Bad News Thread
- Thread starter kickingandscreaming
- Start date
EOTL is back as Espola.
Long Game, is that you?
This is Espola. "It's a dark day today." Always gloom and doom with Mr Magoo. I dont get him. i told him almost three years ago soccer was going to get flipped on its head and he told me I was coo coo.
Bruddah IZ
DA
11/24/20
Remember when the CDC credited masks for bringing down "cases" in Arizona?
When they say ridiculous things like this, they give the green light to people who want to blame their neighbors for rises in cases. "Why, since we know masks work, the rise in cases must be because of you stupid anti-science people who refuse to wear them!"
Even though mask compliance is as high as ever, these "pro-science" people just know it can't be, because they just know masks at the very least go a long way toward solving the problem.
Well, anyway, how about we check out Arizona's curve now?
Well, how about that.
Could it be that masks didn't bring the curve down after all? That these curves seem to do more or less the same thing no matter what?
Right now one blue state after another that supposedly "followed the science," is seeing a rise in "cases." And all their people can do is blame their neighbors. Because, don't you know, the "science" works! So if the "science" isn't working, that means someone somewhere must not be sciencing.
Remember when the CDC credited masks for bringing down "cases" in Arizona?
When they say ridiculous things like this, they give the green light to people who want to blame their neighbors for rises in cases. "Why, since we know masks work, the rise in cases must be because of you stupid anti-science people who refuse to wear them!"
Even though mask compliance is as high as ever, these "pro-science" people just know it can't be, because they just know masks at the very least go a long way toward solving the problem.
Well, anyway, how about we check out Arizona's curve now?
Well, how about that.
Could it be that masks didn't bring the curve down after all? That these curves seem to do more or less the same thing no matter what?
Right now one blue state after another that supposedly "followed the science," is seeing a rise in "cases." And all their people can do is blame their neighbors. Because, don't you know, the "science" works! So if the "science" isn't working, that means someone somewhere must not be sciencing.
Did you watch the mimosa appendix? (Be sure to view and like it on youtube so Logan gets his stats)
The blue state train wreck right now is NY, who opened indoor dining.11/24/20
Remember when the CDC credited masks for bringing down "cases" in Arizona?
When they say ridiculous things like this, they give the green light to people who want to blame their neighbors for rises in cases. "Why, since we know masks work, the rise in cases must be because of you stupid anti-science people who refuse to wear them!"
Even though mask compliance is as high as ever, these "pro-science" people just know it can't be, because they just know masks at the very least go a long way toward solving the problem.
Well, anyway, how about we check out Arizona's curve now?
Well, how about that.
Could it be that masks didn't bring the curve down after all? That these curves seem to do more or less the same thing no matter what?
Right now one blue state after another that supposedly "followed the science," is seeing a rise in "cases." And all their people can do is blame their neighbors. Because, don't you know, the "science" works! So if the "science" isn't working, that means someone somewhere must not be sciencing.
Nothing to do with D/R. It's just behavior. If you open restaurants and/or skip masks, your numbers go up.
Yes indeed, that was my point. Big Pharma is gonna ride this horse.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Fauci is a fraud. Always has been big pharma shill.
So take one of the old fashioned ones once they get approved. They work, too.
-Buzz
He's also a particular kind of shill. Most (IIRC around 90%) of the money allocated early on was directed by him entirely towards vaccines. Only about 10% was allocated towards treatments, mostly the antibody treatments Trump received. He made a deliberate decision not to put money into treatments (either new or repurposed). On the one hand, credit where credit is due, we (unlike the EU) have vaccines. On the other hand, because some treatments like ivermectin were and continued to be ignored, if proven out he will have contributed to the needless death of thousands. Trade offs. Life's messy.
"And in recent months, the meme has evolved into something new: Coronavirus Karen. This particular form of Karen refuses to wear a face covering in shops, won't stick to quarantine, and thinks the whole pandemic thing is overblown. "
What exactly is a 'Karen' and where did the meme come from?
