Coronavirus 2019-nCov: Political Thread

[abdullah_sharif]

for those of you who trust the government...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ed-mask-orders

[abdullah_sharif]

And just to say something positive: I want more than anything to walk into my favorite joint tonight, crack jokes and flirt with the waitresses, talking **** with my buddies... I believe that day will come with so many vaccines under way. It won't be here tomorrow, but maybe it will be here around Thanksgiving or Christmas? I'm not a huge drinker, but I tell you what, I will get pissed on that night. It will be a great day to be an American.

Let's just hold our sanity together for a few more months, share helpful information freely, keep an open mind, and stop the spread.


T


...

oh that'll be the day! has anyone seen this... should this pass, we'll have half of our vacation paid for on uncle same

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimwang.../#1dfce019f2b0

i'm not for this bill as it would add additional debt, but it would be a way to assist the leisure sector and to provide tax monies to cities, counties, and cities..

[revenge_of_shocka_khan]

I shouldn't speak for Wufan, and allow him to state his own opinions. However, I will take a stab at it and then he can shoot me down if he needs to.
I think that Wufan's point is that Scientists having political viewpoints is natural. And just like anyone, their political opinions will sometimes cloud their scientific opinions.

However the next statement here that he wrote is a problem.
"So much chaff out there, and all for activist bias, and now the journals are getting involved."

Scientific journals should only state facts from the data they have, and they shouldn't print bad studies based on bad data and bad scientific method.

Scientific journals don't publish bad data or studies. They are peer-reviewed prior to publishing and the last thing, a researcher would want to have happen to them would be getting discredited at a future date. That could ruin you as a researcher. As someone who leverages my 'good name' and my credentials to get a paycheck, I realize how important that would be. Why ruin something you spent your whole life building over something stupid. It's called reputational risk.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bockris

"Bockris performed a series of cold fusion experiments in the wake of the announcement in 1989 by Pons and Fleischmann that their electrolysis of heavy water had produced results consistent with nuclear fusion.^[9] Many groups attempted similar experiments: Bockris' research group was one of few to provide results that supported those of Pons and Fleischmann, reporting decisive evidence of tritium production.^[10] Their results were greeted with widespread skepticism. Gary Taubes wrote an editorial in Science suggesting that their cells might have been spiked with tritiated water.^[11] An academic tribunal at Texas A&M eventually ruled out fraud, declaring that intentionally spiked experiments gave different results.^[12] Bockris, seemingly inured to criticism,^[1] published his side of the controversy in a stubborn defense of academic freedom.^[13]

Though his professional reputation declined after this episode, the International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Reactions has continued to hold Bockris in high esteem, awarding him its Preparata Medal in 2012.^[14]"

So he was cleared, but his professional reputation was injured. That means the ability to attract grants, write scholarly papers and so forth. Clear-cut case of the reputational risks involved in research fraud.

What do you think would have happened to him if the finding was that he deliberately faked results?

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

I don't get this argument at all. Have the scientists been wrong? Sure. That's literally part of the scientific method. Form a hypothesis, test, then adjust based on those results. Normally this can be done in a controlled environment. Yet they were thrust into making very public choices before being able to validate their conclusions. They used the data they had available and made the best suggestions based on that. That data was based on other previous "similar" viruses. My sister is a hospital based doctor that has had to deal with this. Her words were that this virus is so unpredictable. They don't know when someone comes in with it whether that person will be able to be sent home in a day or will be put on a ventilator by then. The data in the past wasn't helpful but they are starting to get enough real data to make better suggestions of how to control this.

So I don't get how you can "not trust" scientists because their suggestions change as their data changes. That doesn't make them wrong, that's what makes them right. They are evolving their potential solutions as the data matures.

Even worse people say to ignore scientists but then follow their favorite politician. You want to talk about bias??? Politicians careers are based on making it seem like they are right, whether they are or not. They won't change their stance but instead will fight anybody that disagrees with them and try to discredit them. That's literally what their careers are based on. So we should trust people who have a HUGE vested interest in making things seem better or worse than they actually are over the people whose careers are dedicated to finding solutions to things like pandemics ?? That's just idiotic. Has this been politicized? Absolutely. Both the right and the left have turned this into a political nightmare. Not the scientists that are trying to fight this.

So, just so I understand. Scientists are wrong and allowed to be wrong, that is part of their job. Trump is not allowed to be wrong. He's a bad man.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

I'll just put this here for all of those who blindly follow the news media and believe what they say:

https://www.insidesources.com/nbc-ne...ue-correction/

A frightening NBC News report that a medical contributor caught COVID-19 through his eyes while simply sitting on an airplane has been debunked by multiple tests results. Unfortunately, the network has yet to correct the story.

In May, NBC medical contributor Joseph Fair, a self-styled “virus hunter,” told the Today Show about his experience with the virus. “If it can take me down, it can take down anybody,” he said.

According to Fair, he caught the virus on a commercial flight out of New Orleans. “I had a mask on, I had gloves on, I did my normal wipes routine… but obviously, you can still get it through your eyes,” Fair told the Today Show from his hospital bed. “And, of course, I wasn’t wearing goggles on the flight.”

A month later, Fair repeated his tale to NBC’s Chuck Todd on Meet The Press, calling the illness “the worst I’ve ever felt. I probably spent 23 out of 24 hours in bed.”

“I don’t have any of those underlying conditions, I’m 42 years old. So you wouldn’t think, clinically, that I would be one of those people that would get so very ill,” Fair said, adding: “Those people that are young and think they’re invincible or people that just don’t think it’s going to affect them that greatly even if they do get it. I can say that my own experience was the complete opposite.”

What Fair, Todd and NBC News didn’t tell the audience is that before he made this claim, Fair had already tested negative for COVID-19 at least five times. Fair followed that up with an antibody test to detect if he’d ever had the virus. The results were negative.

[wufan]

If it supports my position and propaganda = good
If not, bad.

Kind of like your position on masks, right?

Both the right and the left produce propaganda to support their points.

Wrong. Why would you dismiss what I’m saying? I’m a scientist. I have 60+ scientists that work for me.

My current job is to critically evaluate scientific papers And implement policies based on that science. I used to write scientific papers that were critically evaluated. I’m totally fine with masks. Show me a scientific paper that evaluates their effectiveness for Covid. I read em all and there isn’t anything out there that points to its effectiveness for cloth; which is what is being recommended.

[wufan]

Scientific journals don't publish bad data or studies. They are peer-reviewed prior to publishing and the last thing, a researcher would want to have happen to them would be getting discredited at a future date. That could ruin you as a researcher. As someone who leverages my 'good name' and my credentials to get a paycheck, I realize how important that would be. Why ruin something you spent your whole life building over something stupid. It's called reputational risk.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bockris

"Bockris performed a series of cold fusion experiments in the wake of the announcement in 1989 by Pons and Fleischmann that their electrolysis of heavy water had produced results consistent with nuclear fusion.^[9] Many groups attempted similar experiments: Bockris' research group was one of few to provide results that supported those of Pons and Fleischmann, reporting decisive evidence of tritium production.^[10] Their results were greeted with widespread skepticism. Gary Taubes wrote an editorial in Science suggesting that their cells might have been spiked with tritiated water.^[11] An academic tribunal at Texas A&M eventually ruled out fraud, declaring that intentionally spiked experiments gave different results.^[12] Bockris, seemingly inured to criticism,^[1] published his side of the controversy in a stubborn defense of academic freedom.^[13]

Though his professional reputation declined after this episode, the International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Reactions has continued to hold Bockris in high esteem, awarding him its Preparata Medal in 2012.^[14]"

So he was cleared, but his professional reputation was injured. That means the ability to attract grants, write scholarly papers and so forth. Clear-cut case of the reputational risks involved in research fraud.

What do you think would have happened to him if the finding was that he deliberately faked results?

https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/04/lancet-retracts-major-covid-19-paper-that-raised-safety-concerns-about-malaria-drugs/

[wufan]

Here’s a great journal article that suggests that a female listening to glaciers crack is important.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0309132515623368

[wufan]

These guys published articles taken from Hitlers writings and even won an award for their work on canine homosexuality in dog parks.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/572212/

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

This could be fun.

Here is a someone who was given hundreds of thousands of dollars to study cow farts:

https://nypost.com/2018/05/15/califo...udy-cow-farts/

[wufan]

This could be fun.

Here is a someone who was given hundreds of thousands of dollars to study cow farts:

https://nypost.com/2018/05/15/califo...udy-cow-farts/

Most of the articles published in most of the journals are good. Several journals and organizations that gatekeep knowledge have adopted specific anti-logic ideology.

[revenge_of_shocka_khan]

These guys published articles taken from Hitlers writings and even won an award for their work on canine homosexuality in dog parks.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...rticle/572212/

So I looked at the title, would seem like she's frigid, what do the rest of you think?


Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research

[WstateU]

How often are y'all changing your facial diapers? Just asking for a friend... have to admit, my "facial diaper" hasn't been changed.

[revenge_of_shocka_khan]

How often are y'all changing your facial diapers? Just asking for a friend... have to admit, my "facial diaper" hasn't been changed.

Now that's funny!

I go out no more than 3 times per week, most of the time two.

Having said that, I also use KN95 masks (that I order on Ebay).

In my usage situation, I get 3-4 weeks out of a mask, when I can see it is getting dirty, I get rid of it (dirty=discoloration of the white material - dirt smudges and the like).

I would imagine if you are wearing your mask all day, you would probably need to change about once a week, IF you are using something similar to a KN95.

I am going to have to run several errands on Saturday (pick-up at the seafood market), trip to the hardware store to get a sheet of plexiglass and a trip to the UPS store (I need something printed for the closing on my house), so tomorrow will be a bit of an oddity for me.

Good news, though, hospitalizations are slowing down some, not only here, but also in Houston. Close the bars and make everybody wear a mask and you can beat this stuff back!

[wufan]

I wear my mask ~10 hours per day. I change it everyday.