Vaccine
- Thread starter Multi Sport
- Start date
He is on record flip flopping. You just refuse to see it.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
It was for our own good, kicker. That's all that matters.
Happened again
SILVER ELITE
More $$$$ certainly to be made in the private sector. Selling your expertise to the highest bidder is a daily occurence for former government employees. Some stay for the guaranteed paycheck and great retirement, others aren't satisified with their plush lifestyle and choose to pursue more plush.
Imagine working for the the FDA then going to the private sector. Happens all the time. The lines are kept blurred for a reason. Ambiguity, fake outrage and fake sympathy make the behind the scenes folks quite healthy. Sure, there is good science out there, but plenty of science for the sake of profit as well.
Did you want our national health policy to remain fixed as we got new evidence? Or did you want us to open things up as soon as we recognize which activities are lower risk?
If anything, your complaint is that we flip flopped too little, not too much.
If he flip flopped on issues based on new evidence, that’s one thing, however it isn’t applicable in this discussion.
If that were the case we would have seen more targeted approach.
B+ for effort
At least this time you can see the Monkeypox. Does this guy have to wear a mask?
New York City is Now the “Epicenter of the Monkeypox Outbreak” Which Accounts For 30% of All US Cases
I tell my pals all the time to watch NYC and LA for their next move. I hope my fence sittings pals get off the fence and take a stand this time. Sorry guys, were not going back to normal.
New York City is Now the “Epicenter of the Monkeypox Outbreak” Which Accounts For 30% of All US Cases
I tell my pals all the time to watch NYC and LA for their next move. I hope my fence sittings pals get off the fence and take a stand this time. Sorry guys, were not going back to normal.
EvilGoalie 21
GOLD
It's worth remembering that up until the mid-1980's much of the public interest in product testing, toxicity, etc was performed directly in government labs. The zeitgeist became that the private sector could perform these tasks more efficiently because....bureacracy is bad, profit motive is good, etc. Good things and bad things accompanied that. The system moves faster, but the entities generating the relevant data have a vested interest in the outcome. It lends itself to a revolving door situation between the regulators and the regulated. Boost the $ involved by two, three orders of magnitude and the same issues attend financial regulation. Its sort of funny to hear people complain about it because we wanted it this way.
With the exception of a few really well paid positions, our political disfunctionality (your ambiguity, fake outrage, etc) is precisely what drives many of the people that are actually doing the science away. It is high burnout. These people do OK, but its definitely not cushy and they are not exactly raking it in. For example, people here today are talking about some news thing hit piece with disgruntled government-type workers complaining about the overlords. The same thing happened, for example, in the EPA during the previous administration. People leave. Most media outlets do a quick "lunchcounter I'm so angry" type piece. Then the clicks move on. There are only a few reporters out there with the breath of knowledge to keep checking the pulse of these institutions and see what damage has accrued.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
Let's step back a second. The statement about the Fauci "flip-flop" was not an important part of the article in terms of claims. It does give insight into the perspective of the individual writing it, though. The important parts of the article were the claims that the NIH and CDC were losing employees, and some employees left due to the agencies putting politics above science or putting forth "bad" science (paraphrasing).
If you believe mask policy works, you bring it out when you need it. My problem with Fauci is that he intentionally misled people when at the beginning of the pandemic stating that masks are not helpful only because he was afraid everyone would buy up masks and front-line workers. It's funny because I went back and read the stories now, and the common rationalization is, "This was also early in the pandemic before public health experts fully knew how contagious the disease was and how it spread." This is total f'ing BS. In science, you don't make a claim if you don't have enough information. Are they telling us they learned that this is the first virus ever that masks would have helped, or, that they actually believed the Chinese government that the virus was not aerosolized? It makes no sense considering how epidemiologists err on the side of playing it safe w.r.t. viruses (no surfing, remember?). The appropriate response should have been, "We don't know if they help, but they might. Wear one to be safe." Or possibly, "We don't know if they help, but we have front-line workers that need to wear masks, and we are having a shortage, so hold off on buying masks now." I know, I know, you can't trust people to do the right thing when you say the second one, right? If that's the case, don't consider a mandate because you must trust people to perform it for it to work.
Hüsker Dü
DA
Seeing one’s own hypocrisy is the first step.
Waiting for your first step...
Last edited:
Happened again
SILVER ELITE
What do you mean? What national health policy? Like from the CDC? Their national health policy?
I suppose you could lash in the FDA with the CDC. Great rule and policy followers that they are.
EvilGoalie 21
GOLD
Question becomes "first step to what"?
Apropos of nothing but I always kind of thought the whole thing about Walden and Thoreau was that if you weren't willing to risk being a hypocrite you weren't willing to put it on the line. Mama at the pencil factory coming home and washing your clothes. Jonesing drinks off friends at the bar. "The railroad rides on us"...
Apropos of nothing but I like fixing up bikes and I'm fixing up a 30 yr old MTB frame for my kid to take to college. Best I could afford at the time. Got them to throw in a rack for free as I recall. Toured Yellowstone on it in WY, rode it over Trail Ridge Road in CO, hauled kids in a bike cart all over the place in CA. But it's old, like me, so if it gets ripped off no big deal. We've got a mile long 10% grade by our house and after it dropped below 90 tonight my kid is spinning up it at about 80 rpm and 10 mph and the bike is not even dialed in for him. Have to make some adjustments. I'm behind him on my ebike thinking he's starting to get muscled in his back and wouldn't it be great to be 18 again. We played it safe and everybody I care about is still alive. Lucky. A few close calls.
"Name me someone who's not a parasite and I'll go out and say a prayer for him". Dylan wrote that song when he was like-what-24. Is that the right age to write a song like that or is it precocious? Something like Cov-2 hits and if its your f'ing job you fight with what is in your quiver at the time. Science is slow and will come along later. All of us adjudicating this after the fact-me included-need to image speaking to a room full of MIS-C parents. "Thank you for inviting me here today. Let me tell you why I'm so angry".
Hüsker Dü
DA
First step towards recovery and hopefully inner peace.
Which begs the question, how does this impact fertility? This issue has been known for over a year and was initially dismissed by so-called experts.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
How many of these discussions veer in another direction due to not following this bit of wisdom?
"Seek first to understand, then be understood."
It invariably veers in a direction that allows the "misunderstander" to make a point. Some of it is simply a sincere mistake in understanding due to perspective and/or an attempt to interpret ambiguous wording, but not all of it.
"Seek first to understand, then be understood."
It invariably veers in a direction that allows the "misunderstander" to make a point. Some of it is simply a sincere mistake in understanding due to perspective and/or an attempt to interpret ambiguous wording, but not all of it.