Coronavirus (San Francisco, Columbia, London: crime, how much, living)

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

The CDC studies are cumbersome and take too long to be relevant in a brushfire pandemic. I look at the vaccinations as one giant clinical trial in which I willingly participate. You cannot ditz around and shuffle along in this kind of a situation if only because of the crippling nature of lockdowns.

And those who don't are the control group. Gives new meaning to "we're in this together" (like it or not).

[goodheathen]

Originally Posted by joosoon

One which wouldn't prove effective and is unworkable, sure.
A journalists job is to write stuff, so who cares that you read something, somewhere in some newspaper.



Who said anything about unmasked and without restrictions? I just got done saying that of all the places where the public comes together, schools are about the only area where protocols are being adhered to including masking, small group cohorts, etc., etc. and are the only places some reasonable effort to contact trace and weed out sick individuals occurs. Schools are the least of our concerns.

The least of concern should be barber shops.

Schools are only low-concern if the protocols (mostly from the state, it seems) "are being adhered to" everywhere and are good enough to almost fully stop Omicron. It's fair to assume some districts or individual schools are cutting corners with the former, and given how contagious Omicron is, protocols probably need to be tightened anyway. That's not even getting into schools outside California where often masking and restrictions aren't used. Given how the virus sweeps across the nation, California won't be particularly safe from the coronavirus until the other states get their act together.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by Soujouner

Masks do work and they are proven to stop viruses. If it weren’t for masks, hundreds of thousands more Americans would be dead.

This is hilarious. There is zero science with a crystal ball. Maybe, might, perhaps. How do we measure what ifs?

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

This is hilarious. There is zero science with a crystal ball. Maybe, might, perhaps. How do we measure what ifs?

The inability to measure ‘what ifs’ does not prove any inverses either Angry. So, arguments need be suspended, not refuted, pending verifiable data.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

The inability to measure ‘what ifs’ does not prove any inverses either Angry. So, arguments need be suspended, not refuted, pending verifiable data.

The farmers almanac has been about as accurate as our experts with this pandemic.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

The farmers almanac has been about as accurate as our experts with this pandemic.

Hey, I like the Farmer’s Almanac! Worked for Grandpappy … works for me …

[Soujouner]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Again: your science degree is what? And how will you validate whatever you claim about yourself and your knowledge?

I haven’t denied any science nor made any claims about my expertise. I haven’t weighed in on listening to, or supporting, or not, the CDC, or Dr. Fauci. What I have pointed out is that: a bunch of anonymous armchair social-media posters - very much including you - do not represent credible knowledge and advice.

Posting an article from what is quite arguably one of the world’s most credible, independently careful news sources demonstrating the highest levels of integrity at all times - is nothing more than offering credible food for thought. The article presents verifiable information - without making conclusions as you imply.

Curiously, NPR you are accusing of malfeasance, has always been an excellent source for science reporting. For you to anonymously accuse them of “science denial” is - well frankly, hilarious.

Again: you are who, exactly to judge NPR and their motivations? Lol.

NPR is not credible. Have you ever listened to their radio broadcast? Complete science deniers. Please stop making scientific claims without having any degree in science. I follow the CDC and Dr Fauci who are actual science.

Tucker Carlson the doofus he is surprisingly hits the nail on the head in regards to NPR. A piece of advice, don’t site NPR, it makes you look unintelligent and more so, lazy.

https://youtu.be/-VVGyRJHuMY

[goodheathen]

https://abc7.com/chla-new-study-ling...alth/11518766/
5-15% of infected kids with long-term symptoms.
But it's okay to get rid of all restrictions? Right, we don't know yet what the rate is with Omicron. But unless it offsets the higher infectiousness of Omicron....

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Soujouner

NPR is not credible. Have you ever listened to their radio broadcast? Complete science deniers. Please stop making scientific claims without having any degree in science. I follow the CDC and Dr Fauci who are actual science.

Tucker Carlson the doofus he is surprisingly hits the nail on the head in regards to NPR. A piece of advice, don’t site NPR, it makes you look unintelligent and more so, lazy.

https://youtu.be/-VVGyRJHuMY

Yes, I listen to NPR a lot. And you clearly have zero idea what you are talking about with regard to NPR (and me).

NPR news has won nine DuPont-Columbia Awards and 10 Peabody Awards in the past seven years.
… plus many Edward Murrow awards … plus Pulitzer Prize awards.

Do you know what those are? Look them up. NPR is outstanding in the world of media. Outstanding.

(And, as for me, since you “follow the CDC and Dr Fauci” … on these CD corona virus threads I have consistently supported the CDC’s and Dr. Fauci’s reputations … I have not argued their various specific positions with regard to this pandemic because … it’s too soon to know absolutes. They are still a work-in-progress as they learn about this virus … and I am not an epidemiologist or scientist.)

By the way, speaking of making one’s self look “unintelligent” … besides your apparent ignorance about media credibility - um, the word that means: ‘to reference’ - is *cite* …. Not *site*.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Soujouner

…
Tucker Carlson the doofus he is surprisingly hits the nail on the head in regards to NPR. A piece of advice, don’t site NPR, it makes you look unintelligent and more so, lazy.

https://youtu.be/-VVGyRJHuMY

There is no greater azz and buffoon in all media than Tucker Carlson … who has even publicly admitted lying to his audience on-air at times when he “feels cornered.” You can look that up. For you to try and use anything Carlson speciously broadcasts as a critical evaluation … pretty much puts you at about his same level.

Fox News’s Tucker Carlson admitted he sometimes lies when he is "really cornered or something" in a new interview with “The Rubin Report” published Sunday.

“I lie. If I'm really cornered or something, I lie. I really try not to. I try never to lie on TV. I just don't, you know, I don't like lying. I certainly do it, you know, out of weakness or whatever,” Carlson said.
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5...d-or-something