• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: 2019-nCoV / Corona virus Pt 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skeptic Ginger said:
Explain then why he denied aerosol and asymptomatic spread for weeks and now claims there is now evidence when the evidence was available weeks ago?

Why did he insist there was so little asymptomatic spread we need not worry about it rather than say the evidence was incomplete?

Why did he make a ridiculous pantomime that the only way aerosolized spread would go further than 6 feet was if a person had a huge forceful cough when the evidence says regardless of what it takes to get into the air, it can stay there for several hours? And IIRC, researchers looked at spread from people who did not have induced coughing.

If the man is such an expert why is he now admitting all this? Note to thread: SG has been shouting in the thread about airborne and asymptomatic spread for a couple weeks.
Click to expand...

Some of your posts on the first page of Part 1 of these threads didn't age very well either.
Edited by zooterkin: 
<SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Doghouse Reilly said:
Curious about what you all think about people not only like Peter Hitchens, but also like the person he quoted in this interview. Do you think they're all fools, like you think I am? Or do you think that it's possible you're not as right as you think you are? Some of these people are eminent scientists in their own right.



https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/03/the-alleged-cure-is-immensely-worse-than-the-disease/

ETA: I'm not so much interested in specific rebuttals or analyses of the arguments in that interview, as in your thoughts on the reality that there are MANY scientists and epidemiologists who aren't considered "fringe" or "cranks" who are against all of this and who say the virus isn't what it's being made out to be. But when I read them and agree with them, you act as though I'm a wacko. Do you think they're all wackos, too?
Click to expand...

An elderly though no doubt eminent in his time bacteriologist is commenting on the epidemiology of virology, so not really an expert and certainly in the minority. His idea that the large number of people being ventilated in Italy is due to pollution and that SARS CoV 2 is just like other corona viruses is foolish. For one thing pollution levels dropped with social distancing but the numbers of people needing ventilation rose.

Who are the many scientists and epidemiologists? You have found one. This is a bit like HIV denialism yes there were a few scientists who said AIDS was not due to HIV there were many deaths due to people listening to a few wackos.

Certainly the doctors suddenly treating hundreds of people for pneumonia are in doubt that it is a real epidemic. Just as AIDS was. People are ill, people are dying.
 
Scopedog said:
Some of your posts on the first page of Part 1 of these threads didn't age very well either.
Edited by zooterkin: 
<SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.
Click to expand...
If you want to post a quote I'll be happy to look at it. But in general:

Who would have known at the beginning of this that the public health experts one has relied on for decades was suddenly now not reliable?

I have always trusted CDC guidelines as the source to go to. Slowly it became more and more clear statements from Fauci and CDC and even the WHO* were not reliable.

This is from the WA State DOH guideline today:
Camp Murray, WA — Washington state is currently experiencing significant community-based transmission of COVID-19. Recent information suggests that a significant portion of persons with COVID-19 may not have any symptoms, and even those who do have symptoms can transmit the infection before showing signs of illness.

The Washington State Department of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now recommend that people wear cloth face coverings when they are in public settings where they cannot maintain 6 feet of distance from others. This might include trips to the grocery store, pharmacy, hardware store, health clinic or similar places.
Click to expand...

That is not what that guideline said a couple weeks ago. Notice the wording, "is currently experiencing" as if that wasn't happening earlier. :rolleyes:


*Sometimes WHO guidelines apply to the world but not always to the US.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Doghouse Reilly said:
Curious about what you all think about people not only like Peter Hitchens, but also like the person he quoted in this interview. Do you think they're all fools, like you think I am? Or do you think that it's possible you're not as right as you think you are? Some of these people are eminent scientists in their own right.



https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/03/the-alleged-cure-is-immensely-worse-than-the-disease/

ETA: I'm not so much interested in specific rebuttals or analyses of the arguments in that interview, as in your thoughts on the reality that there are MANY scientists and epidemiologists who aren't considered "fringe" or "cranks" who are against all of this and who say the virus isn't what it's being made out to be. Butwhen I read them and agree with them, you act as though I'm a wacko. Do you think they're all wackos, too?

You need to be interested in the details so you can evaluate the legitimacy and strength of these arguments. For example Dr Bhakdi has done excellent work on bacterial complement but has never been either a virologist or epidemiologist. We’ve had a past discussion in the opposite direction in which you did not understand how a cutting edge epidemiologist was a cutting edge epidemiologist.

Details are very crucial!! Especially because there are so many scientists willing to offer their opinions. Often these are just legit variations that are what make science so successful. 4 weeks not 5. 6 feet not 4. But with all the scientists in the world some are jerks or quacks. MANY? You’ve cited two so far? And I am certain you could easily find more. But I doubt they would reach 5% of the mainstream views.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Doghouse Reilly said:
ETA: I'm not so much interested in specific rebuttals or analyses of the arguments in that interview, as in your thoughts on the reality that there are MANY scientists and epidemiologists who aren't considered "fringe" or "cranks" who are against all of this and who say the virus isn't what it's being made out to be. But when I read them and agree with them, you act as though I'm a wacko. Do you think they're all wackos, too?
Click to expand...
Sounds like you're more interested in the number of doctors or scientists you can find that agree with you, than the quality of the evidence or arguments of the doctors or scientists you can find that agree with you.

You can find engineers, scientists, doctors, etc. who disagree with just about any mainstream idea out there. For example, the 9/11 truther crowd, are very fond of pointing to lists of engineers or scientists who disagree with the "official version" of events.

I doubt you're going to find many people on a website like this who are impressed with the mere fact that you can find a bunch of people who aren't obvious cranks who agree with you. It's not really much of a point in your favour.
 
Last edited:
Planigale said:
An elderly though no doubt eminent in his time bacteriologist is commenting on the epidemiology of virology, so not really an expert and certainly in the minority. His idea that the large number of people being ventilated in Italy is due to pollution and that SARS CoV 2 is just like other corona viruses is foolish. For one thing pollution levels dropped with social distancing but the numbers of people needing ventilation rose.

Who are the many scientists and epidemiologists? You have found one. This is a bit like HIV denialism yes there were a few scientists who said AIDS was not due to HIV there were many deaths due to people listening to a few wackos.

Certainly the doctors suddenly treating hundreds of people for pneumonia are in doubt that it is a real epidemic. Just as AIDS was. People are ill, people are dying.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what my research on him discovered too.
 
Australia Daily Increase in CoViD-19 Positive tests

Date | Count | %
21 Mar 2020|
280​
| |
22 Mar 2020|
478​
|
71​
|
23 Mar 2020|
133​
|
-72​
|
24 Mar 2020|
362​
|
172​
|
25 Mar 2020|
320​
|
-12​
|
26 Mar 2020|
446​
|
39​
|
27 Mar 2020|
333​
|
-25​
|
28 Mar 2020|
497​
|
49​
|
29 Mar 2020|
344​
|
-31​
|
30 Mar 2020|
377​
|
10​
|
31 Mar 2020|
198​
|
-47​
|
01 Apr 2020|
303​
|
53​
|
02 Apr 2020|
254​
|
-16​
|
03 Apr 2020|
214​
|
-16​
|

In my State, 85 of the new cases came from one cruise ship.
 
Giordano said:
WTF? I’m sorry, but what is your evidence for this statement? I suspect Dr. Fauci must be very, very good as a organizer, resource manager, advocate, public spokesperson, etc. as well as an excellent virologist and epidemiologist. He needed these skills throughout his career and also delivered multiple times when we in the USA needed him in particularly desperate times.

Certainly I hope you were referring to the high goals of politicians,achieving great things, rather than intending a sneering reference. If he has had a “political” agenda at all it appears to have been to protect the American public from disease and death. If he has some level of pride in his accomplishments he deserves it. My own understanding from having met him once and more importantly from his colleagues is that he is pretty modest.

So no need to pee on him. He is a rather admirable guy.
Click to expand...

Next up, you can launch your diatribe against Skeptic Ginger who's comments I was responding to.. She was peeing on Fauci, yet you jump on me.

She pees on President Trump every time she posts.
 
