BillsFanNC
-
Posts
23,500 -
Joined
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by BillsFanNC
-
-
17 hours ago, redtail hawk said:
CNN, Twitter, FB, Time are all privately owned. They can do what they want but I'd love it if they acted ethically.
So is Fox news but you seem to have an ongoing problem here at PPP with that outlet, but not the others. Why?
17 hours ago, redtail hawk said:Re the outliers opinions, they presented them, not endorsed them. These were political opinions, not scientific. I don't believe they were reported as such. They were appealing to authority (which can be valid in certain cases) but these were neither unbiased nor centrist scientific authorities.
Again scientific leaders who stated, correctly, that the vax will not provide protection from infection for all nor will it prevent transmission WERE censored on social media.
And in this case medical professionals who said its OK to go to mass gatherings during lockdowns WEREN'T censored on social media.
Correct on covid=censored.
Incorrect on covid, even by your own admission = not censored.
Why do you suppose that is?
-
1
-
2
-
-
So again @redtail hawk if the doctors and medical professionals who said protesting against racial injustice during the pandemic was ok and were according to you, misinformed stupid outliers, then should the outlets who reported on these medical professionals giving stupid, misinformed medical advice such as CNN and Time been slapped with misinformation warnings by social media platforms? We already know that they were not.
If yes, then why weren't they slapped with warnings or censored do you think?
If no, why not? It's clear misinformation.
simple yes or no and then explain your position.
I know it's hard, but try to stay focused.
-
31 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:
vax refusal cost many more lives and suffering than the protests. That said, two wrongs don't make a right. btw, Fauci was employed by trump at the time. Do you think he'd approve of that rooftop shouting?
not in the overall picture. they are outliers and a tiny percentage.
So should time and cnn have had their reporting on doctors saying protests during lockdowns are ok have had the stories labeled or censored as dangerous misinformation on social media or nah?
-
Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
Why are you giving Fauci a pass? He had the nation’s ear for a sustained period of time. I don’t believe I’m suggesting anything controversial here, these issues are clear and obvious.
If gathering in numbers greater than 3 on a Tuesday in Buffalo was so frigging dangerous to cause widespread death and disease, wtf did 10-15,000 people gathering on a consistent repetitive basis do to our nation’s collective well-being?
Doesn't matter. They and the medical professionals who approved of their actions are merely outliers. Because approved protests.
-
2 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:
This letter is signed by 1,288 public health professionals, infectious diseases professionals, and community stakeholders.
there are almost 1 million US physicians alone. Many more ".community stakeholders". Even if the signings were limited to physicians (which they weren't) that's 0.1 %
So if 1200 workers in cardiac health, among them doctors, nurses, researchers etc. signed a letter advocating that its good for heart attack survivors to go ahead and guzzle down all the saturated fat they want as long as they are attending racial justice protests and that story was picked up by CNN and Time magazine....
No biggie, right?
-
7 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:
"and again, the actions of a few stupid, misguided people does not invalidate a control strategy. Agree, it certainly doesn't help. How many 1000's of people participated in the protests? How many millions remain unvaxed. Equating the "contributions" of the two is ridiculous."
devolving into personal attacks in an argument is a sensitive indicator of losing that argument.
citing nature or NEJM isn't valid but Time is? righty o chief!
Thousands of doctors signed off using their professional credentials to support protests during lockdowns. Theyre hacks just like you are.
You don't get to hand wave that away and not be considered a hack.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/05/health/health-care-open-letter-protests-coronavirus-trnd/index.html
The letter – which went on to draw more than 1,200 signatures – focuses on techniques to reduce harm to people protesting racial injustice.
“We created the letter in response to emerging narratives that seemed to malign demonstrations as risky for the public health because of Covid-19,” according to the letter writers, many of whom are part of the University of Washington’s Division of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
“Instead, we wanted to present a narrative that prioritizes opposition to racism as vital to the public health, including the epidemic response. We believe that the way forward is not to suppress protests in the name of public health but to respond to protesters demands in the name of public health, thereby addressing multiple public health crises.”
-
Just now, redtail hawk said:
asked and answered. Read.
No you didnt.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, redtail hawk said:
What scientific organizations supported mass protests at the height of the pandemic? Just because other stupid people tried to subvert the goals of a temporary lockdown does not make it a bad strategy.
I give you your hypocritical, delusional and moronic colleagues.
Any doctor saying what's supported in this article should have been stripped of their license.
But.....Science!
https://time.com/5848212/doctors-supporting-protests/
Does attending an approved protest lower expression of ACE2 receptors on airway epithelial cells, doc?
“If people were to understand that racism, and all of the social and political and economic inequalities that racism creates, ultimately harms people’s health,” Boyd says, they would see that “protest is a profound public health intervention, because it allows us to finally address and end forms of inequality.”
