3G in Restaurants?

3,770 posts in this topic

22 minutes ago, Namu said:

Ok, who in EMA has a financial interest in Pfizer/ BioNTech? Who is the corrupt person in the Japanese medical authority, who in Australia? Who in Canada? Who in all over the 100 countries which approved the vaccination?

 

Fair enough, I can't give you those names at this moment in time.
Then it's just the US that this applies to until any other names in other countries come out.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jonny said:

Thanks Panda. But to go back to my initial question,  if you NEED a PCR test to be considered Genesen and they won't now give you a PCR test,  how can you now get the Genesen status ? The way I see it is that an average non vulnerable person cannot get it if they can't get a PCR test from now on. 

 

Source: https://www.tagesschau.de/newsticker/liveblog-coronavirus-montag-253.html

  • 13:00 h
    PCR tests for self-payers likely to remain possible
    Despite a prioritisation of PCR tests, there will still be capacities for self-payers in Germany, according to the laboratory association. "A prioritisation of PCR tests does not mean that in future there will only be PCR tests for certain groups," says the chairman of the Association of Accredited Laboratories in Medicine ALM, Michael Müller, to the newspapers of the Funke Mediengruppe. Those who do not belong to the prioritised group, however, may have to be prepared for longer waiting times, for example travellers. He assumes that private test centres will continue to offer PCR tests for self-payers in the future.
     

    Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

--> You should still be able to get a PCR test and with it the "Genesenen" status, if you pay the around 75€ for the PCR test out of your own pocket (= if you are a "Selbstzahler" = self-payer): https://www.corona-teststelle.de/

So from the clarification posted today at 1pm on the Tagesschau website, they only want to do away with the free PCR tests for the "average non-vulnerable person".

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Eric7 said:

 

Fair enough, I can't give you those names at this moment in time.
Then it's just the US that this applies to until any other names in other countries come out.

Or there are no names to come out because the people involved are not corrupt. How about assuming those involved in the approval of the vaccines did act in good faith and to the best of their knowledge?

 

Corrupt individuals surely exist but are the exception and do not have the power to dictate everything in every country, in all the universities, ethical commissions, medical associations etc on this planet. To get the world to vaccinate all its citizens with an unsafe and inefficient vaccine is simply too big a task to be accomplished by anyone. I just don’t buy it.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Namu said:

Or there are no names to come out because the people involved are not corrupt. How about assuming those involved in the approval of the vaccines did act in good faith and to the best of their knowledge?

 

Corrupt individuals surely exist but are the exception and do not have the power to dictate everything in every country, in all the universities, ethical commissions, medical associations etc on this planet. To get the world to vaccinate all its citizens with an unsafe and inefficient vaccine is simply too big a task to be accomplished by anyone. I just don’t buy it.

 

You seem very sure, seemingly without any justification other than blind faith in people you don't know.


I don't know how other countries deal with this but the US doesn't restrict politicians or officials in government agencies owning stock in the industries they are supposed to be regulating.

It would remove a lot of the doubt if anyone involved in the testing, approval & policy processes wasn't allowed to have financial motivations which could influence their decisions.
Also, people constantly switching between government positions and positions in the industries they have previously regulated or will in future regulate is shady beyond belief.
This practice is rife in the pharmaceutical industry.

 

Weird... I just edited this and the edit disappeared...

 

Anyway, a quick Google shows that the EMA has or at least had the same "revolving door problem" and the associated conflict of interest issues:
"This is tricky territory for EMA, considering its recent revolving door history. Vincenzo Salvatore, Marino's predecessor as EMA's head of legal department, joined Sidley Austin LLP in 2012 as a senior counsel in their European life sciences regulatory practice; Xavier Luria who was EMA's head of sector safety and efficacy of medicines later became a freelance consultant for a range of public and private sector organisations, including in the pharmaceutical sector in 2012. Meanwhile, EMA's ex-director Thomas Lönngren set up Pharma Executive Consulting Ltd."


EMA's revolving door with Big Pharma - alive and well

 

Oh, look... Canada:
Health Canada and Big Pharma: Too close for comfort

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point of (very important lol) order: 

The "soft Irish fuck" is "feck".

Fack is how my boy pronounces fuck because he learned it from his schoolmates and they say fuck like an cockney, eg "fack off mate".

He still thinks "bucket" is an expletive to roar when you hit your thumb with a hammer. I have never corrected him on what I actually said ;-)

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, murphaph said:

He still thinks "bucket" is an expletive to roar when you hit your thumb with a hammer. I have never corrected him on what I actually said ;-)

My former speech therapy colleague had a 3 yo who couldn’t manage „tr“ and substituted it with „f“.  She was quite embarrassed when they had guests and he was running around the house and yelling „Where’s my *uck? I can’t find my *uck.“.  I suppose it’s now a great family story.  😂

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Eric7 said:

 

You seem very sure, seemingly without any justification other than blind faith in people you don't know.


I don't know how other countries deal with this but the US doesn't restrict politicians or officials in government agencies owning stock in the industries they are supposed to be regulating.

It would remove a lot of the doubt if anyone involved in the testing, approval & policy processes wasn't allowed to have financial motivations which could influence their decisions.
Also, people constantly switching between government positions and positions in the industries they have previously regulated or will in future regulate is shady beyond belief.
This practice is rife in the pharmaceutical industry.

 

Weird... I just edited this and the edit disappeared...

 

Anyway, a quick Google shows that the EMA has or at least had the same "revolving door problem" and the associated conflict of interest issues:
"This is tricky territory for EMA, considering its recent revolving door history. Vincenzo Salvatore, Marino's predecessor as EMA's head of legal department, joined Sidley Austin LLP in 2012 as a senior counsel in their European life sciences regulatory practice; Xavier Luria who was EMA's head of sector safety and efficacy of medicines later became a freelance consultant for a range of public and private sector organisations, including in the pharmaceutical sector in 2012. Meanwhile, EMA's ex-director Thomas Lönngren set up Pharma Executive Consulting Ltd."


EMA's revolving door with Big Pharma - alive and well

 

Oh, look... Canada:
Health Canada and Big Pharma: Too close for comfort

https://worldcrunch.com/coronavirus/chomsky-on-coronavirus-why-neoliberalism-and-big-pharma-can39t-respond

Actually, silly old fool that I am, I quite like a bit of Chomsky on a cold Monday afternoon!😂

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eric7 said:

don't know how other countries deal with this but the US doesn't restrict politicians or officials in government agencies owning stock in the industries they are supposed to be regulating.

 

You just don't have a clue about what you keep carping on about.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are currently looking into make it forbidden for Senators and Congresspeople to own stocks and not just because of covid. A lot of conflict of interest in many companies. Thing is, those same companies will still be able to make hefty donations to get "their people" elected.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eric7 said:

 

You seem very sure, seemingly without any justification other than blind faith in people you don't know.


I don't know how other countries deal with this but the US doesn't restrict politicians or officials in government agencies owning stock in the industries they are supposed to be regulating.

It would remove a lot of the doubt if anyone involved in the testing, approval & policy processes wasn't allowed to have financial motivations which could influence their decisions.
Also, people constantly switching between government positions and positions in the industries they have previously regulated or will in future regulate is shady beyond belief.
This practice is rife in the pharmaceutical industry.

 

Weird... I just edited this and the edit disappeared...

 

Anyway, a quick Google shows that the EMA has or at least had the same "revolving door problem" and the associated conflict of interest issues:
"This is tricky territory for EMA, considering its recent revolving door history. Vincenzo Salvatore, Marino's predecessor as EMA's head of legal department, joined Sidley Austin LLP in 2012 as a senior counsel in their European life sciences regulatory practice; Xavier Luria who was EMA's head of sector safety and efficacy of medicines later became a freelance consultant for a range of public and private sector organisations, including in the pharmaceutical sector in 2012. Meanwhile, EMA's ex-director Thomas Lönngren set up Pharma Executive Consulting Ltd."


EMA's revolving door with Big Pharma - alive and well

 

Oh, look... Canada:
Health Canada and Big Pharma: Too close for comfort


So who do you believe? Some medical guy on YouTube or Telegramm?

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, murphaph said:

Point of (very important lol) order: 

The "soft Irish fuck" is "feck".

Fack is how my boy pronounces fuck because he learned it from his schoolmates and they say fuck like an cockney, eg "fack off mate".

He still thinks "bucket" is an expletive to roar when you hit your thumb with a hammer. I have never corrected him on what I actually said ;-)

Soz, you're right.

It's the softies that say fack.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, catjones said:

 

You just don't have a clue about what you keep carping on about.

 

So it's not true then?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, fraufruit said:

They are currently looking into make it forbidden for Senators and Congresspeople to own stocks and not just because of covid. A lot of conflict of interest in many companies. Thing is, those same companies will still be able to make hefty donations to get "their people" elected.

 

It's been looked into for years and guess who will have to vote on it if and when the time comes...

That also won't stop people flipping between public office & commercial positions.

 

This is an interesting website to track which shares (unfortunately only a rough range has to be declared) US politicians are trading:
https://app.capitoltrades.com/trades?page=1&pageSize=20

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Namu said:


So who do you believe? Some medical guy on YouTube or Telegramm?

 

 

To be honest, it's very hard to believe anyone which is a pretty shitty position to be in.

I certainly wouldn't dismiss someone just because they are on YouTube or Telegram though. Lots of people rowing against the tide have been censored on more mainstream platforms.

I guess I just have a fundamental distrust of pharma companies & the relationships with government etc.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being distrustful is one thing. Claiming that the vaccines had not been approved unless all the health authorities around the world had been bribed by the manufacturers is quite another. This makes you the creator of the mother of all conspiracy theories.

You should have listened when I said

 

21 hours ago, jeba said:

Stop ridiculing yourself.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, jeba said:

Being distrustful is one thing. Claiming that the vaccines had not been approved unless all the health authorities around the world had been bribed by the manufacturers is quite another. This makes you the creator of the mother of all conspiracy theories.

You should have listened when I said

 

 

I sincerely doubt that every health authority conducted their own analysis of the vaccines. Once they saw that the FDA and the EMA had approved them, that would have counted for a lot.

 

Anyway, I tell you what, you carry on believing in fluffy unicorns and I'll believe in the corruption of money.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BethAnnBitt said:

I hear some rather appalling things spoken and sung in English on the street here by non-native speakers.  I am convinced many people have no idea what they are saying and  if they did they would be quite embarrassed.
 

 

A story: I was at a serious crafting course (shoemaking/cobbling) at a German museum. Everybody was cobbling and sewing and gluing away...
... a late-40s German woman (you know the kind, with the menopausal pot haircut) walked in, clearly singing Flo Rida's song "Whistle" in front of the entire group of serious conservative reenactors:

 

"Can you blow my whistle, baby, whistle, baby? Let me know

Girl, I'm gonna show you how to do it and we start real slow

You just put your lips together and you come real close

Can you blow my whistle, baby, whistle, baby? Here we go

It's like everywhere I go
My whistle ready to blow"

(Yes, it's a song about getting a blowjob!)

 

I stared at the noisily singing woman... then in a pause gently tried to tell her just exactly *what* she was singing with such enthusiasm... and that it maybe wasn't such a great idea...

She gave me a full on stare of hate, and yelled: "Das ist mir sowas von scheißegal!!!" (I don't give a flying rat's ass about that!).
I shrugged, said: "Dann mach so weiter" (then carry on), and turned away while she angrily sang on.
 

 

tl;dnr: Germans don't like to know what they are singing in English.

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Metal reminds me of  my son (aged 3 or 4) and his group at the Kindergarten summer party.  Their performance;  singing and dancing to " Relax", by Frankie GtH.   I would guess the Erziieherinnen had not seen the video.  Excrutiating.  I mean relaxing is good but ...  In case anyone has forgotten:

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Eric7 said:

 

Where was this?

 

I have absolutely no problem with a company being driven by profit. That's completely normal and can't really be any other way.

I do have a problem when:
1. The people presenting the summaries of the companies data have financial interest in said company
2. The people approving this companies products have financial interest in said company
3. The people deciding policy concerning using this companies products have financial interest in said company

 

No matter how you slice it, that's corruption.

Imagine discussing corruption of the Churchill government when German bombs are already falling on London.

 

I mean, sure Churchill was corrupt as hell, but in that case it was called treason.

 

There are things which can be postponed until the end of the war. I have no problem if Albert Bourla is jailed in 2025 for corrupting officials in many countries. Whoever breaks the law, goes to jail.

 

But one must decide what has priority for now: survival of the whole people, or the Rechtsstaat.

 

You keep denying there is a worldwide pandemic and a killer virus which can mutate to something deadly for all, and keep talking about some bureaucratic irregularities. Well, go to the police and file a complaint if you are really serious about corruption charges.

 

But I am 100% sure you aren't. You are just questioning the sanity of all world authorities for one purpose. You tell me which one.

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now