# Some Statements Are Attributed To Dr. Fauci On Coronavirus, The Article Was Written By Amy Wright of Asheville, North Carolina



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

**Note: This is how I found the article. It has been pointed out by some that Amy Wright of Asheville, North Carolina on Coronavirus is responsible for the article, not Fouci. I have removed Fouci's name from the start of the article. 

This link has the article and I think what is in quotations is attributed to Fouci, what isn't in quotations is not.*








الموقع الإخباري للكتائب اللبنانية - آخر الأخبار المحلية والعربية والدولية


الموقع الإخباري لحزب الكتائب اللبنانية. يتضمن الموقع أبرز الأخبار السياسية والإجتماعية والإقتصاديّة والفنيّة على الصعيد الوطني اللبناني والعالم.




kataeb.org






“Chickenpox is a virus. Lots of people have had it, and probably don't think about it much once the initial illness has passed. But it stays in your body and lives there forever, and maybe when you're older, you have debilitatingly painful outbreaks of shingles. You don't just get over this virus in a few weeks, never to have another health effect. We know this because it's been around for years, and has been studied medically for years.
Herpes is also a virus. And once someone has it, it stays in your body and lives there forever, and anytime they get a little run down or stressed-out they're going to have an outbreak. Maybe every time you have a big event coming up (school pictures, job interview, big date) you're going to get a cold sore. For the rest of your life. You don't just get over it in a few weeks. We know this because it's been around for years, and been studied medically for years.
HIV is a virus. It attacks the immune system and makes the carrier far more vulnerable to other illnesses. It has a list of symptoms and negative health impacts that goes on and on. It was decades before viable treatments were developed that allowed people to live with a reasonable quality of life. Once you have it, it lives in your body forever and there is no cure. Over time, that takes a toll on the body, putting people living with HIV at greater risk for health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, diabetes, bone disease, liver disease, cognitive disorders, and some types of cancer. We know this because it has been around for years, and had been studied medically for years.
Now with COVID-19, we have a novel virus that spreads rapidly and easily. The full spectrum of symptoms and health effects is only just beginning to be cataloged, much less understood.
So far the symptoms may include:
Fever
Fatigue
Coughing
Pneumonia
Chills/Trembling
Acute respiratory distress
Lung damage (potentially permanent)
Loss of taste (a neurological symptom)
Sore throat
Headaches
Difficulty breathing
Mental confusion
Diarrhea
Nausea or vomiting
Loss of appetite
Strokes have also been reported in some people who have COVID-19 (even in the relatively young)
Swollen eyes
Blood clots
Seizures
Liver damage
Kidney damage
Rash
COVID toes (weird, right?)
People testing positive for COVID-19 have been documented to be sick even after 60 days. Many people are sick for weeks, get better, and then experience a rapid and sudden flare up and get sick all over again. A man in Seattle was hospitalized for 62 days, and while well enough to be released, still has a long road of recovery ahead of him.
Then there is MIS-C. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children is a condition where different body parts can become inflamed, including the heart, lungs, kidneys, brain, skin, eyes, or gastrointestinal organs. Children with MIS-C may have a fever and various symptoms, including abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, neck pain, rash, bloodshot eyes, or feeling extra tired. While rare, it has caused deaths.
This disease has not been around for years. It has basically been 6 months. No one knows yet the long-term health effects, or how it may present itself years down the road for people who have been exposed. We literally _do not know_ what we do not know.
For those in our society who suggest that people being cautious are cowards, for people who refuse to take even the simplest of precautions to protect themselves and those around them, I want to ask, without hyperbole and in all sincerity:
How dare you?
How dare you risk the lives of others so cavalierly. How dare you decide for others that they should welcome exposure as "getting it over with", when literally no one knows who will be the lucky "mild symptoms" case, and who may fall ill and die. Because while we know that some people are more susceptible to suffering a more serious case, we also know that 20 and 30-year-olds have died, marathon runners and fitness nuts have died, children and infants have died.
How dare you behave as though you know more than medical experts, when those same experts acknowledge that there is so much we don't yet know, but with what we DO know, are smart enough to be scared of how easily this is spread, and recommend baseline precautions such as:
Frequent hand-washing
Physical distancing
Reduced social/public contact or interaction
Mask wearing
Covering your cough or sneeze
Avoiding touching your face
Sanitizing frequently touched surfaces
The more things we can all do to mitigate our risk of exposure, the better off we all are, in my opinion. Not only does it flatten the curve and allow health care providers to maintain levels of service that aren't immediately and catastrophically overwhelmed; it also reduces unnecessary suffering and deaths, and buys time for the scientific community to study the virus in order to come to a more full understanding of the breadth of its impacts in both the short and long term.
I reject the notion that it's "just a virus" and we'll all get it eventually. What a careless, lazy, heartless stance.”


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

What's odd is that more testing is showing that more people are getting it (particularly in the USA)... and yet that's reported as a 'bad thing.' The more people who get it, while remaining asymptomatic or with modest illness at best, the better... HERD IMMUNITY. That is what happened in Sweden... huge infestation while protecting the elderly (as best they can) and their death rate is no higher (and lower in some instances) than every other country that has shut down, put social distancing into practice and is forcing people to wear face masks in public.


----------



## bluehugh2 (Mar 10, 2006)

I have a friend who lives in Sweden... even their Health Minister admits their approach has failed... and economically they had hoped to fare better, but have not. Another thing you don’t know, is that if you’re over 80 in Sweden, and have Covid, you will not be treated at a hospital. That’s the policy. Nice.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

I heard Sweden failed miserably. They regret the herd immunity experiment.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

Brian Johnston said:


> HERD IMMUNITY.


There is no such thing with Covid. By all accounts, you can be affected by it more than once, so getting it does not make you immune to it. The anitbodies do not last.

Add to that the unknown effects that may come in the future. As Dr. Faucci points out, things like chicken pox can lead to later problems with shingles, etc. They do not know what having this virus will do to you in 2,5,10,20 years down the road. It may be insignificant, but it is just as possible that millions of people will have to regularly take time off work for something debilitating. Think about what that does to employers trying to keep businesses going on schedule, not to mention what it does to their insurance premiums for sick leave. The economic impact could be devastating. That is not even considering that perhaps down the road the effects could lead to people having to be institutionalized due to something coming up as a side effect. A small possibility, but possible none the less. No one really knows, but try to accomodate the 110,000 people infected in Canada to date on a regular, or permanent bases. Right now the best we have is to try to avoid getting it.


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

Well, unless you want to live in a cave and avoid people for the rest of your life....

China released another coronavirus back in the 1980s, I believe it was. And I don't believe Faucci and others on this matter... they changed their minds so many times, and even suggested MILLIONS would die in the USA based on models. Just about everything stated since January either was exaggeration or wrong. And if herd immunity is not working, then someone needs to explain the response in Sweden.


----------



## Alex (Feb 11, 2006)

The concern with the herd immunity approach appears to be the recurring effects of the Covid virus (the point that Fauci makes in the OP’s Post). It appears to be incredibly complex to deal with and factor the financial pressures that most countries/organizations/individuals are facing, which the solutions, go against mitigating the virus. as if we needed more divisiveness in the world right now.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

Brian Johnston said:


> Well, unless you want to live in a cave and avoid people for the rest of your life....


