Nebby Covid

[Knight Shift]

Okay, I wondered if I'd misunderstood because it didn't sound like you.

I agree science has been politicized. But science and scientists have also been unfairly attacked for a long time now.

Used to be that scientists expressed most stuff with a great deal of equivocation and uncertainty, because reality rarely supports certainty. I mean, there have always been the folks with IQs off the charts who cannot communicate, but there weren't trotted out in front of people often.

So anyway, people with agendas (i.e. politicians, funded by special interests) starting publicly attacking scientists who were soft and easily attacked targets because, to less intelligent folks and/or folks without the requisite educational and experiential background, certainty always sounds more right than uncertainty. And ~99.999 percent of people listening can only judge a scientific presentation by how it sounds, due to the lack of foundation for meaningfully deep understanding (i.e. the "you don't have the math for it" problem that occurs while explaining most scientific stuff to lay people).

Simple human nature dictated what happened next. Scientists started responding to the attacks, as we humans usually do when attacked, by adapting and being more belligerent, more certain-sounding, and burying their ever-present uncertainty in the metaphorical fine print. They fought back, essentially.

Which is pretty understandable to me. I would do the same thing if I were them. It's extremely frustrating to try to discuss a subject replete with immense complexity and nuance with people who cannot be bothered to consider complexity and nuance. And since most scientific subjects are complex and heavily nuanced, well... you get the point.

It's a vicious catch-22. If scientists express stuff to the public in appropriately cautious and qualified and nuanced ways, nobody will listen to them. And we'll be fvcked. If they instead overstate stuff, people will listen at first, but then, because scientific knowledge is forever evolving, people will eventually claim they lied or were idiots because they spoke with too much certainty. And we'll be fvcked.

This won't resolve itself until people get over their intense aversion to anything expressed in appropriately complex and uncertain terms. Which means probably never. So, yeah. We're fvcked. 😀

Perhaps the way "some" scientists fought back and added to the problem. I will not say his name. It can be easy to get dragged into the mud slinging and wind up in a mud wrestling match. But if everyone adopted an eye for an eye approach, we would all be blind. Scientists should remain above the fray. But as you noted, they are human, and sometimes emotions get the best of reason. We are not fvcked. I remain optimistic for the long term, although pessimism has crept in quite a bit over the past year. Things will right themselves, we will all be happy and carefree again, and when the next pandemic or disaster strikes, we will forget what we "learned" (did we learn anything?) and start the whole mess over again. Or not. Onward, upward.

 

[Knight Shift]

I'm telling you what your post expresses, not what your internal feelings or history are.

I think you are telling me how my post is interpreted by you. My further posts may provide further elucidation. I'm not mad at you or anyone else, and I appreciate your replies (and @mildone 's too), which have been useful (at least to me) discussion.

 

[SleepingGiantIsAwake]

#s, I’ll give you this, you are good at using #s to try to argue your point and paint a picture. However, doesn’t mean you are correct in the actual topic that is being discussed.

With Mcculough and Malone, please state EXACTLY what you disagree with with. You are categorically saying they are wrong. Reference the specific data and references you disagree with and let’s take it from there. Otherwise, with all due respect, I deem them much more qualified on the topics than you.

Regarding the 400K+ deaths before “vax” were available. Well, of course, you’re going to bucket that into the “unvaxed” bucket…there wasn’t a “vax”‘available! And a major censored point of the tragedy of the last 2 years is the shutting down of treatments and not allowing doctors to treat. Thousands of lives could have been saved! And please show your stats and references for ivermectin related death when prescribed by doctors early in covid cycle. Tragic and criminal what happened. Still happening.

Also add the numbers for vax related deaths which are way under inflated.

Don’t get me started on any forced jabs of kids…

You threw out the 70-90% efficacy for real vaxes but failed to add why these covid vaxes are nothing but flu shots. Below are some common examples of peoples expectations of lasting efficacy of real vaccines. Nobody should be forced to take this new “vax” as longer term effects can’t possibly be known. It was experimental when first rolled out. Once again, the forced lockdowns, vaccine only mandates, masking is a failed approach and more people are realizing this and appears slowly to be creeping into MSM. Even Yahoo News https://www.google.com/amp/s/financ...demicity-endgame-morning-brief-101329577.html


Hope RU wins today. Below are some excerpts from some real vaxes.

Shingrix provides strong protection against shingles and PHN. Two doses of Shingrix is more than 90% effective at preventing shingles and PHN. Protection stays above 85% for at least the first four years after you get vaccinated.

The MMR vaccine is very safe and effective. Two doses of MMR vaccine are about 97% effective at preventing measles; one dose is about 93% effective. of the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine after 1967, you should be protected against measles for life.


How long until the chickenpox vaccine is effective?

A case-control study conducted from 1997 to 2003 showed that 1 dose of varicella vaccine was 97% effective in the first year after vaccination and 86% effective in the second year. From the second to eighth year after vaccination, the vaccine effectiveness remained stable at 81 to 86%.

 

[Knight Shift]

For anyone who thinks that non-scientists and yahoos are the only one screaming in the night at the state of science and scientists, Martin Kulldorff, PhD, is a Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School and a Professor, Medicine, Brigham And Women's Hospital. He is one of many scientists and MDs who have voiced similar thoughts.

 

[RULoyal]

Great post. As I've learned over the years with my long posts, sometimes (often?) people tune out, so occasionally, people just need the bottom line, so a stat I throw out a lot is 860K unvaccinated dead vs. 20K vaccinated dead in the US during the pandemic and since vaccines became widely available to our highest risk citizens at the end of January, we've had 400K unvaccinated dead vs. 20K vaccinated dead.

If we had simply followed the playbook of many successful countries (which was our playbook that we ignored), like Japan and South Korea, we'd have 1/20th to 1/50th of our per capita death rate during year 1, meaning maybe 10-20K dead and if we had vaccinated everyone we could have in year 2, we would have had another 20-30K dead since Feb. So much preventable death if we had followed the science of masking (with testing, tracing and isolating) before we had vaccines and vaxxing after, of course.

While it is undeniable that the US could have done better, US citizens would never have stood for the invasion of privacy involved in contact tracing in South Korea. As far as Japan is concerned, I think the fact that Japan has a low prevalence of co-morbidity, obesity, and diabetes due to its healthy eating habits and exercise habit plays a big part.

 

[zappaa]

NFL halts COVID testing for unvaccinated players

The NFL is halting daily COVID-19 testing for unvaccinated players. Only those who report symptoms will be tested.

www.espn.com

NHL has already done it.
IMO this model is the road to normalcy

 

[RU848789]

Had not seen those stats before -- very dramatic. Thanks for posting. And btw, I think there are probably a number of folks reading this exchange who are likely to be "seeing the light" on the truth of the situation here. I always hope that that is the case.

We are currently at 52 deaths total here in NZ, but we are facing a tough situation with Omicron. As you know, we started vaccine program later than most countries, but had a short, strictly enforced, lockdown, and have had very few cases of COVID overall. We are at 93% over 12 years old with two shots of Pfizer, but only have 23% boosted. We are increasing the boosted number by about a percent a day. So it will take a couple of months to get the boosted numbers up. Also just started vaccines for 5-12 year olds.

So, ideally we would try to keep Omicron out of the country for 2-3 months, and then basically not worry about it too much in terms of press on the hospitals. That's what the government is hinting at, but hasn't actually come out and said. I think it's a solid approach, but we had been hoping to hit herd immunity here. That's pretty much out the window with Omicron.

So here is what I'm wondering. I've been vaxxed and boosted. I'm also 71 and have a heart stent. When Omicron hits NZ, what kind of risk do I have if I get Omicron?

Thanks, let's hope so. Some very good news out just today from the CDC on omicron and the superb protection from being boosted vs. double vaccinated and, of course, over the unvaccinated; see the excerpt below in italics.

While the vaccine effectiveness of a two-dose series against emergency department visits, urgent care visits, and hospitalizations declined to 76% after 6 months, it rose back up to 94% after the third shot, said Walensky, referencing new data from the VISION Network published in an early edition of the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).

The numbers for hospitalizations were even more striking, with 90% effectiveness against COVID-associated hospitalizations after a third dose.

Walensky also pointed to a study published on Friday in JAMA that found that a booster dose of Pfizer or Moderna provided "greater protection against symptomatic COVID disease versus the primary series."

Those who received a booster dose versus those who only received the two-dose primary series were less likely to test positive for Omicron (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.32-0.36), according to data from the Increasing Community Access to Testing (ICATT) program.

Finally, she reviewed a second MMWR report that examined both COVID-19 incidence and deaths during the Omicron surge, which found that, in December, unvaccinated adults had a five times higher risk of infection compared with adults who received a booster dose, relative to October-November.

Walensky also noted that CDC's COVID Data Tracker showed that older adults derived the greatest benefit from boosters: adults ages 65 and up who received a booster were almost 50 times less likely to be hospitalized compared with unvaccinated older adults. Adults ages 50 to 64 were 44 times less likely to be hospitalized.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infect...2&utm_term=NL_Daily_DHE_dual-gmail-definition

And there's also the post below from last night you may have missed on the UK controlled population study of health care workers showing significant protection against infection for being boosted (and modest protection for double vaxxed and previously infected but not vaxxed). In addition to the table in that post showing protection against infection, there was also a table in that report (and text explanation) showing the superb protection against hospitalization due to omicron for those boosted/double vaccinated

That is untrue with regard to omicron and only became true with delta once the 2-dose vaccinations were found to wane, which was always a risk and why boosted should now be considered fully vaxxed (just like we do for so many other viruses). Boosted people have the best immunity vs. omicron infection, while double-vaxxed have second best immunity and unvaccinated, but previously infected people have the least immunity, but still have moderate immunity (part 2 of the table below). The study below is the first one I've seen where it was actually a controlled population (all were health care workers tested regularly whether symptomatic or not, so variables around testing/symptoms weren't an issue like they are in most of the other datasets out there). And of course, unvaccinated, not previously infected people have, by far, the highest infection rates - and, by far, the highest rates of hospitalization and death.

For the record, I have always said that previous infection should be considered similar to vaccination with regard to protection against infection and thought such people should be exempted from vaccine requirements, although I also thought they should still get vaccinated since the immune response from infection is so highly variable. Plus, there have been some suggesting people should just get infected to get immunity, which is simply insane, as immunity derived from vaccination is extraordinarily safe, whereas immunite derived from infection is quite dangerous, especially for older people and those with comorbidities, but even for healthy people too, relative to vaccine risks.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...395/technical-briefing-34-14-january-2022.pdf

Lastly, while this next graphic on vaccine protection against death during the month of November in the US isn't about omicron, it shows the incredible protection against death from delta during that time from being boosted (68X vs. unvaccinated) and the still pretty (13X vs. unvaccinated) strong protection against death from delta infection from being double vaxxed (or single with J&J). Frankly I'm astounded that all of these data wouldn't make some unvaccinated run to get vaccinated (especially if never infected or unsure).

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-status

 

[bac2therac]

You're getting tedious, bac. Wen, who is NOT a virologist, is saying that the "95" masks are way better than cloth masks. But that wasn't the question here. It was between masks and no masks. And in terms of not spreading Covid, a cloth mask is better than no mask. Simple as. See here: https://health.clevelandclinic.org/are-cloth-masks-enough-against-omicron/

No she is saying cloth masks don't work..and was backed up michael ohlstrom sp? Numerous times

Ever wonder how states with no mask mandates and then with mandates follow the same trajectory

Those mask mandates sure have helped in Europe

 

[bac2therac]

NFL halts COVID testing for unvaccinated players

The NFL is halting daily COVID-19 testing for unvaccinated players. Only those who report symptoms will be tested.

www.espn.com

NHL has already done it.
IMO this model is the road to normalcy

Its amazing are sports leagues have to be the ones to say enough with this ridiculousness. More businesses need to do this

 

[bac2therac]

For anyone who thinks that non-scientists and yahoos are the only one screaming in the night at the state of science and scientists, Martin Kulldorff, PhD, is a Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School and a Professor, Medicine, Brigham And Women's Hospital. He is one of many scientists and MDs who have voiced similar thoughts.

View embedded media

Kulldorf has been great throughout this

Martin Makary also has been excellent on the issue of natural immunity where he has been panned by tge usual suspects as touting misinformation. He often is on Fox and has written editorials for ny times

 

[bac2therac]

 

[bac2therac]

John Hopkins..and its similar at many Ivies

 

[bac2therac]

WHO official says children do not need boosters

 

[RUfinally2008]

But, Joe had a plan to kill the virus and unite the country. Of course he NEVER said what those plans were and mainstream media ate it up just like so many of you did. It gets harder and harder to find anyone who'll admit they voted for this train wreck. Hey Liberals, remember the good old days when you predicted Trump would start WW3???

 

[fluoxetine]

Usefulness of bronchoalveolar lavage in the management of patients presenting with lung infiltrates and suspect COVID-19-associated pneumonia

This link to a scientific article is not related to the deranged ranting I quoted in my post. If this is what he is talking about, you need a translator to figure that out, which is my point.

But, Joe had a plan to kill the virus and unite the country. Of course he NEVER said what those plans were and mainstream media ate it up just like so many of you did. It gets harder and harder to find anyone who'll admit they voted for this train wreck. Hey Liberals, remember the good old days when you predicted Trump would start WW3???

I mean it's fairly obvious what the plan* was to any non-idiot. It was to get everyone vaccinated, watch the virus fade away on its own, and take as much credit for that as possible. Unfortunately, a couple things were unanticipated:

(1) The Facebook and OAN induced holes in many people's brains are larger than previously thought, which caused a lot of resistance to getting vaccinated.

(2) Variants made the vaccines less effective (note, to people who are aware of the existence of numbers between 0 and 1, this is not the same thing as completely ineffective).

 

[RU848789]

While it is undeniable that the US could have done better, US citizens would never have stood for the invasion of privacy involved in contact tracing in South Korea. As far as Japan is concerned, I think the fact that Japan has a low prevalence of co-morbidity, obesity, and diabetes due to its healthy eating habits and exercise habit plays a big part.

It plays a small but important part, maybe 2X, out of the 20-50X reduction in deaths in many of those countries, which was mostly due to masking and testing/tracing/isolating.

 

[Knight Shift]

This link to a scientific article is not related to the deranged ranting I quoted in my post. If this is what he is talking about, you need a translator to figure that out, which is my point.


I mean it's fairly obvious what the plan* was to any non-idiot. It was to get everyone vaccinated, watch the virus fade away on its own, and take as much credit for that as possible. Unfortunately, a couple things were unanticipated:

(1) The Facebook and OAN induced holes in many people's brains are larger than previously thought, which caused a lot of resistance to getting vaccinated.

(2) Variants made the vaccines less effective (note, to people who are aware of the existence of numbers between 0 and 1, this is not the same thing as completely ineffective).

Agree on #2, but there is A LOT more to the resistance than what you posted in #1. It has been hashed out here numerous times. There are a lot of people who genuinely distrusted the government, big pharma and vaccines long before Facebook (have no idea what OAN is), but it is cute how some people want to paint with such a broad brush when people who have not taken the vaccine are a much broader and diverse group, perhaps because they want to make it political. An equally large problem is the refusal of many authorities to acknowledge acquired immunity through infection, some who are still promoting the notion that the vaccine stops the spread of the virus, and vaccine mandates in the face of people who have legitimate medical reasons for not taking the vaccine or who have acquired immunity. Lumping them all in together causes further anger and division and finger pointing. The lack of transparency and muddled messaging by government authorities has been a huge problem, probably larger than #1.

 

[RUBOB72]

lmfao, stop acting as if one side politicized and the other didnt, they both did and some are clinging to it now

why did 33andrain shut the covid thread down?

Spot on when you say some wish to make it out that you , I and others are the only ones who make it political. This is the pseudo reality which is floated by MSM.

 

[Knight Shift]

It plays a small but important part, maybe 2X, out of the 20-50X reduction in deaths in many of those countries, which was mostly due to masking and testing/tracing/isolating.

I don't think you can make such an assessment without RCTs.
Undoubtedly, high quality masking and testing and tracing have been important. Had an interesting discussion with a colleague in Taiwan about contact tracing, which was put in place in the early 2000's with SARS. People in Taiwan are also more compliant with government directives.
But for some reason, some want to dance around and not fully acknowledge the issue of poor metabolic health and bad covid outcomes. It's on the CDC website. The US has one of the worst obesity and T2D rates in the world, which has not helped outcomes here (along with a lower percentage of vaccination and masking, etc.). It is complicated with many confounding variables.

 

[fluoxetine]

Agree on #2, but there is A LOT more to the resistance than what you posted in #1. It has been hashed out here numerous times. There are a lot of people who genuinely distrusted the government, big pharma and vaccines long before Facebook (have no idea what OAN is), but it is cute how some people want to paint with such a broad brush when people who have not taken the vaccine are a much broader and diverse group, perhaps because they want to make it political. An equally large problem is the refusal of many authorities to acknowledge acquired immunity through infection, some who are still promoting the notion that the vaccine stops the spread of the virus, and vaccine mandates in the face of people who have legitimate medical reasons for not taking the vaccine or who have acquired immunity. Lumping them all in together causes further anger and division and finger pointing. The lack of transparency and muddled messaging by government authorities has been a huge problem, probably larger than #1.

I don't agree. For sure there were anti-vaxxers before Facebook, and before COVID-19, but they were basically a fringe group that most everyone agreed were insane. They were on par with the 9/11 melting steel people or whatever, a small group of lunatics that could be safely ignored.

None of this messaging shit would've mattered at all if a huge group of people had not gone insane first. I'm sure they've made mistakes but it's also completely impossible to message something to a group that despises you and is already determined not to do the thing you are trying to get them to do.

Similarly, stuff like "acquired immunity through infection" only becomes relevant when people are already fighting tooth and nail to avoid getting the vaccine.

I do agree that places with vaccine mandates (such as NYC) should have a way to get some kind of certification of medical exemption so that people with legitimate reasons not the be vaccinated can still participate in life. But, let's be clear, this is a small group of people with truly legitimate reasons.

 

[BIGRUBIGDBIGredmachine]

Wrong again - what's it like to be wrong so often and badly? If not for delta, we were well on our way to endemicity with the original strain, with transmissions very low and deaths quite low and if we had continued with strong vaccination rates I think we would've gotten there. But delta and then omicron couldn't have been predicted (although we knew variants were likely) and they changed the game as we've seen.

Countries like South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and several others had essentially triumphed vs the original strain with about 1/20th to 1/100th our per capita death rates and without completely shutting their countries down, via excellent testing/tracing/isolating, which the former Adminitration completely bungled allowing us to have a horrific outbreak and then additional ones. If not for delta, those countries would've completely been vaccinated without ever having much death or lockdowns, but delta and omicron impacted them some too - but still much less than us.

LOL with your same old silly apples-to-Mars comparisons and political nonsense.

COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...

699 new positives reported for NJ. Anyone know where you can find the number of tests reported that the 699 came from? Could be another reporting lag, or it could be the signal of a problem. My hunch is the former.

rutgers.forums.rivals.com

 

[RUBOB72]

And you think calling one of the most respected public health scientists of our time, who served countless administrations with distinction, disparaging names is helpful? I don't. And for the record, as much as I reviled the previous POTUS, I never called him names.

Sorry numbers the man created his own issues . He is cunning , clever and manipulative . He may be brilliant but he lost the respect of many millions always using “the virus is changing “, masks work, ( now it’s well we all get an NK 95 mask as a trophy for springtime ) the masks don’t really protect ( Walensky ) only the mask made in …you know where . The amount of questions on the NIH…Francis Collins bailing early probably is living in Bali today. The standard response is / was used by Fauci , CDC, NIH will always …” it’s a new virus we don’t understand it fully yet ( we all understood that point) it can mutate into other variants “ ( ok we got that) and of course people believed Dr. Fauci until hundreds of other scientists and medical people ( who probably are just as reliable and maybe more so ) came out with other data debunking what was told to the public. Dr.Fauci at times let his personal frustration show when the heat got turned up. Dr. Fauci resorted back to his Napoleon complex and he does have a Napoleon complex. By not giving clarity on the issue of protection he then resorted to calling people names. If after almost 3 full years we are only slightly better off in this war then perhaps a change would have been good . I would suggest we will be lucky that Omicron took over…maybe. The last point is does anyone believe the world with 9 billion inhabitants can also be vaccinated fully . The best is no one gives a damn where and how this started but…the public knows …the world knows…

 

[RULoyal]

It plays a small but important part, maybe 2X, out of the 20-50X reduction in deaths in many of those countries, which was mostly due to masking and testing/tracing/isolating.

Again, the US would not stand for the privacy invasions within the South Korea contact tracing protocol.

 

[BIGRUBIGDBIGredmachine]

Again, the US would not stand for the privacy invasions within the South Korea contact tracing protocol.

And it would be each state responsible for, in cooperation with the Feds, to manage and implement any SoKo-like protocols, not at all like the central government in Seoul. Of course this would be consistent with our Constitution and logistically practical since the US is 99x larger in land mass and exceedingly more geographically and demographically diverse. Such a silly apples-to-Mars comparison by #'s. Again.

 

[RUskoolie]

Numb3rs has been spot on throughout the pandemic. And obviously masks worked, even cloth ones. But with the transmissibility of omicron, cloth masks do not provide much protection from getting COVID, but still help against spreading it.

See here from the Cleveland Clinic: https://health.clevelandclinic.org/are-cloth-masks-enough-against-omicron/

Delusional? Sensible.

Lol what? One of his best ever was explaining how Japan got it right with masks and then months later their infection rate spiked to insane levels

Cloth masks do absolutely nothing. This has been shown over and over and over again. JFC how stupid are some of you?

Do me a favor, go outside today with your cloth mask and tell me if you see your breathe go right through it on a nice cold day like today.

FFS

 

[bac2therac]

They will never admit they were on masking

 

[sunsetregret]

This link to a scientific article is not related to the deranged ranting I quoted in my post. If this is what he is talking about, you need a translator to figure that out, which is my point.

You, maybe. I did not. Of course, I wasn't disingenuously trying to find something to attack him for, so there's that. Anyone who has ever had a relative with severe COPD knew exactly what he was suggesting. And we also knew that he didn't just invent it in his head and that someone had just briefed him on it (and the light therapy) that day (because that's common sense and we weren't actively trying to portray him in a negative light for political purposes).

 

[sunsetregret]

I really cannot believe that we're eight pages in and we have people clinging to "we just didn't mask enough" like a life raft. The game's over. Even the leftist doctors and scientists are quietly saying publicly, (paraphrase) "Well, everyone knows the masks don't do anything." Twenty years from now, you guys are going to be like the Japanese soldiers hiding on a remote island in the South Pacific in the 1960s that still think WW2 is on-going. Masks are not the hill to die on.

 

[fluoxetine]

You, maybe. I did not. Of course, I wasn't disingenuously trying to find something to attack him for, so there's that. Anyone who has ever had a relative with severe COPD knew exactly what he was suggesting. And we also knew that he didn't just invent it in his head and that someone had just briefed him on it (and the light therapy) that day (because that's common sense and we weren't actively trying to portray him in a negative light for political purposes).

No, that's bullshit. Like this is an obvious lie. No one listens to that in real time and understands it with any degree of certainty.

 

[bac2therac]

They think mannequin mask studies are teal life

They disregard that most mask studies done before 2020 said masking is ineffective

 

[sunsetregret]

No, that's bullshit. Like this is an obvious lie. No one listens to that in real time and understands it with any degree of certainty.

If I had access to the CE Board, I could easily prove you wrong (assuming the old March and April 2020 posts still exist there).

 

[Proud NJ Sports Fan]

If I had access to the CE Board, I could easily prove you wrong (assuming the old March and April 2020 posts still exist there).

You’re right man

 

[fluoxetine]

If I had access to the CE Board, I could easily prove you wrong (assuming the old March and April 2020 posts still exist there).

You could prove to me, using the current events board, that a Trump speech isn’t essentially a Rorschach test? Okay.

 

[sunsetregret]

You could prove to me, using the current events board, that a Trump speech isn’t essentially a Rorschach test? Okay.

If the posts still exist (and I had access to them), I could prove to you that the day he gave the press conference (and the media immediately and predictably began the "drinking bleach" propaganda), I was posting on here that (1) it was obvious what he referring to because my mother is a COPD patient that gets a bronchoscopy several times a year and the light therapy was being promoted by its company on YouTube, and (2) it was obviously something that he had been briefed on just prior to the press conference. I also pointed out that cancer patients put disinfectant in their bodies all the time as a medical treatment, except they call it "chemotherapy."

To put it in vernacular you might understand, I'll translate your post for you: "HURR DURR, that billionaire with 200 top medical advisors thinks we should all drink bleach! I'm so much smarter than him!1!!1!"

 

[fluoxetine]

If the posts still exist (and I had access to them), I could prove to you that the day he gave the press conference (and the media immediately and predictably began the "drinking bleach" propaganda), I was posting on here that (1) it was obvious what he referring to because my mother is a COPD patient that gets a bronchoscopy several times a year and the light therapy was being promoted by its company on YouTube, and (2) it was obviously something that he had been briefed on just prior to the press conference.

To put it in vernacular you might understand, I'll translate your post for you: "HURR DURR, that billionaire with 200 top medical advisors thinks we should all drink bleach! I'm so much smarter than him!1!!1!"

I’m willing to believe that you might have known what he was talking about, in this specific instance, because you already knew about it. But that’s still a Rorschach test; it’s not decipherable easily by anyone without prior knowledge.

 

[MADHAT1]

Everything Trump said was told to him by "experts".

"One day the virus would vanish".. that's what happened with Sars (a coronavirus) .. right? Hell.. Fauci downplayed the virus at first and Fauci was advising Trump. For all I know that was Fauci's line that came out of "the orange man's" mouth.

Trump's problem, one of many, was that he is a braggart, a blowhard.. who loves to pretend he knows everything and is on top of everything... Obama was the same way but a helluva lot better at it. Trump repeatedly tried to restate complicated issues in simple terms and he blew it fairly often. But that doesn't mean he made bad decisions behind the scenes. I'd take a guy that has a personality flaw like that but makes the right decisions every time over what we have now.

Trump created the Coronavirus response team on 1/29/2020.. a month later Fauci said this on the Today Show:

​

"There's no need to change anything that you're doing on a day by day basis. Right now the risk is still low, but this could change. When you start to see community spread, this could change and force you to become much more attentive to doing things that would protect you from spread."​

​

And what would become the "Faucists" agreed, of course, because that meant being able to say Trump was crazy shutting down travel for China. And the "Faucists" would say that SCIENCE agreed with Fauci then and that would change.

They say Fauci follows the science.. but it is more like "the science" follows Fauci.

Remember folks !!! Throughout January of 2020, President Trump repeatedly played down the seriousness of the virus many of the advisors inside his government from top White House advisers to experts deep in the cabinet departments and intelligence agencies — identified Covid 19 as a great threat, sounded alarms and made clear the need for aggressive action.

• The National Security Council office responsible for tracking pandemics received intelligence reports in early January predicting the spread of the virus to the United States, and within weeks was raising options like keeping Americans home from work and shutting down cities the size of Chicago. Mr. Trump would avoid such steps until March.
• Despite Trump’s denial weeks later, he was told in a Jan. 29 memo laying out in striking detail the potential risks of a coronavirus pandemic: as many as half a million deaths and trillions of dollars in economic losses.
• The health and human services secretary, Alex M. Azar II, directly warned Mr. Trump of the possibility of a pandemic during a call on Jan. 30, the second warning he delivered to the president about the virus in two weeks. The president, who was on Air Force One while traveling for appearances in the Midwest, responded that Mr. Azar was being alarmist.
• By the third week in February, the administration’s top public health experts concluded they should recommend to Mr. Trump a new approach that would include warning the American people of the risks and urging steps like social distancing and staying home from work. But the White House focused instead on messaging and crucial additional weeks went by before their views were reluctantly accepted by the president — time when the virus spread largely unimpeded.

