Don't expect many food options when you land at MCO, labor shortage.Booked my next trip for first week of December. Progress, no?
Don't expect many food options when you land at MCO, labor shortage.Booked my next trip for first week of December. Progress, no?
Lunchables!Don't expect many food options when you land at MCO, labor shortage.
Here's a non-paywall link...What are you talking about???
Look here is the other side, a NY Times article that has quotes from others that dispute what the NIH has now reported is actually an admission of gain-of-function research funding. On the flip side, it also puts a particular research group under the spotlight.
Bat Research Group Failed to Submit Virus Studies Promptly, N.I.H. Says
The federal agency told a G.O.P. House member that it had notified EcoHealth Alliance, a group criticized for its U.S.-funded work with Wuhan scientists, to file data within five days.www.nytimes.com
It is called being curious...
Oh sorry. I didn't have a paywall when I opened it on my end. Thanks!Here's a non-paywall link...
Bat Research Group Failed to Submit Virus Studies Promptly, N.I.H. Says (Published 2021)
The federal agency told a G.O.P. House member that it had notified EcoHealth Alliance, a group criticized for its U.S.-funded work with Wuhan scientists, to file data within five days.www.nytimes.com
Ticket prices are going up - "who cares, deal with it and move on"My answer is who cares. It's here, it's more important to deal with it and move on.
The source is "someone" within the NIH whose credentials we don't know, brought forward and being framed in a certain way by a rather partisan member of Congress. There might be something there, there might not. I'll wait and see.The source is the NIH. Soo…
Fox News reported it as well but I didnt want some people to cry about someone posting a Fox News article.
anyways, I posted it without comment so people can make up their own minds about how to take this news.
Yes, and because of that, every headline that begins with something like "The NIH Admits..." is a big ol' lie, because there is no statement from the NIH about that one document.The source is "someone" within the NIH whose credentials we don't know, brought forward and being framed in a certain way by a rather partisan member of Congress. There might be something there, there might not. I'll wait and see.
The source is the NIH principal deputy director, who sent a letter to a member of Congress. I guess his letter can be interpreted in different ways? Seems relatively obvious to me...The source is "someone" within the NIH whose credentials we don't know, brought forward and being framed in a certain way by a rather partisan member of Congress. There might be something there, there might not. I'll wait and see.
Heck. No need for any kind of root cause analysis from now on. It’s happened already, so who cares how. We will just deal with it at the time when it happens again.With that attitude, no one would ever work to change anything. We all have a role to play in our society, our government, and our world that goes beyond "your life."
You mean like the time that a NY Post story was taken off social media and ignored by the mainstream media, only months later to be called out as accurate, at which time other news agencies finally picked up on it?Keep that in mind the next time people link to Yahoo News or the NY Post.
We are a world super power. We're obviously funding research for a lot of stuff we would be willing to obfuscate under the guise of "national security" and avoid tipping the US' hand of what we know and what we can and can't do. The idea that government officials are going to openly talk about such things, even when asked by Congress is naïve. In another set of circumstances, people would decree the lack of participation in such research as dereliction of duty in the protection of the United States and her citizens because you know bad actors are doing it, so the US needs to do it too. Also, is it news to anyone that there likely was lack of oversite into how approved funding actually gets used and if everyone is strictly following the rules? As they say, "No one wants to know how the sausage gets made," leading to a dance of sorts up until someone decides to break off the dance to use it as a hammer against a political opponent. And it's never consistently applied the "what did they know, and when did they know it?" question. Fauci and others are going to be ripped to shreds by certain elements over something that might cross the threshold of GAF while simultaneously downplaying the events of Jan 6th. I swear, anytime something significant happens regarding that event, the "it was a lab leak!" contingent gets press.I care. I care that an official told Congress that we were not funding gain of function research, only to find out by the NIH that we actually did (maybe inadvertently, but it happened). It is another blow to trust. And makes me wonder what else we are funding.
I would add, "Cancel social media" to their list.
Expect it was talked about openly, and they said we did not fund gain-of-function research. And that has been repeatedly called into question, even more so now with this new letter. He didn't say, "I cannot talk about that directly." He said "no" repeatedly. So...we will see where this goes, if anywhere.The idea that government officials are going to openly talk about such things, even when asked by Congress is naïve.
If the head of the CIA were asked about an intelligence operation, I would expect him to refuse to discuss it openly, even in front of a Congressional committee. But the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases? Damn straight I expect him to provide full, complete, and honest information to Congress when requested. And the American people should expect the same. Members of Congress, love them or hate them, are our elected representatives. The career officials at the NIH are not. The latter is answerable to the former. They don't get to decide otherwise.The idea that government officials are going to openly talk about such things, even when asked by Congress is naïve.
I’m not speaking directly about Covid, just unions in general. If it’s not in the contract it’s their job to fight for their members until an agreement is reached and put in the contract.
In some good news, Ontario has put in place the plan to have all restrictions lifted by March of next year.
There is no hidden reason if that's what you are getting at. I personally believe we should be in a good spot by then. With masks staying in place and the vaccine passport it should keep cases low. It's been working so far."In the absence of concerning trends" per the infographic released. They have also stated it's subject to change based on the usual criteria of case numbers, hospitalizations, etc.
So, still subject to change and pretty arbitrary. As if anyone can predict what COVID will still look like in March 2022.
Sounds kind of hypothetical to me at this point. Hmmm, could there be a reason they're making vague promises?
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.