ADVERTISEMENT

Anybody get The Rona over Turkey Day?

Can you please help all of us figure which statements made by "experts" are lies and we should just ignore?

TIA
Pretending to be this stupid is a stupid look. You understand exactly what happened. Faucci and the CDC have been consistent on mask wearing since April of 2020 when the guidance changed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrigAUgirl
CROCKY POOOOOO, pleeeeze don't lizzzztin to COACH!!!!!!
I hope all hiz GRANDCHILDREN PLAY SOCKER FOR JOHN CARROLL and hiz wife MAKES HIZ AZZ GO TO ERRRY DAYUM GAME!!!
@crococile22
i used to play club soccer with a kid from john carrol, he would stick his arms through his shorts and run around in circles at the other team. we scored at least 5 or 6 goals cuz of him!
 
They absolutely lied. Surely this isn't the first time you have heard a government official lie? But just because they lied about it doesn't mean you completely abandon any semblance of reason and that every single other thing they say is a lie. Like with everything else in life, you have to think and evaluate. The basic precautions of masking and social distancing in public are not rocket science.
All I've done since this whole thing started was think and evaluate. Which is why I'm not cowering in fear of a virus that is basically no risk for me or my family. I haven't missed a day of work. I haven't stopped hanging out with my friends and family. I will not stop living my life. But I will wear a mask and social distance when I need to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Blue
Well it was more nuanced than that about what Faucci said, and anyone with any sense could and should have known it was a fluid situation that could change. And, the bigger point was that was said last Feb/March and was revised many times and a long, long time ago and that didn't change the minds of the die hards. Using what was said that long ago is an excuse and justification for people who just want to do what they want to do regardless of the risks to others.
Nah, it wasn't nuance. Fauci lied. The surgeon general lied. They knew they were lying. They were lying for a purpose. They didn't want people rushing out and buying and hoarding all the PPE needed by medical professionals. It is understandable why this would be a concern and it is understandable why they might think lying about it was the only way to limit the damage, but it was still straight up lying. However, I agree that people now are just using that as an excuse. I can understand not trusting that Fauci and the bureaucrats aren't lying about other stuff, but just because we know they were lying doesn't mean we can't understand the very simple concept that masks and social distancing help prevent infection. It doesn't even take a lot of science or rational thought to understand why they help either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrigAUgirl
Sure. Thinking that the President can't do and say things to guide the public through a public health crisis in a responsible manner is mind boggling. Is that really where we are? Has the bar been lowered that much?

News flash...there are tons of out there who won’t know what the President said because they don’t watch and they don’t care. I’ve never changed my opinion or ways of doing things just because the government tells me to. In fact, I’d say it makes it worse when some government official goes on TV and tells everyone what they “should do” and then that person proceeds to live their own lives normally (eating in a restaurant after shutting others down is just one example).
 
Nah, it wasn't nuance. Fauci lied. The surgeon general lied. They knew they were lying. They were lying for a purpose. They didn't want people rushing out and buying and hoarding all the PPE needed by medical professionals. It is understandable why this would be a concern and it is understandable why they might think lying about it was the only way to limit the damage, but it was still straight up lying. However, I agree that people now are just using that as an excuse. I can understand not trusting that Fauci and the bureaucrats aren't lying about other stuff, but just because we know they were lying doesn't mean we can't understand the very simple concept that masks and social distancing help prevent infection. It doesn't even take a lot of science or rational thought to understand why they help either.
Agree to disagree on the first part and to agree on the second part
 
News flash...there are tons of out there who won’t know what the President said because they don’t watch and they don’t care. I’ve never changed my opinion or ways of doing things just because the government tells me to. In fact, I’d say it makes it worse when some government official goes on TV and tells everyone what they “should do” and then that person proceeds to live their own lives normally (eating in a restaurant after shutting others down is just one example).
Good grief.
 
Again, my issue isn't with OP having Thanksgiving. It's with this attitude of wanton foolishness and superiority over people who decided to be safe. There's nothing wrong with people watching out for their own. For some people, being safe is their best way to be happy. You have to weight the risks and take into account the people you come in contact with.
 
Link for where Faucci admitted was he said was a "lie"?


So, why weren't we told to wear masks in the beginning?

"Well, the reason for that is that we were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply. And we wanted to make sure that the people namely, the health care workers, who were brave enough to put themselves in a harm way, to take care of people who you know were infected with the coronavirus and the danger of them getting infected."

I mean, I understand why he lied, but he still lied.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Blue
And Fauci lied to manipulate people so you can understand why people would question him going forward.

Fauci lied to people in the face of a bunch of evidence he was wrong. He presented it all through an "if you get the virus under control" lens. You can open schools up "if you get the virus under control" even though all evidence showed that schools are not spreaders of the virus. It wasn't a fact that we didn't know what the data showed yet. There was plenty of data showing that was wrong.

A lot of smart people who had no stake in this told him that this was the wrong stance. They were condemned as kooks who didn't care about getting it under control.

They will memory-hole that next year and pretend like they all along believed schools were safe. Especially when the damage has already been done. Whole entire grades are now reading below their grade level in some places. There is no telling the mental damage that has been done to kids.
 
Pretending to be this stupid is a stupid look. You understand exactly what happened. Faucci and the CDC have been consistent on mask wearing since April of 2020 when the guidance changed.
Yeah, I understand that masks have never been recommended by Fauxci or the CDC for respiratory viruses, which is why they said that in Feb/Mar. And yet, here we are, all wearing cloth diapers on our airholes in hopes that we don't spread the virus to someone while we pass them in the aisle at the grocery store.
 


So, why weren't we told to wear masks in the beginning?

"Well, the reason for that is that we were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply. And we wanted to make sure that the people namely, the health care workers, who were brave enough to put themselves in a harm way, to take care of people who you know were infected with the coronavirus and the danger of them getting infected."

I mean, I understand why he lied, but he still lied.
Ok we can compare the exact words he said (masks don't provide "perfect protection" and might catch droplets but might not be effective because it makes people touch their faces a lot--all spoken before we knew much about asymptomatic transfer and that transfer by touching things is not a big factor) and argue about "lying" or not but what the hell difference does it make? All of that was cleared up last April and there has been no conflicting advice since then. What possible impact has a TV interview from March 2020 had for the last 9 months?
 
people would be very surprised at the number of people on messages boards and IRL that are supporters of the most stringent restrictions that have come into contact with someone they found out to be positive but then they failed to quarantine.....the "for thee but not for me" mantra pervades society. I would go so far as to say there are plenty of posters in this thread who have foregone quarantining despite guidlines.
 
Link for where Faucci admitted was he said was a "lie"?
People are like FAUCI MADE A MISTAKE ABOUT A NOVEL PANDEMIC no shit sherlock. No one has ever dealt with this thing before! I'm sorry that they didn't tell you everything perfectly the first time. Complex problems require nuanced thinking. Here's what we should do:

1. 100% mask wearing
2. Continue to ramp up testing
3. No indoor dining, gyms
4. Be willing to do absolutely whatever it takes to keep schools open
5. Any businesses that can't pay their bills, loan or grant them money to stay open. I don't want @lewis3882 to lose his business or anyone else to lose their business. Businesses aren't at fault here and they shouldn't be forced to stay open or put their workers into unsafe conditions by packing in more people than necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KilgoreTrout
I suggest all of us go back and review history to put this into context. In October of 1918, 200,000 Americans died in one month of the Spanish Flu. The population of the US at that time was around 103 million. All in all 0.5% of the American population in 1918 ended up dying of the Spanish Flu. In 1957, the flu killed 116,000 Americans after coming from Hong Kong. Our population at that time was 172 million. All in all 0.06% of Americans died of the 1957 flu. The 1968 flu ravaged the 65 and older population in the US. Over 100,000 Americans were killed. The US population in 1968 was 200 million. All in all 0.05% of Americans were killed. In 2009, H1N1 hit America with no immunity or vaccine. Far less deadly, except to children, we had existing antivirals that worked very well and kept the death toll to 12,000 Americans. However, 60.8 million Americans contracted H1N1. In short, we dodged a major bullet. The vaccine roll-out was completely botched. The US population in 2009 was 306 million. All in all 0.004% of Americans were killed. In 2020, we have COVID-19. No existing antivirals, no immunity and no starting point with a vaccine at all. Projections show that about 320,000 Americans will die due to complications from this virus. There are 331 million people in the US in 2020. All in all 0.09% of Americans are projected to die from COVID-19 complications. Just the facts. You decide what it all means.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim in Scranton
What possible impact has a TV interview from March 2020 had for the last 9 months?
None? You asked for a link showing that he knew what he initially said about masks was a lie. I provided it. That's all.

Edit: And the interview was done in June.
 
All I've done since this whole thing started was think and evaluate. Which is why I'm not cowering in fear of a virus that is basically no risk for me or my family. I haven't missed a day of work. I haven't stopped hanging out with my friends and family. I will not stop living my life. But I will wear a mask and social distance when I need to.
Same here. I haven't missed a day of work either. Almost all of that work has been in the office, where we are deemed essential, though I have worked from home a couple of weeks, partly because the company sent folks home at times. I even go out and eat inside restaurants since they opened back up. Of course I wear a mask in public and stay away from people and wash my hands often. I haven't completely stopped hanging out with friends and family, but have been very cautious about that. I have resumed having a regular meal with a couple of guys, one of whom already has had the virus. We mask and distance. My church has resumed in-person services for a few months, but we attend online instead. It isn't ideal, but times are not ideal. I oppose the government preventing people from gathering to worship, but I am glad I have the option to do it remotely.

We decided not to go to a family gathering for Thanksgiving because there were going to be up to 35 people there. One aunt was in the hospital with COVID while they were planning it. Obviously she nor my uncle attended and several others did not attend either, but about twenty or more, including my mom in her 70s, did attend. My wife had been exposed to someone with the virus a couple of weeks prior. We tested negative, but thought it wise just to be careful and avoid the gathering. Turns out one of my relatives and her boyfriend who did attend are now quarantined because a couple of his family members have it. It's possible everybody at the event got exposed to it. I hope they were all cautious and masked. I know a good portion of them gathered outside. I hope no one had it or caught it, but I guess we will see. Most who were there would be unaffected even if they did catch it, but my mom and an aunt and uncle who were there would be higher risk.

I don't feel like I have stopped living my life just because I am taking extra precautions. I want things to go back to normal and fully intend on resuming my normal life as soon as a vaccine is widely available. If the authorities try and use fear of the virus to keep in place restrictions to prevent going back to normal, I will resist that strongly. I'm willing to yield some freedom temporarily in an urgent/emergency situation, but fully plan to live free or die once that situation has passed. Like @lewis3882 mentioned in a previous post, I probably have become more conservative/anti-government as a result of this pandemic, but that doesn't keep me from trying my best to be reasonable and responsible. I don't think any of us have to be extreme in our response to this thing.
 
I suggest all of us go back and review history to put this into context. In October of 1918, 200,000 Americans died in one month of the Spanish Flu. The population of the US at that time was around 103 million. All in all 0.5% of the American population in 1918 ended up dying of the Spanish Flu. In 1957, the flu killed 116,000 Americans after coming from Hong Kong. Our population at that time was 172 million. All in all 0.06% of Americans died of the 1957 flu. The 1968 flu ravaged the 65 and older population in the US. Over 100,000 Americans were killed. The US population in 1968 was 200 million. All in all 0.05% of Americans were killed. In 2009, H1N1 hit America with no immunity or vaccine. Far less deadly, except to children, we had existing antivirals that worked very well and kept the death toll to 12,000 Americans. However, 60.8 million Americans contracted H1N1. In short, we dodged a major bullet. The vaccine roll-out was completely botched. The US population in 2009 was 306 million. All in all 0.004% of Americans were killed. In 2020, we have COVID-19. No existing antivirals, no immunity and no starting point with a vaccine at all. Projections show that about 320,000 Americans will die due to complications from this virus. There are 331 million people in the US in 2020. All in all 0.09% of Americans are projected to die from COVID-19 complications. Just the facts. You decide what it all means.
You do realize that you can’t compare deaths to total population in order to draw conclusions about how deadly a virus really is, correct?

If you want to make that argument you compare total infections to total deaths.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KilgoreTrout
You do realize that you can’t compare deaths to total population in order to draw conclusions about how deadly a virus really is, correct?

