Fauci Moves the Goalposts

 

This is brutal, and it sums up what I think of the public health profession. Were they ready for any aspect of this pandemic?

BTW, Howard Wall has a great Twitter account.

Published in Healthcare
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 108 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. EODmom Coolidge
    EODmom
    @EODmom

    The arrogance. The bald faced-ness. He really does think we are idiots. 

    • #1
  2. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    EODmom (View Comment):

    He really does think we are idiots.

    Of course he does. He believes we are all like him. 

    • #2
  3. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

     

     

     

    I really hate these people. 

    Last week they were trying to tell us that the virus doesn’t die on people that have been vaccinated. Really? It still spreads like crazy but people don’t get sick from it? Really? That’s what happens with the flu shot? Really? I notice they quit babbling like that now. Because it’s a lie.

    • #3
  4. EODmom Coolidge
    EODmom
    @EODmom

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

     

     

     

    I really hate these people.

    Last week they were trying to tell us that the virus doesn’t die on people that have been vaccinated. Really? It still spreads like crazy but people don’t get sick from it? Really? That’s what happens with the flu shot? Really? I notice they quit babbling like that now. Because it’s a lie.

    If this were a dangerous- really dangerous- virus and a real pandemic therefrom, there would be tens of thousands of homeless, drug using, otherwise variously vagrant and transient, and often violent radical others living on city streets out in the open already dead and dying daily. They are not and they are surely as unhealthy as the average couch potato sheltering at home. 

    • #4
  5. Eustace C. Scrubb Member
    Eustace C. Scrubb
    @EustaceCScrubb

    Sold the birthright of credibility with the initial mask fiasco.  

    • #5
  6. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Last week I went looking for something I had read along the way regarding “living a lie” / “living in the truth.” This led me back to The Power of the Powerless. I am now re-reading it in full (I am not a fast reader…especially with the important stuff and when I am highlighting along the way.) Still have ten pages to go but the themes of manipulation are strong throughout. Well worth the time…

    • #6
  7. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    EODmom (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

     

     

     

    I really hate these people.

    Last week they were trying to tell us that the virus doesn’t die on people that have been vaccinated. Really? It still spreads like crazy but people don’t get sick from it? Really? That’s what happens with the flu shot? Really? I notice they quit babbling like that now. Because it’s a lie.

    If this were a dangerous- really dangerous- virus and a real pandemic therefrom, there would be tens of thousands of homeless, drug using, otherwise variously vagrant and transient, and often violent radical others living on city streets out in the open already dead and dying daily. They are not and they are surely as unhealthy as the average couch potato sheltering at home.

    I want to be clear. I get that the authorities have to do something to make sure that we don’t run out of medical resources, but I don’t see the reason trust (almost) any of them. 

    • #7
  8. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    I think Ziegler is pretty sharp on COVID-19 policy analysis.

     

     

     

    • #8
  9. MISTER BITCOIN Inactive
    MISTER BITCOIN
    @MISTERBITCOIN

    Fauci is the epitome of the deep state fraud

    https://amgreatness.com/2020/07/10/fauci-is-a-deep-state-fraud/

    by Angelo Codevilla

     

     

    • #9
  10. Brian Wyneken Member
    Brian Wyneken
    @BrianWyneken

    There is a longer story here, but ten years ago I said:  “culturally, public health’s stock in trade appears to be disinformation.” That may have been a bit too severe at the time, but I had my reasons. A lot of what I have been observing this year from the public health components of the State of Minnesota and two counties (& Fauci, etc.) reminds of that decade old frustration.

    • #10
  11. EODmom Coolidge
    EODmom
    @EODmom

    Brian Wyneken (View Comment):

    There is a longer story here, but ten years ago I said: “culturally, public health’s stock in trade appears to be disinformation.” That may have been a bit too severe at the time, but I had my reasons. A lot of what I have been observing this year from the public health components of the State of Minnesota and two counties (& Fauci, etc.) reminds of that decade old frustration.

    You were just looking ahead – welcome to State run medicine and health care. USA Medicine, we hardly knew ye’.

    • #11
  12. MISTER BITCOIN Inactive
    MISTER BITCOIN
    @MISTERBITCOIN

    Brian Wyneken (View Comment):

    There is a longer story here, but ten years ago I said: “culturally, public health’s stock in trade appears to be disinformation.” That may have been a bit too severe at the time, but I had my reasons. A lot of what I have been observing this year from the public health components of the State of Minnesota and two counties (& Fauci, etc.) reminds of that decade old frustration.

