Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » Trump off to hospital
  1. Results 151 to 180 of 188
  2. Page 6 of 7
  3. First
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  10. Last

Thread: Trump off to hospital

post 1618273271 10-02-2020, 08:30 PM
-
#151
  1. Briisk
  2. EDM since way back when
  1. Briisk
  2. EDM since way back when
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 16,110
  6. Rep Power: 35877
Has the theory that the Democrats planted a covid positive person in trumps path been examined?

Craziest pre election plot twist in history if the pres does actually rip right before the election?
14-9 total correct guesses (1st place), 61% accurate - Lyon Gaultier Presents Euro 2012 Contest ||| 45-33 total correct guesses (4th place), 58% accurate - 2014 World Cup Pick Em' Giveaway by Lyon Gaultier
2015-2016 NFL Football Pick-em Trinity: 3rd place, 163 points, 163-93.
post 1618273921 10-02-2020, 08:40 PM
-
#152
  1. ANumber1
  2. Duke of New York
  1. ANumber1
  2. Duke of New York
  3. Join Date: Jul 2013
  4. Location: New York, United States
  5. Posts: 18,570
  6. Rep Power: 128694
Kelly-Anne Conway has tested positive.

Both Republican Senators and John Jenkins, the President of Notre Dame, who have tested positive, were seated behind right behind Conway, Barr, Pence at the Barrett announcement, and Jenkins was two rows behind Melania.

It was the Barrett nomination that did it. Guaranteed. Everybody shaking hands, hugging, and cheek-kissing at those things.
Nah, fukk that. I’m not doing that.
post 1618275171 10-02-2020, 08:56 PM
-
#153
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2017
  4. Age: 36
  5. Posts: 848
  6. Rep Power: 1401
Originally Posted By ANumber1⏩
Kelly-Anne Conway has tested positive.

Both Republican Senators and John Jenkins, the President of Notre Dame, who have tested positive, were seated behind right behind Conway, Barr, Pence at the Barrett announcement, and Jenkins was two rows behind Melania.

It was the Barrett nomination that did it. Guaranteed. Everybody shaking hands, hugging, and cheek-kissing at those things.
Were any of them wearing masks?
post 1618275651 10-02-2020, 09:02 PM
-
#154
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By ANumber1⏩
Kelly-Anne Conway has tested positive.

Both Republican Senators and John Jenkins, the President of Notre Dame, who have tested positive, were seated behind right behind Conway, Barr, Pence at the Barrett announcement, and Jenkins was two rows behind Melania.

It was the Barrett nomination that did it. Guaranteed. Everybody shaking hands, hugging, and cheek-kissing at those things.
while I get we're gonna act like this is irresponsible, people do this despite us having the flu every year. No this isn't the same as the flu, but it isn't going away anytime soon. IMO, best option is to protect the vulnerable (elderly and those with comorbidities), but everyone else should more or less carry on as usual (with more hand wishing and awareness). Our best chance is herd immunity
post 1618276101 10-02-2020, 09:08 PM
-
#155
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2017
  4. Age: 36
  5. Posts: 848
  6. Rep Power: 1401
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
while I get we're gonna act like this is irresponsible, people do this despite us having the flu every year. No this isn't the same as the flu, but it isn't going away anytime soon. IMO, best option is to protect the vulnerable (elderly and those with comorbidities), but everyone else should more or less carry on as usual (with more hand wishing and awareness). Our best chance is herd immunity
Just recently a study ( no I don't want to go find it) said nationally only 10% of the population had yet contracted covid.

To suggest herd immunity would then mean taking the current deaths 200000 and multiplying that by up to 9 times to reach future herd immunity. Bro your suggesting we kill off another 1.5 million american citizens

Please understand the lunacy of your statement
post 1618276351 10-02-2020, 09:11 PM
-
#156
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By Girther⏩
Just recently a study ( no I don't want to go find it) said nationally only 10% of the population had yet contracted covid.

To suggest herd immunity would then mean taking the current deaths 200000 and multiplying that by up to 9 times to reach future herd immunity. Bro your suggesting we kill off another 1.5 million american citizens

Please understand the lunacy of your statement
I don't believe the 10% figure for one minute with the number of asymptomatic patients and current available data. Regardless, my point stands, this virus is going nowhere. We can't stay locked down forever. We need to protect the vulnerable (ie elderly and those with comorbidities), for everyone else it is more or less a flue (in 99% of cases).
post 1618276371 10-02-2020, 09:11 PM
-
#157
  1. ErnieMccracken
  1. ErnieMccracken
  3. Join Date: Nov 2013
  4. Posts: 100,067
  5. Rep Power: 330292
Originally Posted By AlwaysFocus⏩
how much extra above and beyond in tax will you pay this year comrade?
More than Trump, boyo. And I get none of the socialist benefits that he and his political friends enjoy.
post 1618276381 10-02-2020, 09:12 PM
-
#158
  1. MediocreGains
  2. Registered User
  1. MediocreGains
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Nov 2016
  4. Age: 42
  5. Posts: 9,614
  6. Rep Power: 45350
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
while I get we're gonna act like this is irresponsible, people do this despite us having the flu every year. No this isn't the same as the flu, but it isn't going away anytime soon. IMO, best option is to protect the vulnerable(elderly and those with comorbidities),but everyone else should more or less carry on as usual (with more hand wishing and awareness). Our best chance is herd immunity
Which is basically a large chunk of the leading politicians, so yes, it was pretty damn irresponsible. I have zero love for Trump, but he's still the POTUS. They should've practiced more caution.
post 1618276501 10-02-2020, 09:14 PM
-
#159
  1. drLihp
  2. Registered User
  1. drLihp
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Aug 2014
  4. Age: 34
  5. Posts: 4,746
  6. Rep Power: 13729
Originally Posted By BulkingIsHard⏩
From my college's networking app: "Good news yall, Trump has corona" (50+ upvotes)
Exactly 4 years ago today

https://www.dailydot.com/debug/trump...ton-pneumonia/
post 1618276561 10-02-2020, 09:15 PM
-
#160
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By MediocreGains⏩
Which is basically a large chunk of the leading politicians, so yes, it was pretty damn irresponsible. I have zero love for Trump, but he's still the POTUS. They should've practiced more caution.
don't disagree, but I also don't think he's going to come out and act like a victim. Some people want to be able to decide how to live their lives. My grandmothers is a 92 year old that's been smoking a a pack a day since she was 14, try to tell her she shouldn't go out, she'll respond "I'd rather die". To a certain extent, people should be allowed to live their lives the way they want. Educate the groups at risk, and after that leave the decisions to them.
post 1618276701 10-02-2020, 09:17 PM
-
#161
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By EnochsProphecy⏩
The problem with covid is that is here year round and the antibodies, from what the research say, only last a couple of months. So you can essentially get it multiple times per year.
trust me I understand that. So what's the solution? lockdown forever? like we do with the flu? oh wait...


it sucks we're in this situation, but I don't see an end in sight. Vaccines may help blunt the issue, but they won't solve it. This virus mutates like the flu and has multiple strains, we've been developing vaccines for the flu for decades and still can't get that right
post 1618277181 10-02-2020, 09:26 PM
-
#162
  1. katya422
  1. katya422
  3. Join Date: Dec 2011
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 34,673
  6. Rep Power: 372543
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
I don't believe the 10% figure for one minute with the number of asymptomatic patients and current available data. Regardless, my point stands, this virus is going nowhere. We can't stay locked down forever. We need to protect the vulnerable (ie elderly and those with comorbidities), for everyone else it is more or less a flue (in 99% of cases).
Believe, don't believe, I'm kinda apathetic at this point. But here is the study:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...009-2/fulltext
INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
post 1618277311 10-02-2020, 09:28 PM
-
#163
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2017
  4. Age: 36
  5. Posts: 848
  6. Rep Power: 1401
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
I don't believe the 10% figure for one minute with the number of asymptomatic patients and current available data. Regardless, my point stands, this virus is going nowhere. We can't stay locked down forever. We need to protect the vulnerable (ie elderly and those with comorbidities), for everyone else it is more or less a flue (in 99% of cases).
Not believing doesn't change reality

Here's the study.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...009-2/fulltext

