this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2025
129 points (99.2% liked)

Politics

1114 readers
18 users here now

For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.

Rule 1-3, 6 & 7 No longer applicable

Rule 4: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.

Rule 5: Be excellent to each other. Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.

The Epstein Files: Trump, Trafficking, and the Unraveling Cover-Up

Info Video about techniques used in cults (and politics)

Bookmark Vault of Trump's First Term

USAfacts.org

The Alt-Right Playbook

Media owners, CEOs and/or board members

Video: Macklemore's new song critical of Trump and Musk is facing heavy censorship across major platforms.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The altered Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, without new data to justify a reassessment, will no longer recommend universal hepatitis B vaccination at birth. The committee voted 8–3 to limit vaccination of newborns to those whose mothers test positive for the virus.

For mothers who test negative during pregnancy, ACIP now recommends waiting until their infants are two months of age to give them the first dose. There was no evidence provided at the meeting to support this timing change.

all 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] foodandart@lemmy.zip 36 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Again, from now until this malevolently incompetent adminstration is gone, it is imperative for everyone to look historically at what is needed WRT vaccinations and make sure to stay on top of the critical ones.

Just because Secretary Brainworm is saying something and getting others to play "yes man" to his insanity, does not oblige anyone in the public to listen to and obey, the shit they're currently spewing.

Fuck those morons.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The real problem is insurance. You can get your child whatever vaccines your doctor will give them on whatever schedule but your insurance provider is likely to only cover the schedule from the government.

This is once again something that will disproportionately impact lower income families.

[–] foodandart@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 months ago

...your insurance provider is likely to only cover the schedule from the government...

Honestly, I doubt that. Insurers have the actuarial tables which represent the unvarnished, apolitical, straight numbers.

If the actuarials show that there is increased mortality and more importantly for them, increased morbidity (sickness) from not getting vaccinations on schedule, they'll offer clinics to their members.

(The insurance that comes from my husband's employer offers vaccine clinics for influenza and covid still, in spite of what the government is spewing.)

They're not paying attention to the nonsense coming out of the beltway as they've got the actual numerical proof of what works and what doesn't.

Insurance is the ONE industry that doesn't deal with political fairy tales and governmental opinions.

They don't give a shit because the numbers don't lie and their profits are completely tied to them. That is all they look at.

I got a measles booster last spring since I'm old enough to have gotten the older non-viable vaccine from the mid-60's. The insurance covered it no questions asked.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 32 points 3 months ago

The brain worms are winning.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Are Warhammer books any good?

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Not really. They tend to be pretty amateurishly written.

[–] goferking0 2 points 3 months ago

And everyone in them always does the dumbest moves

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 3 months ago

Meh they're pretty standard space opera pulp, with some better than others. The real problem is that, like any satire, eventually they forget they are supposed to be satire and begin to unironically endorse the system they mock.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I haven't read any of them, just the reference stuff in rulebooks and wikis.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Shame. I still haven't met anyone whose read them. It gets referenced a lot though.

[–] Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 2 points 3 months ago

I've read a few, they're great filler as audiobooks.

I enjoyed xenos, malleus and hereticus by Dan Abnett.

They're more like crime novels then warhammer smash and action from memory but still wharhammer

[–] lllIII000IIIlll@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago

well the headline is a bit misleading, the recommendation was changed from 'within 24hrs of birth' to 'within 2 months of birth'

still cruel and idiotic, it will lead to unnecessary suffering.. but chronically ill people are easily enslaved by their capitalist overlords, if they want their medicine that is

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is only a recommendation. The reason it's dangerous is that now it's up to states to decide to vaccinate babies with this vaccine and the vaccine has eliminated the cancer often caused by such an infection by something like 90%.

If you are an expectant mother please advocate for your children. Even if you're not, we should all be advocating for our state legislatures to continue this recommendation.

[–] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

I'm in Florida. Newborns won't have a chance here.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago

Most of the power brokers just need the kids to live until they're thirteen or so.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

As bad as this is, it's a change of recommendation, not a ban. Your doctor didn't suddenly become retarded because of this, they still know what's right.

[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I went for a covid vax last week, and my provider required me to read this long statement about how covid vaccination is only recommended for people over 65 or people with specific health conditions. They made me 'attest' to understanding that the vaccine isnot* recommended for me, but that I was voluntarily requesting it.

Now, I know that's some lawyer bullshit. The practitioner agreed it was new corporate policy, but they were careful not to say anything that would have indicated a personal or professional belief other than the corporate legalese. And I'm pretty sure that some people, reading that a treatment is not recommended, will interpret that as actively discouraging rather than the absence of encouragement.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's some "giving insurance an excuse not to cover it" bullshit. Elective = self-pay.

[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

I can't say for other insurers, but mine still gives covid shots to non-recommended groups with no out-of-pocket cost. Their epidemiologists and actuaries still know that preventative care is way more profitable than emergency care, even if the lawyers kowtow to policy. I imagine that birth-hepatitis vax will be similar, but everything about births seems to be a cash grab for them.