    Racism is a public health crisis according to the useful and useless idiots

     

    • #12
  13. Franz Drumlin Inactive
    Franz Drumlin
    @FranzDrumlin

    Permit me to come to the defense of Dr. Fauci. I had an interesting (read: heated disagreement) with a progressive friend who happens to be a health care professional. She is of the opinion that since they (the Experts) are not sure if the vaccines will actually prevent the spread of the Covid 19 rather than merely protect individuals from contracting it, people who get inoculated should still wear masks and practice social distancing until we are given the All Clear signal. Say, in about two or three years from now. (Seriously.) I responded by saying after all the expense and waiting for the vaccine to finally deliver us from this plague we then have to spend the next several years avoiding close contact and skulking around with masks then a lot of people will say the hell with it, why bother. Those who have been vaccinated but are unsure of its efficacy or those who refuse to get the jab for whatever reason should Just Stay Home. There’s a dangerous virus out there. Stay Safe (why does that always sound like a command?). In the meantime those of us who get the vaccine and are willing to roll the dice should be encouraged to resume normal life as quickly as possible. The message from those in authority should not be ‘get vaccinated, then resume the lockdown’ but rather ‘Hey Folks, the more people we can get vaccinated the quicker we can get out of this thing!” I’m going to take what Dr. Fauci said in that spirit. In the meantime I’ve already got my sleeve rolled up. Let’s roll!

    • #13
  14. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Franz Drumlin (View Comment):
    She is of the opinion that since they (the Experts) are not sure if the vaccines will actually prevent the spread of the Covid 19 rather than merely protect individuals from contracting it, people who get inoculated should still wear masks and practice social distancing until we are given the All Clear signal. Say, in about two or three years from now. (Seriously.)

    They could have been explicit about this a long time ago. Nobody thinks that vaccines work this way.

    • #14
  15. EODmom Coolidge
    EODmom
    @EODmom

    Franz Drumlin (View Comment):

    Permit me to come to the defense of Dr. Fauci. I had an interesting (read: heated disagreement) with a progressive friend who happens to be a health care professional. She is of the opinion that since they (the Experts) are not sure if the vaccines will actually prevent the spread of the Covid 19 rather than merely protect individuals from contracting it, people who get inoculated should still wear masks and practice social distancing until we are given the All Clear signal. Say, in about two or three years from now. (Seriously.) I responded by saying after all the expense and waiting for the vaccine to finally deliver us from this plague we then have to spend the next several years avoiding close contact and skulking around with masks then a lot of people will say the hell with it, why bother. Those who have been vaccinated but are unsure of its efficacy or those who refuse to get the jab for whatever reason should Just Stay Home. There’s a dangerous virus out there. Stay Safe (why does that always sound like a command?). In the meantime those of us who get the vaccine and are willing to roll the dice should be encouraged to resume normal life as quickly as possible. The message from those in authority should not be ‘get vaccinated, then resume the lockdown’ but rather ‘Hey Folks, the more people we can get vaccinated the quicker we can get out of this thing!” I’m going to take what Dr. Fauci said in that spirit. In the meantime I’ve already got my sleeve rolled up. Let’s roll!

    The only ones left out in your headcount is the millions of people who have already been sick, not died, been without obvious symptoms for 18 months or now are “vaccinated.” Seems that the still “vulnerable” number really ought to be going down, down, down.  Not up and ever more up. 

    • #15
  16. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

     

     

     

    • #16
  17. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    One of my parents has narcissistic personality disorder. This is what it’s like. 

    • #17
  18. Franz Drumlin Inactive
    Franz Drumlin
    @FranzDrumlin

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    They could have been explicit about this a long time ago. Nobody thinks that vaccines work this way.

    You touched on the reason the conversation descended into a heated argument. She is of the Follow the Science school and I quickly agreed with her. ‘Science’ people came up with these vaccines and I am going to trust them. Give me the shot and let me out of lockdown! It was then that the goalposts were moved. “They don’t know!” was her response. So in other words, listen to Science when we think you should but don’t when we think you shouldn’t. 

    • #18
  19. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Franz Drumlin (View Comment):
    There’s a dangerous virus out there.

    Unless you define a dangerous virus as one that makes people sick, it is not a dangerous virus. It is not a deadly virus except to those who are elderly or in frail health. All you have to do is look at the death rates from this virus to date to see that. It was believed to be a deadly virus when we began all this, but based on the last year, it is simply not deadly to 99% of the population and to even less of those under the age of 50.

    Indeed, deaths are distributed pretty much like deaths resulting from colds.  People do die from colds, especially the elderly and infirm who develop pneumonia after getting a cold. This is pretty the same population that dies from Covid. 

    If so, then we are going to have as much success “conquering” Covid as we have of curing the common cold. We can never return to normal. That seems silly for a disease with a fatality rate – especially for those under the age of 50 – as we have with Covid. Do you know what is more likely to kill you if you are under 50 than catching Covid? Going to work each day if you are a logger, a professional fisherman, an oilfield roughneck or a long-haul trucker. 

     

    • #19
  20. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Franz Drumlin (View Comment):
    There’s a dangerous virus out there.

    Unless you define a dangerous virus as one that makes people sick, it is not a dangerous virus. It is not a deadly virus except to those who are elderly or in frail health. All you have to do is look at the death rates from this virus to date to see that. It was believed to be a deadly virus when we began all this, but based on the last year, it is simply not deadly to 99% of the population and to even less of those under the age of 50.

    Indeed, deaths are distributed pretty much like deaths resulting from colds. People do die from colds, especially the elderly and infirm who develop pneumonia after getting a cold. This is pretty the same population that dies from Covid.

    If so, then we are going to have as much success “conquering” Covid as we have of curing the common cold. We can never return to normal. That seems silly for a disease with a fatality rate – especially for those under the age of 50 – as we have with Covid. Do you know what is more likely to kill you if you are under 50 than catching Covid? Going to work each day if you are a logger, a professional fisherman, an oilfield roughneck or a long-haul trucker.

    It’s only dangerous in the sense that some localities can run out of medical resources. I don’t believe society can just do whatever the hell it wants until the vaccine kicks in. People get really mad at me for saying this, but it’s the reality. 

     

    • #20
  21. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

     

     

     

    • #21
  22. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    It’s only dangerous in the sense that some localities can run out of medical resources. I don’t believe society can just do whatever the hell it wants until the vaccine kicks in. People get really mad at me for saying this, but it’s the reality. 

    The reality is that is not a problem in the United States. Last March we set up numerous emergency facilities that stood largely empty. We cannot do whatever the hell we want to control the virus by overreacting to its dangers. And overreacting includes lockdowns. People get really mad at me for saying this, but it’s the reality. 

    • #22
  23. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    It’s only dangerous in the sense that some localities can run out of medical resources. I don’t believe society can just do whatever the hell it wants until the vaccine kicks in. People get really mad at me for saying this, but it’s the reality.

    The reality is that is not a problem in the United States. Last March we set up numerous emergency facilities that stood largely empty. We cannot do whatever the hell we want to control the virus by overreacting to its dangers. And overreacting includes lockdowns. People get really mad at me for saying this, but it’s the reality.

    Neither one of us can prove it, other than we know the R0 of COVID 19 is way higher than the flu. 

    The only way we would know is if all of these localities were literally doing nothing while they had a spike that ended up being manageable. 

     

    • #23
  24. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    It’s only dangerous in the sense that some localities can run out of medical resources. I don’t believe society can just do whatever the hell it wants until the vaccine kicks in. People get really mad at me for saying this, but it’s the reality.

    The reality is that is not a problem in the United States. Last March we set up numerous emergency facilities that stood largely empty. We cannot do whatever the hell we want to control the virus by overreacting to its dangers. And overreacting includes lockdowns. People get really mad at me for saying this, but it’s the reality.

    Neither one of us can prove it, other than we know the R0 of COVID 19 is way higher than the flu.

    The only way we would know is if all of these localities were literally doing nothing while they had a spike that ended up being manageable.

    Prove what? That thousands of emergency beds stood empty last spring? That’s an established fact. That we are overreacting? That’s pretty obvious when you see the deaths from suicide and overdose increase faster than death due to Covid. 

    We can prove how deadly the disease is by counting deaths – which are pretty low, except among the elderly and infirm. What we cannot prove is how mild the disease is because those with mild or asymptomatic cases often do not get tested. The fatality rates for this disease represent maximums, not minimums. And no one in public health seems to have an incentive to find exactly how low the fatality rate is because if it is significantly lower than the already low rate we are experiencing then they become unimportant.

    • #24
  25. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    It’s only dangerous in the sense that some localities can run out of medical resources. I don’t believe society can just do whatever the hell it wants until the vaccine kicks in. People get really mad at me for saying this, but it’s the reality.