Less than 10% of population have covid antibodies
post 1618277411 10-02-2020, 09:29 PM
-
#164
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2017
  4. Age: 36
  5. Posts: 848
  6. Rep Power: 1401
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
Believe, don't believe, I'm kinda apathetic at this point. But here is the study:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...009-2/fulltext
Oh beat me to it
Cheers
post 1618277451 10-02-2020, 09:30 PM
-
#165
  1. Harry362
  2. Registered User
  1. Harry362
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2017
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 7,061
  6. Rep Power: 738
Originally Posted By Girther⏩
Just recently a study ( no I don't want to go find it) said nationally only 10% of the population had yet contracted covid.

To suggest herd immunity would then mean taking the current deaths 200000 and multiplying that by up to 9 times to reach future herd immunity. Bro your suggesting we kill off another 1.5 million american citizens

Please understand the lunacy of your statement
Where do you get the 200000 figure? Is that worldwide?

As of a few weeks ago CDC said only 7k people died from covid alone
post 1618277991 10-02-2020, 09:36 PM
-
#166
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By Girther⏩
Not believing doesn't change reality

Here's the study.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...009-2/fulltext

Less than 10% of population have covid antibodies
You said less than 10% of the population has contracted covid, not has covid antibodies.

Also, your study extrapolated data from 28k people, to which your basing off of the entire us population. What % of the US population has gotten tested? are those with mild symptoms likely to get tested? Or is it likely those with moderate to severe symptoms are getting tested while those that are asymptomatic/mild symptoms are less likely to be tested? I haven't been to the doctor in about 10 years. Last year I had what I assume was the flu, a few months ago I had a severe cold, but couldn't tell you what it is. Fact is there's not enough data, and there won't be for years.
post 1618278101 10-02-2020, 09:38 PM
-
#167
  1. 2011change
  2. MISC_LEGEND
  1. 2011change
  2. MISC_LEGEND
  3. Join Date: Nov 2011
  4. Posts: 8,068
  5. Rep Power: 9876
***Disclaimer: All posts made by [2011change] are works of satire and made for entertainment use only.***
post 1618278271 10-02-2020, 09:40 PM
-
#168
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2017
  4. Age: 36
  5. Posts: 848
  6. Rep Power: 1401
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
You said less than 10% of the population has contracted covid, not has covid antibodies.

Also, your study extrapolated data from 28k people, to which your basing off of the entire us population. What % of the US population has gotten tested? are those with mild symptoms likely to get tested? Or is it likely those with moderate to severe symptoms are getting tested while those that are asymptomatic/mild symptoms are less likely to be tested? I haven't been to the doctor in about 10 years. Last year I had what I assume was the flu, a few months ago I had a severe cold, but couldn't tell you what it is. Fact is there's not enough data, and there won't be for years.
I'm not a scientist. And neither are you. This is a profesional peer reviewed study posted in academic journal.
post 1618278611 10-02-2020, 09:46 PM
-
#169
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
Believe, don't believe, I'm kinda apathetic at this point. But here is the study:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...009-2/fulltext
a study of 28k people extrapolated to the size of the us population?

That's using dialysis patients' samples as a means to gather data?

Yea, seems legit. Remind me, what group of the population is receiving dialysis treatment and what % of the population do they make up? Also, are healthy persons of the US, that are experiencing no symptoms, mild symptoms, and in some cases moderate symptoms, but still not seeking treatment, factored into this study?
post 1618278781 10-02-2020, 09:49 PM
-
#170
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By EnochsProphecy⏩
Difference with the common flu is that it's a lot less courageous and if you're unlucky you'll only get it once. Now people can get covid and the flu at the same time which will definitely have a 2 + 2 = 5 effect.

I don't know what the solution is but here are my 2 guesses

1. An extreme 12 week lockdown where everything and everyone is locked down.
2. Open everything and have millions die a year until we get a vaccine.

I'm as lost as you. I wish we really took it seriously in the beginning.
what you said is completely incorrect. You can absolutely get the flu more than once. It is very similar to covid in that it's a mutating virus.

