Cdc Assent Form For Children: Fill & Download for Free

Why is the coronavirus vaccine not provided to all age groups?Authorized age groupsUnder the EUAs, the following age groups are authorized to receive vaccination:Pfizer-BioNTech: ages ≥16 yearsModerna: ages ≥18 yearsJanssen/Johnson & Johnson: ages ≥18 yearsInterim Clinical Considerations for Use of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Currently Authorized in the United StatesFind interim clinical considerations for the use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/clinical-considerations.htmlChildren and adolescents outside these authorized age groups should not receive COVID-19 vaccination at this time.The provision of certain age groups depends primarily on which age groups have been tested in a large clinical Phase III trial. At the moment that is babies to Age 12, age 12 to 16 and 16 to 18 are being tested—some reports will give different numbers. Both Pfizer and Moxderna have clinical trials in progress. I believe Johnson & Johnson had a broader age range than the earlier trials.The younger ages will be provided with vaccines when testing is complete and indicates sufficient safety and efficacy. The difficulty will be with the parents who reject vaccines for their children.There are also some other groups with conditions that suggest they not receive a vaccination at this time. For specific considerations, wee the reference given here.Vaccination of children and adolescents (CDC)“Adolescents aged 16–17 years are included among people eligible to receive the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine under the EUA. While vaccine safety and efficacy data in this age group are limited, there are no biologically plausible reasons for safety and efficacy profiles to differ from those observed in people 18 years of age and older. Adolescents aged 16–17 years who are part of a group recommended to receive a COVID-19 vaccine may be vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine with appropriate assent. Children and adolescents younger than 16 years of age are not authorized to receive the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at this time.Children and adolescents younger than 18 years of age are not authorized to receive the Moderna or Janssen/Johnson & JohnsonCOVID-19 vaccines at this time.”Interim Clinical Considerations for Use of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Currently Authorized in the United StatesFind interim clinical considerations for the use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/clinical-considerations.html

I’m just going to take an assortment of comments of hers and indicate why, to me, she is monumentally dishonest, disingenuous and uninterested in truth. Her values suck, but frankly, I’m okay with even that if you discuss honestly.You quote a study that says the majority of campus rapes are done by repeat offenders. You say the men who commit these rapes are just a small minority of men with psychological problems. Not men who are in any way representative of your average guy who might make a mistake and accidentally rape a woman.First of all, “might make a mistake and accidentally rape a woman”?Honestly, dude, do you think this is acceptable to say?Because I instantly want to punch her, because this is misandrist.It’s saying that the “average guy”, presumably you, is just so bad at figuring out if someone wants to pork you that you might accidentally rape them.Are you? Do you not get what “No” means? What would you do if you were on top of someone thrusting and they were turning away from you, or crying, or just sitting there staring blankly at the wall?I suspect most decent human beings of any stripe would stop and go, “Wow, this isn’t right. What the hell is going on?”Even if you wouldn’t call that rape, you probably would stop and say, “Are you having any fun? At all?”Second, who the hell cares if it’s repeat offenders?That doesn’t respond at all to the idea of rape culture. As I myself discussed in my article about Brock Turner, the issue of rape culture is that we routinely don’t much care about victims and how much damage is done to them. It’s not that our whole culture literally says rape is okay: it’s that we downplay it, minimize it, ignore it, and then when a white swimmer kid comes along with a “bright future”, we sympathize with him instead of the person he violated.In fact, the very fact that so many victims are repeatedly assaulted either by the same attacker or different attackers (as is the case) and so many rapists get away with it so many times is proof of rape culture.Imagine if a conservative said that we had a serious violent crime problem in the inner city, a serious issue with a culture of poverty or anything else that led to murderers getting away with it.Would the response that most murders and violent crimes are committed by the same few offenders be at all compelling against that claim?No! It would prove it! The conservative would instantly respond, “So you’re saying that there’s a culture that lets these repeated criminals get away with it!”Why didn’t you think that when it came to this case?Feminists explain it with phrases like, “Rape is the means by which all men keep all women in a state of fear.” Or, “Rape is part of a concerted campaign.” Or they say, “As long as some men rape, not all men need to rape. As long as some men do it, all women are kept subordinated.”Does Karen quote anyone saying any of these things? No. She just offers them as arguments without offering examples.Worse, she’s actually wrong. Women have very different fears of criminalization and interactions with men than men do of women and rape is part of it. There are studies that find that even broaching the idea of rape can cause women in a setting like a classroom to become more afraid and more willing to assent to authority.So of course rape isn’t part of a concerted campaign outside of war. But honestly: If one in six men were sexually assaulted (and yes, that is actually lower than the CDC’s statistic), would you think that that was just some accident? Might you be more afraid of women or men, whoever was doing the assaulting? Might you think that society clearly doesn’t give a damn about you if the vast majority of those rapists never spent a day in jail?And when she says that we as feminists have “gone out of our way to tie rape to maleness”: The vast majority of rapes are male-on-female or male-on-male. Again, the CDC data and damn near every other data set on the topic is flatly unambiguous about this. So clearly it says something about maleness. Sure, it may not say that men are intrinsically bad guys. That’s what a “rape culture” hypothesis says. A “rape culture” hypothesis says that varying rates of rape in society emerge from institutional and cultural interactions. Your only alternative, near as I can tell, is to say the objectively worse and far more misandrist statement that men are just genetically predisposed to commit soul murder to other human beings. Which is it, guys?Again, how many conservatives out there spew Karen’s nonsense then turn around and tell us that there’s some part of black culture or black genetics that explains higher violence. And unlike us on the Left, who will then look further back at institutional decisions that influenced those impacts that were not chosen by those individuals, their sociological analysis ends there. Why the hypocrisy?The Teddy Roosevelt Whipping PostSo Karen likes to bring up that Teddy Roosevelt wanted a whipping post for wife-beaters.Except Karen can’t actually show that that policy, which had been in place before but wasn’t by his time by and large, was ever expanded as a result.And any criminologist on the planet could tell her that that wasn’t evidence that protecting women was viewed as important in those days. Rather, as this article points out, “Well, it turns out it had less to do with women’s rights than it did with Roosevelt’s beliefs as a prohibitionist. You see, he saw alcoholism, poverty,and wife-beating as symptoms of poor moral character, so he thought that if he could put a stop to wife-beating and alcohol, he could eliminate poverty”.Patriarchal laws have often protected women harshly. Would you conclude that because rapists are to be stoned in the Bible that the Bible is therefore pro-women? Please, make that argument. I like to see when people are willing to lie for their pre-existing biases and beliefs.The fact is that Teddy Roosevelt’s idea for brutal corporal punishment doesn’t say an iota about today’s politics. If you want to tie something from the 1900s to now, you have to actually prove that it still influences culture today, compellingly. Again, conservatives recognize this when it comes to racism: they say that slavery, a far more serious institution, stopped in the 19th century so it couldn’t influence things today. Except we on the Left then point out Jim Crow, which stopped in the lifetimes of still-living people, and then how that in turn led directly to redlining. Karen can’t do anything like that.Yes, in the early 20th century people liked the idea of brutal treatment for criminal offenders. That was also still a time when women didn’t have the right to vote and couldn’t participate equally in the democratic system or the workforce. So, again, does that nonsense show that men respected women’s rights? No, it shows that patriarchal culture has always viewed women as property and as objects to protect. That’s the most parsimonious theory, and Karen can’t even discuss it.And Now We Get to the UglyAs this article pointed out, Karen made horrific apologia for Roosh’s proposal (as if endorsing rape is somehow an acceptable way of preventing it - hey, remember when she remembered to give a crap about brutalizing people?); claimed that redpillers aren’t really misogynistic, even when they treat women with less dignity than children, because they just love women that much (if you were “loved” by your girlfriend like a redpiller you’d probably call the cops); and launched an ad hominem at male feminists by calling them neckbeards.Wow, that dude sure looks like he loves My Little Pony.If you got what you think from Karen, you are either dishonest or credulous.I’m sorry, but I can’t put it any nicer than that. It takes a few seconds of research to realize that Karen is misrepresenting her opposition, and a few seconds of critical thinking to realize that every one of her arguments are just absolute nonsense.It isn’t defending men to trivialize and make excuses for rape. It’s misandrist to do so, because it implies that you’re all rapists and you need to have your feelings coddled. It isn’t defending men to make excuses for those who want to view women as lawn furniture or as babies who need to be told when to eat and drink.Get your opinions from people who do research, honestly represent the other side, and give a crap about you. She doesn’t.

Why do state educated people think that that's a good thing, when in fact state education is no more than an indoctrination and those victim to it are no more than tax slaves with no valuable knowledge at all?I think the majority of your answer is in your question, “when in fact state education is no more than an indoctrination”.Just take a look at the new rules the establishment has made in “state education”. Young kids being separated by plexiglass and forced to wear face coverings in the guise of safety. No public gatherings, no plays or after school functions, and if there are any there are Gestapo type rules governing them.Below is just one tiny example of many, copied and pasted from one of many pages easily accessed on line;As NYC reopens, you can decide whether or not you're comfortable spending time with other families. If you do gather with others, make sure you do it safely. Keep gatherings under ten people, consider meeting outside, and limit contact.recommends that people wear masks in public settings and when around people who live outside of their household.School-based testing should NEVER be conducted without consent from a parent or legal guardian (for minor students) or from the individual him or herself (for adults).Assent may also be considered for minor students. Children's Assent. Some children as young as 7 years old may be able to take part. But, this age varies depending on the child and the institution running the trial. As with the informed consent process, the assent process is meant to be an ongoing conversation between the child and research team.If you notice in the above paragraph, there is no reference to parents or guardians and children as young as seven can be tested without any consent from their parent or guardian.New CDC guidelines:Some of these guidelines in Steps 1 and 2 include grouping children together and retaining the same staff or support faculty with that group and not intermixing students; canceling any field trips and extracurricular activities; spacing desks 6 feet apart; closing cafeterias, playgrounds and other communal areas; staggering drop-off times; and physically distancing children on the school buses.But you can still go to Walmart, Lowes, Target without any of these restrictions. Keep the billionaires happy while you indoctrinate children with the divide and conquer protocol.These are just the so called “protections” from a virus that has a 95% or better survival rate of those who catch it.There are many other “indoctrination” tactics going on that are easily found online from K through college. The removal of “offensive” statues, paintings and words from the history books. The worst “indoctrination” tactic I have seen, and proudly supported by government propaganda media is censorship on college campuses. Conservative views are being banned. Civil rights be damned; if you don’t agree with the leftist, progressive, socialist agenda, you are a problem and you must be dealt with by any means necessary in order to remove you and your views from campus.Unfortunately when presented with facts, those who are indoctrinated have also been taught that name calling and aggressive, abusive and violent behavior makes things right. They very rarely counter conservatives facts with actual facts that support their arguments. Why don’t they back up their baseless arguments with facts, because there aren’t any to support their indoctrinated ideology.