    The reality is that is not a problem in the United States. Last March we set up numerous emergency facilities that stood largely empty. We cannot do whatever the hell we want to control the virus by overreacting to its dangers. And overreacting includes lockdowns. People get really mad at me for saying this, but it’s the reality.

    Neither one of us can prove it, other than we know the R0 of COVID 19 is way higher than the flu.

    The only way we would know is if all of these localities were literally doing nothing while they had a spike that ended up being manageable.

    Prove what? That thousands of emergency beds stood empty last spring? That’s an established fact. That we are overreacting? That’s pretty obvious when you see the deaths from suicide and overdose increase faster than death due to Covid.

    We can prove how deadly the disease is by counting deaths – which are pretty low, except among the elderly and infirm. What we cannot prove is how mild the disease is because those with mild or asymptomatic cases often do not get tested. The fatality rates for this disease represent maximums, not minimums. And no one in public health seems to have an incentive to find exactly how low the fatality rate is because if it is significantly lower than the already low rate we are experiencing then they become unimportant.

    You are acting like no localities bumped up against resources. They did. Each area has to manage this somehow without overdoing it, that’s all I’m saying. It’s not a black-and-white issue. 

    • #25
  26. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    You are acting like no localities bumped up against resources. They did. Each area has to manage this somehow without overdoing it, that’s all I’m saying. It’s not a black-and-white issue. 

    Which localities in the United States? Even New York City had excess capacity. They sent the hospital ship away early. My point is we have demonstrated an ability to surge capacity, and can do it again, even when we have to deal with incompetents like de Blasio and Cuomo. 

    • #26
  27. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Seawriter (View Comment):
    My point is we have demonstrated an ability to surge capacity,

    There is a limit to how many resources you can create under a certain amount of time, particularly with medical labor. That’s all I’m saying. 

     

     

    • #27
  28. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

     

     

     

     

    • #28
  29. EODmom Coolidge
    EODmom
    @EODmom

    On the issue of herd immunity, some may find these articles interesting.

    https://www.aier.org/article/who-deletes-naturally-acquired-immunity-from-its-website/

    https://www.aier.org/article/singapores-covid-experience-and-overestimated-death-rates/

    • #29
  30. Mark Camp Member
    Mark Camp
    @MarkCamp

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    I get that the authorities have to do something to make sure that we don’t run out of medical resources

    That sounds at first like an innocuous principle for granting powers to government if one considers only the present economic data, system of production, and limitations on government power and responsibility: what goods are consumed in what quantity by whom?

    It is a particular expression of a general ideology that is usually referred to by the arbitrary term  “welfarism”.

    • First, let politicians and panels of government experts classify all currently produced goods and services as “essential” (“medical resources”, e.g.) or “non-essential”, and then dictate what quantities of each of those goods should be consumed, and when, and by whom.
    • Then transfer from the private sector to the State a sufficient degree of ownership of the means of production to ensure that the State’s goals for consumption of medical or other essential goods are met.
    • Each year or so, with the new economic data collected by government analysts (what kinds and quantities of goods are being produced and consumed and by whom?) the authorities would update their criteria for “medical” vs. non-medical, and their decisions about who should get how much of which goods and when.
    • The planners would also determine what unexpected steps the private sector producers took to optimize their interests at the expense of the State’s–what codes did doctors enter into their computers while their patients were sitting in the room for an office visit?–and fix those.

    Then they would determine why, with the current level of State ownership of productive enterprises, the wrong production is occurring.  What unanticipated and perverse production and consumption incentives did last year’s orders create.  What increased regulations and incentives need to be imposed (i.e., what new levels of State ownership of all property are needed?)

    Over the decades I’ve given a lot of thought and self-education to the practical consequences of this idea, and concluded that it’s inherently and tragically flawed. Liberty and welfarism can’t long co-exist.

    I’ve never succeeded in convincing anyone of that, and at this stage I have with great sadness accepted that I never will.

    I only mention that this is my considered opinion.

    Why bother?

    Because other teachers were able to teach it to me, and I am relatively slow-witted. So my expressing my skepticism, even though I am completely incompetent as a teacher, could silently lead one person to begin to think critically about these long-term practical problems, and one day a competent teacher, a future Thomas Sowell or a Walter Williams, might bring forth an Aha! moment.

    In my view of the world (I don’t claim to be certain that my view is right) that would mean that the cause of liberty will have been kept alive in one heart and mind for another generation.  That is all the justification any Christian needs, right!?

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.