on Fauci changing what he said. When little was known about the virus he based his advice on what was known at the time and said people could go on doing what thewy normaly were doing , but also let it be known the virus could prove to be a major problem
In the early months, Fauci followed the practice of telling reporters how the situation stood at the moment — which, given relatively few cases, was generally encouraging — but warning that the situation could change.
On Jan. 20, Fauci told CNN, "It really is an evolving situation, and we have to be prepared for the worst. I mean, I don't think there is cause for panic on anyone's part but we certainly need to be following it and watching this very carefully."
The next day, the first country had its first confirmed case. On Fox Business’ "Lou Dobbs Tonight", Fauci said "I believe it can still be stopped, Lou, and it's completely impossible to predict what the scope is going to be, what the kinetic is going to be. … this is something that will likely spread more before we actually get it under control."
With just 15 cases reported as of Feb. 22, Fauci told CNN, "At this particular moment, Michael, the risk is very low. But, and I have to underline ‘but’, this could change and it could change rapidly. Getting back to what you said about a pandemic, if this evolves into a pandemic there's no way we in the United States are going to escape having more infections in this country."
On Feb. 29, with cases still numbering just 24, Fauci spoke in the morning on NBC’s "Today Show" and later that day at the White House Coronavirus Task Force briefing. On NBC, he said:
"Right now at this moment there's no need to change anything that you’re doing on a day by day basis. Right now the risk is still low, but this could change. I’ve said that many times even on this program. You’ve got to watch out because although the risk is low now, you don't need to change anything you’re doing. When you start to see community spread, this could change and force you to become much more attentive to doing things that would protect you from spread."
And at the White House briefing:
"The country as a whole — because we get asked that all the time — still remains at low risk. But when we say that, we want to underscore that this is an evolving situation."

When knocking Fauci for the advice he gave when virus first started being noticed and had a low number of infections , some here are using part of his statements acting like Fauci gave bad advice, but ignoring the fact their was little knowledge of the virus at the time and the infection rate was low. Also leaving out when they knock the good Doctor how he also advised that the issue could change for the worse and it needed to be looked at closely in case it becomes more of a problem .
Those knocking Fauci ignore the fact as more info about the virus became available , his advice to the public was base on the latest scientific evidence at the time, but he also admitted the problem could get worse.
Those knocking Fauci refuse to knock Trump’s playing down the seriousness of the virus to the public, despite being warned it was a serious issue
Me thinks it more about political agendas and wanting to believe conspiracy theories for them and not really the virus

adding this for informational purposes
From The New York Times:
He Could Have Seen What Was Coming: Behind Trump’s Failure on the Virus
An examination reveals the president was warned about the potential for a pandemic but that internal divisions, lack of planning and his faith in his own instincts led to a halting response.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/us/politics/coronavirus-trump-response.html?smid=em-share

 

[RUfubar]

For the record, I have always said that previous infection should be considered similar to vaccination with regard to protection against infection and thought such people should be exempted from vaccine requirements, although I also thought they should still get vaccinated since the immune response from infection is so highly variable.

The problem for the US and immunity passport - setting aside Omi surge and setting aside other infection and immunologically detailed arguments for vaccination vs natural durable immunity.
1. Not enough testing to have proved prior infection equitably. Equity is a big issue.
2. Fragmentation of the US healthcare system and communicating processes.
No centralized system for reporting positive tests in a unified systematic way. It's pure chaos.
3. Long covid
4. Main goal was to flatten curve and keep people from running the ER/floors ragged. People lining up for minimal symptoms and routine testing in the ER in the US. Emergency rooms on divert. Healthcare workers either sick or broken down from being overrun.
5. The US healthcare system is like no other for worldly comparison and is dysfunctional and fragmented. Third world-like at times.
6. So in a perfect world a college student doesn't show up claiming immunity from prior infection with a handwritten note from an unclear source claiming positive antigen test or the like. There's a lot of work to be done to make reporting data more efficacious.
7. So if you're lucky and wealthy enough to have had access to PCR testing that documented 4 month prior infection nicely on a printout -well then that is good for you and maybe you should be exempt but not very fair for those other kids/people without resources.
8. Everyone's an expert critic because it's easy to be a critic and second-guessing, question everything and everyone. Now I know what it's like for soldiers returning from war and listening to all the luncheonette crowd who weren't trench fighting, but who are expert critics about that war being fought.
9. This virus is far from going endemic. When you can infect so many asymptomatic people so easily and be spread pre-symptomatically, there is no evolutionary advantage to not mutate at will.

 

[BIGRUBIGDBIGredmachine]

oh yeh the NYTimes is trustworthy....🤣

 

[MADHAT1]

oh yeh the NYTimes is trustworthy....🤣

Don't like the message and can't refute it, shoot the messenger.

 

[BIGRUBIGDBIGredmachine]

Don't like the message and can't refute it, shoot the messenger.

It's been refuted check CE. Remember how honest the NYTp "examined" the #rusher hoax lmao.