Coronovirus IV

[JettaKnight]

Some are simply willing to shoot you.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/p...uffer&utm_term=ttagfeed&utm_campaign=ttagfeed

“As a concerned carry-permitted gun owner, if you refuse to wear a mask and try to come within 6 feet of me or my family, I will exercise the same constitutional rights to shoot you.”

I hope she's lying about that, but it's PA and permits are easy to get there (or at least they were)...


I get her point (of course, I don't agree), but the way she said it.... no, just no.
I'm not sure if Facebook makes people stupid or makes them reveal their stupidity.


As for their resignation letters, they seem to be doubling down on that stupidity.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Inconsistent policy? Trump's taken the lead on that. The CDC - from what I'm aware of - consistently stated the known risks. Evidence to the contrary? Sure, there's always contrary evidence (like whether hydroxychloroquine is effective).

The CDC has many faults, many related to reporting and tracking. One thing they've been pretty good about is putting the [STRIKE]known facts[/STRIKE] latest WAG out there. They aren't always right, and certainly not prompt, but the fearmongering is done by the politicians. Because that's a motivator.

FIFY. If they aren't right, then they were never facts, right?

 

[T.Lex]

FIFY. If they aren't right, then they were never facts, right?

Ah, yes, the oldest of INGO arguments: the relativity of truth.

 

[jamil]

You're reading alot of words into my posts that don't exist this morning.

Let's go back. The point was regurgitated that "this is just the flu." My counterpoint was that the flu numbers are just estimates, like COVID numbers. And the CDC is one repository for both (the primary one for the flu, from what I can tell).

When I learned that the flu numbers are just estimates, that was the final straw breaking the "its just the flu" argument. The comparison is absurd.

Arguably, we know more about how many people have died from COVID than the flu.

But no, obviously, the processes are different. The common factor in the IJTF argument is the CDC. But, the inconsistency is trusting the CDC for one but not the other.

This is the only statement I had problems with:

"But if one trusts the flu numbers estimates, consistency dictates that one would trust the COVID estimates."

That statement isn't true for the reasons I said. I don't believe flu=covid.

 

[T.Lex]

I don't believe flu=covid.

Neither do I.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Ah, yes, the oldest of INGO arguments: the relativity of truth.

Not my argument. Truth isn't relative. Something is either true, or it's not. Otherwise, it's a guess or an estimate, or a "model" if you will.

 

[T.Lex]

Not my argument. Truth isn't relative. Something is either true, or it's not. Otherwise, it's a guess or an estimate, or a "model" if you will.

Welcome to my syllogism.

It is true that the novel coronavirus causes death. It is true that we do not have a vaccine for this novel coronavirus. It is true that we do not have an effective treatment for this novel coronavirus.

With me so far?

 

[jamil]

FIFY. If they aren't right, then they were never facts, right?

Let's assume the CDC is actually interested in the pubic health and not other things relating to their power. In itself, you could say that incorrect information is a fact as reported. So if they say, what we believe now is 'x', that's a fact. They believe x. And then their credentials makes the weight of what they believe believable to others. In a climate where they're constantly changing what they believe 180 degrees from what they believed a couple of weeks ago, the value of their credentials and makes what they're saying less believable. Credibility is important. The CDC's credibility is smelling like ****.

 

[T.Lex]

Credibility is important. The CDC's credibility is smelling like ****.

Hey, whatdayaknow! Today started off rocky, but more common ground.

 

[jamil]

Welcome to my syllogism.

It is true that the novel coronavirus causes death. It is true that we do not have a vaccine for this novel coronavirus. It is true that we do not have an effective treatment for this novel coronavirus.

With me so far?

The CDC told us that covid's primary way of infecting people was not airborne, but through contacting infected surfaces and then touching eyes/nose/mouth. And I think they said at the time in the context of "we believe based on blah blah blah". Okay, fine. They get to be wrong. But 180 degrees and that's not the only one, and we're basing public policy on all that, I kinda think they need to sit tight and kinda figure **** out to a more certain degree than "we believe".

 

[nonobaddog]

"We believe" really means "we want you to believe".

 

[T.Lex]

The CDC told us that covid's primary way of infecting people was not airborne, but through contacting infected surfaces and then touching eyes/nose/mouth.

Well, first, I don't recall them ever saying "primary." My recollection is that they've always said it is like the flu... "contact" with a carrier is how it spreads.

Not saying "YOU'RE WRONG" just saying that I have a different recollection.

(Not sure where that fits on the truth/fact spectrum.)

And I think they said at the time in the context of "we believe based on blah blah blah". Okay, fine. They get to be wrong. But 180 degrees and that's not the only one, and we're basing public policy on all that, I kinda think they need to sit tight and kinda figure **** out to a more certain degree than "we believe".

That's unrealistic.

People look at them and ask, "What do we need to know?" Their response is, "Well, we're still figuring things out, but here's a laundry list of good ideas from an epidemiological perspective."

I don't want doctors setting national (or local) policy on this. They are SMEs. I'm a big Fauci fan, but if he were in control we'd all be under house arrest until there's a vaccine/treatment. That's terrible policy.

The SMEs should provide the best information they can to the elected leaders, and to us, probably in that order.

 

[jamil]

I hope she's lying about that, but it's PA and permits are easy to get there (or at least they were)...


I get her point (of course, I don't agree), but the way she said it.... no, just no.
I'm not sure if Facebook makes people stupid or makes them reveal their stupidity.


As for their resignation letters, they seem to be doubling down on that stupidity.

"I am in a profession where the threat of someone approaching me not wearing a mask while in the midst of a pandemic is equivalent to the threat against my life. Just as it would be if they approached me with their gun drawn and pointed at me."

Uh. I think she's a bit [STRIKE]hyperbolic[/STRIKE] hysterical. People around her need to just tell her to calm the **** down. While I'd say in this climate that I can see why people might think it's kinda rude to get into people's personal space without wearing a mask, but it's not a death threat. I think she doesn't have the proper temperament to have that job. She should maybe consider some other line of work. Maybe a job where she doesn't have to work with people.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

The CDC told us that covid's primary way of infecting people was not airborne, but through contacting infected surfaces and then touching eyes/nose/mouth. And I think they said at the time in the context of "we believe based on blah blah blah". Okay, fine. They get to be wrong. But 180 degrees and that's not the only one, and we're basing public policy on all that, I kinda think they need to sit tight and kinda figure **** out to a more certain degree than "we believe".

^^^What he said.^^^

 

[jamil]

Well, first, I don't recall them ever saying "primary." My recollection is that they've always said it is like the flu... "contact" with a carrier is how it spreads.

Not saying "YOU'RE WRONG" just saying that I have a different recollection.

(Not sure where that fits on the truth/fact spectrum.)



That's unrealistic.

People look at them and ask, "What do we need to know?" Their response is, "Well, we're still figuring things out, but here's a laundry list of good ideas from an epidemiological perspective."

I don't want doctors setting national (or local) policy on this. They are SMEs. I'm a big Fauci fan, but if he were in control we'd all be under house arrest until there's a vaccine/treatment. That's terrible policy.

The SMEs should provide the best information they can to the elected leaders, and to us, probably in that order.

About the recollection, they initially told us not to worry about airborn. Washing your hands would do more than wearing a mask.

Okay, and asking them to be careful about the specificity of information is not an unrealistic ask. In the above example of how to protect yourself, instead of saying that it's spread by picking it up from mostly hard surfaces, and that we should wash our hands often and disinfect hard surfaces often, and don't bother wearing a mask, they could have been less specific. How about, "we're still figuring things out, these kinds of viruses can spread from contact with surfaces, or airborne particles or droplets. So these are all the things you can do to mitigate all that..."

So now they tell us the primary way to get is the airborne droplets, oh, and by the way, homemade masks are better than nothing. Thanks a lot *******s.

Oh. And a Fauci fan I never was, but I thought he was doing a pretty good job initially. I kinda think he's quite full of **** now.

 

[T.Lex]

About the recollection, they initially told us not to worry about airborn. Washing your hands would do more than wearing a mask.

Quick googling - is this what you're thinking of? The publication of studies about how long it lasts on surfaces?
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/new-coronavirus-stable-hours-surfaces

I'm still not sure the CDC has indicated the virus can travel 15 miles in the open air to infect someone.

Okay, and asking them to be careful about the specificity of information is not an unrealistic ask.

Kinda like with the "every death a COVID death" spinification, the CDC is not the root of all evil in this. It is acting like a clearinghouse of information, from what I can tell. Their role (as superfluous as it may be) is to: a) try to protect Trump's statements, b) publicize the results of testing done by other entities.

As I go through more of what the CDC does on its own... I wonder more and more what their mission is. Or was.

 

[foszoe]

Right now "we" are seeing all the "benefits" without the consequences. The have nots are getting free money. The haves are getting some free money AND watching their investments rebound. The middle class is getting squeezed. I think once the chickens come home to roost. That is when things will happen.

have any of those impacts mattered so far? I mean they closed schools when there were 0 cases in the county, only 1 case in all of the counties around us combined. The decision would rest on the superintendents, not the politicians. Schools that are in the red would see it as a lifeline, not having to run busses, etc.

I’ve talked to some parents, e.g. who attend our church, who say they will not be sending their kids back next year no matter what... too risky they say.

ETA: I could also see certain functions/activities restricted... like no or limited bussing, no extracurricular activities (or no/limited spectators), etc.

I really hope I’m wrong. I think it’s at least a real possibility, and you will see it at least some places (not necessarily nationally Or statewide).

-rvb

 

[foszoe]

It would be interesting to see how flu death estimates compare to flu death actuals.

Not true. They know a lot more about seasonal flu than covid. Flu tracking is consistently done year by year. Look how many times they've changed the criteria for covid. How reliable are the tests they do for flu vs covid? That plays into the estimates as well. So I don't think you can relate one to the other to say that both are equally trustworthy. Also, the flu has not been politicized anywhere near the same level of magnitude. With people so divided on covid and policies around it, especially with a CDC that seems eager to lie "for the public good" there are plenty of more reasons to lie about covid than the flu, and plenty more reasons to distrust the numbers we hear compared to the flu.

 

[foszoe]

IF what they said in January was based on evidence presented and/or vetted by the Chinese, THEN I find it hard to fault statements made by trusting that data in good faith as it was all we had to go on. I heard on CNBC, Cramer I think, that the first time the Chinese indicated it MIGHT be airborne was like Jan 23rd.

About the recollection, they initially told us not to worry about airborn. Washing your hands would do more than wearing a mask.

Okay, and asking them to be careful about the specificity of information is not an unrealistic ask. In the above example of how to protect yourself, instead of saying that it's spread by picking it up from mostly hard surfaces, and that we should wash our hands often and disinfect hard surfaces often, and don't bother wearing a mask, they could have been less specific. How about, "we're still figuring things out, these kinds of viruses can spread from contact with surfaces, or airborne particles or droplets. So these are all the things you can do to mitigate all that..."

So now they tell us the primary way to get is the airborne droplets, oh, and by the way, homemade masks are better than nothing. Thanks a lot *******s.

Oh. And a Fauci fan I never was, but I thought he was doing a pretty good job initially. I kinda think he's quite full of **** now.

 

[rvb]

Right now "we" are seeing all the "benefits" without the consequences. The have nots are getting free money. The haves are getting some free money AND watching their investments rebound. The middle class is getting squeezed. I think once the chickens come home to roost. That is when things will happen.

This morning was my kid’s last day of elementary school. The middle school principal was on their morning video chat talking about middle school procedures. As of this morning he was saying that their SOP is for all the kids to arrive, collect in one area at the entrance to the school where they can socialize (~900 kids), then they are released all at the same time to go their lockers and then to their first period class. So as of now their position is that they are implementing ZERO social distancing.

im watching this thinking either 1) they have zero desire to follow CDC guidelines, 2) they can’t figure out how to do it, or 3) they have no intention to do it and are already thinking remote learning if the whole situation isn’t resolved by fall.

-rvb