Again, there is a way to get around it, all a hospital needs is a "reasonable clinical or safety concern." Considering that one third of hospital patients suffer from AB-resistance infections and one in ten of those die of the acquired conditions, maybe, it is hospitals themselves that must be banned. :)
Thanks. Good news. Now - what about right to medication of choice, informed consent to be treated or not with particular medications or vaccinations? And where are we in NYC with right of unvaccinated health professionals to work? Are even self-employed sole practitioners’ offices still closed?
Rationalism can handle only empirical and logical problems. The vast majority of problems are neither, so people use analogies... Existential needs overwrite perception, logic, emotions, and intuitions.
@James Lyon-Weiler: I put this comment on another thread but in case you don’t see it I’m putting it here too. There’s a new study in JAMA claiming that both COVID and all cause deaths were significantly lower in highly vaccinated states vs lower vaccinated states. I can see the author has a long list of conflicts (and study was funded by CDC) but could you do an analysis and tell us if the methodology makes sense and whether this study holds any water or if it’s typical CDC propaganda? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2798990
"Absolutely not! I am full of vengeance. I am vengeful. It's not a time to say I'm sorry. It's a time to put these bastards in jail! I'm calling it 'the big kill'. It's the physicians, not just the politicians."
It's still way off. Departments of health should not even be dictating (or euphemistically "advising") who can visit, when, and for how long. If anything, they should only set the minimum baseline for accessibility with hospitals choosing how far they want to exceed that minimum. Instead, we have a dystopian world where the baseline is zero accessibility with hospital operations and safety determined at the whim of politically motivated apparatchiks.
That "reasonable...concern" clause still allows them to forbid entry to unjabbed or unmasked family members. I mean, their whole schtick is that it's perfectly reasonable to require jabs and masks of all family members - including little kids - who want to visit sick loved ones, or else deny them access, because jabs and masks ensure safety for staff and patients by preventing infection and transmission to the vulnerable sick and possibly dying patients who [illogically] don't have to be masked or jabbed to be admitted to hospital, right? So, despite acquiring durable broad immunity the natural way, to at least two dominant strains 23 months apart, I cannot visit my mother in her nursing home because I lack the jabs and can't physiologically tolerate the irritant material in disposable mask or its carcinogenic titanium nanoparticles. It's so "reasonable" to be cruel, harmful and ignorant when it comes to enforcing political hospital rules, doncha think?
Again, there is a way to get around it, all a hospital needs is a "reasonable clinical or safety concern." Considering that one third of hospital patients suffer from AB-resistance infections and one in ten of those die of the acquired conditions, maybe, it is hospitals themselves that must be banned. :)
Thanks for this notice.
May we stand ag this malfeasance in our “hell”thcare “systems” & advocate for the rights of the sick & dying.
Thanks. Good news. Now - what about right to medication of choice, informed consent to be treated or not with particular medications or vaccinations? And where are we in NYC with right of unvaccinated health professionals to work? Are even self-employed sole practitioners’ offices still closed?
Moreover, "Rationalism" is a dubious concept.
Rationalism can handle only empirical and logical problems. The vast majority of problems are neither, so people use analogies... Existential needs overwrite perception, logic, emotions, and intuitions.
Yes, that's only rational. :)
@James Lyon-Weiler: I put this comment on another thread but in case you don’t see it I’m putting it here too. There’s a new study in JAMA claiming that both COVID and all cause deaths were significantly lower in highly vaccinated states vs lower vaccinated states. I can see the author has a long list of conflicts (and study was funded by CDC) but could you do an analysis and tell us if the methodology makes sense and whether this study holds any water or if it’s typical CDC propaganda? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2798990
Shall we forgive & forget?
"Absolutely not! I am full of vengeance. I am vengeful. It's not a time to say I'm sorry. It's a time to put these bastards in jail! I'm calling it 'the big kill'. It's the physicians, not just the politicians."
https://twitter.com/hugh_mankind/status/1593994830622953472?s=20
Interesting to see this considering that NY supposedly intends to appeal the ruling curtailing their ability to quarantine people [sorry, paywalled]:
New York COVID-19 Quarantine Rules Unconstitutional and Illegal: Judge
https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-york-covid-19-quarantine-rules-unconstitutional-and-illegal-judge_4597334.html
For f*cks sake, this was still going on? Makes perfect sense with that mental patient governor I suppose.
No one should isolated from the ones they love, especially during a time of vulnerability - https://leemuller.substack.com/p/3-day-poll-to-prove-a-point
It's still way off. Departments of health should not even be dictating (or euphemistically "advising") who can visit, when, and for how long. If anything, they should only set the minimum baseline for accessibility with hospitals choosing how far they want to exceed that minimum. Instead, we have a dystopian world where the baseline is zero accessibility with hospital operations and safety determined at the whim of politically motivated apparatchiks.
This is feeling a lot like NYC is following the recent good guidance of the CCP. What a wonderful world.
Thanks NY Department of Health. Now, you can all drop dead and go to Hell.
Should never have been tolerated
That "reasonable...concern" clause still allows them to forbid entry to unjabbed or unmasked family members. I mean, their whole schtick is that it's perfectly reasonable to require jabs and masks of all family members - including little kids - who want to visit sick loved ones, or else deny them access, because jabs and masks ensure safety for staff and patients by preventing infection and transmission to the vulnerable sick and possibly dying patients who [illogically] don't have to be masked or jabbed to be admitted to hospital, right? So, despite acquiring durable broad immunity the natural way, to at least two dominant strains 23 months apart, I cannot visit my mother in her nursing home because I lack the jabs and can't physiologically tolerate the irritant material in disposable mask or its carcinogenic titanium nanoparticles. It's so "reasonable" to be cruel, harmful and ignorant when it comes to enforcing political hospital rules, doncha think?