Yes it's unfortunate, and there's no great solution. So, protect the at risk groups, and everyone else take precautions. For those without comorbidites less than 70 years old its a 90+% survival rate
post 1618278921 10-02-2020, 09:52 PM
-
#171
  1. r32gojirra
  2. Registered NEET
  1. r32gojirra
  2. Registered NEET
  3. Join Date: Feb 2013
  4. Location: East Coast, Australia
  5. Posts: 39,557
  6. Subscribers: 6
  7. Rep Power: 597995
Originally Posted By MustardTiger17⏩
Why would he pay more in taxes if he doesn't have to?Is the IRS a charity?
Idk but I have been seeing all these ads lately saying I can sponsor an American family from as little as $10 a month and help with basic needs such as healthcare and it will benefit their entire village
post 1618279411 10-02-2020, 10:02 PM
-
#172
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By Girther⏩
I'm not a scientist. And neither are you. This is a profesional peer reviewed study posted in academic journal.
Lol I’m a doctor, I guarantee I have much more experience reviewing peer review documents. I have over 50 credit hours reviewing peer reviewed documents so I’m able to read them and form accurate views based upon them, which i did. To which you replied nothing substantial.

The source you cited does nothing to corroborate your position.

It reinforces mine, at risk groups are more subject to facing negative consequences while healthy individuals are more or less not nearly as affected.
post 1618279591 10-02-2020, 10:05 PM
-
#173
  1. katya422
  1. katya422
  3. Join Date: Dec 2011
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 34,673
  6. Rep Power: 372543
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
a study of 28k people extrapolated to the size of the us population?

That's using dialysis patients' samples as a means to gather data?

Yea, seems legit. Remind me, what group of the population is receiving dialysis treatment and what % of the population do they make up? Also, are healthy persons of the US, that are experiencing no symptoms, mild symptoms, and in some cases moderate symptoms, but still not seeking treatment, factored into this study?
Well their reasoning was that using samples from dialysis patients should actually reduce selection bias in the sense that it was collected as part of an unrelated medical procedure, but:
Our data might overestimate overall seroprevalencein the general population since patients on dialysis are disproportionately from racial and ethnic minorities;38, 39 for example, Black Americans have a nearly four-times higher risk of end-stage kidney disease than white Americans.12 Moreover, the process of undergoing in-centre haemodialysis might include the use of public or non-public shared transportation to and from the facility, and 10–12 h of care delivered in indoor facilities.

Conversely, these data might underestimate overall seroprevalence in the general population.Patients receiving dialysis are less likely to be employed40 and more likely to restrict their mobility and social activity due to advanced age and frailty;41 therefore, they might have fewer opportunities to acquire the infection, particularly from asymptomatic individuals. Extrapolating from multiple prospective hepatitis B immunisation studies—in which 50–75% of vaccinated patients receiving dialysis mounted a response compared with 95% or more people from the general population—patients receiving dialysis might mount a weaker immune response and thus be less likely to seroconvert.42 Finally, patients receiving dialysis might have been more likely to die or have been hospitalised due to complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection. If so, these patients would not have been present for testing in the dialysis facilities, creating a survival bias and yielding lower estimates of exposure.

Nonetheless, the ten-times difference we observed between diagnosed cases per 100 000 population and our estimates of seropositive people per 100 000 has been similarly reported in studies from New York,10 the CDC Six Sites study,11 and in a population-representative analysis from Geneva.26 Thus, our findings comport with other seroprevalence estimates.We confirm that as in other studies from COVID-19 hotspots,1, 26, 43 a minority of the population has evidence of exposure and immune response, and a vast majority, including people at high risk for mortality (ie, the population on dialysis), remain vulnerable. In fact, even if the seroprevalence estimates derived from the US dialysis population overestimated true seroprevalence in the overall US adult population, our data nonetheless support that fewer than 10% of the US population has seroconverted as of July, 2020, and herd immunity remains out of reach, as has been the conclusion from large international surveys from the UK44 and Spain,1 where intense outbreaks of COVID-19 occurred during the spring and summer of 2020.

