leh-nerd skin-erd

If you had told me prior to the pandemic, that more than one person would argue that the nation's preeminent infectious disease specialist, a man who serves as an advisor to multiple presidents and other world leaders overly 40 years, who would become the face of 'flattening the curve' to millions of Americans, who has been interviewed, quoted or mentioned by every major media outlet over a 6 month period, who speaks daily about personal accountability and shared responsibility---anyway, if you told me that there were people who didn't think he held a major leadership position in the fight against the pandemic, I'd have thought you mad. We agree on the politicians, 100% across the board. All the more reason for him to step up instead of throwing the hot potato back to those failing us. In closing, Bob Costas, what's up with that guy?

So, you bought a mouse from a chick at a flea market? Now I’ve heard everything.

Amazing how far we've come in moving backwards. Richard Nixon's 5:00 shadow helped to derail his early candidacy, now we have an 80 year old Edsel breaking apart in front of us and it's no big deal.

In honor of the later great Wilford Brimley---Horsepucky! You can bag on Jim Jordan and his scurrilous behavior all you like--and apparently you like, but it's irrelevant to me in a post about Dr. Fauci's testimony. The man is the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and from his bio, an individual widely touted as having served 6 presidents since 1984. He's been a key player on the COVID Task Force, has spoken eloquently on the obligation (my word, not his) of ordinary citizens to help flatten the curve, to drastically modify our daily behavior and create new habits to reduce the impact of the virus. From his bio: Dr. Fauci was appointed Director of NIAID in 1984. He oversees an extensive research portfolio of basic and applied research to prevent, diagnose, and treat established infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, respiratory infections, diarrheal diseases, tuberculosis and malaria as well as emerging diseases such as Ebola and Zika. He had the opportunity to scream what should be incredibly obvious to anyone watching: The decision of tens of thousands of people to congregate on city streets is surely, and definitively contributing to the explosion of cases across the country. From the perspective of the science guy charged with "preventing" the spread, the fact that medicine intersects with politics should be irrelevant. In fact, I'd say his decision to soft-step around the issue was, in and of itself, political and egregious. Then again, maybe we just have different views on what constitutes effective leadership. I consider not just what is said, how it is said, and the behavior that those saying it follow themselves.

Oh wait, you missed the point. Thanks for clarifying that a political forum, with questions being asked by politicians of a scientists who serves in a role to advise politicians, has a political bent to it. Let’s put aside for a second the obvious point that hearings like these are designed for experts to share thoughts with policy makers that theoretically leads to better policy. It was Jordan this time, next time it’s someone else. So? Hap made the point that the actions of the individual in the time of the virus have potentially adverse consequences for Hap and those she loves. We dance around this issue of mass gatherings where people don’t socially distance, while individual policy makers make individual policy decisions that groups of 12 sitting together without potato chips are a menace. On the other hand, we’re told that gatherings with 22,000 people from across the fruited plain is not. We have a President who exhibits no mask discipline, held a large gathering indoors with one high profile death in the weeks that followed. And, as citizens we try to make sense of it all from one extreme to another. Enter the science guy. Dr. Faucci, good, bad or other is the face of the world as it relates to COVID. To suggest he is suddenly but a humble scientist set upon by a rogue politician seems weak to me. Personally, I would have liked to see him lead. From what I can see, his response was tepid and impotent at a time when he could have been strong and decisive. It seems common sense that people out in massive groups contribute to the transmission and death count, likely significantly, and I’m not sure why a scientist would hesitate to state that emphatically with statistics to back up his statement. When 25,000 people gather, what might that look like two weeks hence? How many infections? Hospitalizations? Deaths? Or, if the science supported the notion that there is little impact of tens of thousands of people gathered closely together on city streets, he might expound on that. He’s the science guy. The politics in play here is that there is a massive disconnect between what is being said, the laws and regulation implemented to target certain activity while no rules or regulations apply to other activity. The end result is the same as it always is: people see politics in play, see the hypocrisy in implementation of regulation, and call BS on the regulation because it’s viewed as politics as usual. But sure, you can blame Jim Jordan for being a politician if you like.

