Follow the science....

[Bkk Brian]

59 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Thanks!

In the additional info on the link ACEP also states:

... < Some corrections on statements made by the 2 doctors > followed by:

This is not to say that individuals should not have their own opinions, or that their opinions will not turn out to be true. Emergency physicians should speak those opinions in controversies such as this. However, in doing so, we must be careful not to overstate our qualifications, particularly when we are in domains outside of medicine.

Would be interesting to know whether the video was taken down because of their medical opinions (part-1) or because of their thinly veiled political opinions (part-2) or because of both.

 

I think the issue is that these were just opinions, yes they may turn out to be true but they were based on flawed data as evidenced in the statement by the medical societies.

 

They indeed have some valid points but they left themselves wide open to criticism by manipulating the stats they referenced. It was right in my opinion to expose this otherwise it would be allowing other people to then follow and use stats that are not trustworthy.

[steelepulse]

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

It may have been taken down from Youtube because of this which gives a very different view on those doctors:

 

ACEP-AAEM Joint Statement on Physician Misinformation

Joint Statement issued on April 27, 2020:

These reckless and untested musings do not speak for medical societies and are inconsistent with current science and epidemiology regarding COVID-19. As owners of local urgent care clinics, it appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the public’s health.
 

 

 

Hmmmmm,

 

Reckless and untested musings with raw first hand data.  Not sure how it is inconsistent either as more and more studies show most people show no symptoms and a lot more people have had covid 19 then previously thought,  Meanwhile data shows that up to 90% of the people that are dying have one or more comorbidities.    

[cornishcarlos]

54 minutes ago, chessman said:

Lots of reports about this from other countries too.

 

I was surprised to hear from my sister (recently retired A&E doctor), that her colleagues were reporting exactly the same. In the U.K...

Empty hospital, over staffed and people bringing them free food, because they are under the impression that they are overwhelmed !!!

Edited May 1, 2020 by cornishcarlos

[chessman]

4 minutes ago, steelepulse said:

Reckless and untested musings with raw first hand data. 

If a clinic allows walk-ins to get tested for a virus and then uses the percentage that are positive to extrapolate the percentage who are positive in the whole state, and then advocate policy positions based on this figure, this seems pretty reckless. What kind of person would visit a clinic and want to get tested?

[chessman]

3 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

I was surprised to hear from my sister (recently retired A&E doctor), that her colleagues were reporting exactly the same. In the U.K...

Empty hospital, over staffed and people bringing them free food, because they are under the impression that they are overwhelmed !!!

Edited 1 minute ago by cornishcarlos

Yes,  people working in A&E seem to be less busy

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/27/fears-seriously-ill-a-and-e-numbers-drop-coronavirus-nhs

 

am sure there is a divide with some doctors and nurses working much more and those not involved with Covid being much less busy.

[BeltAndRoad]

8 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Clueless they are not.

How would they be able to dictate the narrative to the mainstream media, if they were clueless.

Masters, they are masters

Master of Puppets

[BeltAndRoad]

16 hours ago, Throatwobbler said:

I wish that those who keep going on about it is not too bad were given their own island to play on. Of course they will get no expert medical attention as they have shown on here that they know more than all the doctors so they can heal themselves. Then we can let Darwin run it's course and thin the herd. One good thing would be that the average IQ of TVF users would be raised.

What's a Darwin?  Will you be an example of an average IQ TVF user?

[chessman]

54 minutes ago, BeltAndRoad said:

Master of Puppets

Or maybe they are just as blind and ignorant as the rest of us.

[BeltAndRoad]

6 minutes ago, chessman said:

Or maybe they are just as blind and ignorant as the rest of us.

"We are Kings or Pawns" a man once said.

[CG1 Blue]

7 hours ago, Logosone said:

And if the evidence is so clear in favour of masks then why did the UK's top committee of scientists, SAGE, as reported by the UK deputy chief medical adviser, report that the evidence is weak and shows masks make little difference?

 

Why would they hold this view if "masks are shown to work as well as claimed"?

 

Please explain this.

 

 

Some believe the government are reluctant to recommend the wearing of masks for fear that panic buying of masks could result in a shortage. 

