Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

Kennedy won't be confirmed so don't worry. GOP doesn't like him for his pro-choice stances in the past.

Your boi Donny nominated him. What does that say about his decisionmaking skills that he'd nominate a guy who's trying to kill the polio vaccine? And to run a health department, no less.

- - - Updated - - -

Elon Musk is a hostile lobbyist.

Do you know what irony is?

It's absolutely hilarious that Leon and Vivec aren't just viewed as billionaire lobbyists because that's literally all they are at DOGE - they have no actual powers themselves beyond making suggestions and requests which is...well...what lobbyists do.

- - - Updated - - -

Case on point on "Leon is actually just a very highly placed lobbyist" - https://www.reuters.com/business/aut...by-2024-12-13/

The Trump transition team wants the incoming administration to drop a car-crash reporting requirement opposed by Elon Musk’s Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab, according to a document seen by Reuters, a move that could cripple the government’s ability to investigate and regulate the safety of vehicles with automated-driving systems.

Musk, the world's richest person, spent more than a quarter of a billion dollars helping Trump get elected president in November. Removing the crash-disclosure provision would particularly benefit Tesla, which has reported most of the crashes – more than 1,500 – to federal safety regulators under the program. Tesla has been targeted in National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigations, including three stemming from the data.

roflmao, though he does have more power than a lobbyist over Donald since he helped buy him the presidency

[tehdang]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/robert...polio-vaccine/



MAKE POLIO GREAT AGAIN

MAKE KIDS CRIPPLED AGAIN

a nation of gullible idiots, roflmao.

[Information in this section withdrawn due to IPOL/IPV/OPV mixup]

[Edge-]

The most ironic part is that the article is written for gullible idiots. To misinform gullible idiots. You have to click through to the NYT, and then click through the NYT to the source document, and then you learn it's regarding the debate of specifically the oral vaccine, which might transmit a weakened virus to other people. Not, in particular, the IPV poliovirus vaccine currently mandated for children. An inactivated virus and a safer treatment, which can be compared to the other in a series of pros and cons.

This makes me a little angry that journalists intentionally hide the ball to fool gullible people *that already know RFK Jr to be a kook* into believing that the story is proof of new kookery. It's a primed audience and it does a disservice, and reminds people that the NYT and the Daily Beast get stories wrong and it will take backlash to obtain a clarifying editorial note. Meanwhile, readers go off on absolutely wrong "X Advisor wants KIDS CRIPPLED" and it will take days to get an editor's note on the article, and there will be a reactionary wave of dunk articles on unprofessional journalists and untrustworthy media outlets.

https://archive.is/QNNQJ

Mr. Siri has also filed a petition seeking to pause the distribution of 13 other vaccines; challenged, and in some cases quashed, Covid vaccine mandates around the country; sued federal agencies for the disclosure of records related to vaccine approvals; and subjected prominent vaccine scientists to grueling videotaped depositions.

I don't think an anti-vaccine lawyer for a notable anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist who's frequently made attempts to prevent the distribution of other vaccines is something to be that casual about.

Much of Mr. Siri’s work — including the polio petition filed in 2022 — has been on behalf of the Informed Consent Action Network, a nonprofit whose founder is a close ally of Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Siri also represented Mr. Kennedy during his presidential campaign.

Especially given that it's at the behest of RFK Jr.'s organization.

It seems this is reporting on a lawsuit from a few years back, but I still think it matters, and here's an actual link to the lawsuit - https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphic...e0b90-full.pdf

If the vaccine didn't prevent infection or transmission surely we'd have had a raft of polio cases over the past 20 years, no?

No, this is accurate. RFK is an antivaccine nutjob and is very dangerous, with lawyers using the transparent bullshit of, "We just need more research!" when that's not what they actually mean and they just want to get vaccines they don't trust (because they're conspiracy theorist idiots) off the market.

If you're going to cite things, it would be nice if you provided links to them so people don't need to do all the legwork for you.

[Woodtable]

The most ironic part is that the article is written for gullible idiots. To misinform gullible idiots. You have to click through to the NYT, and then click through the NYT to the source document, and then you learn it's regarding the debate of specifically the oral vaccine, which might transmit a weakened virus to other people. Not, in particular, the IPV poliovirus vaccine currently mandated for children. An inactivated virus and a safer treatment, which can be compared to the other in a series of pros and cons.

This makes me a little angry that journalists intentionally hide the ball to fool gullible people *that already know RFK Jr to be a kook* into believing that the story is proof of new kookery. It's a primed audience and it does a disservice, and reminds people that the NYT and the Daily Beast get stories wrong and it will take backlash to obtain a clarifying editorial note. Meanwhile, readers go off on absolutely wrong "X Advisor wants KIDS CRIPPLED" and it will take days to get an editor's note on the article, and there will be a reactionary wave of dunk articles on unprofessional journalists and untrustworthy media outlets.

The cult loves them some dead kids. Enjoy

[Jessicka]

I would include both hostile lobbying and inefficient and counterproductive government as impediments to a facile "it's inherently linked to safety." Sometimes, it isn't. Safety occupies last place or second-last on the hierarchy of considerations.

But I do think you've answered my question in the negative. I also do acknowledge that the regulatory state has its pockets of good function, and streamlining or cutting everything might hit the good parts.

I would be far less certain that this is universally true, or even majority true. Even good original causes can be overtaken by decades of bloat from regulatory capture or bureaucratic mal-administration.

Poison lands legislation came after toxic spills.
Clean air regulations came after toxic smogs.
Clean water regulations came after water pollution.
Drug regulations come in and get tighter after medicinal use of poisons, get tighter after disasters like thalidomide.
Flight regulations get tighter as plane crash causes are investigated and become apparent as risks from design and maintenance are discovered.
Building regulations are built up from fires, structural and material uses like asbestos. Earthquake risk.
Building zoning and construction takes into account flood risk.
Workplace regulations come from people falling into smelting pots. Inhalation of dust and toxic vapours.
Even the chairs, desks and monitors are regulated so they’re not designed in such a way as to cause injury to backs, eyes, necks and so on because companies are intentionally negligent in this stuff if they can get away with it.
Vehicles are designed to not catch fire after a company decided it was cheaper to let customers burn than redesign parts.
Windshields no longer decapitate people in a crash thanks to regulation.

Do I need to go on? Industry wilfully “externalise costs”, yes there’s literally a term for it, when it comes to the harms they cause from their design and operations where and when it can, and leaves the taxpayer and victims to pick up the bill because that damage has to be rectified at some point.

That’s why regulations exist. That’s why industry is so vehemently opposed to it.

[Poopymonster]

Chinese President Xi Jinping has reportedly declined to attend Donald Trump’s inauguration next month in Washington, despite the president-elect personally extending an invitation to the foreign leader.

"We have a good relationship with China. I have a good relationship," Trump said during a CNBC interview Thursday morning. "We've been talking and discussing with President Xi some things."

Xi had Chinese lawmakers amend the country's constitution in 2018 to remove term limits and impose strict censorship and surveillance measures. The invite came as Trump ratchets up rhetoric and threats of steep tariffs on China.

I'm sure at this point Xi has had enough of Trump’s bullshit.

He has seen Trump's bullshit before. He knows what he's dealing with.
He also knows the current congress will be so dysfunctional you could call the House "Ike" and the Senate "Tina".
He probably sees this as a golden opportunity.

[tehdang]

[2 or 3 tangents]

[Information in this section withdrawn due to IPOL/IPV/OPV mixup]

Poison lands legislation came after toxic spills.
Clean air regulations came after toxic smogs.
Clean water regulations came after water pollution.
Drug regulations come in and get tighter after medicinal use of poisons, get tighter after disasters like thalidomide.
Flight regulations get tighter as plane crash causes are investigated and become apparent as risks from design and maintenance are discovered.
Building regulations are built up from fires, structural and material uses like asbestos. Earthquake risk.
Building zoning and construction takes into account flood risk.
Workplace regulations come from people falling into smelting pots. Inhalation of dust and toxic vapours.
Even the chairs, desks and monitors are regulated so they’re not designed in such a way as to cause injury to backs, eyes, necks and so on because companies are intentionally negligent in this stuff if they can get away with it.
Vehicles are designed to not catch fire after a company decided it was cheaper to let customers burn than redesign parts.
Windshields no longer decapitate people in a crash thanks to regulation.

Do I need to go on? Industry wilfully “externalise costs”, yes there’s literally a term for it, when it comes to the harms they cause from their design and operations where and when it can, and leaves the taxpayer and victims to pick up the bill because that damage has to be rectified at some point.

That’s why regulations exist. That’s why industry is so vehemently opposed to it.

I already covered this when I said the criticism isn't true about all regulations, and safety moving to last place still means safety is buried there, somewhere.

Abuse, politicization, and regulatory capture are symptoms of losing the focus on actual safety. Pointing to the origin stories doesn't re-energize a defense from either. On the populist angle, the presence of institutional failure brings up cutbacks and streamlining as a corrective to that problem, and re-discovers what parts of them existed for good reason instead of false reasons. Pointing to the prevention of water pollution through the clean water act doesn't excuse or justify the EPA going after someone building on their soggy Idaho property. Pointing to toxic smogs doesn't mean the clean air act covers carbon dioxide.

I'd love to see some bipartisan involvement on seeking out the bad regulations and separating them from the good. If nobody is yielding that the field contains both, then maybe their own ignorance will sideline them.

[Somewhatconcerned]

The most ironic part is that the article is written for gullible idiots. To misinform gullible idiots. You have to click through to the NYT, and then click through the NYT to the source document, and then you learn it's regarding the debate of specifically the oral vaccine, which might transmit a weakened virus to other people. Not, in particular, the IPV poliovirus vaccine currently mandated for children. An inactivated virus and a safer treatment, which can be compared to the other in a series of pros and cons.

This makes me a little angry that journalists intentionally hide the ball to fool gullible people *that already know RFK Jr to be a kook* into believing that the story is proof of new kookery. It's a primed audience and it does a disservice, and reminds people that the NYT and the Daily Beast get stories wrong and it will take backlash to obtain a clarifying editorial note. Meanwhile, readers go off on absolutely wrong "X Advisor wants KIDS CRIPPLED" and it will take days to get an editor's note on the article, and there will be a reactionary wave of dunk articles on unprofessional journalists and untrustworthy media outlets.

Wow nice find.

Don't believe anything said around here. And they wonder why nobody trusts them or that the Dem brand is in the trash. They've been wrong about virtually everything.

[Woodtable]

Wow nice find.

Don't believe anything said around here. And they wonder why nobody trusts them or that the Dem brand is in the trash. They've been wrong about virtually everything.

So why is this scumbag allowed to lie in every single post again?

[NED funded]

The most ironic part is that the article is written for gullible idiots. To misinform gullible idiots. You have to click through to the NYT, and then click through the NYT to the source document, and then you learn it's regarding the debate of specifically the oral vaccine, which might transmit a weakened virus to other people. Not, in particular, the IPV poliovirus vaccine currently mandated for children. An inactivated virus and a safer treatment, which can be compared to the other in a series of pros and cons.

This is wrong.

Their complaint isnt about an oral vacccine. Its about IPOL vaccine.

A. ACTIONREQUESTED
1. Petitioner requests that the FDA withdraw or suspend the approval for IPOL for
infants, toddlers, and children until a properly controlled and properly powered double-blind trial of
sufficient duration is conducted to assess the safety of this product.

2. Petitioner further requests that the FDA amend the product label for IPOL to note
that: "IPOL does not prevent intestinal infection and therefore does not prevent poliovirus
transmission."

IPOL vaccine is not oral.

Single-antigen IPV (IPOL) is distributed in 10-dose vials. The recommended dose for both children and adults is 0.5 mL. It can be administered by the intramuscular or subcutaneous route, using a needle length appropriate for the age and size of the person receiving the vaccine.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/pol...0the%20vaccine.

In fact oral vaccines are not authorized in the US.

Available vaccines
There are two types of vaccines that protect against polio.

Inactivated polio vaccine (IPV)
The only polio vaccine that has been used in the United States since 2000.
It is given by shot in the leg or arm, depending on the patient's age.
Oral polio vaccine (OPV)
No longer licensed or available in the United States
It is still used in many parts of the world.
Children receive doses of the vaccine by drops in the mouth.
Since 2000, only IPV has been used to eliminate the risk of polio variants that can occur with OPV.

https://www.cdc.gov/polio/vaccines/i...%20the%20mouth.

The vaccine they are talking about IPOL has been approved in the 90s roughly 29 years or so ago. A vaccine that is used for early immunization.

IPOL is an IPV vaccine to boot so dunno what are we talking about.

I think you genuinely believe what you wrote but its wild to comment on calling other people gullible without googling what IPOL is. I am not a doctor or a specialist so I wont comment on their specific complaints, I trust doctors and if you are making a claim that a vaccine that has 29 years on the market is not safe then you better bring some really good arguments and extaordinary evidence.

So far, they seem to be right? These guys seem to genuinely just want to take out a established long standing polio vaccine that is widely used in the US.

[Edge-]

This is wrong.

It's funny because he cites things, doesn't link to them, and also appears to not have even read them.

[NED funded]

Idc that the daily beast was attacked btw. But my beloved NYT is very credible and I love it <3

- - - Updated - - -

It's funny because he cites things, doesn't link to them, and also appears to not have even read them.

Its a bit weird bc the complaint claims that oral vaccines are safer

IPOL is unlike the inactivated polio vaccine invented by Jonas Salkor the oral polio
vaccine ("OPV"), made from a live attenuated virus, invented by Albert Sabin. As described in
the package insert for IPOL, the “culture technique and improvements in purification,
concentration, and standardization of poliovirus antigen produce a more potent and consistent
immunogenic vaccine than the inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) available in the US prior to
1988. Indeed, while Salk's IPV contained 20, 2 and 4 D antigen units of PV types 1 , 2, and 3 ,
by introducing a new culture technique using cells on microcarrier beads in suspensions cultured
in large stainless steel tanks, IPOL contains 40, 8 and 32 D antigen units of types 1 , 2, and 3.
Meaning, vaccine production methods for IPOL allow for higher concentrations of vaccine
antigens in IPOL than were attainable in previous inactivated polio vaccines.4

I checked on google through multiple sources to see if it was oral or was administred orally. Somewhere to track that specific claim and couldnt find it.

[Doomcookie]

Wow nice find.

Don't believe anything said around here. And they wonder why nobody trusts them or that the Dem brand is in the trash. They've been wrong about virtually everything.

You mean like lying about being a Trump supporter for years, then defending rape?

Yeah, people like that should not be trusted.

[tehdang]

This is wrong.

Their complaint isnt about an oral vacccine. Its about IPOL vaccine.



IPOL vaccine is not oral.



https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/pol...0the%20vaccine.

In fact oral vaccines are not authorized in the US.



https://www.cdc.gov/polio/vaccines/i...%20the%20mouth.

The vaccine they are talking about IPOL has been approved in the 90s roughly 29 years or so ago. A vaccine that is used for early immunization.

IPOL is an IPV vaccine to boot so dunno what are we talking about.

I think you genuinely believe what you wrote but its wild to comment on calling other people gullible without googling what IPOL is. I am not a doctor or a specialist so I wont comment on their specific complaints, I trust doctors and if you are making a claim that a vaccine that has 29 years on the market is not safe then you better bring some really good arguments and extaordinary evidence.

So far, they seem to be right? These guys seem to genuinely just want to take out a established long standing polio vaccine that is widely used in the US.

I got my articles jumbled on the OPV IPV & IPOL. A different lawyer & controversy was on cVDPV / OPV & those risks. My apologies for the mix-up, though I still wish that the NYT would be specific on type, since the article talks about the "virus still circulating worldwide" (the circulation of the virus worldwide implicates the world of polio vaccines, not "the" polio vaccine).

[NED funded]

As a side note. On this

IPOL seems to be the main if not the only IPV vaccine

Two inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) products that are not combination vaccines are licensed in the United States. However, only IPOL® is still used in the United States. POLIOVAX® has been discontinued.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/pol...%20(DTaP%2DIPV).

So yeah these guys are trying to make polio great again. If so then they better have some good evidence and arguments lol

[Jessicka]

[Information in this section withdrawn due to IPOL/IPV/OPV mixup]

I already covered this when I said the criticism isn't true about all regulations, and safety moving to last place still means safety is buried there, somewhere.

Abuse, politicization, and regulatory capture are symptoms of losing the focus on actual safety. Pointing to the origin stories doesn't re-energize a defense from either. On the populist angle, the presence of institutional failure brings up cutbacks and streamlining as a corrective to that problem, and re-discovers what parts of them existed for good reason instead of false reasons. Pointing to the prevention of water pollution through the clean water act doesn't excuse or justify the EPA going after someone building on their soggy Idaho property. Pointing to toxic smogs doesn't mean the clean air act covers carbon dioxide.

I'd love to see some bipartisan involvement on seeking out the bad regulations and separating them from the good. If nobody is yielding that the field contains both, then maybe their own ignorance will sideline them.

Microplastics, lead, asbestos, fossil fuel combustion all went into mass use without even consideration for testing or regulation. Far far more damage is done by a lack of it than by its existence.

You’re arguing for reduced costs for industry that still hasn’t come close to paying the costs it’s caused to the countries they operate in. These are costs that have to be paid by someone somewhere, better the business than the taxpayer.

You say yourself many of those regulations, thanks to lobbying at their implementation, don’t go far enough. There’s just no case that there’s too much.

Like politicians constantly demand efficiency savings, those oddly never happen and just turn into cuts to services.

[Edge-]

As I said -

MAKE POLIO GREAT AGAIN

It's troubling to see cases on the risk in recent years, even if the numbers are very small. Seriously, if my great uncle was still alive he'd be traveling to beat the shit outta this lawyer and RFK Jr. for being absolute dumbasses that haven't the foggiest clue what suffering from polio is actually like and how miraculous vaccines are. He survived polio and was left with a bad limp and other problems for life.

It's really emblematic of the anti-science, stupid, dangerous, unserious people and policies this incoming administration is bringin.

DEPORT 11 MILLION TO FREE UP MORE HOUSING

Most of those people are renters, not homeowners. Most of those people are renting low-income housing and living in the margins, not taking up prime real-estate and desirable locations. The notion itself is completely balderdash and there's not a single housing policy expert who supports the conclusion. Instead, removing 15%+ of the people working in construction, which is the lowball estimate for how much of the construction industry is undocumented, will both raise the prices of labor (hiring American citizens to fill those jobs is much more expensive) while also dramatically slowing many construction projects as they simply try to find Americans with the skillsets they need and willing to work for the wages offered.

Because we tried this with farm labor a few times and it largely and predictably resulted in Americans not being willing to do the backbreaking work for the compensation offered.

[Shadowferal]

*sniffs* wtf...

Sources are claiming President-elect, Donald Trump, pooped himself while in France after a video appeared to show people sat around the President-Elect covering their noses and looking confused.

...ooookay...almost everything Trump wants is going to cost billions. Which should be a major hurdle...

[Rasulis]

Whatever sum Musk contributed to Trump's campaign was definitely worth it.

Trump transition recommends scrapping car-crash reporting requirement opposed by Tesla

The Trump transition team wants the incoming administration to drop a car-crash reporting requirement opposed by Elon Musk’s Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab , according to a document seen by Reuters, a move that could cripple the government’s ability to investigate and regulate the safety of vehicles with automated-driving systems.

[NED funded]

My issue with the upcoming Trump administration that I did not have with the previous one is that Trump seems to have surrounded himself with not only loyalists but loyalists that feel open disdain for the institutions they are being put in charge of and in general the government. Something that did not happen in 2016. JFK jr openly disregards vaccines and seems intent in basically putting any regulatory and judicial hurdle it can get to stop them.