Barrier gestures respected ... or not

[Gardener]

HS or not the president slapped in a walkabout! But why didn't he have a pizza peel for the occasion?
Or it is orchestrated.

Well, in any case there is smoldering survivalism.

I correct and confirm that macron calls the slap and the claim, the body language does not deceive, hence my doubts

By the way I am so happy that the chief trimmer without any compassion is suffering the soft return of his policy, you can delete in case

[Exnihiloest]

Some answers here: health-pollution-prevention / covid-19-list-of-effective-vaccines-t16510-1160.html # p434049

There is no need for any site to answer that. The first 3 questions have the same answer. Question of threshold from which one estimates the acceptable risks compared to the constraints of the process. Less risk would be too many constraints, which could then no longer be followed, and more risks would be too much for the health consequences, in relation to our requirements and the size of the health system.

The real world is not binary, the threshold is arbitrary, and not all parameters are mastered. We're in real life, not theory.

Question 4 is obvious: we are not going to spend the rest of our lives with a mask and overcrowded hospitals (because not everyone wears a mask. If you believe that since the covid the high school students / high school students do not kiss each other more when they meet, you've got it all wrong).

Question 5 is also. Either we want the pharmaceutical industry to take its time before mass-producing a safe product for which it responds, and part of the population dies while the other suffocates under its mask, or we think that the pharmaceutical industry has a product that is certainly not sufficiently tested over the long term, but the benefits of which are now estimated to outweigh the risks, and so we ask it to produce. It's like asking a cabinetmaker to make a custom table in 24 hours. Do not expect the same finish as after a week of work. I would understand his reluctance to provide the same guarantee if he was no longer in control of his working time.

[Obamot]

Well done, but it wasn't that serious.

A little sarcastic to denounce all the criminal defects (deliberate or not) in crisis management.

It must be said that these days viruses are super disciplined, they remain in us when we go to the supermarket, eat at the bistro or get on public transport

[Janic]

Or it is orchestrated.

it is indeed to wonder!
A president who runs towards the only guy who will give him a slap that he parries like an expert in martial arts, ignoring the protocol to escape his bodyguards who will arrive, of course, too late! What a combination of hazardous circumstances all the same!

[Exnihiloest]

...
A little sarcastic to denounce all the criminal defects (deliberate or not) in crisis management.
...

Yes, I understand.
But in the end, most of those excited against "big pharma" get vaccinated, and the vaccination still seems effective.
We can effectively denounce their margins or their processes (the implication of question 5), but then not so vehemently as to call them rotten, which I often see here, if it is then to go and eat from their hands. and participate in their success. Some have even less complexes and dignity than the industrialists they denounce.

[Janic]

extremely

But in the end, most of those excited against "big pharma" get vaccinated, and vaccination seems still effective.

fun! if they were excited against BP, they would be just as stupid as you who, being proBP, would then refuse to be vaccinated.

We can indeed denounce their margins or their processes (the implication of question 5), but then not so vehemently as to call them rotten,

the one and the other are currently linked when the money outweighs the rest, that is to say the real health of the people!

what I often see here,

names, not innuendos!

if it is then to go eat from their hands and participate in their success. Some have even less complexes and dignity than the industrialists they denounce.

simple assumption free! you would like your fantasies about others to come true to self-justify yourself then.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

As for the other "funny", it is his specialty to take the others for idiots.

[Janic]

extremely

There is no need for any site to answer that. The first 3 questions have the same answer. Question of threshold from which one estimates the acceptable risks compared to the constraints of the process.

And who decides on these thresholds? The manufacturer judges and parties, which is the most doubtful of all systems.

Less risk would be too many constraints, which could then no longer be followed, and more risks, it would be too much for the health consequences, in relation to our requirements and the size of the health system.

This is abstract and political discourse that reasons false in terms of numbers, no real humanism and all that based on experimental DIY!

The real world is not binary, the threshold is arbitrary, and not all parameters are mastered. We're in real life, not theory.

Precisely, when playing with fire, (the parameters are not mastered) we risk fires and victims of this game.

Question 4 is obvious: we are not going to spend the rest of our lives with a mask and overcrowded hospitals (because not everyone wears a mask. If you believe that since the covid the high school students / high school students do not kiss each other more when they meet, you've got it all wrong).

Always so null especially if, in spite of the vaccines, the epidemics set out again and it is not by re-vaccinating ad infinitum that it will put an end to it, quite the contrary.

Question 5 is also. Either we want the pharmaceutical industry to take its time before mass-producing a safe product for which it responds, and part of the population dies while the other suffocates under its mask, or we think that the pharmaceutical industry has a product that is certainly not sufficiently tested over the long term, but the benefits of which are now estimated to outweigh the risks, and so we ask it to produce.

This is the drama; it's like making bombs without knowing the risks that it will blow up in the mouths of those who designed them.

It's like asking a cabinetmaker to make a custom table in 24 hours. Do not expect the same finish as after a week of work. I would understand his reluctance to provide the same guarantee if he was no longer in control of his working time.

A true cabinetmaker aware of his role would refuse a shoddy job; his reputation being at stake, so without having to guarantee anything. Only margoulins unworthy of their profession would sell themselves for a fleeting glory, but the big labs don't give a fuck, especially with complete impunity, as long as the cash drawer fills up regularly.

[Obamot]

...
A little sarcastic to denounce all the criminal defects (deliberate or not) in crisis management.
...

Yes, I understand.
But in the end, most of those excited against "big pharma" get vaccinated, and the vaccination still seems effective.
We can effectively denounce their margins or their processes (the implication of question 5), but then not so vehemently as to call them rotten, which I often see here, if it is then to go and eat from their hands. and participate in their success. Some have even less complexes and dignity than the industrialists they denounce.

Well if you think that getting vaccinated will be of no consequence, then I would not put my hand in the “fire” ...

[Exnihiloest]

But yes, there will be consequences: we will be much less likely to catch COVID, and if so, we will be much less likely to have dramatic consequences.