Formerly DT: COVID-19 - Featuring Lots of Politics, now CR because political talk not going away

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, smoky said:

Should otherwise healthy kids be vaccinated?

At this point, fuck no. 

[Message Board User 12406]

2 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

And if the districts go fully open in the fall, per TEA, then yes, there will be a shitload of lawsuits.

Exactly what would be the basis of the lawsuits? 

That the school is putting teachers in jeopardy by forcing them to teach in the classroom when study after study after study (including real world examples since August) shows that in-person school is not a source of Covid outbreak?  Or if a teacher contracts Covid 19 the school is responsible, when it will be virtually impossible to prove where the teacher contracted the disease?

People file lawsuits all the time - it doesn't mean they have merit.

 

 

[atomheartbevo 90651]

10 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

Exactly what would be the basis of the lawsuits? 

That the school is putting teachers in jeopardy

We were talking about those parents who would be upset if the schools fully open. Most/all teachers and staff should be vaccinated by the summer, if not the end of spring.   

Many parents are currently keeping their kids home, and I could be wrong on TEA, but based on the last 10-11 months or so, I think the TEA will heavily penalize districts who are not fully open in the fall.   

Then again, quite a few districts did stand up to the TEA last year, so it very well could be a fuck around and find out kind of situation. 

 

[BradInATX 9208]

Should otherwise healthy kids be vaccinated?

I won't be vaccinating mine until they're adolescents if covid is even still a thing . They're basically in the zero risk group as is. My toddler is in day care in exurban Texas. He probably already had all of the strains of it.

[BrazilHorn 6847]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

We were talking about those parents who would be upset if the schools fully open. Most/all teachers and staff should be vaccinated by the summer, if not the end of spring.   

Many parents are currently keeping their kids home, and I could be wrong on TEA, but based on the last 10-11 months or so, I think the TEA will heavily penalize districts who are not fully open in the fall.   

Then again, quite a few districts did stand up to the TEA last year, so it very well could be a fuck around and find out kind of situation. 

 

Parents are keeping kids home because they are a ping pong ball being hit between teachers that are crying out their fears of teaching in person vs a district's policies of going in person.

I don't know anyone that is keeping their kid home from life. Even those that aren't going in person are still playing sports, doing a learning pod, seeing friends, having sleepovers etc

Next to no kids are hanging out solo in their house 100%.

[GRHorn 105]

I think this is an example of the mixed messaging here regarding vaccinations. So grandparents get vaccinated, but they still can’t see their grandkids? So people get it so they can be “safe” from Covid but just not with family contact? 
 

He doesn’t want to make some proclamation on Tv suddenly? Isn’t that what he does for a living? Most people that watch this have to be wondering what the fuck he’s talking about. Are there people that still listen to him?
 

The only explanation that makes sense to me is that they’re are more uncertain about vaccine efficacy towards variants than they are letting on. In which case it’s a harder sell to get people to take the shot if it’s already greatly losing efficacy. He’s basically being dishonest either way. 

Edited February 22, 2021 by GRHorn

[LurkingHorn 1093]

19 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I think this is an example of the mixed messaging here regarding vaccinations. So grandparents get vaccinated, but they still can’t see their grandkids? So people get it so they can be “safe” from Covid but just not with family contact? 
 

He doesn’t want to make some proclamation on Tv suddenly? Isn’t that what he does for a living? Most people that watch this have to be wondering what the fuck he’s talking about. Are there people that still listen to him?
 

The only explanation that makes sense to me is that they’re are more uncertain about vaccine efficacy towards variants than they are letting on. In which case it’s a harder sell to get people to take the shot if it’s already greatly losing efficacy. He’s basically being dishonest either way. 

Did you actually watch the clip? He said there are going to be less strict recommendations for vaccinated people but he wanted to discuss with the team before they release anything. No, his job isn’t to go on TV and make unilateral proclamations in which he doesn’t know the answer to. Come on, dude. You’re being just like the media you’re roasting. 

[GRHorn 105]

6 minutes ago, LurkingHorn said:

Did you actually watch the clip? He said there are going to be less strict recommendations for vaccinated people but he wanted to discuss with the team before they release anything. No, his job isn’t to go on TV and make unilateral proclamations in which he doesn’t know the answer to. Come on, dude. You’re being just like the media you’re roasting. 

Yes I did watch it. He doesn’t want to make any big proclamations. He sure seems to do that often. We’re also going on a couple months of data from people getting vaccinated. How much data does he need before saying it’s ok for vaccinated seniors to see their family? Again, why is he not sure about that?
 

If being vaccinated doesn’t even grant his blessing for you to be around your family, then how good is it?  It’s a bizarre clip. 

[StruggleBus 3922]

I’m going back to normal life once fully vaccinated. And so is the rest of my extended family. Otherwise, what’s the point?

[LurkingHorn 1093]

32 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I think this is an example of the mixed messaging here regarding vaccinations. So grandparents get vaccinated, but they still can’t see their grandkids? So people get it so they can be “safe” from Covid but just not with family contact? 
 

He doesn’t want to make some proclamation on Tv suddenly? Isn’t that what he does for a living? Most people that watch this have to be wondering what the fuck he’s talking about. Are there people that still listen to him?
 

The only explanation that makes sense to me is that they’re are more uncertain about vaccine efficacy towards variants than they are letting on. In which case it’s a harder sell to get people to take the shot if it’s already greatly losing efficacy. He’s basically being dishonest either way. 

Is it okay to admit there is uncertainty about the variants but also know that the vaccines are amazing? I don’t understand why you need to have a black and white answer to a very complicated issue. 

[LurkingHorn 1093]

1 minute ago, StruggleBus said:

I’m going back to normal life once fully vaccinated. And so is the rest of my extended family. Otherwise, what’s the point?

Just to go on record, I’m on this boat too. I just think the constant complaining about fauci is strange. 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

Just to go on record, I’m on this boat too. I just think the constant complaining about fauci is strange. 

because now he’s not going to make recommendations for grandparents to see grand kids until he talks to his team but 2 days ago he said vaccine will stop spread and protect the unvaccinated.

He does so many interviews a day he can’t keep his stories straight.

[LurkingHorn 1093]

33 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

because now he’s not going to make recommendations for grandparents to see grand kids until he talks to his team but 2 days ago he said vaccine will stop spread and protect the unvaccinated.

 

 

 

He does so many interviews a day he can’t keep his stories straight.

 

 

 

The vaccines will end the pandemic. That’s not the same thing as telling everybody they should go out tomorrow and pretend everything is back to normal. Can you seriously not see the difference there? And if that tweet is taking things out of context like the previous tweet shared from that account, I would recommend some of you try to follow other news sources along with the ones you frequent. 

[DDD Dad 14653]

He does so many interviews a day he can’t keep his stories straight.

Critical reading skills are not your strong point [mention]MNLonghornFUKM [/mention]

[Spankytoes 1748]

16 minutes ago, LurkingHorn said:

The vaccines will end the pandemic. That’s not the same thing as telling everybody they should go out tomorrow and pretend everything is back to normal. Can you seriously not see the difference there? And if that tweet is taking things out of context like the previous tweet shared from that account, I would recommend some of you try to follow other news sources along with the ones you frequent. 

Based on what long term studies?

[Pato del Muerto 53511]

Once I’m done with my course, I feel like my odds are sufficiently in my favor against a negative outcome that I won’t worry about where I go or who I’m around. 
but I have no problem wearing a mask in certain situations for a while longer until they confirm that the vaccinated aren’t carriers, or until everyone that wants the vaccine has gotten it and the only people to be infected are the god is my shield or the my immune system is strong and the it’s the flu people. 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

The vaccines will end the pandemic. That’s not the same thing as telling everybody they should go out tomorrow and pretend everything is back to normal. Can you seriously not see the difference there? And if that tweet is taking things out of context like the previous tweet shared from that account, I would recommend some of you try to follow other news sources along with the ones you frequent. 

No I can’t seriously see the difference . If he’s telling us fully vaccinated people won’t spread the disease from my tweet(source NBC news), why not go on and say that he can recommend fully vaccinated grandparents to see their grand kids if they’re not going to catch it or spread it?

[LurkingHorn 1093]

20 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

No I can’t seriously see the difference . If he’s telling us fully vaccinated people won’t spread the disease from my tweet(source NBC news), why not go on and say that he can recommend fully vaccinated grandparents to see their grand kids if they’re not going to catch it or spread it?

I’m not sure what tweet your referring to, but maybe it’s this article from a few days ago: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1258142

He clearly says the results from these studies point to a positive direction. 
 

“There have been some studies that are pointing in a very favorable direction,” he said, adding that these studies will have to be corroborated by additional research.

Maybe we let the additional research happen before claiming he’s doing so many interviews he doesn’t know what he’s saying. Perhaps he has taken his statements to the next level and declared with 100% certainty that the vaccine completely stops transmission. If you can find that, I’ll definitely apologize and move on my merry way. 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

He’s definitely the master of maybes and we’ll sees. I mean he’s like 81, and is prodigy at answering shit. He just seems to be doing multiple interviews daily and the way he can grab a headline with one quote in one interview, can be the total opposite of a headline in another interview. Thus confusing the ilk of arm chair infectious disease experts like myself

[KaiserSoze 1017]

You truly are a fucking moron. Did you drop out of school after 5th grade?

[DDD Dad 14653]

He’s definitely the master of maybes and we’ll sees. I mean he’s like 81, and is prodigy at answering shit. He just seems to be doing multiple interviews daily and the way he can grab a headline with one quote in one interview, can be the total opposite of a headline in another interview. Thus confusing the ilk of arm chair infectious disease experts like myself

Fauci clearly is the villain here.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

You truly are a fucking moron. Did you drop out of school after 5th grade?

Oh pipe down, bitch

[BradInATX 9208]

Fauci is an over sharer. He needs to understand that providing nuanced information that requires critical thinking and more than 160 letters is confusing for a lot of people and that makes them angry.

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

17 hours ago, Heme Doc said:

We know COVID is less serious for kids than seasonal flu.

That's the kind of thinking that gets you sent to the Gulag.

[Armybrat 41412]

19 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Or how about NBC News? 
 

This morning looking over a couple DeSantis articles I found this gem.

 

A lot of similar allegations as in the CBS article linked, but when I read it this small passage struck me.
 

“Florida, according to the latest NBC News tally, has reported 1.84 million Covid-19 infections and nearly 30,000 deaths due to the coronavirus, some of the worst numbers in the nation.”

On an absolute basis sure. But what about per capita? They’ve had the 27th most cases and 28th most deaths. Is the author unaware of the distinction? Of course not. It’s just blatant misrepresentation of data for purposes of the article. It’s a small detail, but a crystal clear example of how legacy media cannot be trusted to provide news and data to the public or to interpret it justly. 
 

Tl;Dr 

Can any media can be trusted? We’re all fucked. 

NBC - aren’t they the ones who staged & firebombed a pickup to illustrate how “dangerous” that model was?

[Cornfusion 250]

Quote

Fauci is an over sharer. He needs to understand that providing nuanced information that requires critical thinking and more than 160 letters is confusing for a lot of people and that makes them angry.

What's Fauci's latest over /under on how many masks each person is to wear again?  Last I heard, it was 1.5.

[GRHorn 105]

10 hours ago, DDD Dad said:

Fauci clearly is the villain here.

I wouldn’t call him a villain.
He did knowingly disseminate disinfo recently though. 
 

His problem is similar to a lot of our Covid heroes. They looked like (or were easily portrayed as) geniuses next to Trump. Now that he’s gone they look like what they are, typical bureaucrats with underwhelming levels of competency and moral standards.  

 

[LurkingHorn 1093]

10 hours ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

He’s definitely the master of maybes and we’ll sees. I mean he’s like 81, and is prodigy at answering shit. He just seems to be doing multiple interviews daily and the way he can grab a headline with one quote in one interview, can be the total opposite of a headline in another interview. Thus confusing the ilk of arm chair infectious disease experts like myself

This is not the argument you made. You claimed he said something he didn't and basically said he was being a hypocrite. You got called on it and now you appear to be upset that he's a "master of maybes". If you're argument is that he should take a step back from doing so many interviews so that the media doesn't always come up with a contradictory headline, I would agree with that. 

[BradInATX 9208]

5 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

His problem is similar to a lot of our Covid heroes. They looked like (or were easily portrayed as) geniuses next to Trump. Now that he’s gone they look like what they are, typical bureaucrats with underwhelming levels of competency and moral standards.  

 

 

Yeah, I think it's sort of a twofold problem.

The first is that a significant portion of our population does better getting information in small, black and white pieces without nuance. It's why stupid people get sucked into clickbait tweets and it's why Trump resonated with them. They are better at handling their leaders telling them to drink bleach and sticking with it than they are with the message changing as new information comes out. How stupid do you have to be to think that "we don't know yet" is in conflict with a more definitive statement a few weeks later?

But I do agree that Fauci is out his of element as a public figurehead and spokesperson. He's a scientist. He pontificates out loud instead of being consistent with a message. It can be confusing. He needs to learn when to stop talking, and he needs to learn that "we don't know yet, we're working on it" is an acceptable answer to most people. And the people to whom that's not an acceptable answer are irrelevant because no matter what he says, they will be angry partisan hacks. He is a TMI guy.

He is not a great "public persona at the front of an initiative". At all. They need to get him a spokesperson and have said person manage the message, and move him to more of a CTO role than CEO. He has gotten a lot of undue praise IMO. Great scientist I'm sure, not a great public figure.

[Anastasis 23721]

8 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

He did knowingly disseminate disinfo recently though. 

I think that's a harsh way to frame it. Fauci is a political animal at this point in his career. He frames whatever he is saying to shape behaviors at the moment to effect the public health goal he is trying to accomplish. See shifting sands on mask wearing, see moving the goal posts on herd immunity, see shiftiness post-vax activities and timeframe for return to normalcy. I get it, but I think that he is being less than forthright, and I think that it is counterproductive in the end due to the mixed messages.

The vaccine end game needs clear messaging, or it will fail. To Brad's point, people need manageable and consistent soundbites. People need to see light at the end of the tunnel. This "we're all gonna have to wear masks forever, I can't tell you that your vaccinated parents can see their grandchildren, the vaccine doesn't reduce transmission" coming from noisy megaphones across the spectrum is counterproductive to driving vaccine demand. Social media in particular is a cancer to the objective here, and frankly the noise from people with the degrees after their name are often more problematic than the right out "Bill Gates gonna alter my DNA!" nonsense. We are at a point were very soon we will shift from a supply constraint to a demand constraint in terms of large scale vaccination. A lot of the noise being blasted is not exactly inspiring to demand. 

Here is an example of concise and clear messaging to drive a singular point home, and shine light on the end of the tunnel.

 

[BradInATX 9208]

7 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that's a harsh way to frame it. Fauci is a political animal at this point in his career. He frames whatever he is saying to shape behaviors at the moment to effect the public health goal he is trying to accomplish. See shifting sands on mask wearing, see moving the goal posts on herd immunity, see shiftiness post-vax activities and timeframe for return to normalcy. I get it, but I think that he is being less than forthright, and I think that it is counterproductive in the end due to the mixed messages.

The vaccine end game needs clear messaging, or it will fail. To Brad's point, people need manageable and consistent soundbites. People need to see light at the end of the tunnel. This "we're all gonna have to wear masks forever, I can't tell you that your vaccinated parents can see their grandchildren, the vaccine doesn't reduce transmission" coming from noisy megaphones across the spectrum is counterproductive to driving vaccine demand. Social media in particular is a cancer to the objective here, and frankly the noise from people with the degrees after their name are often more problematic than the right out "Bill Gates gonna alter my DNA!" nonsense. We are at a point were very soon we will shift from a supply constraint to a demand constraint in terms of large scale vaccination. A lot of the noise being blasted is not exactly inspiring to demand. 

Here is an example of concise and clear messaging to drive a singular point home, and shine light on the end of the tunnel.

 

 

I feel like Fauci scored some points with the public, especially on the blue side of the spectrum, because he actually did do a pretty good job of walking the tightrope of dealing with Trump's bullshit while still mostly putting good scientific information out. He managed to walk the line and keep non-junk science at the forefront while not getting himself run out of town. 

But the fact of the matter is that now Trump is gone and there are probably a lot better candidates for Fauci's current role. 

 

I feel like it's kinda like Chuck Pagano with the colts. He came in, had a great first season but had to leave to fight cancer. He became sort of a folk hero there. But when he recovered and came back, it turns out he was just an okay football coach. Both handled extreme adversity situations well, but once they were operating under normalcy, turns out there are a lot of people that could do a better job. 

I think you can respect Fauci and what he's done while understanding that he is flawed. But of course the smooth brains on #bothsides have made him a political lightning rod.

Edited February 22, 2021 by BradInATX

[gmr548 16702]

 
Yeah, I think it's sort of a twofold problem.
The first is that a significant portion of our population does better getting information in small, black and white pieces without nuance. It's why stupid people get sucked into clickbait tweets and it's why Trump resonated with them. They are better at handling their leaders telling them to drink bleach and sticking with it than they are with the message changing as new information comes out. How stupid do you have to be to think that "we don't know yet" is in conflict with a more definitive statement a few weeks later?
But I do agree that Fauci is out his of element as a public figurehead and spokesperson. He's a scientist. He pontificates out loud instead of being consistent with a message. It can be confusing. He needs to learn when to stop talking, and he needs to learn that "we don't know yet, we're working on it" is an acceptable answer to most people. And the people to whom that's not an acceptable answer are irrelevant because no matter what he says, they will be angry partisan hacks. He is a TMI guy.
He is not a great "public persona at the front of an initiative". At all. They need to get him a spokesperson and have said person manage the message, and move him to more of a CTO role than CEO. He has gotten a lot of undue praise IMO. Great scientist I'm sure, not a great public figure.

Agree with this. A lot of scientific/analytical types are like that when talking about their area of expertise. Not necessarily the guy you want doing news interviews every day.

Still, the message with regard to behavior post-vaccine has pretty consistently been “Well, we just can’t know yet, so play it safe.” As more information comes out that message is starting to change. Fauci is not a pundit paid to have hot takes so he will be among the slowest to come around, because it’s more important he be right than first.

If you are looking to be aggrieved or are profoundly stupid you can take more from it than that, of course.

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

7 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Social media in particular is a cancer to the objective here, and frankly the noise from people with the degrees after their name are often more problematic than the right out "Bill Gates gonna alter my DNA!" nonsense. We are at a point were very soon we will shift from a supply constraint to a demand constraint in terms of large scale vaccination. A lot of the noise being blasted is not exactly inspiring to demand. 

I've had several people ask me if I'm getting the vaccine, and a few of them are surprised when I say, "Hell, yeah, as soon as I'm on the list". Some people who I consider pretty intelligent (on both sides of the political aisle) have fallen for the Bill Gates/Big Pharma nonsense. 

[BradInATX 9208]

2 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Agree with this. A lot of scientific/analytical types are like that when talking about their area of expertise. Not necessarily the guy you want doing news interviews every day.

Still, the message with regard to behavior post-vaccine has pretty consistently been “Well, we just can’t know yet, so play it safe.” As more information comes out that message is starting to change. Fauci is not a pundit paid to have hot takes so he will be among the slowest to come around, because it’s more important he be right than first.

If you are looking to be aggrieved or are profoundly stupid you can take more from it than that, of course.

 

Yeah, and a lot of the problem is that the media loves to take nuanced answers and make them black or white, because that's what their readers respond to. 

"We don't know yet if the mRNA vaccines prevent transmission too" gets turned into "Fauci says mRNA vaccines don't stop transmission". 

But - that's the world we live in, and part of his job is to figure out how to message his stuff to avoid that. Biden knows how to do that. Trump knows how to do that. Most high-level CEOs know how to do that. Most scientists probably don't.

[dcar00 14974]

13 hours ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

because now he’s not going to make recommendations for grandparents to see grand kids until he talks to his team but 2 days ago he said vaccine will stop spread and protect the unvaccinated.

 

 

 

He does so many interviews a day he can’t keep his stories straight.

 

 

 

you just aren't able to keep up with the nuance. Its difficult for people to understand someone as smart as he is.

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

13 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

But - that's the world we live in, and part of his job is to figure out how to message his stuff to avoid that. Biden knows how to do that. Trump knows how to do that. Most high-level CEOs know how to do that. Most scientists probably don't.

Very true. Ask an engineer about how safe a bridge is, and he'll hedge his answer. Fauci is hurting his cause more than he is helping at this point. He needs to let the Sunshine Pumpers be out there right now.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

This is not the argument you made. You claimed he said something he didn't and basically said he was being a hypocrite. You got called on it and now you appear to be upset that he's a "master of maybes". If you're argument is that he should take a step back from doing so many interviews so that the media doesn't always come up with a contradictory headline, I would agree with that. 

So Fauci can assume one thing(vaccines will protect unvaccinated) but can’t answer if fully vaccinated Grand parents can safely see their grand kids? I mean what am I missing? You and Kaiser and DDD can insult ones intelligence because it’s an easy out, but in who’s eyes does a country’s perceived mouthpiece for this pandemic not see this hypocritical messaging? I get insulted because he talks too much. But gmr, Brad say he shouldn’t speak so much because he’s a scientist, and I’m the 5th grade drop out fucking moron that lacks critical thinking? Fuck off with your bullshit

[gmr548 16702]

So Fauci can assume one thing(vaccines will protect unvaccinated) but can’t answer if fully vaccinated Grand parents can safely see their grand kids? I mean what am I missing? You and Kaiser and DDD can insult ones intelligence because it’s an easy out, but in who’s eyes does a country’s perceived mouthpiece for this pandemic not see this hypocritical messaging? I get insulted because he talks too much. But gmr, Brad say he shouldn’t speak so much because he’s a scientist, and I’m the 5th grade drop fucking moron that lacks critical thinking? Fuck off with your bullshit

If we say you’re right will you stop whining?

[Don Johnson 4847]

 

[LurkingHorn 1093]

7 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

So Fauci can assume one thing(vaccines will protect unvaccinated) but can’t answer if fully vaccinated Grand parents can safely see their grand kids? I mean what am I missing? You and Kaiser and DDD can insult ones intelligence because it’s an easy out, but in who’s eyes does a country’s perceived mouthpiece for this pandemic not see this hypocritical messaging? I get insulted because he talks too much. But gmr, Brad say he shouldn’t speak so much because he’s a scientist, and I’m the 5th grade drop fucking moron that lacks critical thinking? Fuck off with your bullshit

Where did I insult your intelligence? I did no such thing. You posted factually incorrect information and I called you out on it. That's the difference between your initial post and all the other posts you're referring to.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

If we say you’re right will you stop whining?

Get called a whiner for defending ones self or get called a fly by poster for not coming back after getting called out. Unreal

[BrazilHorn 6847]

Fauci to me was a three legged dog in a room full of two legged dogs when he was surrounded by Trump and his staff. Now he needs to back out of the spotlight and quit talking, He is doing more harm than good, he is not an effective public speaker, he is a career bureaucrat who cannot fully take a position and his wavering is driving people crazy.

Biden's team needs to get someone to be front and center on this who can clearly articulate a position and get the country moving forward. Fauci is convincing more people not to get the vaccine vs go get it. He is not currently effective as the "spokesperson" for addressing CV19.

Put him back in the lab where he belongs leading his group to help ensure from a public policy perspective we are in better shape for the variants coming etc and that we are working to avoid the next wave of shit that is coming. Quit putting him on TV where all he is doing is fucking making things worse and feeding all of the people who are like "yeah see, it ain't real". People have to have hope, if you take that away you will see shit go bad real quick.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

Where did I insult your intelligence? I did no such thing. You posted factually incorrect information and I called you out on it. That's the difference between your initial post and all the other posts you're referring to.

My initial post was a tweet basically saying “fauci announces a few studies claim vaccines stop transmission” according to the nbc article you found and linked.

Ok cool. Hook ‘em


2 days later he can’t recommend one seeing their grand kids because he needs to talk to his team first? I comment he’s great at answering with maybes, ifs and we will sees (which he really is) and that is why you and I are having any back and forth about this? Apologize for putting you in the insult list.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

Fauci to me was a three legged dog in a room full of two legged dogs when he was surrounded by Trump and his staff. Now he needs to back out of the spotlight and quit talking, He is doing more harm than good, he is not an effective public speaker, he is a career bureaucrat who cannot fully take a position and his wavering is driving people crazy.
Biden's team needs to get someone to be front and center on this who can clearly articulate a position and get the country moving forward. Fauci is convincing more people not to get the vaccine vs go get it. He is not currently effective as the "spokesperson" for addressing CV19.
Put him back in the lab where he belongs leading his group to help ensure from a public policy perspective we are in better shape for the variants coming etc and that we are working to avoid the next wave of shit that is coming. Quit putting him on TV where all he is doing is fucking making things worse and feeding all of the people who are like "yeah see, it ain't real". People have to have hope, if you take that away you will see shit go bad real quick.

Unfortunately what’s left in the cabinet is Osterholm and Slavitt. Osterholm predicted 3 weeks ago the next 6-14 weeks will be the darkest of the pandemic.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

As a private school parent I was shocked to learn that public schools in our area are still virtual to this day. That's horrible, it will be going on 1 year in March. Thoughts and prayers to all those parents trying to WFH; last Spring was brutal in terms of actual learning and development that occurred on Zoom.

Edited February 22, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[BrazilHorn 6847]

10 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Unfortunately what’s left in the cabinet is Osterholm and Slavitt. Osterholm predicted 3 weeks ago the next 6-14 weeks will be the darkest of the pandemic.

I would rather someone say that vs the back and forth. If Osterholm is saying "everyone should get vaccinated and its 14 weeks more (basically ride out the spring) and then we will be closer to normalcy" I am down. It is the wishy washiness that drives people crazy.

Seeing school districts talking about being virtual in the fall still is fucking insane, if Biden is truly concerned with children of color, he has to nationally mandate schools are 100% in person in the fall. It isn't going to be middle/upper class white kids left behind educationally.

[Guest Lobo]

20 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

As a private school parent I was shocked to learn that public schools in our area are still virtual to this day. That's horrible, it will be going on 1 year in March. Thoughts and prayers to all those parents trying to WFH; last Spring was brutal in terms of actual learning and development that occurred on Zoom.

You just found out public schools in your immediate vicinity were still in remote learning mode?  Wow, you sound like a really engaged community member who should be telling everyone else what to do given your scope of expertise.  

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

I would rather someone say that vs the back and forth. If Osterholm is saying "everyone should get vaccinated and its 14 weeks more (basically ride out the spring) and then we will be closer to normalcy" I am down. It is the wishy washiness that drives people crazy.
Seeing school districts talking about being virtual in the fall still is fucking insane, if Biden is truly concerned with children of color, he has to nationally mandate schools are 100% in person in the fall. It isn't going to be middle/upper class white kids left behind educationally.

Or have goals. If the country is at x amount of cases/deaths/positive % by st patties, Easter, May Day etc then we we can see normalcy by Memorial Day weekend. By then all variants will have been in America for a while and if we’re meeting goals- our 2019 way of life can resume by early summer with vaccinations basically available via walk up for anybody anywhere.


Agree completely with what your opinion of fauci is

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

I think that's a harsh way to frame it. Fauci is a political animal at this point in his career. He frames whatever he is saying to shape behaviors at the moment to effect the public health goal he is trying to accomplish. See shifting sands on mask wearing, see moving the goal posts on herd immunity, see shiftiness post-vax activities and timeframe for return to normalcy. I get it, but I think that he is being less than forthright, and I think that it is counterproductive in the end due to the mixed messages.

The vaccine end game needs clear messaging, or it will fail. To Brad's point, people need manageable and consistent soundbites. People need to see light at the end of the tunnel. This "we're all gonna have to wear masks forever, I can't tell you that your vaccinated parents can see their grandchildren, the vaccine doesn't reduce transmission" coming from noisy megaphones across the spectrum is counterproductive to driving vaccine demand. Social media in particular is a cancer to the objective here, and frankly the noise from people with the degrees after their name are often more problematic than the right out "Bill Gates gonna alter my DNA!" nonsense. We are at a point were very soon we will shift from a supply constraint to a demand constraint in terms of large scale vaccination. A lot of the noise being blasted is not exactly inspiring to demand. 

Here is an example of concise and clear messaging to drive a singular point home, and shine light on the end of the tunnel.

 

Fauci saying we can’t safely open schools without more stimulus is objectively false. And he knows that. That’s what I was referring to, but I’m currently tired of beating that dead horse. 
 

1 hour ago, gmr548 said:

Agree with this. A lot of scientific/analytical types are like that when talking about their area of expertise. Not necessarily the guy you want doing news interviews every day.

Still, the message with regard to behavior post-vaccine has pretty consistently been “Well, we just can’t know yet, so play it safe.” As more information comes out that message is starting to change. Fauci is not a pundit paid to have hot takes so he will be among the slowest to come around, because it’s more important he be right than first.

If you are looking to be aggrieved or are profoundly stupid you can take more from it than that, of course.

Here’s more of my consultancy work. 
 

Jake Tapper- thanks for coming on Dr GR, you’re one of my personal heroes for how you’ve helped us manage the pandemic. After seniors get vaccinated is it safe for them to see their grandkids in person?

GR- thanks for the kind words Jake. It’s really been a pleasure serving the country during this difficult time. At this point I think it should be safe for people to see their families in person, including their grandchildren. 
 

Jake- Wait, esteemed Dr, what do you mean should be?

GR- Well we are constantly learning about this virus but we see no reason currently why they should continue to isolate completely from their families. These are great vaccines that will help us end the pandemic as more people receive them. 
 

 

The above works unless he is harboring deeper concerns about the variants and vaccine efficacy than he is letting on. Which is possible. 

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

The above works unless he is harboring deeper concerns about the variants and vaccine efficacy than he is letting on.

If you leave gaps, the lowest common denominator will fill them with conspiracies.