Positions like Boyd’s, which are widely shared in the medical community, may strike some people as hypocritical. Why, in the middle of a pandemic, after months of telling people to stay indoors to stop the spread of COVID-19, are doctors encouraging thousands of people to gather?
The answer, for many in health care, is simple: Racism is a public-health issue that long predates coronavirus. Without action, they say, it will postdate it, too.
5 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:how bout contributing some actual science to support your positions. And I don't mean economists masquerading as clinicians or early "hydroxy" studies.
The next time you contribute actual science will be the first.
You haven't a clue about virology. You're a political hack.
-
10 hours ago, redtail hawk said:
what part of conflict of interests do you not understand? It's a study whose data has been questioned by multiple respected experts in the field and its conclusions are of little to no consequence to clinical or population medicine. Did bhat's proposed local prevalence estimates lead to a prediction of 1 million US deaths (or 3 million without widespread vaxing)? Did he quote those numbers, based on his insignificant study , in his "declaration"? Why would I waste my time? Wondering the same about debating you.
Thanks for confirming that you're a hack. Again.
40 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:This is a global pandemic. The effectiveness of the vax would ideally and most effectively be looked at on a global basis
Please provide a reference.
Are you going to actually read it if he does?
50 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:She should publish the findings so we all can learn. This study done in that time period showed the opposite (I'm sure there are others but you can look them up for yourself) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36068643/. The study does point to decreased effectiveness of the vaccines on emerging strains but the solution isn't giving up on vaxes. It's improving them.
You're a moron.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, redtail hawk said:
Vital, undisclosed conflicts of interest are enough to reject his "work" without further analysis. If your standard of validating data was adopted universally in Medicine, progress would grind to a standstill. No one is well versed in all fields in Medicine. The vast majority of care provided worldwide is provided by primary care practitioners. They can't read every important (or in this case, not important) study with a fine toothed comb. That's why journal clubs and consolidation articles on the most important recent studies exist. Those publishing these are experts or consult with experts in the particular field so that the conclusions can be summarized and the data trusted. Those given that role are required to be free of interest conflicts and widely respected and admired. Bhat... is neither.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/89204
As an aside, Vioxx was mentioned. Eric Topol was one of the first to publicly question its CV safety. Where was bhatt then?
What part of read the study yourself and then provide scientific criticism didn't you understand ?
-
13 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:
Prove it Einstein.
Not how it works good doctor. But since you aren't a scientist its no surprise that you fall short here. Again.
It's up to YOU to read and understand Bhattacharya 's serology study and critique the weaknesses of the study.
Simply copying and pasting text from someone else that you don't provide the source for sn’t going to cut it.
So here's the link to the study. Please use your extensive serology assay development experience to critique the study design and conclusions, specifically your experience in lateral flow assay design.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v2
Conclusions The estimated population prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Santa Clara County implies that the infection may be much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases. More studies are needed to improve precision of prevalence estimates. Locally-derived population prevalence estimates should be used to calibrate epidemic and mortality projections
-
2 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:
Bhattacharya was an early opponent of lockdowns in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and questioned the severity of the virus.[6]
On March 24, 2020, Bhattacharya co-wrote an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal entitled "Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?", which argued there was little evidence to support shelter-in-place orders and quarantines of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.[12] Bhattacharya was a lead author of a serology study released in April which suggested that as many as 80,000 residents of Santa Clara County, California might have already been infected with COVID-19.[13] The study and conduct of the research drew wide criticism for statistical and methodological errors and apparent lack of disclosure of conflicts.[14][15] The study was later revealed to have received undisclosed funding from JetBlue founder David Neeleman, according to an anonymous whistle blower.[16][17]
He's an embarrassment to Medicine and Science. What a shill? Ethics? What are those?
Wrong as usual.
-
A repeat reminder from a Stanford public health expert that big tech censored because he told the truth.
@redtail hawk as an MD you ignore science. Period.
-
13 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:
I get why people don’t wear masks and I don’t think we should mandate them.
What I fail to understand is why people would refuse to get a shot that greatly reduces their chances of a severe outcome from a contagious disease that’s still killing hundreds of people every day. Even if people don’t care about anyone but themselves, they should get the shot. Or at the very least, talk to their doctor about it.
What populations?
Healthy people under say 40 with no comorbidities are extremely low risk for severe disease from covid.
Older diabetics? Undergoing chemotherapy at any age? Obese? 65+? Those populations should consider getting vaccinated because they are actually at risk for severe disease.
Just like the vaccines never promised to prevent infection to all, despite government officials lying and saying otherwise, the risk of severe disease is not one size fits all.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, cle23 said:
Do you seriously think that people sit around and say "Gee, I wonder how I could prove that people will listen to me? Oh, I know, I get them to wear masks! That'll do it!" Especially on a worldwide scale?
Masks help with germ spread. That is why surgeons wear them. Nurses. Drs. Is it a cure all for the situation? Absolutely not. But it can help.
It's funny because if we had 50% of people growing their own food to cure world hunger, I swear the other 50% would stand of to the side, do nothing, and then point and say "See, them growing their own food doesn't help, there are still plenty of starving people." People who made no effort to stop the spread are the ones who then turn around and say "See, it doesn't work." I personally know people who went into public KNOWING they had COVID, but just didn't think it mattered. And then laughed when other people caught it. It insanity.
Wrong.
As a public health measure to control transmission of respiratory viruses they are useless.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
This is all about bending the knee. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Yes, you prove that you're an authoritarian moron.
-
58 minutes ago, B-Man said:
THIS STUDY COULD BE ‘SCIENTIFIC NAIL IN THE COFFIN’ FOR MASKS:
One of the largest and most comprehensive studies on the effectiveness of masks found they do almost nothing to reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.
The study reviewed 78 randomized control trials—experiments that have long been considered “the gold standard” for medicine—which assessed the effectiveness of face masks against flu, COVID-19, and similar illnesses. It found that wearing masks “probably makes little or no difference” for the general public, no matter what kind of mask is used. Even N95 masks, considered the most effective at filtering airborne particles, showed no clear benefit for health care workers.
The study was published on January 30 by the Cochrane Library, a world-renowned medical database that is famous for its high-quality evidence reviews. It comes as a battering ram to the recommendations of the U.S. public health establishment, which urged children as young as two to wear masks throughout the pandemic.
“This amounts to the scientific nail in the coffin for mask mandates,” said Kristen Walsh, a clinical professor of pediatrics in Morristown, New Jersey. “I just can’t wrap my mind around the fact that some schools are still actively forcing children to wear masks, much less children who need to see faces to learn.”
One would hope, but as Jennifer Sey, the former brand president of Levi Strauss, who was forced out for being insufficiently woke, writes:
What seems clear is that the enthusiastic, religious devotion to the dogma — “masks work” — signified adherence to a set of beliefs: I mask therefore I am good. I mask my children therefore I am loyal to the Democratic Party and public health diktats. I mask therefore I care. I am a loyal follower of “the Science.” My faith is unwavering.
Those who claim to be on the side of “the Science” will continue to push unscientific policies in order to prove that they were right all along. This is the sunk cost fallacy writ large. Don’t admit mistakes. Ignore the actual science in favor of “the Science.” And continue to punish those who challenge. As well as those most vulnerable who simply aren’t in a position to challenge at all.
“Science” has apparently been rebranded by the left. It is now a slogan — a tagline — shouted at heretics to signify one’s moral superiority and loyalty to the party. What we have now is “science” that ignores the scientific method, which means “the science” is a cult. And a dangerous one at that.
Indeed.
https://freebeacon.com/coronavirus/this-study-could-be-scientific-nail-in-the-coffin-for-masks/
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full
https://thespectator.com/topic/pro-science-anti-mask-cochrane-covid/
.
There was plenty of published evidence prior to covid showing that masks were largely useless at preventing the spread of respiratory viruses, as this meta analysis shows.
If you want to wear one that is perfectly fine. You're also welcome to use leeches to cure what ails you.
However, if you want to force others to wear them while at the same time arguing that "the science" supports your position, then you're doing nothing more than confirming your status as a moron.
-
2
-
-
On 2/9/2023 at 5:33 PM, B-Man said:
81 million votes
Biden Speech Draws 26.9 Million TV Viewers, a 28-Year Low
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/biden-speech-draws-26-9-million-tv-viewers-a-28-year-low/
Apr 29, 2021 — President Biden's first address to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday pulled in just 26.9 million viewers, earning it the lowest ...
.
81 million votes!
-
1
-
-
-
-
Political agendas above actual science?
No way.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, B-Man said:
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna TORCHES Yoel Roth – Exposes Democrat-Big Tech-Government Collusion
Continuing crickets from the commie left
-
2
-
-
-
On 2/9/2023 at 6:48 AM, BillsFanNC said:
Clearly disinformation like...
When renowned epidemiology experts say that covid lockdowns are doing massive harm to overall public health?
When doctors push back on the actual disinformation put out by government officials telling people that if they get the vaccine then they won't get covid?
Because these types of posts were removed or slapped with warnings.
Are those the kind posts of "clear disinformation" that should be removed, because ethics, doc?
Again @redtail hawk no comment?
Are the above examples the type of "disinformation" content that social media platforms should remove on ethical grounds?
POLICE STATE BIDEN SHOW TRIALS: Corrupt DOJ/FBI/GA DA/CO SC/ME SoS: Trump Indicted 5x.
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted