Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Reread your first sentence, out loud, while looking in the mirror. In a global pandemic you take data and analysis from credentialed professionals when you can get it. More data, more better.

 

Of course more data is better.  But the leader of the federal response to the pandemic has a limited amount of time, and can’t wade through every piece of data out there.  Peer review first, then presentation to leadership.  

 

Also, there’s a bit of “fake logic” there.  You return to the point that the fact that the presenter here is a “credentialed professional[]” is determinative.  It’s not.  It’s the quality of her work that counts.  Peer review measures the quality and reliability of the study.  If of quality, and if reliable, then it should move up the chain.  

Posted
1 minute ago, SectionC3 said:

 

Of course more data is better.  But the leader of the federal response to the pandemic has a limited amount of time, and can’t wade through every piece of data out there.  Peer review first, then presentation to leadership.  

 

Also, there’s a bit of “fake logic” there.  You return to the point that the fact that the presenter here is a “credentialed professional[]” is determinative.  It’s not.  It’s the quality of her work that counts.  Peer review measures the quality and reliability of the study.  If of quality, and if reliable, then it should move up the chain.  

Fauci and Birx are her peers. Pence is the leadership. 

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
13 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

When you behave like a cult by accepting everything that he says, true or not,  it's hard to think of the group differently.

 

Posted
29 minutes ago, Cinga said:

 

Easy answer... Most Millennial's don't want to work anyway....  

 

Every generation feels superior to the generations that follow them.

 

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

Posted
Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Fauci and Birx are her peers. Pence is the leadership. 

 

Fair enough on Pence.  But Fauci and Birx are part of the leadership w/r/t the response, no?  If not, there would be no reason to have them on the podium.  And the fact remains that they can’t analyze and marshal every piece of data and analysis generated with respect to this issue.  That’s where the relevant scientific community, i.e., peer review, comes into play. 

Posted
13 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

So, how many people in the world would have to be infected before you would acknowledge it as a pandemic?

What pandemic?

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Reality Check said:

What pandemic?

 

The one Trump says exists. Do you disagree with him?

Posted
Just now, SectionC3 said:

 

Fair enough on Pence.  But Fauci and Birx are part of the leadership w/r/t the response, no?  If not, there would be no reason to have them on the podium.  And the fact remains that they can’t analyze and marshal every piece of data and analysis generated with respect to this issue.  That’s where the relevant scientific community, i.e., peer review, comes into play. 

They are the experts assigned to the team. In my view their job is to gather as much data and perspective as possible to advise the leadership. You are absolutely right, they can't analyze everything, which is why they should talk to people doing different analysis and shift focus if something prominent arises.

 

As an aside, can I assume that you support Trump blocking Fauci from appearing in front of congress since his time is limited? 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said:

They are the experts assigned to the team. In my view their job is to gather as much data and perspective as possible to advise the leadership. You are absolutely right, they can't analyze everything, which is why they should talk to people doing different analysis and shift focus if something prominent arises.

 

As an aside, can I assume that you support Trump blocking Fauci from appearing in front of congress since his time is limited? 

 

W/r/t the last point, it depends on the purpose for which Fauci was called.  My news consumption lately has been limited to information germane to the pandemic and my economic interests, so I’m not as familiar as I should be with respect to the request for Fauci’s testimony.  A Congressional investigation is not on my radar.  If the testimony was expected to take an amount of time commensurate with that Fauci has spent standing around on the dias at one of Trump’s pressers, then I’d question the motivation for the block.  If Fauci was supposed to be on the hill for a couple of days, then it probably would be a different story.  

Posted
6 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

The one Trump says exists. Do you disagree with him?

Fine, take Trump's side if you must. You call the man a liar all the time but now you believe him. To each his own.

Posted
5 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

W/r/t the last point, it depends on the purpose for which Fauci was called.  My news consumption lately has been limited to information germane to the pandemic and my economic interests, so I’m not as familiar as I should be with respect to the request for Fauci’s testimony.  A Congressional investigation is not on my radar.  If the testimony was expected to take an amount of time commensurate with that Fauci has spent standing around on the dias at one of Trump’s pressers, then I’d question the motivation for the block.  If Fauci was supposed to be on the hill for a couple of days, then it probably would be a different story.  

Yeah, no idea on scope here either. My expectation is that the purpose was to fish for out of context soundbytes that sound contradictory to Trump to spread through the press, which would be a spectacular waste of time regardless of duration, but I readily admit that the thought is based on my personal bias.

Posted
16 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

Every generation feels superior to the generations that follow them.

 

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

What I stated however, wasn't a feeling, it is an observable fact. ?

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

And when you are disrespecting the office of the President of the United States, you are disrespecting the American people.
 

 

You and I agree, though it may be more than just the press disrespecting the office at times. 

 

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:


It continually puzzles me why people want to immediately take the word of some person on twitter of unknown depth of knowledge, over CDC experts and people whose job it is to be knee-deep in the data?

 

You missed the magnetic vibrations silver doctor cited here yesterday!

Posted
14 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

They are the experts assigned to the team. In my view their job is to gather as much data and perspective as possible to advise the leadership. You are absolutely right, they can't analyze everything, which is why they should talk to people doing different analysis and shift focus if something prominent arises.

 

As an aside, can I assume that you support Trump blocking Fauci from appearing in front of congress since his time is limited? 

 

Do you really believe Fauci was blocked because he's too busy or was it a sarcastic remark?

Posted
Patent number: 9896509
Abstract: Methods are provided for the treatment of a HIV infection. The methods can include administering to a subject with an HIV infection a therapeutically effective amount of an agent that interferes with the interaction of gp120 and ?4 integrin, such as a ?4?1 or ?4?7 integrin antagonist, thereby treating the HIV infection. In several examples, the ?4 integrin antagonist is a monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to a ?4, ?1 or ?7 integrin subunit or a cyclic hexapeptide with the amino acid sequence of CWLDVC. Methods are also provided to reduce HIV replication or infection. The methods include contacting a cell with an effective amount of an agent that interferes with the interaction of gp120 and ?4 integrin, such as a ?4?1 or ?4?7 integrin antagonist. Moreover, methods are provided for determining if an agent is useful to treat HIV.
Type: Grant
Filed: August 3, 2016
Date of Patent: February 20, 2018
Assignee: The United States of America, as Represented by the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services
Inventors: James Arthos, Diana Goode, Claudia Cicala, Anthony S. Fauci
  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...