That is a lame response to taking reasonable precautions.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

Brian Johnston said:


> Well, unless you want to live in a cave and avoid people for the rest of your life....
> 
> China released another coronavirus back in the 1980s, I believe it was. And I don't believe Faucci and others on this matter... they changed their minds so many times, and even suggested MILLIONS would die in the USA based on models. Just about everything stated since January either was exaggeration or wrong. And if herd immunity is not working, then someone needs to explain the response in Sweden.


You sound like you would like to go to a covid party. All you need is a person infected with covid, then everyone gets really really close. A guy died the other day after a covid party in the US. He told a nurse before he died he had made a mistake.


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

player99 said:


> You sound like you would like to go to a covid party. All you need is a person infected with covid, then everyone gets really really close. A guy died the other day after a covid party in the US. He told a nurse before he died he had made a mistake.


I never said to make a point of crowding together, did I? And what other underlying problems did he have? Anything like the guy dying in a motorcycle accident and the hospital marking him down as Covid?


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

I'm with the "take reasonable precautions" crowd. One benefit is that I am finding out what I can live with out. I used to spend at least a couple hundred dollars a week in dining out. I have only dined out once since last March. A patio after a round of golf in June. I was tempted to dine out again as phase 3 kicked in and dining rooms were again open. But the fact that you have to wear a mask inside was unappealing and its just not worth it. I have allergies and asthma and mask wearing is a challenge for me. I still wear it in public but I leave my nose exposed and even occasionally have to uncover my mouth for a few seconds. The mask makes me feel claustrophobic. But I still make every attempt to wear it for consideration of others. 
My wife and I have been to many places around the world so we're both fine with the idea that maybe we will never travel again. Another savings in money. We drive the car about a quarter the amount we used to, so more savings that way. Its really showing us what is important in life and we are saving a ton of money. 
If enough others are in the same boat it will be unfortunate for restaurant owners and travel agents.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

At present, we have no confirmation that "herd immunity" can exist for this particular virus. It might, and I doubt many virologists and immunologists would rule it out completely for now. But there is no "herd immunity" for herpes, HIV, the common cold, and many other viruses. And, while it is only right that pharmaceutical companies and university research centres try their damnedest to come up with a vaccine, at present we have no idea regarding how long any effective immune response, whether "natural" or assisted, can last. Herd immunity *can* occur when the immune response - again, either naturally occurring via contracting a disease and fighting it off, or assisted via vaccination - is long-lasting, and the pathogen in question does not mutate.

In some instances, as well, something _like_ herd immunity can occur for evolving viruses. So, each year the influenza virus is a little different, and virologists/immunologists have to engineer a new vaccine to target what they believe to be THAT season's little tweak in the virus itself. If enough people get their flu shot, early enough in the season to acquire an immunity (because vaccines only kickstart antibody production, and do not instantly result in "protection"; think of them like a condom with millions of little holes that gradually close up over the course of a month), there are enough people in the general population with enough temporary immunity to get through that season successfully without spreading the virus to the unvaccinated. But even there, with a well-coordinated and systematic public health strategy, that herd immunity lasts for a season, like a Grey Cup victory, with no assurance of continuing conquest in subsequent years.

As for Sweden, the stats I'm looking at indicate an estimated death rate of 556/million persons, compared with 234 for Canada and 433 for the United States. So who, exactly, is getting right, and who is getting it wrong? The same source notes 7650 cases per million in Sweden, 2922 in Canada, and 11777 in the U.S.

The aspect that I find woefully overlooked and underconsidered is the people who don't die from it. Polio killed a lot of people, but many more did NOT die from it. However, the societal impact of what happened to all those surviving-but-permanently-affected persons is still with us, nearly 65 years on. In even the brief period we have known about Covid-19 and seen hospitalized patients return home, ostensibly "recovered", we see that they are not at full capacity, even months later. So imagine an epidemic that made, say, 5% of your working-age population (which is clearly only a subset of all those persons who might contract it, hence the large percentage; I won't count school-age or retired persons) unable to work anymore, and in need of a range of supports, simply to live, for the rest of their lives. What would be the economic impact of that? Ponder that for a moment.

The wisest, most frugal, strategy for anyone concerned about the economic future of the country is simply: don't get it, don't spread it.

As for Fauci "changing his mind", yeah, that's basically how science works: new data comes in and theories get revised. It's not a weakness, but a systematic approach to evidence and inference; the veritable "scientific method". Drives politicians crazy, who would prefer to adopt an unswerving stance to matters of policy. A weakness is clinging to the same inference *in spite of* new and mounting information.


----------



## 1SweetRide (Oct 25, 2016)

Brian Johnston said:


> What's odd is that more testing is showing that more people are getting it (particularly in the USA)... and yet that's reported as a 'bad thing.' The more people who get it, while remaining asymptomatic or with modest illness at best, the better... HERD IMMUNITY. That is what happened in Sweden... huge infestation while protecting the elderly (as best they can) and their death rate is no higher (and lower in some instances) than every other country that has shut down, put social distancing into practice and is forcing people to wear face masks in public.


Sweden's approach has now been deemed a failure.


----------



## bzrkrage (Mar 20, 2011)

player99 said:


> From Dr. Fauci:


People are posting this as coming from Dr. Fauci but it actually isn't his words. I still think it is a great explanation though, from someone called Amy Wright


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

bzrkrage said:


> “
> 
> 
> People are posting this as coming from Dr. Fauci but it actually isn't his words. I still think it is a great explanation though, from someone called Amy Wright


I posted it in another thread too. It may not be directly from Faucci, but it may be a condensed version of a few items he has discussed. At the very least, it is a compendium of common, sound medical advise that has been reported to date.


----------



## Markus 1 (Feb 1, 2019)

Brian Johnston said:


> Well, unless you want to live in a cave and avoid people for the rest of your life....
> 
> China released another coronavirus back in the 1980s, I believe it was. And I don't believe Faucci and others on this matter... they changed their minds so many times, and even suggested MILLIONS would die in the USA based on models. Just about everything stated since January either was exaggeration or wrong. And if herd immunity is not working, then someone needs to explain the response in Sweden.



We are all in the dark here. And I acknowledge that Fauci may have made mistakes. Additionally he is being hampered by the politician of the day that he serves at any given time. An unenviable position as a scientist to say the least.
The good thing is that he is willing to tell you that he doesn't know. When he knows, he shares. When he doesn't - he admits. ( This is something politicians are not fond of doing)
Some of the states in US are now dealing with the fallout of a cavalier approach to re-opening. People treat mask wearing as a political statement. Which is the typical bullshit you get from flag-wavers on both sides of the spectrum. (Normally people who live by slogan and pre-conceived ideology rather than science) If you don't understand the first principles of germ theory (that germs and viruses spread from body to body and that barriers work) you belong in a 3rd world country where magical thinking cures diseases. 
This is not aimed at you Brian. I don't know your full perspective nor your personal experience. 

You just made me think ( which is always a good thing) a bit so forgive the rant.

Markus V


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

I can't find that quote anywhere being directly attributed to Fauci. Source?


----------



## Markus 1 (Feb 1, 2019)

This is a bit long. But if this kind of stuff is your jam then have a look. Basically Critical thinking and its benefits. Totally non- partisan
Markus


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

The Hippocratic oath emphasizes that one do no harm (although apparently not in those exact words). This has been understood by many contemporary health practitioners as the desire to aim for "harm reduction". In other words, "What I'm planning to do isn't the best or ideal, but to NOT do it would end up being harmful". Obviously cure and direct treatment is the best and most effective reduction of harm, but slightly down the list is simply not making things worse. Though Fauci, and his colleagues, would likely vigorously reject the strategies (and often absence of any) adopted by the White House, he also understands that to NOT be included in discussions could easily make things worse. So, he softens his statements and looks for areas of fuzzy agreement, in an effort to not be cast aside, and leave decision-making entirely up to those with no medical knowledge or understanding whatsoever.

As for who the quote actually comes from, the point is rather moot. Richard/player99 is not an investigative journalist, so I don't expect him to be able to cite references. What matters is that it is true. If it was simply a matter of opinion, then yes, who it is attributed to would be important.


----------



## Markus 1 (Feb 1, 2019)

mhammer said:


> The wisest, most frugal, strategy for anyone concerned about the economic future of the country is simply: don't get it, don't spread it.
> 
> *As for Fauci "changing his mind", yeah, that's basically how science works: new data comes in and theories get revised. It's not a weakness, but a systematic approach to evidence and inference; the veritable "scientific method". *Drives politicians crazy, who would prefer to adopt an unswerving stance to matters of policy. A weakness is clinging to the same inference *in spite of* new and mounting information.



BINGO!!
AMEN


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

While being an intreped explorer, going off into uncharted territory is an admirable trait sometimes in humans. Doing it with this virus is not the time nor the place to do it. Seeing as we know little about it, and nothing of future repercussions, it is better to be safe, than to be a statistic.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

mhammer said:


> As for who the quote actually comes from, the point is rather moot. Richard/player99 is not an investigative journalist, so I don't expect him to be able to cite references. What matters is that it is true. If it was simply a matter of opinion, then yes, who it is attributed to would be important.


You're kidding, right? This is not a quote from Fauci. Tacking his name to it to give it weight is wrong. As a phd I'm sure you agree that sources are important.


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

Faucci is an expert in the area of vaccination... he's not an epidemiologist. I don't trust him, any more than WHO or that Chinese woman acting on behalf of Canada (while being part of WHO).


----------



## Markus 1 (Feb 1, 2019)

Brian Johnston said:


> Faucci is an expert in the area of vaccination... he's not an epidemiologist. I don't trust him, any more than WHO or that Chinese woman acting on behalf of Canada (while being part of WHO).


Small part of his BIO
Looks like more than just vaccination expertise. Immunologists typically need a far broader spectrum of specialized knowledge to give context to their particular area of focus. The guy has the cred.

_Dr. Fauci has advised six presidents on HIV/AIDS and many other domestic and global health issues. He was one of the principal architects of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a program that has saved millions of lives throughout the developing world.
Dr. Fauci also is the longtime chief of the Laboratory of Immunoregulation. He has made many contributions to basic and clinical research on the pathogenesis and treatment of immune-mediated and infectious diseases. He helped pioneer the field of human immunoregulation by making important basic scientific observations that underpin the current understanding of the regulation of the human immune response. In addition, Dr. Fauci is widely recognized for delineating the precise ways that immunosuppressive agents modulate the human immune response. He developed effective therapies for formerly fatal inflammatory and immune-mediated diseases such as polyarteritis nodosa, granulomatosis with polyangiitis (formerly Wegener's granulomatosis), and lymphomatoid granulomatosis. A 1985 Stanford University Arthritis Center Survey of the American Rheumatism Association membership ranked Dr. Fauci’s work on the treatment of polyarteritis nodosa and granulomatosis with polyangiitis among the most important advances in patient management in rheumatology over the previous 20 years.
Dr. Fauci has made seminal contributions to the understanding of how HIV destroys the body's defenses leading to its susceptibility to deadly infections. Further, he has been instrumental in developing treatments that enable people with HIV to live long and active lives. He continues to devote much of his research to the immunopathogenic mechanisms of HIV infection and the scope of the body's immune responses to HIV.
In a 2019 analysis of Google Scholar citations, Dr. Fauci ranked as the 41st most highly cited researcher of all time. According to the Web of Science, he ranked 8th out of more than 2.2 million authors in the field of immunology by total citation count between 1980 and January 2019._


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

As someone who has taken this very seriously, this part is important to me:

"For those in our society who suggest that people being cautious are cowards, for people who refuse to take even the simplest of precautions to protect themselves and those around them, I want to ask, without hyperbole and in all sincerity:
*How dare you?
How dare you risk the lives of others so cavalierly. How dare you decide for others that they should welcome exposure as "getting it over with", when literally no one knows who will be the lucky "mild symptoms" case, and who may fall ill and die.* Because while we know that some people are more susceptible to suffering a more serious case, we also know that 20 and 30-year-olds have died, marathon runners and fitness nuts have died, children and infants have died.
How dare you behave as though you know more than medical experts, when those same experts acknowledge that there is so much we don't yet know"


----------



## Kerry Brown (Mar 31, 2014)

It is a waste of time arguing with a believer. They will never change their mind no matter how much evidence you present. This is not a dig at anyone in particular. There are lots of "believers" on both sides of this argument. If you apply critical thinking to all the different information and check where the information is coming from most people come to the conclusion that COVID-19 is real. There are most likely long term effects that we won't know about until years from now. It can kill, especially people that fit certain profiles. It spreads very easily, especially in crowded indoor settings. Some things appear to inhibit it's spread. As we learn more about the disease we may have to change our ways of dealing with it.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Brian Johnston said:


> Faucci is an expert in the area of vaccination... he's not an epidemiologist. I don't trust him, any more than WHO or that Chinese woman acting on behalf of Canada (while being part of WHO).


By that reasoning, Brian, one ought not to trust the judgment of pretty much anyone in a major decision-making position, whether they be bank senior economists, the head of NASA, the head of the Armed Forces, or any large corporation, if they do not have specific extensive experience in the specific area in question. ALL such major decision-makers take their entire personal experience over many contexts into account, along with as much expert advice as they have access to. Sometimes they have the relevant specific expertise, and sometimes they have analogous experience. I may not have specific experience in repairing pedal X, or wiring guitar Y, but I have enough analogous experience with other devices to be able to reason my way through troubleshooting a repair of something I've never seen before. Same way most of us can figure out the chord progressions for songs we've never heard before after we listen to them and apply what we know from other songs.

Recognize that Fauci has the official obligation to read all the reports and briefing notes from all corners of the MUCH wider organization, just like "that Chinese woman" who heads PHAC . Everything that emerges from their respective organizations MUST pass through their hands and inspection. If that doesn't count for something, I don't know what would. You seem to have set the bar for relevant expertise unrealistically high.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

I think a huge problem is the media. They want to spin feel good stories about Alice making masks, or some locals videoing their music or whatever. They never show the bodies. Hundreds and thousands of bodies. Tons and tons of dead human meat. Hundreds and thousands of sick people and devistated families. But this feel good story priority leaves plenty of room for deniers, tough guys etc. Show the bodies. Interview the funeral directors who can't keep up with the cremations. Stop covering up the story so you can sell advertising.


