is a slam dunk, you are always drawing live to crazy holdout jurors. However, you don’t get off if there is a mistrial, you are retried. I don’t think it’s likely there are enough ardent anti-vaxxers who get past jury selection and tank multiple go rounds of this case. Again, it would be different if they were giving these out for free. But making 1.5 mil off it? You need a really crazy asshole anti-vaxxer who lies their way through jury selection and then holds out against 11 others to make that hang.
Just want to be clear that I’m playing devil’s advocate here, because I don’t agree with that article. But your criticisms are easily handled.
He is not suggesting that you should not get vaccinated. If someone hasn’t had it and hasn’t been vaccinated, he is not against hitting them with a mandate. If he said something contrary to that, then I missed it and I apologize. All he is saying is that if you happened to already get it, then that should satisfy the mandate. Presumably if you haven’t had it yet, he would recommend vaccination (once again I didn’t see anything to the contrary).
So what else do you have?
I guess I just feel like those people are plentiful. I very well could be wrong. I’m pretty sure they will take a deal, so I doubt we’ll get to see it play out.
Jury room pressures are intense and hung juries are generally rare. But yes, I agree, the most likely outcome is a plea. New York does not have mandatory minimums for nonviolent class ‘D’ felonies (which is what they are charged with), so they could potentially avoid prison here, or at worst, be looking at low prison and be program eligible such that they do very little actual prison time.
No, I think it was someone replying to me or something, it wasn’t me.
CN clarified it upthread, I think it was him. High acidic substances like soda can cause a false positive. That said, still overwhelmingly likely that hte positive is a positive.
1 Like
I don’t think it’s acid, it’s just that there’s a lot of foreign substances that, if introduced, can cause a false positive. LFTs are just chemical reactions that create a line via thin layer chromotography, lots of things can screw that up. PCR is a lot more specific because it requires binding to a specific target nucleic acid.
1 Like
My comment was only meant for the oped writer.
Prior infection should not count in general with what we know about this thing.
I’d probably be ok with a recent infection timeline on the order of the recommended delay between a positive test and the next shot in the series. But no longer than that (what’s current, 90 days?).
Sorry no cites. I’ve been through the ringer this week.
I am thankful to not have what I consider close relatives on the anti-vax, anti-mask spectrum. I don’t know how you all handle that.
Don’t get me wrong. We have some bleeps in the family, just not that variety.
1 Like
We don’t need no education
We don’t need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teacher, leave them kids alone
1 Like
CDC says “The specificity of antigen tests is generally as high as most NAATs.”
These tests are based on antibodies binding to COVID proteins. The antibodies aren’t glomming on to random contaminants.
1 Like
If that’s the case then to be consistent, you would have to mandate booster. Most places with mandate have only mandated initial series (i.e., J&J x 1, or Modern/Pfizer x 2). I’d be fine with mandating boosters FWIW.
It doesn’t make any sense to put a clock on prior infection but no clock on recency of vaccination (especially based on the data that he quoted in the paper, which I admittedly haven’t looked into yet).
I’ll conclude with my aforementioned disclaimer. Not for you, but for anyone who happens to grunch this post in the future.
vaccines that went into arms weren’t wasted. that’s a dumb take. one year into vaccine denialism, you would be justified to feel that offering it to still unvaccinated is wasted effort. i would probably say yeah, a couple more months and take the free vaccines away from unconsenting adults, ship extra doses to poor countries. transition to insurance/chip/medicaid to cover vaccines like you did with tests, and move on. would likely still be good to push through mandates for all other vaccines until they tire of striking them down.
A better thing would just be to make all vaccines free and paid for by the government.
they are right now. taking them away is to make another 1-2% rethink and go get them
I agree with that. I also don’t think that is his position. It sounds like he said that when supplies were limited a vaccine would have done more good if it went into someone who was not previously infected. Especially someone who was not previously infected and had risk factors.
I’ll conclude with my aforementioned disclaimer. Not for you, but for anyone who happens to grunch this post in the future.