This last part resonates with me, especially as it relates to Dr. Faucci’s testimony. This was a prime opportunity to send the message loud and clear: large gatherings result in increased transmissions and are exceptionally dangerous to us all. He treated it as a political issue, and it’s ultimately a health and safety issue.

This is bothering me for a reason I'm struggling to put my finger on. At this point, I'd just order a fruit salad and hash browns on the side.

Well, what are the bread options? Can I ask for lightly toasted ciabatta roll, or something with 7+ grains? Bagel? This can all be worked out.

You don't upset me. I'm a rational person and understand that you have the right to spread whatever version of The Message you choose to. There are always true believers spreading The Message. The only difference is the target. I didn't threaten you, I mocked you. My comments were not vitriolic in any way. There is a difference, and please spare me the Kardashian model of victimization. The three words I typed could not possibly have upset your personal apple cart, though it's telling that you have lumped me into a group of other posters who may have said hurtful things to you. I see a pattern.

Yeah, I was going for subtle. White Boi Rick Bucahnan goes on a tear about police officers as war criminals, mustard gassing citizens, etc. I just like to smooth into it. I read his comments and think how interesting it is that in 2020, it's perfectly acceptable to group large blocks of people together, characterize them negatively, make outrageous claims and how some bobble heads bobble. My sense in 1960, a person with that sort of mindset might not assault a person who fought for civil rights, but would probably lend his truck to those that did. That was a lot to write though. And, I was concerned about him as well. I'm thinking he was probably wrongfully detained for being massless whole feeding the ducks at a local park.

Did you survive?

The problem is this goes one step further than that. I can understand non-interested folks not really paying attention to politics and something like the Russia hoax. People are busy and you outlined one of the reasons people dont bother. I'm talking about people who care enough to be engaged but believe it's 100% appropriate to weaponize intelligence, f around with FISA, and oust a president they disagree with. We've all engaged with these people before, and these were the same people lead around by the nose screaming "Worse than watergate!" when Obama started the scam and never understanding it was, they just had the wrong perspective.

How many deaths would you think come from mass protests? You’re running the daily death toll, you seem very dialed in to the crisis, must have an opinion?

Thanks for replying, but we'll have to agree to disagree. The reality is that the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, for all the good that followed, it occurred half-a-century ago. Our country today is not the country of the 1960s, and our ability to connect almost instantaneously dwarves the communication at that time. The mass notification to the hundreds of thousands of protestors that they are risking the lives of themselves and they know via Facebook, Insta, Tik Tok, and loudspeaker could certainly include "We Stand With You, But A Whole Hell of a Lot of You are Going to Be Infected and Die from COVID 19" if necessary. The theory that the outdoor nature of the protests somehow magically prevents wide scale transmission if the intellectual equivalent of suggesting we don't need security features on airliners--we really just need to close the door to the cockpit. It's silly and no offense intended, but it borders on the moronic. Some in the crowd are screaming, crying, yelling, tearful, physical--and the spittle surely flies and again--they all arrive from somewhere, somehow. I've come to the conclusion that while the virus is dangerous, we're all being played. Or, maybe the political leaders actually want protestors infect and dying for any number of reasons. Thanks for the feedback though--you're a good egg.

I don't wear a mask walking the dog, through a parking lot, at work when clients are not in. I do wear a mask when there is any person in my field of vision, when I enter stores, and when I'm setting treasured national monuments ablaze. ?

I'm trying, I really am. I just revert back to what I know to be true: Individual enterprises can be honest and truthful, but when you look at the massive amounts of money changing hands, there are inevitably organizations that do not follow the ethical path. Hospitals are sales organizations, they just sell different products than Chipolte. I'm sorry to hear you lost a friend (I have a friend who at age 54 was admitted to the hospital 4 days after I saw him--both maskless---in the early COVID days--he had a tough go but survived, no underlying health issues), and certainly would attribute your friend's death to COVID. I am aware of a story where a friend in end stage cancer who was on hospice tested positive for COVID, and his death subsequently attributed to COVID. I'd think that death was due to catastrophic organ failure that began before COVID was even a thought in our minds. Some people like to control other people. It's a story as old as humanity. It makes zero sense for a governor shutting down a state, destroying people's financial and emotional lives as they comply to NOT scream to the high heavens "COVID SPREADS AMONG PROTESTORS. STAY AT HOME. STAY AWAY. YOU'RE KILLING PEOPLE!". Either the dead don't matter, or we're being manipulated for political gain. We agree on the police though--so that's something.

I understood. You're suggesting that not one of the hundreds of thousands of people attending protests found anything out "the hard way". Because they were outside. 6' apart. Masked up. And arrived by transporter like in the old Star Trek show. Mmmmmm'kay.

Which is markedly different than 'safe'.

First--thanks for the honest reply. In the interest of full disclosure, I've read more than a few of your posts on various subjects and often wondered if you should add 'cranky' to your screen name. ? I don't think we would agree on many issues, but I respect the fact that you took the time to reply. As noted earlier, people with all sorts of opinions on the governmental shut down of our economy seem to develop alligator arms when I inquire on this issue. I'm not a scientist, but really enjoy watching the behavior of those suggesting XXX for the masses and operating on a YYY basis (this is the extent of my dive into data). With that in mind, here's some feedback: I think when you mix fear, medicine, salvation and money, there is a tendency for those in power to attempt to grab more power. In this case, fear is (you're going to die or at least kill everyone around you!), medicine (the science behind covid), salvation (you--individually, submit to THE order to save you and everyone around you!), and money (COVID is making lots of people and enterprises lots of money), there is a high likelihood of abuse by those in power; I think COVID is serious and needs to be taken as such, but we've transitioned from common sense to abuse of power to smother the economy for political purposes; There seems to be room for debate about approach and the science behind successfully navigating the COVID outbreak, but those who speak out against the lockdown of the economy are branded deniers. Same as it ever was. So using the 150,000+ COVID deaths, in your guesstimate 7,500 - 15,000 deaths resulted from COVID. Based on a quick Google search, that number represents between 10.1% and 21.1% of the population of the Town of Tonawanda...and no politician, health provider or social do-gooder is out sounding a massive alarm about the dangers these protests pose? In the neighborhood I grew up in, I'd think if you walked down the street and found a dead body in the driveway of every 5th house, it would be considered newsworthy. The second point on all this. Just using some anecdotal numbers, I'd say a minimum of 10-15% of the people I encounter out and about are not following the instructions listed on the mask box in English/Spanish/German and French. I see noses exposed, breach of mask on either side, non-compliant masks and the like. In other words, mask discipline is sorta suspect. So, in a gathering of 25,000 people packed tightly together in a highly emotional and charged state, assuming a 10% mask discipline issue, that's 2500 people around all sorts of bodily fluids, droplets and aerosols. They disturb the mask to catch a better breath, they rub and pick their nose, wipe sweat from their face and flick it about, they drink fluids to stay hydrated, and quite likely a substantial % seek hydration from a communal source. I'd be the number is substantially higher (maybe closer to 50% over a 5 or 6 hour protest) but this works for now. So, let's assume 2,500 people lacking mask discipline each encounter 25 people people in there social group in the immediate days after a protest...well, that's a substantial exposure imo. Third point. Protests are not spontaneous in many cases, it's not like 5 individuals gathered a on street corner suddenly start a protest. The individuals protesting arrive at a location by many means of transport---walking, riding a bus, personal auto, rental cars, train, plane, UHaul box trucks, riding a bike. Along the way there, and on the way 'home', they use public facilities, transportation, food stores, McDonalds, thruway rest stops and encounter all sorts of people unaffiliated with the protests just trying to make a living. They go to Walmart, Target, a restaurant to eat, 7-11 and Wegmans. They engage, eat, sleep, drink, vomit, excrete, copulate and so on--hopefully not in that order. Here's my point. Personally, I think you are extraordinarily low on your estimates. It makes no sense to me. Be that as it may, our elected leaders advise us under threat of law and financial ruin that 25,000 people gathering pose little risk, but 12 family members spending time together over Memorial Day represents 2 too many. They tell us that droplets dodge protestors packed like sardines on a public street, but that business owners will be crushed if they have more than 15 people in a place rated for 50 unless they serve Super-sized Nachos with the beer the customer ordered. They tell us church services must be suspended or moved on line, but applaud 40 unmasked MomsAgainstSomeStuff linked arm and arm. In the end, assuming you are correct, it would appear the 7,500-15,000 dead is a price worth paying to defund the police. That number will surely rise to God knows what, and it seems an extraordinarily high price for progress. Or, our elected leaders are playing a much longer game and it really doesn't matter who gets trampled along the way. Thanks again. I really do appreciate it.

OMF...thanks for chipping in. You've mentioned the science so maybe you can help. Individuals who gather at events outside by the tens of thousands...do they contribute to the spread or not? Assuming they do, what percentage would you attribute to the infection/death rate? I wear a mask, am unconvinced it truly helps me, but social distance and have all along. I shut my office down, arranged for people to work from home for an extended period of time at substantial cost on a personal level. Thanks.

Thanks for taking a stab at this. Most I've engaged with don't seem to want to share their thoughts on this issue. You haven't answered the question, but we're getting there. "Not nearly as dangerous", what does that mean to you? Would you attribute 5% of the new cases/deaths to the outdoor protests? 10%? 0? And does it make a difference if we call one a protest and one a rally? Is that the magic to the virus running rampant in one situation and encountering deflector shields in the other?

Same question for you Cap. What divine intervention causes the virus to hover over tens of thousands of protestors—by now, more like millions—gathered arm and arm, yet targets 17 people socially distanced outside at a bar in Upstate NYwith laser focus, assuming of course they only ordered 25 chicken wings (hot, xtra crispy with extra blue) v a cheeseburger with a Caesar salad on the side? I think you’re right about the part about being in good hands though.

You’re taking the time to post, and care enough to create a cool nickname for the President, but I may have missed your reply to an earlier question: Do you believe, as do such soaring intellectuals as Pelosi, Biden, Schumer, and Cuomo, that the virus hovers magically over the hundreds of thousands of protestors in the streets all across the country, respecting the boundaries and sanctity of events? How many transmissions and deaths would you attribute to the protests? Maybe all those people benefited from astral intervention as well?

I’m confident that you and Mr. B Gal can comfortably handle the wet work that will follow. I’ve seen Jason Bourne movies. You grab a TV Guide, roll it up into a tube, slam it into an ear hole and the guy dies bleeding out the lower extremities (obviously). Mr. B Gal grabs a towel, snaps the other guy in the eye, the eye pops like stepped on grape (obviously) then whirls the towel into a knot around the guy’s wrist and makes him beat himself to death. Then, you call your friends, bip bop boop, the clean up team shows up, you and the Mr. go out dancing to a Luther Vandros cover band.

I just don’t think enough people care. If FISA court abuses, circular reporting, collusion with MSM and the FBI crushing citizens doesn’t cause you to think “Wait, what if this happened to me?”, what do they care if Flynn got kneecapped? When I questioned another poster about the failure of the MSM (WaPo specifically) with respect to Russia/Herr Muëllër, and the spectacular failure of their vaunted anonymous sources, his reply was basically that they had a bad day and just missed it. I think Flynn to many is disposable, a throw away. I keep thinking he cannot possibly appear to be older and more out of touch than the last time he appeared old and out of touch, but he one ups himself every time. 50 years in the public eye and he doesn’t understand delay? No one prepped him for it? And what’s with his sister Liz-Warren Biden translating to each party what the other says.