 

I'm on the fence with this one. I can't help thinking that even if wearing a face covering only has a small impact on the spread of Covid 19, it's better than nothing. I mean, at the very least a face covering would capture some of the droplets being expelled by asymptomatic carriers - no?  

 

Isn't it a bit like refusing to wear a seat belt in a car because a seat belt won't protect you against a head on collision with a lorry? 

[Logosone]

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

Some believe the government are reluctant to recommend the wearing of masks for fear that panic buying of masks could result in a shortage. 

 

I'm on the fence with this one. I can't help thinking that even if wearing a face covering only has a small impact on the spread of Covid 19, it's better than nothing. I mean, at the very least a face covering would capture some of the droplets being expelled by asymptomatic carriers - no?  

 

Isn't it a bit like refusing to wear a seat belt in a car because a seat belt won't protect you against a head on collision with a lorry? 

No, it's nothing like that. AT ALL. 

 

Plenty of studies show that wearing a seat belt is the difference between life and death in many situations.

 

The evidence on face masks is contradictory, weak and indicates there is little effect, if any.

 

In the absence of hard evidence wearing a face mask is like wearing an amulet. Belief over knowledge.

[jimmybcool]

5 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No, it's nothing like that. AT ALL. 

 

Plenty of studies show that wearing a seat belt is the difference between life and death in many situations.

 

The evidence on face masks is contradictory, weak and indicates there is little effect, if any.

 

In the absence of hard evidence wearing a face mask is like wearing an amulet. Belief over knowledge.

I find it hard to believe that masks don't protect others around you somewhat if you carry a virus.  If it stops or reduces how far your sneeze or cough travels how can it not?  SO maybe mask wearing of the infected is a benefit.

 

Is it a magic amulet that keeps you safe walking through others with the virus unmasked and sneezing in your face?  No of course not.  Whatever.  I have not worn one in public here in the USA yet.  I have some but feel stupid putting it on as I keep my distance and spend very little time in public.  And I don't think it makes me safer.  My opinion may change.

[CG1 Blue]

7 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No, it's nothing like that. AT ALL. 

 

Plenty of studies show that wearing a seat belt is the difference between life and death in many situations.

 

The evidence on face masks is contradictory, weak and indicates there is little effect, if any.

 

In the absence of hard evidence wearing a face mask is like wearing an amulet. Belief over knowledge.

As I understand it the virus is transmitted via droplets expelled from a carrier. If I am a carrier and I cough in a supermarket while wearing a mask, less droplets will make it onto the floor, shelves etc., therefore less virus transmission. No? 

 

I agree the scientific data doesn't currently support this. 

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

As I understand it the virus is transmitted via droplets expelled from a carrier. If I am a carrier and I cough in a supermarket while wearing a mask, less droplets will make it onto the floor, shelves etc., therefore less virus transmission. No? 

 

I agree the scientific data doesn't currently support this. 

I agree, it makes sense to me.

Which scientific data doesn't support this ?

[CG1 Blue]

13 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I agree, it makes sense to me.

Which scientific data doesn't support this ?

For example, SAGE who advise the UK government say evidence is weak that masks provide any material benefits wrt Covid 19. 

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

For example, SAGE who advise the UK government say evidence is weak that masks provide any material benefits wrt Covid 19. 

Ok then, what does SAGE suggests ? Stay at home ?

With all these experts contradicting themselves all the time, while in the same time ruling our lives, it's really hard not to think that there's something fishy going on.

[debbiedebbie]

 

Now, this:

 

"This video has been removed for violating YouTube's Terms of Service."

 

I appreciate any new links.

[vermin on arrival]

56 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No, it's nothing like that. AT ALL. 

 

Plenty of studies show that wearing a seat belt is the difference between life and death in many situations.

 

The evidence on face masks is contradictory, weak and indicates there is little effect, if any.

 

In the absence of hard evidence wearing a face mask is like wearing an amulet. Belief over knowledge.

 Meanwhile all the Asian countries with much more controlled epidemics recommend them highly. Granted they are doing other things, but I believe there is great benefit when all are wearing them. Sneezes and coughs are more contained. Fewer droplets get out and the ones which do are smaller resulting in less viral load. The countries with huge epidemics say they are useless.

True, the evidence I have seen from some scientific studies of flu epidemics doesn't support this, but I have read elsewhere that it does much mitigation in the spread. These weren't in scientific studies.

[lkv]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

With all these experts contradicting themselves all the time, while in the same time ruling our lives, it's really hard not to think that there's something fishy going on.

I would not necessarily look at it like that.

 

It's a new virus, so many things are still unclear or redefined. Immunity lenghth, R0, death rates, spread in the population and so on.

 

The models are very dynamic and get adjusted every day, so what an expert might tell you today is based on current available data.

 

In time obviously, the models do become better and better.

 

If it becomes like flu and with a low RO, maybe masks are no longer necessary, for example.

Edited May 1, 2020 by lkv

[Monomial]

41 minutes ago, lkv said:

I would not necessarily look at it like that.

 

It's a new virus, so many things are still unclear or redefined. Immunity lenghth, R0, death rates, spread in the population and so on.

 

The models are very dynamic and get adjusted every day, so what an expert might tell you today is based on current available data.

 

In time obviously, the models do become better and better.

 

If it becomes like flu and with a low RO, maybe masks are no longer necessary, for example.

 

But that isn't "science". It is merely expert opinion, and doesn't deserve to be taken as gospel. Calling it science is disingenuous.

Richard Feynman, one of the most brilliant physicists who ever lived, did a fantastic Caltech commencement speech on "cargo cult science."  It is something every student at Caltech reads at some point. You should read it too.

The WHO has done many things during the course of this epidemic. None of their recommendation on response to the virus have risen to the level of genuine science. There are so many anomalies in the data coming from different areas that any model they may have advanced would have been falsified under any reasonable definition of science.

The only honorable thing they could have said under the flag of "science" was to say "We really have no idea. Let's begin a public discussion on shared global values and see if we can come to a common consensus on how to proceed in the absense of science." They didn't do that. Instead, a few influential people said "We are experts, and therefore our value system is more credible than yours." Then they proceeded to influence global policy. This is something, but it certainly is NOT science.

Experts are just people. They may have more knowledge in a specific area, but that doesn't mean we should automatically bow to them. And it doesn't mean they get to use the term "science" to justify something that is merely their personal value choice. It is disingenuous and an affront to what real science is.

This is why you now have crazies saying ridiculous things like "Don't vaccinate your children." How can they tell the difference between what is science and what isn't? Expert opinion is NOT science. When you poison the entire discipline of science is for personal values and agendas, you destroy that thing we all desperately need.

The WHO really needs to be held accountable for what they have done during this pandemic. It is a disgrace and if I could bring them to trial for crimes against humanity, I would.

Edited May 1, 2020 by Monomial

[yuyiinthesky]

2 hours ago, vermin on arrival said:

Meanwhile all the Asian countries with much more controlled epidemics recommend them highly. Granted they are doing other things, but I believe there is great benefit when all are wearing them. Sneezes and coughs are more contained. Fewer droplets get out and the ones which do are smaller resulting in less viral load. The countries with huge epidemics say they are useless.

True, the evidence I have seen from some scientific studies of flu epidemics doesn't support this, but I have read elsewhere that it does much mitigation in the spread. These weren't in scientific studies.

 

May be the possible benefit of masks should be looked at separately for infected and non-infected people.

• If you are infected, especially if with symptoms such as coughing, wearing a mask is certainly good and important to protect others.
• If you are not infected it will have no effect to protect others, obviously.
• If you are not infected it might or might not give you some protection from getting infected from others.
• If you were a dirty mask, touch it, wear it for a longer time, it looses any possible protection effect, it might even make an infection easier.

So if you're sick and infected, it would be a really good idea to wear a mask.

[lkv]

16 minutes ago, Monomial said:

The WHO really needs to be held accountable for what they have done during this pandemic. It is a disgrace

Why? Because they did not include in their model as a variable, that China was lying about the numbers and witholding information?

Edited May 1, 2020 by lkv

[Monomial]

15 minutes ago, lkv said:

Why? Because they did not include in their model as a variable, that China was lying about the numbers and witholding information?

Because they elevated their personal values above those of everyone else on the planet, and influenced global policy by disingenuously calling it "science".