----------



## 1979 930 (Oct 13, 2019)

interesting link 



https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/coronavirusvaccinetracker/?fbclid=IwAR2BUOxnRK6yLKsqc0-hZHnyPaYboRFA7VH584HxfInbO74Cs4wcFk8jivo


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

FWIW, when I saw the quote on CNBC yesterday or Saturday, it was attributed to Fauci.


----------



## Markus 1 (Feb 1, 2019)

Kerry Brown said:


> It is a waste of time arguing with a believer. They will never change their mind no matter how much evidence you present. _This is not a dig at anyone in particular._ .............. As we learn more about the disease we may have to change our ways of dealing with it.


Same here Kerry
I am fascinated by how people assemble their unique truths. 
A point my partner and I frequently discuss is how heuristics play into understanding (basically that we use "thinking shortcuts" to efficiently arrive at an axiomatic point of truth/certainty and then from there we formulate the subsequent argument). My partner frequently refers to _temperament_. She holds that on either side of the spectrum you find people who are _temperamentally _inclined to be ideological in their thinking. Those folks have low appetite for ambiguity. Thus, first of all, they need to "believe". Then after that they take snippets of information to bolster the belief. If you offer proof to the contrary, you are frequently/easily called "Naive" or "foolish" or "not a patriot" or "a Fascist" or a "Marxist".... you get the picture
This may have to do with the fact that for some,- if their argument is un-done they themselves feel personally attacked because they struggle with critical thinking and perhaps emotional boundaries. Jordan Peterson speaks very impressively about "Ideological possession" - though he applies it mostly to the Left when citing examples. Nevertheless the principle applies to everyone who uses personal beliefs to serve as axiomatic "truths" as a departure point for an argument. He also explains that thoughts or ideas are like Avatars of yourself. You set _them _into flight and if they have to fall and die- well then, at least _you _don't have to. (paraphrased)

Problem is that we get so invested in our beliefs that nothing is allowed to shake them

Markus


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

I just wanted to pass on some info after talking to my sister who is a respiratory therapist. I personally think it's a major issue that there isn't more education out there on what's going on with 'recovered' people, and there only being a focus on death tolls. The hospital here had an outbreak with 24 people total. One of those people was able to get back to work after 2 weeks (since we see that 2 weeks number quoted). The rest have been off for as much as 9 weeks. Several of them are completely debilitated and can't even walk up a set of stairs. Many of them are on oxygen, and the Dr's say there is no guarantee they will ever get back off of it. Others had issues with clots that are just wreaking havoc on their body. These aren't older people either, these are hospital workers. 

The media always shows numbers for "recovered" but that is not really an accurate term for what people are actually going through. Yes, the numbers of death are a small percentage, but a lot of the people who 'recover' are going to have serious issues for life. I really wish there was more education going around on that aspect of things.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

Then there is the total morbidity rate. The cancer patients who can't get surgery. The elderly slipping into dementia from isolation. All the other surgeries and emergencies that were not able to be address due to covid. That is a much bigger number.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

1979 930 said:


> interesting link
> 
> 
> 
> https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/coronavirusvaccinetracker/?fbclid=IwAR2BUOxnRK6yLKsqc0-hZHnyPaYboRFA7VH584HxfInbO74Cs4wcFk8jivo


Thanks for the link. Good read.
Think of vaccines as being like guards who can receive different sorts of orders.
"Shoot anyone and everything who tries to come through"
"Shoot anyone not wearing our uniform"
"Shot anyone with red hair, regardless of what they're wearing"
"Shoot anyone who can't tell you the right password"
"Let people through but follow them and shoot if they begin to look suspicious"
etc.
All of these orders will certainly keep out the undesirables, but at what cost? The various strategies being pursued in vaccine development approaching the task from different angles. What is a testament to the state of virology, immunology, and molecular biology in general is that enough is known about the mechanisms of viruses and immunology that we have all these many possible strategies to explore. What an absolute blessing.

Centuries ago, if we wanted to send a message from Europe to North America, we had one choice: sending it by boat. Just think of the number of options we have available to us today to accomplish the same task.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

torndownunit said:


> I just wanted to pass on some info after talking to my sister who is a respiratory therapist. I personally think it's a major issue that there isn't more education out there on what's going on with 'recovered' people, and there only being a focus on death tolls. The hospital here had an outbreak with 24 people total. One of those people was able to get back to work after 2 weeks (since we see that 2 weeks number quoted). The rest have been off for as much as 9 weeks. Several of them are completely debilitated and can't even walk up a set of stairs. Many of them are on oxygen, and the Dr's say there is no guarantee they will ever get back off of it. Others had issues with clots that are just wreaking havoc on their body. These aren't older people either, these are hospital workers.
> 
> The media always shows numbers for "recovered" but that is not really an accurate term for what people are actually going through. Yes, the numbers of death are a small percentage, but a lot of the people who 'recover' are going to have serious issues for life. I really wish there was more education going around on that aspect of things.


Absolutely. We focus, and rightly so, on deaths, since that is obviously the least desirable outcome. But let's say _nobody_ died from this, and what we had instead was an epidemic that simply made a goodly percentage of the workforce unable to work anymore, for years, or even the rest of their lives. I'll be uncharacteristically uncompassionate here and ignore the fact they're suffering. If 5% of the workforce simply couldn't show up for work anymore, and had to be added to the social-assistance rolls, what would that mean?

I'm not sure we're there yet, concentrating on other things, but I hope in due time we start to see stats about duration and extent of recovery, hopefully broken down into working-age and non-working age subgroups, so people start to realize this is not simply a matter of "dying old folks", or slowed economic growth due to businesses temporarily closed down. We can expect slowed economic growth when absolutely everything is open but there aren't enough healthy employees to go around.


----------



## 1SweetRide (Oct 25, 2016)

allthumbs56 said:


> I can't find that quote anywhere being directly attributed to Fauci. Source?


It's not him. It came from a lady from what I recall. I saw this posted last week.


----------



## Private Hudson (Jan 27, 2018)

Brian Johnston said:


> What's odd is that more testing is showing that more people are getting it (particularly in the USA)... and yet that's reported as a 'bad thing.' The more people who get it, while remaining asymptomatic or with modest illness at best, the better... HERD IMMUNITY. That is what happened in Sweden... huge infestation while protecting the elderly (as best they can) and their death rate is no higher (and lower in some instances) than every other country that has shut down, put social distancing into practice and is forcing people to wear face masks in public.


Herd immunity doesn't work for a virus you can get a month later. Even if you use caps, lol


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

mhammer said:


> Absolutely. We focus, and rightly so, on deaths, since that is obviously the least desirable outcome. But let's say _nobody_ died from this, and what we had instead was an epidemic that simply made a goodly percentage of the workforce unable to work anymore, for years, or even the rest of their lives. I'll be uncharacteristically uncompassionate here and ignore the fact they're suffering. If 5% of the workforce simply couldn't show up for work anymore, and had to be added to the social-assistance rolls, what would that mean?
> 
> I'm not sure we're there yet, concentrating on other things, but I hope in due time we start to see stats about duration and extent of recovery, hopefully broken down into working-age and non-working age subgroups, so people start to realize this is not simply a matter of "dying old folks", or slowed economic growth due to businesses temporarily closed down. We can expect slowed economic growth when absolutely everything is open but there aren't enough healthy employees to go around.


I think that, largely, the information made available to the public at any given time, is designed to elicit the desired effect - enough to get our attention and cooperation, but not so much that we go crazy and stampede.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

bluehugh2 said:


> Another thing you don’t know, is that if you’re over 80 in Sweden, and have Covid, you will not be treated at a hospital. That’s the policy. Nice.



I can't find anything to back that up.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Private Hudson said:


> Herd immunity doesn't work for a virus you can get a month later. Even if you use caps, lol


Which leaves us hoping for either a commonly available vaccine of some decent effectiveness (at least 50%) , or a virus that simply goes away and leaves us alone.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

Markus 1 said:


> Problem is that we get so invested in our beliefs that nothing is allowed to shake them


Well written! 

I was recently doing some reading on "belief systems" ....so powerful!


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

I like Dr. Fauci but I just popped in for a minute and I can't contribute to the conversation so I'll just post this cartoon. This was shown to Trump in a Fox news interview and his reply was something like "well yes, he makes a few mistakes but I like him". If anyone can post the exact quote, go ahead.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

Guitar101 said:


> I like Dr. Fauci but I just popped in for a minute and I can't contribute to the conversation so I'll just post this cartoon. This was shown to Trump in a Fox news interview and his reply was something like "well yes, he make a few mistakes but I like him". If anyone can post the exact quote, go ahead.
> 
> View attachment 322654


This is fear propaganda.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

player99 said:


> This is fear propaganda.


For, or against?


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

allthumbs56 said:


> For, or against?


It is clearly ridiculing Fouci and what he is recommending for public health.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Just to clarify a little, do NOT confuse vaccines with cures. You can get you a shot of something to near instantly counteract, say, a nasty allergic response, or clear up a stuffy nose. Those sorts of cures act on the more problematic _symptoms_ provoked by the allergen or pathogen. They do not "cure" the allergen or prevent it ever provoking such symptoms in future, nor do they kill the virus causing your stuffy nose.

Vaccines are intended to elicit the production of antibodies to a particular pathogen or family of pathogens, and that takes time. So, if by some miracle, a vaccine were available for October 1, it might not begin to have any beneficial effect in the population until closer to the end of the month. Until then, it is still the person's responsibility to stay healthy, and not contract the virus until such time as the vaccine has elicited enough of an immune response in the person to effectively defeat any subsequent virus they contract. Undoubtedly, there are variations in individual immune systems and some will be faster, some slower, but vaccines do NOT "kill bugs on contact" like Raid.

To that end, the search for treatments that address those life-threatening symptoms produced by the virus is every bit as important as the search for a vaccine. Effective post-hospitalization treatment is obviously not as good as prevention. But treatments that can reduce hospital stay, reduce the suffering attached to this virus, and allow as many to return to full functionality as possible, is still a VERY good thing. Of course, the very diverse form the symptoms can take across individuals likely means no single treatment would address every conceivable symptom. What improves lung capacity may have little impact on loss of sense of smell, and so on.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

My limited understanding is viruses are not alive. They enter cells, plug into their DNA and reprogram the cells to replicate more of the virus, which in turn goes into cells etc. My understanding of antiviral meds is they somehow block the viruses from reproducing. But they don't destroy the virus.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

player99 said:


> It is clearly ridiculing Fouci and what he is recommending for public health.


I get that. But why do you call it "Fear propaganda"? It may make fun of Fauci but does it breed fear, and in who?


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

allthumbs56 said:


> I get that. But why do you call it "Fear propaganda"? It may make fun of Fauci but does it breed fear, and in who?


This is serious shit, and clearly there are hundreds of thousand / millions of people in the US that are following Trumps lead and dying because of it. This type of propaganda feeds into it and propagates the false narrative.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

player99 said:


> This is serious shit, and clearly there are hundreds of thousand / millions of people in the US that are following Trumps lead and dying because of it. This type of propaganda feeds into it and propagates the false narrative.


I think you're working very hard to make something out of nothing. As far as breeding fear perhaps you could do a little less yourself by changing the title of this thread to something truthful. Dr. Fauci cannot be identified as the source of any of that quote. I checked.


----------



## Markus 1 (Feb 1, 2019)

player99 said:


> It is clearly ridiculing Fouci and what he is recommending for public health.



Funny - my cursory reading of it was that EVERYBODY reads into it what they are inclined to.
I may be wrong


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

I don't like people very much so social distancing is playing very well for me 

More seriously, if we don't develop immunity to it after having it, how is a vaccine supposed to work?
BTW, thanks everyone for running up my stock in Moderna anyway


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

*The source, ending that issue/debate:*​U.S. Disease Chief Rejects Notion That Coronavirus Is


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

Diablo said:


> I don't like people very much so social distancing is playing very well for me
> 
> More seriously, if we don't develop immunity to it after having it, how is a vaccine supposed to work?
> BTW, thanks everyone for running up my stock in Moderna anyway


_"I don't like people very much so social distancing is playing very well for me"_
You'd get along well with my wife. We've been social distancing since this thing started but I don't have the heart to tell her it's more for people outside your bubble.😷

_"More seriously, if we don't develop immunity to it after having it, how is a vaccine supposed to work?"_
I thinks that's why we have to get vaccinated every year. It keeps changing.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Jim DaddyO said:


> *The source, ending that issue/debate:*​U.S. Disease Chief Rejects Notion That Coronavirus Is


It's A source, but perhaps not THE source. I won't disparage them, simply because it is a non-North-American news source, but it wouldn't be the first time that a foreign news-information site may have misattributed something. The information contained is certainly true. I'm not entirely sure Fauci would have used phrases like "How dare you", as he tends to be more tempered in his language - that is, after all, how people tend to rise to senior management, at least in government agencies. I will also note that the content up to the "How Dare You" has quotation marks around each paragraph, while the content after that is not shown as quotations, with the sole exception of a single closing quotation mark, minus the one that should have preceded it at some point. So, it reads, at least on that site, like a hodge-podge of things that may have been said by several persons, and certainly not like any contiguous formal statement from Fauci himself. The "How dare you" is not wrong-headed, IMHO, but like I say, confrontation is simply not his style.


----------



## TheGASisReal (Mar 2, 2020)




----------



## jb welder (Sep 14, 2010)

This is not hard people. 









Did Fauci Compare Research About COVID-19 to That of Chickenpox?


The comparison happened on Facebook and went viral in summer 2020.




www.snopes.com


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

jb welder said:


> This is not hard people.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cool, thanks. 

Misattributed, now, is it inaccurate?


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

If herd immunity doesn't work, I'm curious as to what is happening around the world with reduced deaths... and does that mean we stay shut down for the rest of our lives? Also interesting is the study that came out last week, with over 1600 infected people (who tested positive), yet they could not detect in a lab environment any virus from people breathing and talking (only forced coughing), thus making face masks pretty much pointless (and unhealthy when worn for long periods).


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

It's getting to the extreme, and to the point that the mayor in one Florida town is mandating people wear face masks in their own homes!!!!!!!!!


https://www.broward.org/CoronaVirus/Documents/EmergencyOrder20-22.pdf


According to the CDC... facemasks are pointless:








Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures


Pandemic Influenza—Personal Protective Measures




wwwnc.cdc.gov





“Here, we review the evidence base on the effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical personal protective measures and environmental hygiene measures in non-healthcare settings and discuss their potential inclusion in pandemic plans. Although mechanistic studies [*] support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza. We similarly found limited evidence on the effectiveness of improved hygiene and environmental cleaning.”
Here are quotes from pages 970-972 of the review: “In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs [randomized controlled trials] that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks…”
“Disposable medical masks (also known as surgical masks) are loose-fitting devices that were designed to be worn by medical personnel to protect accidental contamination of patient wounds, and to protect the wearer against splashes or sprays of bodily fluids… There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

Brian Johnston said:


> If herd immunity doesn't work, I'm curious as to what is happening around the world with reduced deaths... and does that mean we stay shut down for the rest of our lives? Also interesting is the study that came out last week, with over 1600 infected people (who tested positive), yet they could not detect in a lab environment any virus from people breathing and talking (only forced coughing), thus making face masks pretty much pointless (and unhealthy when worn for long periods).


You're right. It's all a hoax.


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

Markus 1 said:


> We are all in the dark here. And I acknowledge that Fauci may have made mistakes. Additionally he is being hampered by the politician of the day that he serves at any given time. An unenviable position as a scientist to say the least.
> The good thing is that he is willing to tell you that he doesn't know. When he knows, he shares. When he doesn't - he admits. ( This is something politicians are not fond of doing)
> Some of the states in US are now dealing with the fallout of a cavalier approach to re-opening. People treat mask wearing as a political statement. Which is the typical bullshit you get from flag-wavers on both sides of the spectrum. (Normally people who live by slogan and pre-conceived ideology rather than science) If you don't understand the first principles of germ theory (that germs and viruses spread from body to body and that barriers work) you belong in a 3rd world country where magical thinking cures diseases.
> This is not aimed at you Brian. I don't know your full perspective nor your personal experience.
> ...





player99 said:


> You're right. It's all a hoax.


Quote me where I stated it was a hoax. I think there is a lot of ignorance and exaggeration, which is different from a hoax.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Jim DaddyO said:


> *The source, ending that issue/debate:*​U.S. Disease Chief Rejects Notion That Coronavirus Is


Thanks for tracking that down Jim.

I believe the statements to be true, some or most were probably uttered by Dr Fauci (and most other people) at some time or other. I suspect the author also added some of his/her own comments too, ie "weird, right", and "How Dare You".

And thanks to JB for the Snopes report:

_"However, Fauci was not the source of, or at all connected to, the viral message. Rather, we determined Facebook user Amy Wright, of Asheville, North Carolina, was the post’s original author. "_​
But, well, there it is and I really suggest that the thread title be changed accordingly to "*From Amy Wright of Asheville, North Carolina on Coronavirus*". Let us not be the propagators of false news - there's enough of that already.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

"Herd immunity", as a phenomenon, _does_ exist. However, as I believe I noted in an earlier post, it requires certain conditions in order to exist. No one knows, at this point, whether those conditions _could_ be met for this particular virus. They _migh_t, and I don't want to rule that out completely. But since we don't know, and don't have any suggestive evidence at the moment that they might, best to behave as if it can't happen. None of us know our house is going to burn down, or that the boat we're in will take on water and sink, but we still have home insurance and wear life-jackets just in case.

The underlying premise of herd immunity is that if a critical mass of the populace is able to successfully combat a given bacterial or viral pathogen - whether - because their own immune system is robust enough to have responded and killed it endogenously, or because a vaccine has elicited antibody production that would kill it if they ever caught it, then it won't spread from me to you because it isn't surviving in me enough to be spreadable. All of that rests on the assumption, however, that any endogenous or elicited immune response lasts long enough, and robustly enough, that I won't catch it again and be unable to fight it off. Keep in mind that at any given point in time, there are all sorts of pathogens in circulation, but enough of us have sufficient immune response that such pathogens only result in isolated instances rather than epidemic-like spread. Here, what we tend to see is "There's something going around at work", but it doesn't spread beyond that little niche. The convention is that if 80% or more of a population are immune to a pathogen, then it won't spread beyond those sporadic cases. The collective generally protects the individual.

So, to your question about why death rates are dropping around the world. I'll set aside, for the moment, the matter of reliable case and death reporting from various nations "around the world", and concern myself with those where we know reporting to be reliable and thorough. Deaths are dropping, because cases are dropping. And cases are dropping because of the joint result of ALL public health measures undertaken, masks, social distancing, handwashing, sanitizing, isolating identified cases, minimizing travel, etc. Expecting any single part of that to show what statisticians would call a "main effect" would lead to disappointment.

WHY wear a face mask? Well, ask yourself why wash or sanitize your hands, why not touch your face, and why stay a safe distance apart? The answer is that stuff comes out of our pie hole that is in intimate contact with pathogens circulating in our bodies. It goes from our mouths onto surfaces, and from surfaces onto our hands, and when we touch wet openings in our bodies, like our eyes or mouth, whatever we picked up from those surfaces can enter our bodies. So, if we could all wear inflatable 4ft-radius sumo wrestler suits, such that we could guarantee NO one would come within 6-8ft of anyone else, no matter what (assuring that the directional arrows in supermarket aisles would be observed, lest two people get jammed in an aisle), then perhaps face coverings would be less necessary, or at least lapses in their use would have less impact.

You may have noted the recent co-signed letter from a consortium of researchers concerning the risk of "aerosolized virus". Their point was not that this is the "real" risk. Rather, they noted that we expel a variety of droplet sizes when we speak, cough, sneaze, laugh, yell, etc. Many are of sufficient mass that they travel like a shot-put, and fall down on whatever surface is around - hence the 6ft distance recommendation. However, some of what we expel is sufficiently low mass that it simply continues to float around in the air, not unlike those thin plastic produce bags you put out with the garbage but got caught by a breeze and floated away while the rest of the garbage stayed put where you left it. As such, those tinier droplet can still carry virus and still pose an _additional_ source of risk and exposure; not the main one, but not something you can simply ignore, either. If anything, this is why places like long-term care homes, schools, hospitals, and a great many workplaces need to rethink and redesign their HVAC systems. Blowing air around the room doesn't remove anything floating in the air, and like the hamster study I noted much earlier, moving air from room to room simply accumulates any pathogens that become aerosolized.


----------



## Markus 1 (Feb 1, 2019)

mhammer said:


> "Herd immunity", as a phenomenon, _does_ exist. However, as I believe I noted in an earlier post, it requires certain conditions in order to exist. No one knows, at this point, whether those conditions _could_ be met for this particular virus. They _migh_t, and I don't want to rule that out completely. But since we don't know, and don't have any suggestive evidence at the moment that they might, best to behave as if it can't happen. None of us know our house is going to burn down, or that the boat we're in will take on water and sink, but we still have home insurance and wear life-jackets just in case.
> 
> The underlying premise of herd immunity is that if a critical mass of the populace is able to successfully combat a given bacterial or viral pathogen - whether - because their own immune system is robust enough to have responded and killed it endogenously, or because a vaccine has elicited antibody production that would kill it if they ever caught it, then it won't spread from me to you because it isn't surviving in me enough to be spreadable. All of that rests on the assumption, however, that any endogenous or elicited immune response lasts long enough, and robustly enough, that I won't catch it again and be unable to fight it off. Keep in mind that at any given point in time, there are all sorts of pathogens in circulation, but enough of us have sufficient immune response that such pathogens only result in isolated instances rather than epidemic-like spread. Here, what we tend to see is "There's something going around at work", but it doesn't spread beyond that little niche. The convention is that if 80% or more of a population are immune to a pathogen, then it won't spread beyond those sporadic cases. The collective generally protects the individual.
> 
> ...



What a great, well-written post.
Thanks MHammer


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Thanks. Glad you liked it.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

Have there been more than a couple of reports of people getting it twice or more?


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

keto said:


> Have there been more than a couple of reports of people getting it twice or more?


There may not have been any viable reports of anyone getting it twice. The virus can appear to go away or minimize itself, and then reappear with vigor a few weeks later. That isn't really getting it twice.

We only have 6 months of experience with it. We have so much more to learn.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

High/Deaf said:


> There may not have been any viable reports of anyone getting it twice. The virus can appear to go away or minimize itself, and then reappear with vigor a few weeks later. That isn't really getting it twice.
> 
> *We only have 6 months of experience with it. We have so much more to learn.*


This is what it boils down to, for me.
So for now, in the absence of definitive information, i'll use whatever precautions are available to me...whether it be masks, avoiding crowds, vitamin D, a necklace made of garlic or carrying a silver cross. the risk /reward for me is simple. Risk: look back and feel like I looked stupid for a year (wouldn't be the first time) and wasted a few bucks...Reward: hopefully not have to be hooked up to a machine to do my breathing for me (or a family member). I'll leave it to those braver and smarter than me, to beta test their theories.


----------



## KentHamiltone (Jul 21, 2020)

Brian Johnston said:


> What's odd is that more testing is showing that more people are getting it (particularly in the USA)... and yet that's reported as a 'bad thing.' The more people who get it, while remaining asymptomatic or with modest illness at best, the better... HERD IMMUNITY. That is what happened in Sweden... huge infestation while protecting the elderly (as best they can) and their death rate is no higher (and lower in some instances) than every other country that has shut down, put social distancing into practice and is forcing people to wear face masks in public.


----------



## KentHamiltone (Jul 21, 2020)

They have not acquired herd immunity in Sweden. A population can't acquire herd immunity without a vaccine. Those Swedish doctors talking points were largely debunked. Nobody even knows if the virus they are looking at right now won't mutate into another strain. Instead of looking at Sweden, you should look at a country like Taiwan. They had a hard time during SARS, so when Covid hit, they immediately made everyone wear masks and frequently hand wash. They are already holding sporting events with full stands, and are going on with life as normal. Look at the States now. A bunch of entitled idiots refusing to wear masks because of their "rights" and they are screwed... Not sure when Facebook became people's go to for science information.


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but other countries have been wearing face masks with not much luck. As per the above entitled idiots, don't forget the surge of cases during the BLM movements... and nearly all of them (by the photos) wore masks.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

Brian Johnston said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but other countries have been wearing face masks with not much luck. As per the above entitled idiots, don't forget the surge of cases during the BLM movements... and nearly all of them (by the photos) wore masks.


You're right. Masks do nothing. There must be a conspiracy to get the top disease prevention experts around the world to lie and tell us to wear masks.


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

player99 said:


> You're right. Masks do nothing. There must be a conspiracy to get the top disease prevention experts around the world to lie and tell us to wear masks.


Interesting, as I provided a link to a research paper that clarifies that mask wearing does nothing... absolutely no proof... based on in-lab results and not 'experts' in the news.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

Brian Johnston said:


> Interesting, as I provided a link to a research paper that clarifies that mask wearing does nothing... absolutely no proof... based on in-lab results and not 'experts' in the news.


It's a conspiracy. Masks do nothing. Trump once again is smarter and more knowledgeable than the world scientific community.


----------



## HighNoon (Nov 29, 2016)

Fauci has been a proponent and supporter of gain of function research, whether in Ft Detrick, UNC or Wuhan. Canada has played it's part from the lab in Winnipeg. Other countries have ongoing research into such matters and we've only see a small sample so far. It's the future weapon of choice.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

player99 said:


> It's a conspiracy. Masks do nothing. Trump once again is smarter and more knowledgeable than the world scientific community.


I knew it before Tam did. Does that make me smarter than the world scientific community?


----------



## Brian Johnston (Feb 24, 2019)

player99 said:


> It's a conspiracy. Masks do nothing. Trump once again is smarter and more knowledgeable than the world scientific community.


Why does it have to be a conspiracy? A scientific paper indicating, through testing/research, that masks do LITTLE (don't put YOUR words... NOTHING... into the paper).


----------



## Kerry Brown (Mar 31, 2014)

Brian Johnston said:


> Why does it have to be a conspiracy? A scientific paper indicating, through testing/research, that masks do LITTLE (don't put YOUR words... NOTHING... into the paper).


The Lancet recently published a study that used the results from 172 studies. The conclusion:

“Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection”

They go on to say that some types of masks are better than others but even cotton masks were significant.



https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext#%20


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

Brian Johnston said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but other countries have been wearing face masks with not much luck. As per the above entitled idiots, don't forget the surge of cases during the BLM movements... and nearly all of them (by the photos) wore masks.


Your wrong. Put on a mask and see if you can blow out a candle and please use some common sense, if the mask stops or even slows the droplets from infecting you, it's done it's job. If you were doing your job, you would be 6 ft away from that infected person.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

It's not 6.5' or a mask. It's 6.5'. Masks definitely help, but since researchers have found active coronavirus in 1 micron floating human vapour the masks are not going to protect from that. It is unknown if there is a minimum amount of active virus required for infection.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

player99 said:


> It's not 6.5' or a mask. It's 6.5' mask or not. Masks definitely help, but since researchers have found active coronavirus in 1 micron floating human vapour the masks are not going to protect from that. It is unknown if there is a minimum amount of active virus required for infection.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

The mask is part of a system who's whole is more than the sum of it's parts. Just as a speed limit in cars saves a percentage of lives, if you combine it with a seat belt, it saves more, and then add an air bag even more lives. The amount of lives saved by all 3 together is more than each individual component, by itself, added individually.

Social distancing, a mask, avoiding crowds, washing, not touching your face each individually would have an effect on it's own. But if you combine all the methods it is a greater effect than the sum of it's parts.

It is a system. Use it in good health.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

Oh, and masks as a conspiracy theory for the government to control you?

The governments literally assigns a number to you (a few of them actually) SIN, drivers licence, and health card come to mind. They tax you. They make you register your address and your vehicle. They know where you work and how much you make. They do a census on a semi regular basis. You have to give all kinds of information to vote.

If you think that masks are the way they are going to keep track of you and control you? You haven't been paying attention.


----------



## KentHamiltone (Jul 21, 2020)

Brian Johnston said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but other countries have been wearing face masks with not much luck. As per the above entitled idiots, don't forget the surge of cases during the BLM movements... and nearly all of them (by the photos) wore masks.


You're wrong. The thing is, I've found that if you search hard enough for something in particular, you're guaranteed to find it. Wearing a mask isn't ideal, especially in hot weather, but the countries that mandated masks in public, as well as public education campaigns with data gleaned from the SARS epidemic, all have Covid under control. The masks work most efficiently if everyone agrees to wear them to keep everyone safe. The worst thing has happened in that the act of wearing a mask has become a political issue, not a public health issue. The Trump effect is even sneaking tendrils across the border. The longer people resist public health measures, the longer the shutdown will last. There were more waves than one during the Spanish flu epidemic from 1918-1920.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

The masks with these valves are not helping, as they let the wearer exhale without any filtering. It is agreed that wearing a mask is really protecting others from your exhaled moisture. But if you have a valve that allows the free flow of exhaled air, then the wearer is not protecting others, thus breaching the mask protocol. The valve may actually make it worse by concentrating the exhalation and add velocity and spread the vapour further.

*Note: This my own theory.

Bad valves:










Bad valves:













Bad valves:


----------



## TubeStack (Jul 16, 2009)

Thread title should be changed, or at least the OP edited.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

TubeStack said:


> Thread title should be changed, or at least the OP edited.


To what?


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

So doctors and nurses are dressing up for Halloween every shift? Why do they wear a mask?


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

The surgical masks look like the paper masks but they are a much higher quality.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

player99 said:


> To what?


Remove Fauci's name from the title.

As for your comments on mask types I agree totally. Common sense dictates that they have to be of some use preventing the expelling of junk from one's mouth. The ones with valves don't do that - they're for inhaling and have to be fitted and work perfectly to be of any use.

Wear a mask when you're around others.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

KentHamiltone said:


> They have not acquired herd immunity in Sweden. A population can't acquire herd immunity without a vaccine.


Millions of Mayans and Aztecs would take issue with this - if they weren't already wiped out by the Spanish, who had herd immunity from a few animal virus' that the Central and South Americans did not. Are you saying the Spanish 500 years ago, or the people of Mesopotamia 5000 years go, had invented vaccines? I'm gonna call bullshit on that one.



> Those Swedish doctors talking points were largely debunked. Nobody even knows if the virus they are looking at right now won't mutate into another strain. Instead of looking at Sweden, you should look at a country like Taiwan. They had a hard time during SARS, so when Covid hit, they immediately made everyone wear masks and frequently hand wash. They are already holding sporting events with full stands, and are going on with life as normal. Look at the States now. A bunch of entitled idiots refusing to wear masks because of their "rights" and they are screwed... Not sure when Facebook became people's go to for science information.


Probably more significant to Taiwan's success was how they shut down their borders right away, rather than play political silly bugger, as per the WHO (and certain PHO's). Masks and handwashing helped to minimize and then eliminate the small amount of virus that had been let in before they went into a total border shutdown.

Their previous distrust of the totalitarian CCP, due to previous outbreaks like SARS, was the largest factor to their immediate border control response. It would be nice to learn from them, but for some reason the WHO refuses to do that. Why? Follow the money.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Saw this in an article...its being used as an example of how americans and Canadians are behaving differently during covid.

















Social distancing Canadians eye new sight at Niagara Falls: crowds of Americans


The tourist hotspot of Niagara Falls has gained a new photo-op for social distancing Canadian visitors on board ferries taking them into the mist of the falls: crowds of Americans. Although cases of COVID-19 continue to rise across the United States, neighboring Canada has largely managed to...




ca.yahoo.com


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Diablo said:


> Saw this in an article...its being used as an example of how americans and Canadians are behaving differently during covid.
> View attachment 322885
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, they're not allowed have more than 10 on the boat so with 6 crew they are selling VIP packages for up to 4 people at a time (imagine what that will set you back). Come this weekend those 2 boats will pretty much look the same as they'll be allowed to carry 100.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

KentHamiltone said:


> They have not acquired herd immunity in Sweden. A population can't acquire herd immunity without a vaccine.


Herd immunity is certainly _*assisted*_ and *enhanced* by vaccines - one of the reasons why public health experts are concerned about anti-vaccination trends in some parts of the world - but _can_ occur in the absence of vaccines. It's just not pretty or as efficient. Remember that what most conventional vaccines do is introduce a mild or crippled form of the pathogen that most recipients' immune systems can easily overcome and wrestle to the ground, in the process of developing antibodies. In theory, I can provide that to you too, assuming I am not seriously infected, and you are not seriously compromised. There ARE the very rare cases in which specific individuals may not be able to develop an immune response, either robustly enough or quickly enough, to pin down the mild pathogen introduced via the vaccine. Part of the development and approval-process of vaccines is that the vaccine be demonstrably and reliably "sub-clinical", insomuch as it can elicit a suitable immune response, _without_ turning into a full-blown case of the disease it's supposed to help combat. That's on top of things like not having severe allergic responses to the vehicle the vaccine comes in or some other additive in the vaccine required, say, storage.

The idea of a bit of "the hair of the dog that _might_ bite you" as protection/prophylaxis actually goes back quite far, even if in unrefined form. Timeline | History of Vaccines


----------



## TheYanChamp (Mar 6, 2009)

player99 said:


> It's not 6.5' or a mask. It's 6.5'. Masks definitely help, but since researchers have found active coronavirus in 1 micron floating human vapour the masks are not going to protect from that. It is unknown if there is a minimum amount of active virus required for infection.



Apparently it comes down to viral load. The reason ICU doctors and nurses have been dying is not because they are exposed to 1 micron leading to lesser symptoms or remaining asymptomatic, but because they are exposed to so much that they're immune system can't handle the viral load. But clearly none of us know what we're talking about.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

Diablo said:


> Saw this in an article...its being used as an example of how americans and Canadians are behaving differently during covid.
> View attachment 322885
> 
> 
> ...


Let's not be puffing our chests out too far with pride about this, because only a short distance away on land......

Coronavirus: Video shows large crowds and little physical distancing in Niagara Falls


----------



## jb welder (Sep 14, 2010)

player99 said:


> To what?


How about just tack 'not really' at the beginning of the thread title.
I'm sure you would NOT be fine with somebody starting a thread titled 'Dr. Fauci says masks are useless', and it turned out to be fake. Why are you sticking by this false attribution?


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

jb welder said:


> How about just tack 'not really' at the beginning of the thread title.
> I'm sure you would NOT be fine with somebody starting a thread titled 'Dr. Fauci says masks are useless', and it turned out to be fake. Why are you sticking by this false attribution?


Is that better? I wasn't sticking I was just a little delinquent.


----------



## jb welder (Sep 14, 2010)

player99 said:


> Is that better? I wasn't sticking I was just a little delinquent.


Thanks. The great one will be proud.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

jb welder said:


> Thanks. The great one will be proud.


It seems like he did say a lot of the article though?


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

player99 said:


> It seems like he did say a lot of the article though?


What's listed has at least been in the news at one time or another and has probably been said at some time by Fauci as well as most people, me and you included. Thanks for changing the title though - let's do our part to be truthful


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Jim DaddyO said:


> Let's not be puffing our chests out too far with pride about this, because only a short distance away on land......
> 
> Coronavirus: Video shows large crowds and little physical distancing in Niagara Falls


Sad 

I know the boat pic was an exaggeration, but at the same time, its undeniable, we've handled this whole thing better than our neighbours to the south, even if the boat pic is more representative of our difference in statistics. maybe we're actually closer to ready to have these crowds now than the US? i mean the goal is to get to that point of normal again. Are we ready now? I dont know. I do know, we sure as hell weren't a coupel months ago when the americans lost their patience and decided that covid precautions are an attack on their personal freedoms. we'll see when the stats come out in a month.


----------

