I’d known of her, but only to the extent that she effectively ex-communicated herself from the scientific community by questioning the narrative. I’m not entirely interested enough to read more about her dealings as it’s going to be rife with political motivation, whether for or against - and all that stuff annoys the hell out of me. I appreciate the share of information, it’s just not something that’s worth taking up my ever-shrinking brain space =)
1 Like
Totally understand that. FWIW, the link I shared is PROBABLY as far as you can get from being politically biased… it’s from science.org, after all. But I get it. I think it’s useful for context though.
The TLDR that I would draw from it is: 1. This most recent interview doesn’t conflict with anything she said 2 years ago, when she was saying that the vaccine would reduce the severity of covid symptoms, but not reduce transmission. 2. I don’t think the issue was ‘questioning the narrative’. I think there’s a lot more to it than that. Her specialization, dating back decades, was in HIV, and she probably looked at the Covid epidemic through that lens too much, and it led to some problematic decisions. Her colleagues in the epidemiology world didn’t disagree with her because of politics, they just thought she was getting it wrong.
1 Like
I know this is your analysis of events, but does this not accurately describe Fauci as well?
Same exact thing could be said about Fauci, but if you questioned him - you “questioned science”, and he had the political and public support to say such ridiculous things.
It is a rough dichotomy that is well overdue to be over. FWIW, LA County is under a mask mandate still; the kool-aid they handed out in Cali was strong.
AIDS Coordinator
He also admitted he had PTSD about AIDS epidemic, which we could all understand why this would affect policy judgment.
yes, to an extent.
I think the way she compared HIV to COVID was different from Fauci, but yes, their backgrounds both center around that.
I mean, I honestly don’t know why this is turning into a discussion about Fauci. I was just talking about Birx, and I felt like it was appropriate to give context to your article. The article you shared had about 5 sentences devoted to Birx stuff, and then 6 or 7 paragraphs about his own feels. It was really cursory, and I felt like a deeper dive on Birx was important, to understand that she was not, in fact, back tracking, or re-writing history. It actually leads to some integrity of her opinion, in that regard.
So all that being said, I DID really hate the ‘if you disagree with Fauci, you hate science’ narrative that was out in the public. I hated that the ‘left’ position was very much an authoritarian one. But that’s sort of a different issue. I don’t like the idea of ‘you have to listen to THIS PERSON because they’re a scientist’. I mostly trust the scientific COMMUNITY, because at the end of the day, that’s how science is supposed to work, right? A bunch of scientists try to replicate one dude’s findings, and if they can, awesome, the science is good, and if they can’t, also good, weed out that data.
1 Like
I guess I wasn’t sure what your angle was in information regarding Birx and I didn’t entirely understand that you didn’t have an ‘angle’ until now lol. I wasn’t intending to make it about Fauci either, was just using it as comparison - perhaps to no benefit of the conversation =)
Yeah, not a particular fan of the overall article, but it seemed relevant. As someone who works in LA County, where Covid is the new religion, it just never seems to go away - I’m frustrated with it so maybe the article didn’t add value to this thread either.
It has been interesting to watch the evolution of the people who were ‘mask nazis’ during Covid though. They went from trying to police those who refused masks, into people who stopped wearing masks themselves (when restrictions ended), then they turned into people who started realizing they were assholes during covid because mask mandates came back. It was nice to watch honestly… we went from >80% population compliance with mask mandates to <30% population compliance. I think it’s forced some people to look back on their own actions, hopefuly to everyone’s benefit.
But I also thought the ‘rules for thee but not for me’ recall of Gavin Newsom would result in a new governor, and the CA populace surprised/disappointed me then too.
Sorry for the derail; I’m ready to move 
2 Likes
Ha! Yea I know it’s unusual to not have an ‘angle’, but in this case, I was working under the assumption that Birx was less of a public figure than Fauci, and most people probably don’t know a lot about her function in the previous administration. It really wasn’t meant to be an attack on the Trump administration or anything like that, just informative. I felt like the link you shared didn’t explain her role appropriately for people unfamiliar with her.
If I remember correctly, this was also a Birx thing, right? Her public recommendation was ‘no gatherings over 10 people at Thanksgiving’, and then she hosted a zillion people at Thanksgiving. I think. I didn’t bother to look this one up, so if I’m wrong, correct me.
I think the last part, at the end of the day, is the most important part, because I feel very strongly about evolving opinions. It IS nice to watch, when people have X information, then then they get Y and Z, and their opinion goes from A to B. Incorporating new information to evolve one’s opinion is essential. As we learned more and more about COVID, and really as the virus itself evolved, I adjusted my opinions and behaviors. I also adjusted these things after realizing that the vaccine really doesn’t prevent spread of the virus, lol. I’ve had COVID twice now, since I was vaccinated. I didn’t get it before the vaccines were available.
1 Like
This is a fair assessment.
I think so but language specificity during Covid was a serious problem, which can nuance these situations greatly. If she advised and recommended people to stay home, no harm no foul. If her guidance was for people to stay home, it’s a little iffy. If she mandated that people stay home (not her role, but for the sake of argument) and still went out, then she deserves the guillotine.
And this is why I enjoy these conversations with you. No one wants to change their opinions, but to actively weigh new information and balance it against your opinion is kind of the backbone of democracy.
1 Like
The article points to most preventative care in 2020-2022 being delayed due to COVID, causing all illness diagnosis and treatment to be delayed, causing the rise in excess mortality.
So, as the saying goes “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”. Imagine if we had done nothing to prevent the spread of COVID, especially as we still have no cure…
We don’t have to imagine.
Let’s establish the fact that it is a shitty disease and it affected many people - not going to argue about that one.
Overall death rates in countries that implemented strict measures vs those that did not are not statistically different when other factors such as comorbidities were standardized.
Mortality Analyses - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center (jhu.edu)
Sweden didn’t impose strict lockdowns and had a smaller death rate (1.1 US to .9% Sweden) and a lower per 100k death rate (235 to 341 roughly). This shows that it is likely other factors than lockdowns/other preventative measures or lack thereof of is not the highest contributing factor to the death toll.
All this means is that nobody actually has a clue what the right action is during outbreaks like this.
However, lockdowns did significantly increase the rates of child abuse, suicide, other mental health conditions, and obesity…
FWIW, Sweden culturally enforced the standard societal norms that were govt enforced in the rest of the western world. Very different culture to the US where people do things to spite the greater good because of “muh freedumbs”. Additionally, Sweden doesn’t have a massive diabetes/obesity epidemic making their population much more susceptible to complications from COVID.
The next time a pandemic happens we for sure need to better address the collateral effects of a lockdown, and also the postponement of preventative medical care. Those were significant problems that we did not account for.
The co-morbidities had a much higher effect on negative outcomes than anything else. Look at the list of countries with the highest death rates and compare them to the obesity lists, they almost line up.
To prevent another pandemic, overall health needs to be promoted, incentivized and implemented across the broader population.
The part that still gets overlooked, IMO, is the first few months of an outbreak. The time where we know a virus/disease is spreading rapidly, and that it has serious symptoms, but we don’t have a good grasp of how serious it is acutely, how exactly it spreads, who is most at risk, how it will evolve, and what the long term effects of the sickness are.
Underestimate the danger, and hundreds of millions could die. Overestimate and more people will be harmed by the preventative measures than by the disease itself. Either way, the scientists, politicians, and medical professionals charged with making the calls will be crucified.
It was all bullshit. People should have been given a choice when it came to risk mitigation.
1 Like
Is that said with 20/20 hindsight about COVID, or do you feel that way about any and all infectious diseases you can be forcibly quarantined for currently (TB, plague, ebola, smallpox, etc)?
Curious to what you all will do the next time this happens…i.e. forced masks, forced shutdowns, forced vaccination
I felt that way when the pandemic started. I believed Covid was real and it might be dangerous for some, but I was not worried about it. I didn’t think masks would be effective and social distancing made no sense when people were indoors, like the supermarket.
How many people got Covid, I did, even after following all of those guidelines? The only way to avoid exposure would be to completely isolate yourself from the rest of humanity.
1 Like
Depends on the disease. Say it’s a similar alarm level as March 2020.
I’d wear a properly fitting n95 mask (uncomfortable AF if it fits well) anytime I was going to be around a crowd, or in a likely exposure situation. I’d minimize my trips and time spent in likely exposure situations like grocery stores, etc. I’d work from home, or from the office but with my door closed. Avoid crowds, and hangout doing outdoor stuff with only a couple friends at a time. Luckily, a lot of services became “COVID safe” during the pandemic and so there is rarely a need for human interaction if you want to avoid it nowadays.
I’d adjust my behavior as more information was learned about the disease, and as information about the status of the healthcare system became available. I’d take the vaccine as soon as possible (I spent years paying to put mystery shit in my body for fun and still sometimes do, it’d be hypocritical to only now decide I don’t trust something when it is finally intended to protect me and loved ones from serious illness).
So, honestly, not a ton of change. I wouldn’t wipe down food, or wear cloth masks, or do some of the other things proven to make zero difference… But things that that were easy to do, and provided a little benefit id still do if the situation called for it(like proper masks).
It’s just so hard to say what I’d do next time, because next time will be a wildly different set of variables and unknowns.
Huh? You understand there’s a difference between mass quarantining and quarantining a person carrying XYZ, right?
Next time? This time ain’t over yet. I’m still wearing my masks, alone in my car. I’m still getting three jabs a month. I’m still avoiding contact with humans.
2 Likes
Play it by ear and base my decisions on whats best for myself and family, taking into consideration the opinions of any physicians I may currently be a patient of.
Just like last time.
I kept my kid home for 1¾ years? He has passed every grade with high honors. Most recently 5th. We made sure he did well with studying.
Especially in times of difficulty or crisis, men have to be men and lead their families. I fell out with a lot of reactive bitchy complainers because when push came to shove, they proved that they’re reactive blameshifting bitches instead of saying “We’re a unit, we’re going this way, this how- and fuck anybody else and what they think.”.
Balls. Real ones that don’t retract at the sign of danger or apologize for being what they are.