• 0 Posts
  • 17 Comments
Joined 8 months ago
cake
Cake day: November 21st, 2024

help-circle



  • According to the linked in the article, the restriction is a requirement to revise the warnings

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration said Wednesday it has expanded existing warnings on the two leading COVID-19 vaccines about a rare heart side effect mainly seen in young men.

    In April, the FDA sent letters to both drugmakers asking them to update and expand the warnings to add more detail about the problem and to cover a larger group of patients.

    I don’t see any indication that the vaccines are not approved other than that the accompanying documentation must be changed. The companies have now had several months to make the required changes.

    The linked article suggests that the conduct of the FDA and resulting requirement to change the documentation was inappropriate. But there is no restriction other than the requirement to update the documentation. Or am I missing something in the article?








  • All seems reasonable to me.

    The only point I might quibble with is “Support for regimes or ideologies that suppress basic human rights.”, as pretty much all regimes and many ideologies suppress basic human rights to some extent. It is good that the suppression of basic human rights itself is called out and condemned and not supported but it would be reasonable to support the good things that regimes do in countries like China, USA, Russia and many, maybe all others, support the good aspects of capitalism, socialism, religions, etc. Perhaps you had in mind more extreme regimes and ideologies. Drawing lines is always challenging. No clearer alternative comes to mind immediately. I would be most supportive of prohibiting support for regimes and ideologies where the suppression of basic human rights is a predominant or at least very significant aspect of what they do or promote. But I can’t think how to express that clearly in a few words. It wouldn’t put my off as-is as, ultimately, moderation is at the discretion of the admins anyway.






  • Long term? Education: a broadly based, liberal education that makes the shared values understood and appreciated by most people, on the basis of good evidence, morality and reason. Without this, if everyone is taught and believes different, conflicting ideas, then there are no shared values to defend. Many organizations are involved but most significant are families, schools, colleges, universities, religious organizations and the media.

    Short term? Justice, law and order that balances personal and collective interests. Without this, people will live in fear and desperation with immediate survival concerns being a priority over getting or giving a good education or making any personal sacrifice for the benefit of society. Also, sufficient resources for everyone so that no one is living in desperation and insecurity. This requires, among other things, preventing extremes of inequality of wealth and power. Not the elimination of inequality, but limiting and moderating it so that tyranny and jealous desperation are avoided. Again there are many organizations involved but most significant are the legislatures, courts, police and military.

    Transparency and oversight are required for all these organizations, to ensure they are doing what they should, and freedom of thought and communication so that their behaviour, virtues and faults can be discovered, communicated, discussed and controlled. Whistleblowers and protections for them, and the media.