If you want to make that argument you compare total infections to total deaths.
Not attempting to make that comparison at all. Just providing some context of deaths per overall population which does provide some level of measure. I am happy to get into real statistics if you would like. However, I do not think it is necessary to prove the point that we have been in these situations before and we all survived and thrived.
 
None? You asked for a link showing that he knew what he initially said about masks was a lie. I provided it. That's all.

Edit: And the interview was done in June.
The interview was in March and nothing you provided indicates Dr. F "knew" he was "lying" about it. You could make a more compelling argument that he was mistaken about the impacts of masks and should have known more/better, even though the virus was novel, which is much more accurate..but that wouldn't generate the kind of outrage toward him that you are looking for.
 
Not attempting to make that comparison at all. Just providing some context of deaths per overall population which does provide some level of measure. I am happy to get into real statistics if you would like. However, I do not think it is necessary to prove the point that we have been in these situations before and we all survived and thrived.
Oh--THAT was the point? I don' t think anyone thinks or has said that Covid is going to wipe out the population to the point that we won't survive or "thrive" once we contain it.
 
CROCKY POOOOOO, pleeeeze don't lizzzztin to COACH!!!!!!
I hope all hiz GRANDCHILDREN PLAY SOCKER FOR JOHN CARROLL and hiz wife MAKES HIZ AZZ GO TO ERRRY DAYUM GAME!!!
@crococile22
iu
 
Not attempting to make that comparison at all. Just providing some context of deaths per overall population which does provide some level of measure. I am happy to get into real statistics if you would like. However, I do not think it is necessary to prove the point that we have been in these situations before and we all survived and thrived.
Of course we will, anyone who suggests otherwise is being extreme. Doesn’t mean we can’t all make small, personal sacrifices for the greater good in the meantime.
 
You do realize that you can’t compare deaths to total population in order to draw conclusions about how deadly a virus really is, correct?

If you want to make that argument you compare total infections to total deaths.
why can't you?...is infectivity not a reasonable part of the equation when dealing with how deadly a virus is...
 
  • Like
Reactions: whynotAU
why can't you?...is infectivity not a reasonable part of the equation when dealing with how deadly a virus is...
No. For instance, Ebola is an incredibly deadly virus with a much different mode of spread that has thankfully allowed us to prevent any major outbreaks. Next question.
 
No. For instance, Ebola is an incredibly deadly virus with a much different mode of spread that has thankfully allowed us to prevent any major outbreaks. Next question.
well....since its not as infectious that makes it less likely to kill as many people, that is what I consider less deadly to a population, not just to the ones it infects.....all depends on your definition
 
well....since its not as infectious that makes it less likely to kill as many people, that is what I consider less deadly to a population, not just to the ones it infects.....all depends on your definition
So “the definition that fits my narrative” versus the actual definition. Gotcha.
 
If both were released into the population which would kill the most people?.....
If released and left to run their course Ebola by a landslide.

I’m sorry you’re having such a hard time grasping such a simple concept. I really feel for you. Everyone can’t be smart, it’s just a fact of life.
 
If released and left to run their course Ebola by a landslide.

I’m sorry you’re having such a hard time grasping such a simple concept. I really feel for you. Everyone can’t be smart, it’s just a fact of life.
so ability to contain outbreaks does not factor into the deadliness of a virus...ok...fair enough
 
Are you two arguing over how deadly something is to an individual or how many people are expected to die from the disease?

Because obviously how infectious it is has little to do with the former and is a major part of the latter
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Blue
Are you two arguing over how deadly something is to an individual or how many people are expected to die from the disease?

Because obviously how infectious it is has little to do with the former and is a major part of the latter
he's arguing the former and I the latter
 
  • Like
Reactions: AU HDL
Oh--THAT was the point? I don' t think anyone thinks or has said that Covid is going to wipe out the population to the point that we won't survive or "thrive" once we contain it.

Not entirely. The point is that all of this back and forth is pointless. It's a virus. It's highly contagious and due to a lack of proven antivirals, immunity and vaccines it can be deadly to those with comorbidities and the elderly. We should be respectful of others and especially businesses that have certain requirements for social distancing, masks, etc.. However, you should not bind on others your own personal thoughts or approach to managing risks of any kind including your health. The bottom line is that we have done a pretty good job of managing health and commerce during this pandemic. It is a fine line, but we have succeeded overall when considering all variables at play.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT