Do note, that I'm not inherently against anyone getting vaccinated. I'm against people being forced to take an experimental drug against their will. If any of you have chosen to be vaccinated, good for you - you've made your own decision as an adult. I'd like to be allowed to make my own decision.
@FreeMan I wouldn't call it "experimental". It was quickly developed and released, but that was due to simplified bureaucracy rather than any experimental science.
A question for you to think about. Since "no-one in particular" has been told to "drop the subject", I'll refrain from any more comments. We don't need a mod stopping by, sweeping loads of comments under the carpet, and I'm not sure if my user account can take another beating like that.
The point is that it took years to discover that there were harmful side effects. That's why it takes years of study to get approval. Until we know the long term effects of this vaccine, it's experimental. And, there is plenty of evidence that it is causing harm in otherwise healthy, 16 to 30 year old young men.
Again, get the vaccine if you want it, don't FORCE it on me.
You always have a choice, the consequences of some choices are just more severe than others. Even to pay taxes is a choice, the consequence of not doing it is that the government will chase you for not paying your taxes, but it's still a choice.
@FreeMan I believe the "no-one in particular" really did mean no-one in particular. FWIW I've decided to lurk here so such an event is less likely to happen again.
@Freeman Any drug submitted to the FDA is no longer experimental. Expedited review by the FDA means that the risks that they can deduce from the provided data are less than the risks associated with not allowing the vaccine, but that the review process is not complete. The expedited review will be under strict review in case there are pharmacovigilance signals that were not evident in the data that has been assessed to date.
Just to give my two cents, purely from a statistical point of view, it is actually possible to do effectiveness studies faster in a pandamic and with a smaller numbers of participants because the chance to get the desease is much higher. You simply get a sufficiently large number of cases in the control group much faster.
Also, the amount of public money thrown at the problem has certainly sped things up massively (at least for the AZ vaccine, not sure about others). Normally, all the steps needed for getting a drug through approval would happen sequentially, because it's cheaper to stop if one of the steps fails.
But in this case, they were run concurrently, speculating that each would be successful. Risk is that a step fails and lots of money is wasted, but the payoff is a much condensed timeline if everything works.
I felt pretty rotten after my first AZ jab, but fine on the second.
@Hosch250 The mRNA jabs (Pfizer and Moderna) seem to have the fewest side effects anecdotally
I'm not going to say long term effects aren't ruled out yet, but the short term effects have all been shown in actual cases of the virus, so I'd be surprised if long term effects weren't caused by the virus too.
First shot I had a triangle area at the top of my arm get locked stiff, and it was painful to the point of losing sleep for a couple days. Second had some chills and general muscle pain.
Both made my brain react somewhat similar to delirium, with racing random thoughts, but no loss of memory or control if I actually tried to think of something specific. No fever either.
I sincerely hope that there are no lasting side effects from any of the various vaccines that are being used. Unfortunately, this whole thing has become so politicized and there has been so much censorship of any dissenting opinion that it's really hard to believe what I'm being told.
@Hosch250 Unfortunately, that doesn't count as far as my employer is concerned - natural immunity, whether from having had a confirmed case or simply testing positive for the antibodies is not acceptable for skipping out on the vaccine. If it were, I might consider getting tested for antibodies. Unfortunately, they've thrown down an ultimatum that I'm not willing to accept. It's time for me to move on.
@Peilonrayz lurk away. On occasion, we've gotten a bit passionate about some very off-topic subject. To the best of my knowledge, that's never scared anyone away on a permanent basis and we've all remained friends - or as "friends" as one can be with people you've never actually met. Maybe that's just my feeling on the topic.
@FreeMan I'm guessing all the CR chat rooms have a similar 'ethos'/'ecosystem' (can't think of the right word) so I very much doubt I'll need to do much. :) Also things can be off-topic on CR chat rooms?! ;)
Stuck again. I'm trying to write a test when a module is inserted but the chosen name already exists. My implementation displays a confirmation dialog informing the user that the name will be suffixed by a numeric to create a unique identifier. When trying to do so in my test I don't see how to mock the viewModel behavior since the dialog is contained within a member whose signature is protected override void DialogOk().
Because of the protected keyword that member is not part of the public interface.
@IvenBach I'm wondering about the use case...If the user is interacting with a dialog, the conflict can be identified prior to clicking 'OK'. If so, the user can be forced to resolve it before dismissing the dialog. So - no subsequent pop-up required. Possible?
I'm just not sure if as part of the dialog it can review all the component names within the vbe to check for a conflict when there is a case-insensitive match.
Self note: If I can do that I'd want a tool-tip or other indicator to note why it can't be added.
ExtractInterface (and tests) may be simpler to review/leverage. The ExtractInterfaceModel has an IExtractInterfaceConflictFinder property that is used by the ViewModel to verify user input.
A different topic: Although my builds 'succeed' and tests pass, my VS Build Error List shows errors like the following:
Severity Code Description Project File Line Suppression State Error Custom tool PublicResXFileCodeGenerator failed to produce an output for input file 'Refactorings\Refactorings.it.resx' but did not log a specific error. Rubberduck.Resources
@IvenBach See DeclarationFinderTests.cs test name: DeclarationFinder_NameConflictDetectionRespectsProjectScope as an example of testing with multiple projects.
I have to take the small victories wherever they are. Knowing to use Enumerable.Single instead of Enumerable.Where(...) or Enumerable.First(...) helped me avoid a possible issue.
VBA Rubberducking
VBA Rubberducking