Posted on 04/10/2020 12:42:28 PM PDT by Mount Athos
The same people who say we have to shut down the country based on nothing but guesses and "models" are the exact same people saying we must not prescribe hydroxychloroquine until we have full 10,000 participant double-blind trials and conclusive scientific proof.
It seems the alleged "Science-Lovers" and Twitter scolds are willing to roll the dice on some speculations, but are extremely aggressive that we don't gamble on other ones.
So strange that sometimes we take suggestive evidence as conclusive proof that we must do something dramatic and destructive -- shutting the country's economy down -- but in other case, suggestive evidence is not enough to encourage doctors to prescribe a well-tested drug with minimal side-effects.
Why? There is no scientific reason for this -- it's entirely driven by the Orange Man Bad Axiom. They want to shut the economy down because they know it's the only way to stop the Bad Orange Man. They do not want any remedy for coronavirus discovered because that would result in the economy being reopened.
Isn't it awfully convenient that we need very little evidence to do something which will harm Trump's reelection chances, but we cannot prescribe a drug which could improve his reelection chances until three years from now when all the studies are completed, peer-reviewed, and published? What other reason could there be for this except the obvious, ghoulishly partisan one?
Good question. Just a guess, but I suspect if this shutdown remains in place past 4/30, we will begin see people blatantly ignoring the shutdown order and demand to get back to work, and if the mayors/governors/president don’t respond favorably and continue citing people that will be the trigger.
Despite most people acting like sheep, we are not animals, we value our freedoms and will only tolerate a limited amount of this bu!!sh!t.
You should not be skeptical of models, instead you should just do some math yourself. The reproduction number is 2.8 Take out your calculator. Punch in 1x2.8 Then do times equals again. Count how many times you hit equals and write down that number next to the result. I just hit “equals” 17 times
and I get: 111,903,730 Do it 18 times and that’s the population of the USA. 18 person to person contacts. This virus infects, on average, 2.8 people for every 1 sick person. If that first person infects 2.8, and those 2.8 infect each 2.8, it only takes 18 person-person contact generations before the whole country is infected. Why does it stop at 65% instead of 100%? Because of math. The more people immune, the more people infected, the more people dead, the lower this Reproduction Number (2.8) drops. But you can calculate that at the begining. And the math of that results in: 65% infected. Your problem is that you don’t trust mathmaticians. Is that a good idea? You have got to separate your distrust of the government from mathmaticians. it is healthy to distrust the government. It is catastrophic to distrust mathmaticians.
EXACTLY!
‘If instead antibody people go back to work’
antibody people...?
Double-blind trials are normally conducted to determine if the proposed medication works and that there is no placebo effect. But in this case, who the hell cares if there is a placebo effect as long as it works! There is already plenty of evidence in the available statistics to know that it works amazingly well.
Total BS
Yes, totally apart from politics, Americans think illogically. We will play Russian Roulette (forgive if that is racist) with one risky behavior but not with another risky behavior.
We will spend money both in government, in business, in the family, on totally useless non-political virtue signalling and then not have enough money for what is truly useful.
“My question of Fauci is more legitimate than his use of it against HCQ (hundreds of times).”
His use of what against HCQ?
Nothing is truth until it has double-blind studies, and more than one, to him.
I love how he and others assume COVID-19 does anything wrong when there are no similar studies on it. It is all assumption even today and if we weren’t testing for it, no one would even assumed to be dying of COVID-19.
I’m a “modeler” too, and my models show you are full of crap.
“Time and time again Fauci has told us there are no studies on HCQ for COVID and that there isn’t the slightest hint of it being effective or is safe for people with COVID and that it is only desperation to use it.
Nothing is truth until it has double-blind studies, and more than one, to him.”
Fauci said he would use HCQ if he was the tending doctor for a serious COVID patient.
“Nothing is truth until it has double-blind studies, and more than one, to him.”
Fauci: it’s understandable why people may want to take something anyway, even with the slightest hint of it being effective, and I have no problem with that.”
Generalize much.
Just another rambling blog post.
Your post is revisionist history combined with moving the goal posts.
First, the shut downs were supposedly to prevent overloading the medical system based on apocalyptic models built on extremely flawed and incomplete data.
Second, the left is now proposing keeping the lockdowns in order to “save lives”, which is an illogical extension of their original purpose. Every death is tragic, but killing the livelihoods of the country is an irrational response - except (debatably) to prevent breakdown of the medical system.
There is no clear evidence that the models reflect any form of reality. Individual responsibility and social distancing (as originally defined, not as used now to mean lockdown) will be used to protect the vulnerable.
Abrogating the bill of rights is not the way to provide safety. Ben Franklin was right, after all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.