[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Same. I don't even know how to respond to questions like this. It's such a failure of our governments that people think loss of taste and smell from an infection years ago is the only lasting impact they're experiencing. It's a vascular disease that can damage every organ in the body and we're being forced to experience repeat infections. Unfortunately most won't realize what is happening until after it does, and there's very few treatments and even little care for prevention.

I'm a disabled organizer focused on covid issues, and every day I hear constantly from people about the barriers covid has to their lives. Some are new barriers like new health conditions, increased precarity, and rising debt. Others are finding existing issues that were already hard to navigate become near insurmountable. Many of us haven't had regular healthcare in years due to lack of covid safety or the system's complete overwhelm. So many of us are fighting to just see a dentist without getting covid, and it's nearly impossible.

And this is just from the folks who are aware of why covid should be avoided and what the current situation is, every day I talk to people who have long therm health issues from covid that now have to navigate a world they thought wouldn't affect the. Covid has and will continue to impact every aspect of everyone's life and it sucks seeing so many ignore it.

Edit to add- and yea, at least 7 million people died worldwide with over a million of that just in the US. The amount of people forever missing loved ones is hard to grapple with. A quarter of a million kids lost one or both parents, it's had profound impact to their life trajectories that we'll see for decades, and that's not even accounting for the health implications they'll endure along with the rest of society as we have continued repeat infections.

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 11 points 8 months ago

Have been masking since early 2020, haven't been sick with any contagious illness in 4 years. Infection is preventable, not inevitable, and I'll never willingly expose myself to it again. Sucks people were convinced otherwise, would be nice to not have overwhelmed health systems (not that it's new, definitely worse now though).

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 13 points 9 months ago

I think they expected to swap the hostages for Palestinian prisoners, since they've done it before.

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 23 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Not the commenter you asked, but my understanding of this situation is that in response to a Hamas attack on the 7th Israel has, for the past week and a half, been bombing a captive population that is currently without electricity, water, food and medical supplies, and our government is supporting that.

What Biden could do, now, is say "Hey, we understand your fear and pain, but Palestinian deaths won't brings back those Israeli lives. Mass killing of civilians in the hopes of killing some of the people responsible won't bring peace, trust me we've tried too." From there he can engage in discussions about next steps, but this is the minimum fucking first step he refuses to take.

18
submitted 10 months ago by unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz to c/coronavirus@lemmy.ml

TUCSON, Ariz. (KVOA) - In a groundbreaking development, Arizonans can now apply for worker's compensation if they contract COVID-19 while on the job. This landmark decision stems from a widow's determined fight to secure worker's compensation following her husband's tragic demise due to COVID-19.

Gabrielle Parish has all of the details after an Arizona woman won a lawsuit to receive workers comp benefits after her husband died after getting Covid-19 at work.

Court documents unequivocally state that if someone contracts COVID-19 at their workplace, they are entitled to file for worker's compensation. An essential detail to note is that if a worker succumbs to the virus, their next of kin will receive financial support.

We had the opportunity to speak with Attorney Dennis Kurth, who played a crucial role in this case. He shed light on how it all began: "She filed a work comp complaint with the Industrial Commission of Arizona to secure widow's benefits, and that claim was denied," Kurth explained.

This denial prompted the widow to take legal action against the company, marking the inception of this historic case. Kurth noted, "This is apparently the first case where an insurance company lost and then decided to take it to the court of appeals. They are arguing that COVID-19 should never be covered by workers' comp as a matter of law."

However, there is a catch. If an employee chooses to accept the compensation, they relinquish their right to sue the company, even if they can prove they contracted the virus on the job. Additionally, there's a time frame to keep in mind: workers must file their claims within a year after contracting COVID-19.

Kurth added, "Now that the court of appeals has published an opinion stating that COVID-19 is compensable if you meet the statutory and case law requirements, people may start looking back and thinking, 'Oh, I should have filed a claim.'"

It's essential to emphasize that the person filing for worker's compensation must have contracted the disease at work for this ruling to apply. Otherwise, these provisions do not come into play.

149
submitted 10 months ago by unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz to c/news@lemmy.world

TUCSON, Ariz. (KVOA) - In a groundbreaking development, Arizonans can now apply for worker's compensation if they contract COVID-19 while on the job. This landmark decision stems from a widow's determined fight to secure worker's compensation following her husband's tragic demise due to COVID-19.

Gabrielle Parish has all of the details after an Arizona woman won a lawsuit to receive workers comp benefits after her husband died after getting Covid-19 at work.

Court documents unequivocally state that if someone contracts COVID-19 at their workplace, they are entitled to file for worker's compensation. An essential detail to note is that if a worker succumbs to the virus, their next of kin will receive financial support.

We had the opportunity to speak with Attorney Dennis Kurth, who played a crucial role in this case. He shed light on how it all began: "She filed a work comp complaint with the Industrial Commission of Arizona to secure widow's benefits, and that claim was denied," Kurth explained.

This denial prompted the widow to take legal action against the company, marking the inception of this historic case. Kurth noted, "This is apparently the first case where an insurance company lost and then decided to take it to the court of appeals. They are arguing that COVID-19 should never be covered by workers' comp as a matter of law."

However, there is a catch. If an employee chooses to accept the compensation, they relinquish their right to sue the company, even if they can prove they contracted the virus on the job. Additionally, there's a time frame to keep in mind: workers must file their claims within a year after contracting COVID-19.

Kurth added, "Now that the court of appeals has published an opinion stating that COVID-19 is compensable if you meet the statutory and case law requirements, people may start looking back and thinking, 'Oh, I should have filed a claim.'"

It's essential to emphasize that the person filing for worker's compensation must have contracted the disease at work for this ruling to apply. Otherwise, these provisions do not come into play.

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 11 points 10 months ago

Same in the US, that's what I assumed when I saw the pic. I've done it myself a handful of times.

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 102 points 11 months ago

That "coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, can have lasting effects on nearly every organ and organ system of the body weeks, months, and potentially years after infection (11,12). Documented serious post-COVID-19 conditions include cardiovascular, pulmonary, neurological, renal, endocrine, hematological, and gastrointestinal complications (8), as well as death.".

This is true regardless of symptom severity or health status, every person is at risk. I think most people really aren't aware of this, they absorbed the narrative that it's gone, mild, only kills/harms the vulnerable, etc. This isn't really their fault, there are a lot of factors that have led people to that belief, but people should know their lives and livelihoods are much more at risk now than 4 years ago.

And that this isn't inevitable, there are simple methods of disrupting transmission and protecting yourself and others. COVID-19 is here to stay (unless we do something about that) and it has impacts on every person infected and on society at large. That shouldn't mean folks accept illness and worse quality of life. We adapt and adopt precautions in our life to reduce long-term health impacts, like we've done before with many other illnesses that plague humanity.

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago

Depending on where you live, yes. We have a setup of 4 panels placed in the backyard connected to an inverter and some batteries. It's technically temporary so legal where we are, basically a large solar charged battery bank.

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

When he opened his eyes, he was on the bottom of the pool, and there was beautiful music everywhere. He lost consciousness, but the music went on. He dimly sensed that somebody was rescuing him. Billy resented that.

Slaughterhouse-five

I read this a few years after I was in a near drowning accident, it was very surreal to read and has stayed with me since.

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 19 points 1 year ago

Why are you pro an environment in which your life isn't valued, and so bothered by people who aren't?

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 23 points 1 year ago

Yea, no one cares about disabled and vulnerable lives. That's the point, that's what we're trying to convey. Thanks for clarifying for yourself.

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 20 points 1 year ago

I'm not mischaracterizing I'm illuminating an issue many have overlooked. Yes, the vaccines are effective against most variants at reducing serious illness and death for many. But they aren't preventing infection or long term impacts from infection, have waning effectiveness, and there are many for whom they aren't effective enough or at all (those vulnerables I mentioned). Many are still dying every week and last info we had showed in the US about half of those dying were vaccinated.

This part is mostly a rant- Covid (and others diseases) disrupts lives and can cause serious medical complications for many, yes even now. Those people's needs have largely been ignored, now and before covid. We have a better understanding of how disease spread impacts everyone and how we can prevent it. We learned these lessons at the expense of millions of lives and instead of honoring that and implementing changes to better all our lives we're squabbling over inefficient vaccines that many won't take. I'm pro vaccines, but they're currently not a solution to covid.

[-] unwellsnail@sopuli.xyz 115 points 1 year ago

Posting what I said on this in another thread-

So, this decision is really bad for reasons that go beyond sick workers. It’s really unpopular to mention but COVID isn’t over, it’s not gone. We just normalized the suffering and shunted the most vulnerable into its path. As one of those vulnerables still trying to survive, masking has been an exhausting situation. I mask, I have to, and antimask sentiment makes it hard to operate in a world that already wishes I wouldn’t. Decisions like this cause harm in wider ways. I wrote an email to In-N-Out Owner/President Lynsi Snyder about this in response to this policy. I don’t think she cares what this policy does, but I’m sharing here for others who may want to understand.

I’m writing to ask you to please reverse your recent decision to ban employees from wearing a mask unless medically exempt. This decision shows not only a complete disregard for the health and safety of your employees and customers, as everyone is affected by disease spread, but is also profoundly ableist and lacking an understanding of current (and historic) context. Requiring employees to not only divulge their medical information to their employers but also openly to the public is a mindset rooted in othering people who are disabled or otherwise medically vulnerable. In general, it’s bad when a marginalized group must publicly declare their status as such, but especially now when people are already struggling to survive an ongoing pandemic amidst the hostility of antimask sentiment. This decision furthers that othering and hostility, making those employees into targets. But this decision doesn’t just impact your employees directly, it feeds into that larger cultural antimask sentiment and perpetuates ableism. This lack of understanding of the impact of your decision is a clear message that it’s not just those employees your company does not value, but all disabled and vulnerable people. Please show your abity to learn and understand the impacts of your decision, as well as your disapproval of ableism, and reverse this decision. Further, I urge you to demonstrate actual value for your employees and customers by adapting to our reality and implementing measures to reduce the spread of covid and other pathogens in your restaurants and other workplaces. This can be achieved through simple measures like improving the ventilation and filtration in buildings, improving sick leave policies, and other actions including, yes, masking by employees.

Thank you Xxx

PS This company push to ignore our current reality and new cultural understanding of disease spread is not just callous, it’s boring. Be better.

view more: next ›

unwellsnail

joined 1 year ago