 

Edited May 1, 2020 by Monomial

[tlock]

34 minutes ago, Monomial said:

<snip>

Instead, a few influential people said "We are experts, and therefore our value system is more credible than yours." Then they proceeded to influence global policy. This is something, but it certainly is NOT science.

Experts are just people. They may have more knowledge in a specific area, but that doesn't mean we should automatically bow to them. And it doesn't mean they get to use the term "science" to justify something that is merely their personal value choice. It is disingenuous and an affront to what real science is.

</snip>

 

I also think that governments have decided that epidemiologist's are the only experts whose opinion matters.

 

Certainly, minimizing human-to-human contact will help to minimize the spread of a virus spread by human-to-human contact.  A 4th grader could tell you that.  If the only goal is to minimize the spread of covid-19 then yes, that will certainly minimize the spread.

 

But leaders should be listening to more than just epidemiologists when formulating their policies.  Certainly economists should also have input.  Mental health experts.  Law enforcement, etc.  The epidemiologists are not taking the effects of the policy recommendations on overall human health (i.e. the effects of large scale unemployment) over the next decade into account.  That's not their job.  They are simply saying "if we want to minimize the spread of this virus everyone should minimize social contact".  They have tunnel vision, because limiting the total number of covid cases is the single metric they will measure their own success or failure on.  

 

It seems pretty obvious to me, I've worked with middle managers with similar tunnel vision.  They've proposed policies that would certainly fulfill their objectives that would be disastrous to the company overall.  It's the job of leaders (presidents, CEOs, governors) to balance the input of experts across different disciplines when formulating policy, not to just let a middle manager dictate the roadmap for the entire company (or country).

Edited May 1, 2020 by tlock

[Peter Denis]

9 hours ago, debbiedebbie said:

Now, this:

"This video has been removed for violating YouTube's Terms of Service."

I appreciate any new links.

Yes, it has been removed by YouTube.

When you google > dr. Erickson covid-19 briefing

you will get several links to sites where it is still available.

E.g. > https://www.bitchute.com/video/pSZekTwJeIWX/

which features the FULL video (both the originally posted part-1, as well as part-2).

[thaibeachlovers]

23 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

Imo other countries could learn a lot of the Swedish approach, and over time it will become clear whether they were correct from the start. 

Given this is all unknown, as never before in history were entire populations locked down, it will be interesting once it has passed to see which countries took the correct path.

I'm with Sweden, but who knows at present?

[cornishcarlos]

7 hours ago, lkv said:

so what an expert might tell you today is based on current available data.

 

Or who is paying them... 

Same as whoever pays for a poll, can dictate the poll results !!

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, Monomial said:

But that isn't "science". It is merely expert opinion, and doesn't deserve to be taken as gospel. Calling it science is disingenuous.

I'd go further and say it's just "opinion".

 

IMO, what should have happened right at the start was to form a coalition government ( a world pandemic is no time for politics as normal ) and create a working group with experts of any and all disciplines relevant to the situation.

It might come up with the same solutions, but it would take the politics out of it.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Ok then, what does SAGE suggests ? Stay at home ?

With all these experts contradicting themselves all the time, while in the same time ruling our lives, it's really hard not to think that there's something fishy going on.

?????????? If one stays at home a mask is not necessary anyway.

 

I doubt anything fishy is going on. The people in charge just don't know as much as they tell us they do, IMO. IMO they are making it up as they go.

However, they are certainly not letting a crisis go to waste.

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, jimmybcool said:

I find it hard to believe that masks don't protect others around you somewhat if you carry a virus.  If it stops or reduces how far your sneeze or cough travels how can it not?  SO maybe mask wearing of the infected is a benefit.

 

Is it a magic amulet that keeps you safe walking through others with the virus unmasked and sneezing in your face?  No of course not.  Whatever.  I have not worn one in public here in the USA yet.  I have some but feel stupid putting it on as I keep my distance and spend very little time in public.  And I don't think it makes me safer.  My opinion may change.

I keep having to say it but NO ONE should be out in public if they are sneezing or coughing, and if they do the cops should be arresting them. Obviously I'm talking about serious cases, not a clearing the throat cough or hayfever sneezes.

I believe that in some cases the cops have arrested them.