Red Mosquito

McParadigm wrote:

Rangi Guy wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

Rangi Guy wrote:

Stickman wrote:After six months’ experience with Covid-19, medical researchers have learned a lot about the disease. But among the still-open questions is this big one: How many people who’ve been infected will suffer lasting symptoms and health problems?

Why don't they have answers now? They're scientists - how am I meant to have any trust in them?

Because....COVID survivors who are 1, 3, 5, or 10 years past recovery don’t yet exist to be studied? I don’t understand your question.

Just calling back to what others had said about not trusting scientists cause they didn't have a complete handle on this virus right from the outset despite it being something completely new

Your sarcasm is too straight-faced for my blood

I'll try better next time

There is just so much we don't know about this virus that we're sure causes lifelong permanent damage in everyone who contracts it

simple schoolboy wrote:

In Illinois every time the daily count looks halfway decent some doomer automatically points out the testing that UIUC does.

One of the funny things about the Rona is that it escaped from a Chinese lab, but it was probably related to work done as part of a federal grant.

Bring back bat virus jobs to the US!

i wonder if russia's vaccine will just be placebo and then they manipulate their numbers to show effectiveness

verb_to_trust wrote:They want us to blame each other to confuse from the fact our leadership and experts failed. Stupid hash tag crap like "cult of selfishness" is case in point.

This has been around forever in America; the pandemic has just laid it bare.

Appreciate your narrow-minded thinking as usual though.

spike wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:They want us to blame each other to confuse from the fact our leadership and experts failed. Stupid hash tag crap like "cult of selfishness" is case in point.

This has been around forever in America; the pandemic has just laid it bare.

Appreciate your narrow-minded thinking as usual though.

Wear a mask

A lot of people won't take the vaccine or wont really need to. That should help the math.

Watch this space.

Imagine a debate performance so poor that you have to...[checks notes]...help Americans.

Simple Torture wrote:Imagine a debate performance so poor that you have to...[checks notes]...help Americans.

God, it was really that bad.

The White House has been more or less on board with the idea of another stimulus for sometime, partially because of election polling panic. They haven’t yet come to an agreement with Democrats on scope, but both sides of the negotiation have submitted compromise bills and they’re a lot closer today than they’ve ever been to something they can each accept.

What’s notable about today’s maneuvering is that time is running out, and the White House seems to be more frustrated with Mitch than it is with Nancy.

Mitch is anticipating a Republican pivot back to fiscal conservatism, and doesn’t want his people to have to choose between voting for trillions in government spending and getting caught denying their constituents any hope of relief. I think Nancy recognizes the faltering White House resolve. She knows that if she passes the compromise bill and there’s nothing left to do, Trump will be willing to sign it in order to have something economy-boosting to wave around on the campaign trail. She also knows that McConnell badly doesn’t want her two trillion dollar package on the Senate floor.

She put her stimulus up for a rushed vote in the Houses so they can move it onto the Senate, shortly after Chuck Schumer engaged a rarely-used power to bypass Mitch and force a vote on a healthcare bill. The threat is pretty clear: negotiate, or we’ll put you in a position of having to vote down our bill.

Suddenly, a few hours later, she drops the vote. I’d love to know why.

Popcorn.gif

Pay me

we can beat COVID with Ca$h

Spoiler: show

Someone who's smarter than me (so anyone):

Is there maneuvering with this bill for it to lock up the senate and block the Supreme Court vacancy process?

No