Last edited:
A "smart thermometer" manufacturer is attempting to track the spread of covid-19 by looking for anomalously high numbers of people reporting fevers. Their results undoubtedly suffer from problems due to non-random sampling, but their graphics are interesting.

http://healthweather.us

(this does not work with Microsoft Edge).
 
Scopedog said:
Did you?
Click to expand...

I watched the video and read the article. The title of the page with the video was "Watch Dr. Fauci In January Say You Don't Need To Worry About Coronavirus", but i don't think that is a fair and accurate characterization of what he said.

Feel free to quote these sources, or any other, to demonstrate that Dr. Fauci had the same view of the pandemic in January and February 2020 as he does now.
Click to expand...

No-one has, or even should have, the same view of the pandemic in January and February 2020 as they do now. New information is becoming available.
 
Stop the bickering I really should not have to repost a warning but rather than simply suspending Scopedog,sir drinks a lot, skeptical Greg and skeptic ginger I will give you a final warning. Any more of your political bickering and personal animosity in this thread you will be suspended. If you don't understand this warning then simply don't post here. As the previous warning this warning and any suspension that follows a breach of it are not subject to appeal.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat
 
sir drinks-a-lot said:
I watched the video and read the article. The title of the page with the video was "Watch Dr. Fauci In January Say You Don't Need To Worry About Coronavirus", but i don't think that is a fair and accurate characterization of what he said.



No-one has, or even should have, the same view of the pandemic in January and February 2020 as they do now. New information is becoming available.
Click to expand...

I was mainly thinking of this statement from Giordano's post: "If he has had a “political” agenda at all it appears to have been to protect the American public from disease and death."

I believe he failed at least through February and it's his job to have unique insight and foresight and to not fail (though anyone probably would have).
 
Last edited:
Scopedog said:
Did you?



Feel free to quote these sources, or any other, to demonstrate that Dr. Fauci had the same view of the pandemic in January and February 2020 as he does now.
Click to expand...

Should he have? The features of science that make it work are that scientists are open to more information and change their hypotheses and recommendations appropriately. Fauci did as more information came in. But I don’t see that he disregarded concerns about the coronavirus even in late January and him ramping up those concerns increasingly as the escape of the virus into a pandemic became more and more clear. Sure he also noted influenza was a big risk. And there was no reason yet to wear masks in public. He was wrong about some stuff but changed as more info became available. Not all that different from other experts throughout the world.

But I think I am misunderstanding your argument. I waded into the thread today to defend Dr Fauci’s honor because I know him to be a very honorable man as well as a superb scientist whose work saved the lives of many AIDS patients, flu patients, and even now will save coronavirus patients who otherwise would have died. But I suspect your argument is that Trump did an excellent job and even Fauci disregarded the coronavirus risk. This has been covered multiple times in the ISF and this is not even the right thread to bring them up again. For now I am just against people pissing on the shoes of folks trying to save their lives.

Apologies to mods, posted before I saw latest warning!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for asking.

Doghouse Reilly said:
Curious about what you all think about people not only like Peter Hitchens, but also like the person he quoted in this interview. Do you think they're all fools, like you think I am? Or do you think that it's possible you're not as right as you think you are? Some of these people are eminent scientists in their own right.



https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/03/the-alleged-cure-is-immensely-worse-than-the-disease/

ETA: I'm not so much interested in specific rebuttals or analyses of the arguments in that interview, as in your thoughts on the reality that there are MANY scientists and epidemiologists who aren't considered "fringe" or "cranks" who are against all of this and who say the virus isn't what it's being made out to be. But when I read them and agree with them, you act as though I'm a wacko. Do you think they're all wackos, too?
Click to expand...
Several others have responded already, making points similar to ones I would make too.

To repeat one of them: Argument from Authority is a logical fallacy, and should have no place in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technnology board. This is not the first time you're read such a response to posts of yours like this. It's odd, then, that you seem to think it makes some sort of sense to keep making such claims.

Somewhat new: OK, no more sports matches, restaurants going to the wall in the hundreds of thousands, millions of parents stuck at home with kids, etc sucks. What would you - and Peter Hitchens, and ... - suggest that we all do instead?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom