Why should people be forced to get the vaccine in order to protect others who choose not to get it?

What changed exactly?

 

We weren't talking about masks. I asked: "what evidence is there that infection from other corona-viruses provides immunity to SARS-COV-2?"

 

They coughed without covering their mouth? And were all four people COVID positive?

 

Here is an example of Trump blocking mask production
Trump, 3M clash over order to produce more face masks for US (apnews.com)

 

You mean an example of blocking mask EXPORTATION?

 

Well I googled mask production and I believe that is mentioned in the article.

 

So Trump did a bad thing?

 

Depends how you look at it. He put American needs first and banned exporting masks that were needed here at home. He didn't ban making them.

 

The statements I’ve presented by Fauci were false. It doesn’t even matter what policy he advocated for. It was based on numerous lies told under two administrations. The nutty idea policy pushed by Fauci doesn’t have to be based on principles of epidemiology and public health is just a strawman argument. It’s irrelevant to the FACT the statements he made were false. The false statements were either intentional, which makes them lies, or they were made in ignorance which makes Fauci the dumbest public health official ever. (He’s not dumb.)

The policies I advocate for here are expected to be based on science by @WillReadmore. But Fauci’s are not expected to be based on science. Fauci has free reign to pursue any policy he wants and lie about it—even making statements that are in direct conflict with ALL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE. But as you have seen, every policy I advocate for (I deal with epidemiology every day in my work just like Fauci) must be based on science exclusively and I must not ever misrepresent science when supporting a policy.

If progressives didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all.

 

To elaborate, if we decided on a policy decision to keep lead pipes, we would not have public information campaigns telling people lead does not harm humans. We would not have information campaigns denying the neurological effects of lead even though the evidence is quite clear that it DOES have negative effects—severe ones.

Well, I would hope that’s not what we would do. With people like Fauci and our current CDC I’m not so sure. That might be exactly how it would play out. And certain PF members would DEFEND the disinformation! This is why lies can be told with impunity. About 3/4 of the country WANTS to be lied to. They eat it up. They would (and did/do) die in support of the lies. That’s hardcore!

 

That is correct, March 7-9, 2020.

Before the masks and distance bull which did nothing....

We were all exposed in America, everyone in America, by April of 2020.

That is a truth your side has never stopped lying about....

 

Absolute total nonsense.

I haven't yet seen you identify ONE lie told by Dr. Fauci.

Furthermore, once again I have to point out that policy is informed by MANY factors. Science is ONLY ONE of those factors.

So, comparing policy to scientific results is ABSOLUTELY going to find differences. And, that is going to be the case ALL THE TIME, not just with COVID.

 

Ok. So you believe Fauci and the CDC are incompetent. That’s fine. But the statements I’ve posted ARE FALSE. And were FALSE when they were made. Either they knew the statements to be false or they didn’t. That means they are either incompetent or liars. Period.

Policy is irrelevant. We can have varying policy but we can’t base it on INCORRECT information like was done here.

 

No, you are misrepresenting Dr. Fauci, the CDC, the FDA, WHO and other organizations of science based medicine.

Policy is not irrelevant. ALL these groups are major contributors to policy. And, science is only ONE of the contributors to policy.

 

Nope. They recommended AGAINST quality masks. Fauci claimed cloth masks were as good as masks being saved for healthcare. This was a false statement. I quoted him. The claim good masks were scarce and needed to be saved for healthcare after the inauguration was false.

Go ahead and show how science based medicine justifies recommending AGAINST quality masks. Go ahead. Go ahead and provide evidence cloth masks are as good as the masks recommend AGAINST. Go ahead and provide evidence masks were scarce after the inauguration. Go ahead and provide evidence the CDC didn’t tell retailers to sell quality masks. As usual all the evidence supports my posts and you have….unsubstantiated opinions.

 

Cite the quote.

And, date that quote.

 

What you are doing is advocating for policy that is in direct opposition to science and all known evidence. You are talking about science based medicine but then defending policy based on either a lie or gross incompetence.

 

Done. His own words on the record to one of the most well known and respected journalists in the US.

 

Fact check: Outdated video of Fauci saying “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask” | Reuters

 

Don't accuse me of stuff for which you don't even have the decency of supplying a reference.

And, you're just wrong about the relationship of science and policy.

Throughout ALL of our government, science informs policy. It does NOT dictate policy.

Look at the myriad times when Republicans single out policy to be changed NOT for science, but in order to allow corporations to foul our environment.

Look at the times when they block funding and authority so that law based on science can not be monitored or enforced.

 

That is not a cite.

Are you seriously going to admit that you are CLUELESS about what constitutes a citation?

 

I’m not sure how anyone can watch that interview and come away thinking Fauci is an honest man. There are direct contradictions in that short clip. When you directly contradict yourself like that, at least one of the statements is untrue. It’s a sad state of affairs when a vast demographic doesn’t possess the critical thinking skills to pick up on that.

 

You just plain refuse to CITE a statement.

I don't have ANY respect for that.

 

Oh. I thought you were supporting the policies in question here. Are you saying you believe good masks shouldn’t have been recommended against? Are you saying the public shouldn’t have been told masks were scarce when they were in OVERSUPPLY?

Nope. Policy should never be based on false information. Ever. It shouldn’t be marketed with false information either. Period. Both were done in this case.

Sure. It informs policy. But in this case the policy is diametrically opposed to the science. If science had informed policy a bunch of people would have worn better masks and lives and health would have been saved.

So do you support that? I don’t.

So do you support that? I don’t. I’m not a big fan of a lot of laws, but if we are going to have them they dang well better be science based.

 

I did. A link to a full interview with the pull quote. You are apparently not reading my posts.

You have provided NOTHING in the way of evidence of ANY KIND. How’s your self respect?