To many the Karen meme - and its male equivalent Ken - sums up a specific type of white privilege.www.bbc.com
There is a good video embedded in that article with a lot of Grace Karens speaking.
So if I (a person of color) were to be yelled as in a supermarket for not wearing a mask by a white woman I'd be a Karen?
Yet if I (a person of color) were to call the police on the Dangy Bros next door (also persons of color, including one African American) to complain about their monthly keggers (sans masks, with loud music), I'd also be a Karen?
Yet if you (a white person with relatives who are persons of color) were to do either you'd not be a Karen because you are a guy?
Something seems strangely amiss to me. Almost like two spidermen accusing each other of being karen.
Spider-Man Pointing at Spider-Man
Spider-Man Pointing at Spider-Man refers to an image from the 60’s Spider-Man cartoon episode in which two people in Spider-Man costumes are pointing at ea
knowyourmeme.com
So if I (a person of color) were to be yelled as in a supermarket for not wearing a mask by a white woman I'd be a Karen?
Yet if I (a person of color) were to call the police on the Dangy Bros next door (also persons of color, including one African American) to complain about their monthly keggers (sans masks, with loud music), I'd also be a Karen?
Yet if you (a white person with relatives who are persons of color) were to do either you'd not be a Karen because you are a guy?
Something seems strangely amiss to me. Almost like two spidermen accusing each other of being karen.
Spider-Man Pointing at Spider-Man
Spider-Man Pointing at Spider-Man refers to an image from the 60’s Spider-Man cartoon episode in which two people in Spider-Man costumes are pointing at ea
Bruddah IZ
DA
So much of what Fauci does depends on him not knowing what he is doing. He is a puppet like Biden. They lack the public policy background to even consider trade offs in a meaningful way.
Bruddah IZ
DA
From the standpoint of what we laughingly call our "public health" establishment, the most dangerous heretic of 2020 was Scott Atlas.
Atlas, who served in the White House during 2020 as a public health adviser on matters related to COVID-19, recently spoke to a group of students at Stanford University about his experience.
Atlas was treated absurdly by his fellow academics and (of course) by the media, who accused him of all kinds of wickedness because he dissented from the lockdown consensus.
He reviewed all the key points from the past year.
First, in order to explain away the clear failures of lockdowns and other alleged mitigation measures, the lockdowners have tried to pretend that Americans weren't really all that locked down after all, and that in any case Americans didn't really change their behavior all that much.
Atlas threw cold water on both of those claims:
Here's the unacknowledged reality: almost all states and major cities, with a handful of exceptions, have implemented severe restrictions for many months, including closures of businesses and in-person school, mobility restrictions and curfews, quarantines, limits on group gatherings, and mask mandates dating back to at least the summer.
And let’s clear up the myths about the behavior of Americans – social mobility tracking of Americans and data from Gallup, YouGov, the COVID-19 Consortium, and the CDC have shown significant reductions of movement as well as a consistently high percentage of mask wearing since the late summer, similar to Western European countries and approaching those in Asia.
He then proceeded to lay out some of the costs of lockdown, of which I offer a sample here:
A recent study confirms that up to 78% of cancers were never detected due to missed screening over three months. If one extrapolates to the entire country, up to a million new cases or more over nine months will have gone undetected. That health disaster adds to missed critical surgeries, chemotherapy, organ transplants, presentations of pediatric illnesses, heart attack and stroke patients too afraid to call emergency services, and others, all well documented.
Beyond hospital care, CDC reported four-fold increases in depression, three-fold increases in anxiety symptoms, and a doubling of suicidal ideation, particularly among young adults – college age – after the first few months of lockdowns, echoing the AMA reports of drug overdoses and suicides. An explosion of insurance claims for these psychological harms in children just verified this, doubling nationally since last year; and in the strictly locked down Northeast, there was a more than 300% increase of teenagers visiting doctors for self-harm.
Domestic abuse and child abuse have been skyrocketing due to the isolation and specifically to the loss of jobs, particularly in the strictest lockdowns.
Was anybody even bothering to consider these effects?
That, said Atlas, was why someone like him needed to be part of the discussion:
To manage such a crisis, shouldn’t policymakers objectively consider both the virus harms and the totality of impact of policies? That’s the importance of health policy experts – my field – with a broader scope of expertise than that of epidemiologists and basic scientists. And that’s exactly why I was called to the White House – there were zero health policy scholars on the Task Force; no one with a medical background who also considered the impacts of the policies was advising the White House.
He also spoke about the policy of universal masking:
Regarding universal masks: 38 states have implemented general-population mask mandates, most since at least the summer, with almost all the rest having mandates in their major cities. Widespread, general-population mask usage has shown little empirical utility for stopping cases, even though that evidence has been censored by Twitter and Amazon. Widespread mask usage showed only minimal impact in Denmark’s randomized controlled study. Those are facts. And facts matter.
I posted a list where mask mandates empirically failed to stop cases, along with direct quotes, without any edit, from WHO, CDC, and Oxford University. That was censored by Twitter. And I stated numerous times that it would be irrational to wear a mask “when alone riding a bicycle outside, when driving your own car alone, or when walking in the desert alone.” I stand by those words.
Those who charge that it is unethical, even dangerous, to question broad population mask mandates must not realize that several of the world’s top infectious disease scientists and major public health organizations explicitly question the efficacy of general population masks. The public needs to know the truth.
For instance, Jefferson and Heneghan of University of Oxford’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine wrote: “It would appear that despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks.” Oxford’s renowned epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta said there is no need for masks unless one is elderly or high risk. Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya stated “mask mandates are not supported by the scientific data … there is no scientific evidence that mask mandates work to slow the spread of the disease.”
Throughout this pandemic until December, the WHO’s “Advice on the use of masks in the context of COVID-19” stated: “At present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID-19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.” In December, the WHO changed their wording to today’s “At present there is only limited and inconsistent scientific evidence to support the effectiveness of masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2.”
The CDC, in a review of influenza pandemics, “did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.” And until the WHO removed it on October 21, 2020 (almost immediately after Twitter censored my tweet highlighting the WHO quote), the WHO had written, “At the present time, the widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider.”
Atlas then slammed the academic community, particularly at Stanford (his home institution), which conducted itself appallingly in his case.
It's a great summary of the insanity.
Atlas, who served in the White House during 2020 as a public health adviser on matters related to COVID-19, recently spoke to a group of students at Stanford University about his experience.
Atlas was treated absurdly by his fellow academics and (of course) by the media, who accused him of all kinds of wickedness because he dissented from the lockdown consensus.
He reviewed all the key points from the past year.
First, in order to explain away the clear failures of lockdowns and other alleged mitigation measures, the lockdowners have tried to pretend that Americans weren't really all that locked down after all, and that in any case Americans didn't really change their behavior all that much.
Atlas threw cold water on both of those claims:
Here's the unacknowledged reality: almost all states and major cities, with a handful of exceptions, have implemented severe restrictions for many months, including closures of businesses and in-person school, mobility restrictions and curfews, quarantines, limits on group gatherings, and mask mandates dating back to at least the summer.
And let’s clear up the myths about the behavior of Americans – social mobility tracking of Americans and data from Gallup, YouGov, the COVID-19 Consortium, and the CDC have shown significant reductions of movement as well as a consistently high percentage of mask wearing since the late summer, similar to Western European countries and approaching those in Asia.
He then proceeded to lay out some of the costs of lockdown, of which I offer a sample here:
A recent study confirms that up to 78% of cancers were never detected due to missed screening over three months. If one extrapolates to the entire country, up to a million new cases or more over nine months will have gone undetected. That health disaster adds to missed critical surgeries, chemotherapy, organ transplants, presentations of pediatric illnesses, heart attack and stroke patients too afraid to call emergency services, and others, all well documented.
Beyond hospital care, CDC reported four-fold increases in depression, three-fold increases in anxiety symptoms, and a doubling of suicidal ideation, particularly among young adults – college age – after the first few months of lockdowns, echoing the AMA reports of drug overdoses and suicides. An explosion of insurance claims for these psychological harms in children just verified this, doubling nationally since last year; and in the strictly locked down Northeast, there was a more than 300% increase of teenagers visiting doctors for self-harm.
Domestic abuse and child abuse have been skyrocketing due to the isolation and specifically to the loss of jobs, particularly in the strictest lockdowns.
Was anybody even bothering to consider these effects?
That, said Atlas, was why someone like him needed to be part of the discussion:
To manage such a crisis, shouldn’t policymakers objectively consider both the virus harms and the totality of impact of policies? That’s the importance of health policy experts – my field – with a broader scope of expertise than that of epidemiologists and basic scientists. And that’s exactly why I was called to the White House – there were zero health policy scholars on the Task Force; no one with a medical background who also considered the impacts of the policies was advising the White House.
He also spoke about the policy of universal masking:
Regarding universal masks: 38 states have implemented general-population mask mandates, most since at least the summer, with almost all the rest having mandates in their major cities. Widespread, general-population mask usage has shown little empirical utility for stopping cases, even though that evidence has been censored by Twitter and Amazon. Widespread mask usage showed only minimal impact in Denmark’s randomized controlled study. Those are facts. And facts matter.
I posted a list where mask mandates empirically failed to stop cases, along with direct quotes, without any edit, from WHO, CDC, and Oxford University. That was censored by Twitter. And I stated numerous times that it would be irrational to wear a mask “when alone riding a bicycle outside, when driving your own car alone, or when walking in the desert alone.” I stand by those words.
Those who charge that it is unethical, even dangerous, to question broad population mask mandates must not realize that several of the world’s top infectious disease scientists and major public health organizations explicitly question the efficacy of general population masks. The public needs to know the truth.
For instance, Jefferson and Heneghan of University of Oxford’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine wrote: “It would appear that despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks.” Oxford’s renowned epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta said there is no need for masks unless one is elderly or high risk. Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya stated “mask mandates are not supported by the scientific data … there is no scientific evidence that mask mandates work to slow the spread of the disease.”
Throughout this pandemic until December, the WHO’s “Advice on the use of masks in the context of COVID-19” stated: “At present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID-19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.” In December, the WHO changed their wording to today’s “At present there is only limited and inconsistent scientific evidence to support the effectiveness of masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2.”
The CDC, in a review of influenza pandemics, “did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.” And until the WHO removed it on October 21, 2020 (almost immediately after Twitter censored my tweet highlighting the WHO quote), the WHO had written, “At the present time, the widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider.”
Atlas then slammed the academic community, particularly at Stanford (his home institution), which conducted itself appallingly in his case.
It's a great summary of the insanity.
Bruddah IZ
DA
"In the last 20 years, we can point to three very specific events in which we have a Corona virus that shifts its behavior from a specific upper respiratory experience to one that's more involving the deep lungs and vascular systems and those present clinically much different finding. The first one was called SARS that really appeared coming out of China and South Asia in 2001, 2002, and then burned itself out importantly within 18 to 24 months, never to really reappear in its same form because humanity had reached this new homeostasis with it. And not just humanity, but water systems, soil systems, air systems, everything had come into balance with that new species within the Corona family, if you will, or that new element of genomic information. Because we can't really, speciate a non-living organism like a virus. So instead it's more of a description of a family of genetic codes."--Zach Bush, MD.
Public health officials and teachers unions have a lot to answer for.....
www.city-journal.org
What School Shutdowns Have Wrought
Though Covid-related restrictions are easing across the country, fewer than half of America’s students are back in school full-time, according to Burbio, a website tracking school reopenings. A look at the national map shows that the most populous state, California, is also the most locked down...
www.city-journal.org