Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

Class of '66 Old Fart

Coronavirus and Its Impact

Recommended Posts

My brother in law got screwed pretty bad by them.  It’s a sore subject with him. One of those things you don’t ask about but sometimes he brings up.  
I guess I have been lucky. I have only had one bad encounter at any VA Medical Center and that was at the Marion, Illinois VA facility. Having said that, still lots of issues on the non-medical side, especially with claims. Still taking too long

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, woodenshoemanHoosierfan said:

You must be a Dem if you believe this.
Sorry for derailing this topic

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

What a compelling and fact based argument. 
 

The Democrats controlled the house for 40 years consistently and easily. Between 54 to 94. Since 94 the longest a party has held the house is 8 years I believe. Something changed. And it was the death of bipartisanship 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/570832/

“But Gingrich had a plan. The way he saw it, Republicans would never be able to take back the House as long as they kept compromising with the Democrats out of some high-minded civic desire to keep congressional business humming along. His strategy was to blow up the bipartisan coalitions that were essential to legislating, and then seize on the resulting dysfunction to wage a populist crusade against the institution of Congress itself. “His idea,” says Norm Ornstein, a political scientist who knew Gingrich at the time, “was to build toward a national election where people were so disgusted by Washington and the way it was operating that they would throw the ins out and bring the outs in.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, woodenshoemanHoosierfan said:

You must be a Dem if you believe this.
Sorry for derailing this topic

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

 

10 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

What a compelling and fact based argument. 
 

The Democrats controlled the house for 40 years consistently and easily. Between 54 to 94. Since 94 the longest a party has held the house is 8 years I believe. Something changed. And it was the death of bipartisanship 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/570832/

“But Gingrich had a plan. The way he saw it, Republicans would never be able to take back the House as long as they kept compromising with the Democrats out of some high-minded civic desire to keep congressional business humming along. His strategy was to blow up the bipartisan coalitions that were essential to legislating, and then seize on the resulting dysfunction to wage a populist crusade against the institution of Congress itself. “His idea,” says Norm Ornstein, a political scientist who knew Gingrich at the time, “was to build toward a national election where people were so disgusted by Washington and the way it was operating that they would throw the ins out and bring the outs in.”

“Coronavirus and it’s impact” for this thread.

There are a lot of posts right now that are pure politics. So, don’t do that.

 Thanks 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder if the Prez of U. of Michigan consulted with Jim Harbaugh about this.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/05/24/michigan-wont-have-football-unless-all-students-are-back-on-campus/

There’s been a sense in recent weeks that some college football programs will find a way around the “no college football without college” principle by having a flexible definition of what constitutes “college.”

At the University of Michigan, there apparently will be no such flexibility.  Michigan president Mark Schlissel tells the Wall Street Journal that the Wolverines won’t play this fall unless all students are back on campus for classes. Schlissel added that he has “some degree of doubt as to whether there will be college athletics [anywhere], at least in the fall.”  Full story at the link above.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Wonder if the Prez of U. of Michigan consulted with Jim Harbaugh about this.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/05/24/michigan-wont-have-football-unless-all-students-are-back-on-campus/

There’s been a sense in recent weeks that some college football programs will find a way around the “no college football without college” principle by having a flexible definition of what constitutes “college.”

At the University of Michigan, there apparently will be no such flexibility.  Michigan president Mark Schlissel tells the Wall Street Journal that the Wolverines won’t play this fall unless all students are back on campus for classes. Schlissel added that he has “some degree of doubt as to whether there will be college athletics [anywhere], at least in the fall.”  Full story at the link above.

 

Lol please he will be ousted long before they don’t have football but the rest of the big ten does 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wonder if the Prez of U. of Michigan consulted with Jim Harbaugh about this.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/05/24/michigan-wont-have-football-unless-all-students-are-back-on-campus/

There’s been a sense in recent weeks that some college football programs will find a way around the “no college football without college” principle by having a flexible definition of what constitutes “college.”

At the University of Michigan, there apparently will be no such flexibility.  Michigan president Mark Schlissel tells the Wall Street Journal that the Wolverines won’t play this fall unless all students are back on campus for classes. Schlissel added that he has “some degree of doubt as to whether there will be college athletics [anywhere], at least in the fall.”  Full story at the link above.

 

I wonder how all of the football players would vote? Do they want to play with all students taking online classes only?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Napleshoosier said:

I’d love for football to be played!


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners

Me too; especially with IU looking better than they ever have, but I’m not getting my hopes up on that one.

I’m thinking basketball has a far better shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Me too; especially with IU looking better than they ever have, but I’m not getting my hopes up on that one.
I’m thinking basketball has a far better shot.

The only thing we got right now is HOPE! Lol

Man, I’m ready for some fanless baseball. At this juncture , it doesn’t matter.


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, brumdog45 said:

We were told we needed randomized controlled clinical trials, yet the article ends with the following:

"There is no data yet from randomized, controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine — the gold standard for evaluating potential treatments. But Fauci was unequivocal on Wednesday, saying that "the data are clear right now.""

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

We were told we needed randomized controlled clinical trials, yet the article ends with the following:

"There is no data yet from randomized, controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine — the gold standard for evaluating potential treatments. But Fauci was unequivocal on Wednesday, saying that "the data are clear right now.""

A controlled trial would be ideal and preferred, in the absence of that this is the best we've got and what we have is clear; he's not wrong on that.  The data available can be clear while still being short of ideal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

We were told we needed randomized controlled clinical trials, yet the article ends with the following:

"There is no data yet from randomized, controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine — the gold standard for evaluating potential treatments. But Fauci was unequivocal on Wednesday, saying that "the data are clear right now.""

Which might mean something if there was ANY literally ANY evidence that it helps 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

We were told we needed randomized controlled clinical trials, yet the article ends with the following:

"There is no data yet from randomized, controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine — the gold standard for evaluating potential treatments. But Fauci was unequivocal on Wednesday, saying that "the data are clear right now.""

I hope you do understand why we do not take pharmaceuticals whose data shows it not to be effective into randomized controlled, clinical trials.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, brumdog45 said:

I hope you do understand why we do not take pharmaceuticals whose data shows it not to be effective into randomized controlled, clinical trials.  

That must be why Fauci's own organization is doing such a study.  

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-begins-clinical-trial-hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin-treat-covid-19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×