This analysis has numerous strengths. We used a highly specific and sensitive immunoassay, one which has been robustly linked to SARS-CoV-2 exposure.13, 25, 54, 55 The study sample was highly representative of the US dialysis population and, as noted, we used remainder plasma from specimens used in routine clinical care. The sample size and sampling scheme allowed us to estimate with precision prevalence across several patient characteristics. Moreover, linking to US Census and other publicly available data sources assembled during the pandemic provides valuable context when considering the implications of these data to the general population.
INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
post 1618280061 10-02-2020, 10:13 PM
-
#174
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2017
  4. Age: 36
  5. Posts: 848
  6. Rep Power: 1401
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
Lol I’m a doctor, I guarantee I have much more experience reviewing peer review documents. I have over 50 credit hours reviewing peer reviewed documents so I’m able to read them and form accurate views based upon them, which i did. To which you replied nothing substantial.

The source you cited does nothing to corroborate your position.

It reinforces mine, at risk groups are more subject to facing negative consequences while healthy individuals are more or less not nearly as affected.
What? I argued against your wish for herd immunity. And cited a source.
I didn't say chit about the types of people that die or are affected. You're LARPing as a scientist on the internet
post 1618280281 10-02-2020, 10:16 PM
-
#175
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By Girther⏩
What? I argued against your wish for herd immunity. And cited a source.
I didn't say chit about the types of people that die or are affected. You're LARPing as a scientist on the internet
Your source is using a percent of the population. A percent that is at risk. So maybe you need to re-read your source.

I’m not larping as chit. I’m not a scientist. I am a doctor. And you should read the sources and their methodology before you post. And maybe try to understand what it says.
post 1618280391 10-02-2020, 10:18 PM
-
#176
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  1. Girther
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2017
  4. Age: 36
  5. Posts: 848
  6. Rep Power: 1401
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
Your source is using a percent of the population. A percent that is at risk. So maybe you need to re-read your source.

I’m not larping as chit. I’m not a scientist. I am a doctor. And you should read the sources and their methodology before you post. And maybe try to understand what it says.
No. I will not.

I strictly follow Trump tweets for my information like a good boy
post 1618280431 10-02-2020, 10:18 PM
-
#177
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
Your source is using a percent of the population. A percent that is at risk. So maybe you need to re-read your source.

I’m not larping as chit. I’m not a scientist. I am a doctor. And you should read the sources and their methodology before you post. And maybe try to understand what it says.

And there’s not one reputable study that uses 28k out of the millions of the us to form a decent stance.
If you cite a source make sure you read what your source actually says instead of posting it blindly
post 1618280451 10-02-2020, 10:19 PM
-
#178
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By Girther⏩
No. I will not.
Lol sounds about right. I don’t understand, you’re wrong, I’m right
post 1618280611 10-02-2020, 10:22 PM
-
#179
  1. katya422
  1. katya422
  3. Join Date: Dec 2011
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 34,673
  6. Rep Power: 372543
Originally Posted By wrastler163⏩
Lol I’m a doctor, I guarantee I have much more experience reviewing peer review documents. I have over 50 credit hours reviewing peer reviewed documents so I’m able to read them and form accurate views based upon them, which i did. To which you replied nothing substantial.

The source you cited does nothing to corroborate your position.

It reinforces mine, at risk groups are more subject to facing negative consequences while healthy individuals are more or less not nearly as affected.
I didn't realize anyone was disagreeing with that. It's just that we have a lot of less than healthy individuals with something like 70 million obese, over 100 million with high blood pressure, and 30 million plus with diabetes. Of course many will fall into more than one of those categories. But even if you just take high blood pressure/100 million people that's a good chunk of individuals likely to be more affected.
INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
post 1618280781 10-02-2020, 10:25 PM
-
#180
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  1. wrastler163
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2009
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 4,202
  7. Rep Power: 21727
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
I didn't realize anyone was disagreeing with that. It's just that we have a lot of less than healthy individuals with something like 70 million obese, over 100 million with high blood pressure, and 30 million plus with diabetes. Of course many will fall into more than one of those categories. But even if you just take high blood pressure/100 million people that's a good chunk of individuals likely to be more affected.
I don’t know why you’re taking a tone with me, as if I’d disagree with what you said, when I clearly stated that we should protect these populations. Sounds like we’re on the same page?
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts