Scholarship table
He is not a science denier. This is a smear that the left uses in the same way the right smears us as anti capitalist. You can do better than this.Johnson, the science denier, hailed by academics and industry for science funding he pushed for. That isn’t the mark of a man who denies science. https://www.ft.com/content/a9f55188-28d1-11ea-9305-4234e74b0ef3
What if a bunch of people get it again and again?
There are significant difference between chloroquine and hydroxycholorquine as it relates to side effects. Both are anti-malarial drugs. Hydroxy is virtually side-effect free, and there is evidence that it is helping stem the symptoms and reverse Corona effects. Meds are written off-label all of the time. The safety/efficacy profile of hydroxy is stellar. There is virtually NO risk in taking it.
He was a science denier when it came to the coronavirus.Scientists and infectious-disease experts specifically said folks should social distance and that they certainly shouldn't shake hands with infected people.He not only ignored the science, he flaunted that he did so. He not only shook hands of infected people, he bragged that he would continue doing so.Not sure why you would want to offer an incorrect defense of somebody who clearly and proudly denied the COVID-19 science.
I just read something that "the reinfection" is not reinfection just testing error.I'd have to re-find the article.
I have an honest question, and I hope that my past involvement in my thread will speak for my good faith here. My understanding for the last several weeks is that it is widely believed that a very pretty significant percentage of people are going to get this virus, and that the various steps we are taking (to a greater or lesser extent depending upon where you reside) are intended to "flatten the curve." In other words, as I understand it, to slow the rate of infection so as to avoid overwhelming the health care system. The thought is that this will reduce the eventual death rate because people will receive better care and we will not be faced with deciding who gets the last ventilator. But the total number of infections likely would not be reduced all that much.If that is the case, aren't things progressing fairly closely to plan? In order to get "through" this as quickly as possible, don't we want to flirt with the line of overwhelming the health care system without crossing it? I understand that the health care system is being taxed, and I believe that is literally inevitable and unavoidable and to be expected. But if cases are increasing but not to the point of collapse of the health care system, isn't that kind of the plan?Because of my job, I'm acutely aware of the lack of PPE and am in contact with people every day who are really struggling because of that. The PPE situation is a total disaster. So, I'm not talking about that. It just seems to me that as shocking and disturbing as all of this is, it it is progressing according to the plans that were explained to me several weeks ago -- including on this board. It seems to me that many of the people who understood this and appreciated the danger far earlier than I did -- and explained the entire concept of "flattening the curve" to me -- are now claiming that nothing is being done. But from my vantage point, we're generally keeping things within the capacities of our (admittedly busy) health care system.Am I completely crazy or wrong? And I hope no one will characterize this as me being insensitive to those who are sick or dying. I don't intend it that way. It's absolutely tragic. I'm just trying to understand where we are and where we are going.
It's been posted twice in this thread alone.South Korea was giving the all clear to infected people that tested negative twice. 51 people are now testing positive again. Maybe rushing ineffective tests out early wasn't the right answer. Reports that the chinese made tests were giving false negatives in 1 in 5 tests.
Yes, given where we are at this point, we are probably pretty close to the best we can do. The backward-looking criticisms are mainly over the fact that our "best" would have been better if we had implemented testing earlier and more comprehensively. But you're right - given the hand we have right now, the "best" option is to flirt with the line between overwhelming the healthcare system and trashing the economy.
It's a pretty huge leap to go from "he ignored the advice of scientists" to "he's a science denier." Probably should not be hyperbolic with stuff like this.
I think you have it spot on. We are flirting with the edge, but have only crossed it on occasion in places like NYC and New Orleans. Personally I think we have exceeded it, because a lot of people we are sending home should be monitored in a hospital setting, but we don't have the capacity for that (mostly on the medical personnel side). The fear is that people see things as "not that bad" and either defy the stay-at-home orders, or some start to reopen the economy and undue the accomplishments. So essentially some underlying fear of the unknown. That isn't going away any time soon.
And it is not my intent to really get into that. It's been hashed, rehashed and re-rehashed.What I don't understand is that it seems to me that today we are pretty much where people were hoping we'd be three weeks ago when the term "flattening the curve" really exploded into the lexicon and public understanding. I understand that a lot of people think that mistakes that were made early in the process led us to a place that this was the best that we could hope for. But it seems to me that evidence is beginning to suggest that what we've done over the last three weeks is actually achieving the desired effect, but people are still claiming that nothing has gone right -- even in the last three weeks. And I genuinely don't understand that position. People who know more than I do explained what we were hoping to accomplish. It seems like maybe we did a pretty good job of accomplishing that (with significant credit to the states). And the same people are arguing that nothing has been accomplished.
And it is not my intent to really get into that. It's been hashed, rehashed and re-rehashed.What I don't understand is that it seems to me that today we are pretty much where people were hoping we'd be three weeks ago when the term "flattening the curve" really exploded into the lexicon and public understanding. I understand that a lot of people think that mistakes that were made early in the process led us to an unfortunate place that this was the best that we could hope for. But it seems to me that evidence is beginning to suggest that what we've done over the last three weeks is actually achieving the desired effect, but people are still claiming that nothing has gone right -- even in the last three weeks. And I genuinely don't understand that position. People who know more than I do explained what we were hoping to accomplish. It seems like maybe we did a pretty good job of accomplishing that (with significant credit to the states). And the same people are arguing that nothing has been accomplished.
Not sure who is arguing that "nothing has been accomplished." Certainly not me. I have posted comments the last day or two that I am encouraged, but that I still think we have a long way to go.For example, here are economists saying they don't think we are anywhere near being ready to re-open the economy.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/business/economy/coronavirus-economy.html?campaign_id=4&emc=edit_dk_20200407&instance_id=17436&nl=dealbook®i_id=108420427&segment_id=24145&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa
Not sure why you would want to offer an incorrect defense of somebody who clearly and proudly denied the COVID-19 science.
I don't disagree. And my post wasn't intended at all to be a "it's not that bad" post (and I'm not suggesting you said it is). I'm merely thinking that I'm happy to see that the big steps we all started taking a few weeks ago seem to be having the desired effect and I don't know why so many of the people who explained it to me (both here and elsewhere) are ignoring that.
I'm not specifically referring to you.And I'm absolutely not even remotely suggesting we're close to re-opening things. I figure we're hunkered down until at least June. I've been telling my oldest that she should probably prepare herself to have her senior VB season cancelled.
The social distancing was definitely the right move given where we are. For that, I definitely compliment the leadership of state governors (both D and R) who have implemented stay at home orders.
Here is how Germany handles these types of financial situations instead of doing mass layoffs coupled with unemployment benefits.https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2020/04/07/828081285/are-we-firing-too-many-people?utm_term=nprnews&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr