As if any more proof was needed.

I haven't heard the left claiming causation; as a matter of fact, when I heard it on CNN, they were careful to say there was no cause proven.

@Organist1 I don't only mean concerning this but I'm sure most will jump on it as causational.

I think this shows the unvaccinated are, in general, incautious dingbats.

I think those who make the effort to get vaccinated generally just take better care of themselves and their health.

I tend to think the left use critical thinking more often than the right and the left are not as likely as the right to wrongly assign causation.

@snytiger6 I think the left is more likely to follow the popular ideas toward what they believe is a good. For instance, most on the left would prob'ly say that chemo is the unavoidable way to deal with cancer. If one is diagnosed with cancer then chemo is the necessary action. I would disagree with that and say first that cancer is caused by chemical pollution of some kind so the course of action is not to make quality of life worse as we die but address this idea of progress which creates the malady. Many on the left think we should do both because longevity of life is the goal. I think that's wrong and removes us from the ideals of nature. I would also argue that humans are peaceful animals. If we look at any natural system (for life and matter) it is violence which propels actions which feed life. Therefore, violence is the norm and peace a determination, or discipline, for social order.

@rainmanjr I happen to be a person who has who has survived cancer. The drug used on me was specifically targeted to the kind of cancer I had. Generalized chemo has been on its way out as a treatment for sometime.

I am wondering how you made the connection between the left and chemo. It is the left that advocates for a persons right to die when a person is suffering from a terminal disease. It is the right that insists on preserving life to the last breath (except for criminals or for the poor).

@snytiger6 My father, at the age of 45, was not one of those who has survived cancer (congratulations on beating the statistic). Chemo did put him in remission but the end result (death) still occurred 2 years later. My connection is not, as you say, between the left and chemo. My connection is with chemo to quality of life. I would not take chemo because IDC about longevity of life. I said, of the left, that they are more likely to get behind whatever science tells them because of their belief in a public good. Con's have no such belief. They think the economic good is more important and Dem's are an existential mistake for the economic good. Con's, as we know, are hostile to medicine because its human concerns tend to promote humanistic policies and Dem's favor those. I hope that clears it up for you.

@rainmanjr I am afraid I am one of those humanists who think science will eventually find a solution.

As to quality of life. I was told I'd have to take cancer drugs for the rest of my life, but the side effects were hard to deal with. So after I had been cancer free (meaning it was undetectable) for about three years, I told the doctor I wanted to stop taking the meds. That was about five years ago.

My treatment was nowhere near what traditional chemo is like, yet I hated it. So, from a perspective of wanting a good quality of life, I can see where you are coming from. However the drug that seems to have cured me costs about $10,000 per month.

I happen to be one of those who believe medical cre shoudl be a right, not a privilege. I think medicine for profit creates a lot of unneeded procedures and treatments to make more money, which is why medical care in the U.S. costs so much more than countries tha thave universal coverage where everybody is covered.

It happened I was diagnosed at OHSU (Oregon Health and Science University), which is a nonprofit research hospital. Had I been diagnosed at a for profit hospital, I doubt I had had access to the drug(s) that cured me as a treatment option, because a lot more money could have been made through invasive procedures, like radiation and a bone marrow transplant, which woiuld ave meant months in the hospital and a life time of anti-rejection drugs, which would have lowered my immune systems ability to fight off infection.

Anyway, my experience has only pushed me further to the left.

@snytiger6 I don't believe humans have another 30 years left so science had better work fast. If I were diagnosed with any fatal illness, even a treatable one, I might not opt for treatment of any kind. I'm tired of this idiotic nation and our constant existential problems so death would be something to welcome.