Enhance

Sure, they have a reason. My post was more or less related to how much their reasoning or logic matters (particularly in comparison to licensed doctors), and therefore, how much weight should be given to it. If you ask me, that weight is very little… bordering on non existent. If 9/10 doctors tell me one thing, and 3/10 nurses tell me another…

I don’t think the answer is that nebulous. There’s a reason we seek out doctors for most of our professional medical opinions/research/analysis and not nurses. Doctors spend 10-15 years learning how to do their job before being given full reign to do it, and the barrier for entry is significant. They also regularly conduct research, understand the process, partake in peer review studies, etc., to a far greater degree than any nurse. I am by no means insulting nurses or the profession as a whole, but the barrier for entry is much lower, even if they’re in the medical field. The fact t

So, to take a step back, our discussion started because you said I was underestimating the value of a full FDA vaccine approval for some people. However, based on the bolded, it sounds like you agree these people are in fact just being obstinate. I would just as soon not have to talk about these people either, but they're very real, and the majority of these folks' obstinance towards the vaccine is not based on the general scientific/research consensus. A lot of the questions/concerns these people have also have legitimate answers. They just don't want to hear or acknow

I don't know the answer, but I imagine it's tied up in a lot of red tape and bureaucracy. The FDA did exactly what it needed to do to provide emergency approval. Since then, they're on record as stating all available data points and research prove that the benefits of receiving the vaccines outweigh any potential risks. They've done just about everything they can outside of slapping an official seal on it. So, my question remains, what exactly are the obstinate people waiting for? To this point, I've seen nothing to disprove the notion that they're not just naysayers who will jump to the next

Precisely.

The vast majority of doctors and researchers worldwide support vaccine usage and their efficacy. The FDA is promoting vaccine usage and says their safe, and they will be fully approved, so what exactly are these people holding out for? These obstinate naysayers are relying on FDA formalities as a crutch. When that's no longer reliable, they'll move onto the next thing. They've been doing it through the entire lifecycle of COVID. They move their goal posts any time something changes.

That's my point. Those people are looking for any crutch or excuse that they can at this point. They don't rely on the FDA for tons of other decisions in their life, but they do on this one? Why? These are the same kind of people who probably would've supported Ricketts' circumvention of the FDA to get death penalty drugs into Nebraska, yet think the FDA 'has it right' in their current approach to medical marijuana. The FDA is a convenient defense when people want it to be. This really isn't necessary. Please take this kind of language to the Shed.

"Nothing to do with the other" is a bit forgiving, IMO. It's childish and hypocritical to in one hand fundraise off of criticism of one of the biggest voices/proponents of vaccine usage while simultaneously repeating the things said proponent has said.

Employers can mandate a lot of things so long as they don't violate federal or state laws (i.e. discrimination laws). I don't know where something like a vaccine fits into the fold. But, we have reams of evidence and scientifically backed data to support vaccine efficacy and usage in the fight against COVID. Most of the people refusing to get it at this point are being irrationally obstinate.

I can't speak to De Santis explicitly, but the about face among many loud Republican voices may be related to the fact that the surge in hospitalizations and deaths are happening among those who aren't vaccinated... a large sum of which happen to be Republicans that have been unnecessarily skeptical/critical of COVID and vaccines. Supporting a rhetoric that emboldens your voting base is only a good idea up to the point you start killing them off and hurting your election chances at the polls. It is a bit ironic of DeSantis to be promoting vaccines in this way while simu

While I agree, I think we're at the point where results are one of if not the most important factors in recruiting. Nebraska needs to be able to take Top 25 level talent and perform at a Top 25 level. As knapplc said, they're currently taking top 25 talent and getting top 50 (perhaps even worse) results. The recruiting will improve if more recruits find value in what Nebraska offers. I don't follow recruiting closely but I wager Nebraska is the best or 2nd best recruiter in the B1G west most years. But, they're getting beat by teams that, on paper at least, are not as t

Speaking of...

I've never lived in another country before, but the consternation among some Americans surrounding nationalism is fairly amazing to me as an American. There are the people who take little pride in U.S. nationalism because of slights against them (perceived or actual) and there are people who take overt pride in U.S. nationalism, often to a fault and to the point where they refuse to believe someone else isn't involved in their shared experience. I often wonder if this is unique to us because of our melting pot society, or if other countries experience it to this degree as well. The

Nebraska's job is certainly desirable, but it's not a tier one destination job and I don't think it has been for quite some time. Alabama, Texas, USC, etc., have been the more elite college football jobs for decades. However, if you take into account potential salary, resources, recruiting potential, fan support, it's still a top 25 job.The fact that Nebraska hasn't been able to perform at a top 25 level is a reflection of coaching, culture and available talent more than anything else, but that doesn't mean the job itself is undesirable.