Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,946
It's amazing to me that so many people are willing to get into an enclosed flying metal tube for even a short flight- let a lone a long flight- without wearing an N95 mask. I guess a lot of people like a high-risk lifestyle. Not me, thank you very much!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Dr. Robert Redfield, the former Centers for Disease Control director, appears to be the latest person to come forward and criticize the COVID-19 vaccines he once praised during the China virus pandemic.
In a recent News Nation interview, Mayfield said major institutions such as the FDA and the CDC have lost credibility with the public after the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Those of us that tried to suggest there may be significant side effects from vaccines, we kind of got cancelled,” he said, “because no one wanted to talk about the potential that there was a problem from the vaccines.”
“But we have to be honest: Some people got significant side effects from the vaccine,” Redfield told show host Chris Cuomo. “I have a number of people that are quite ill, and they never had COVID, but they are ill from the vaccine. And we just have to acknowledge that.”
Athens 2006. Dusseldorf 2007. Berlin 2009. Venice 2010. Amsterdam 1 2012. Amsterdam 1+2 2014. Buenos Aires 2015. Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022 EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
The Biden administration said it has suspended from all federal funding programs the scientist at the heart of the lab leak theory of the origins of the coronavirus, and proposed blocking him from receiving federal funding in the future.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sent a letter to Peter Daszak on Tuesday, less than a week after the agency took similar action against Daszak’s organization, EcoHealth Alliance (EHA).
In the letter, HHS said it was holding Daszak responsible for EcoHealth Alliance’s failure to adequately monitor the activities of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and then subsequently failing to report on the lab’s high-risk virus studies.
Athens 2006. Dusseldorf 2007. Berlin 2009. Venice 2010. Amsterdam 1 2012. Amsterdam 1+2 2014. Buenos Aires 2015. Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022 EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
What to Know About COVID FLiRT Variants
Virologists
are keeping an eye on several COVID variants that have all picked up
the same set of mutations. Here’s what that means.
At the end of March, the KP.2 variant was causing about 4% of infections in the U.S., according to the CDC
,
while its parental strain, JN.1, was causing over 50% of infections at
that time. As of early May, KP.2 makes up about 28% of infections,
overtaking JN.1 as the dominant variant.
KP.2 is one
of several variants being referred to as “FLiRT variants,” named after
the technical names for their mutations. The prevalence of these
variants comes at a critical time, when experts are deciding how to
formulate the fall COVID vaccine.
In this Q&A, Andy Pekosz, PhD, a professor in Molecular Microbiology and Immunology,
explains what virologists like him are seeing, whether these variants
might cause a summer wave of infections, and how people can protect
themselves.
What are these “FLiRT variants”?
This
is the term being used to describe a whole family of different
variants—including KP.2, JN.1.7, and any other variants starting with KP
or JN—that appear to have independently picked up the same set of
mutations. This is called convergent evolution. They are all descendants
of the JN.1 variant that has been dominant in the U.S. for the past several months.
The
particular mutations that people refer to as “FLiRT”s or “FLip”s refer
to specific positions in the spike protein—in this case, positions 456,
346, and 572.
Viruses like SARS-CoV-2 mutate
frequently, and when they mutate to evade recognition by antibodies,
this often weakens their ability to bind to the cells they want to
infect. We then see mutations appear that improve that binding ability.
This is a cycle we have seen many times with SARS-CoV-2. The fact that
these different variants are picking up the same mutations tells
virologists that this combination of mutations is helping the virus
accomplish these goals most efficiently.
How do these mutations help the virus bind to cells while evading antibodies?
Two
of these mutations—456 and 346—eliminate binding sites for antibodies
that neutralize SARS-CoV-2. However, those same antibody binding sites
are also important for the virus to bind to and enter cells. So in
evading antibodies, these FLiRT variants may have also lost some ability
to bind to their receptor. At the same time, the 572 mutation appears
to allow the virus to more tightly bind to cells and ultimately cause an
infection.
Do people who recently had COVID have any protection against infection from FLiRT variants?
A
JN.1 infection should provide pretty strong protection against all the
FLiRT variants. The difference between JN.1 and these variants is only
one or two amino acid changes, so there are still a lot of other places
antibodies can bind to. Infection from a variant older than JN.1 is less
likely to offer as much protection.
Do we know yet how well the current COVID-19 vaccines work against the FLiRT variants?
Against
JN.1, the vaccine designed around XBB.1.5 does generate some
cross-reactive antibodies. Studies have not been yet done with some of
these newer variants, but those are likely to be a little less
cross-reactive. It’s also been several months since many people received
their last dose of the vaccine, and that immunity wanes over time.
for adults 65 and older who received theirs in the fall. There is a
question now of what the guidance will be going into the summer. We’ve
seen fairly low uptake of these additional boosters when they’re
recommended, even in high risk populations, so it’s unclear whether a
third dose of the current vaccine will be recommended. If case numbers
remain relatively low, it may not be necessary.
Should we anticipate these variants to drive a surge in cases this summer?
It’s
certainly possible. The FLiRT variants would be high on my list of
viruses that could cause another wave of infections in the U.S. That
said, our definition of a wave has changed; while we still see case
rates rise and fall throughout the year, we see much lower numbers of
cases of hospitalizations or deaths than we saw in the first couple
years of the pandemic.
And yet, while these waves are
becoming smaller, they are still having the greatest impact on our
susceptible populations: the elderly, people who are immunocompromised
and those with other secondary medical conditions. Everyone can play a
role in protecting those populations that remain the highest-risk when
new variants cause an uptick in cases.
How might these variants impact plans for the COVID vaccine formula that gets updated for the fall?
This
is the time of year when governing bodies like the WHO and FDA
recommend a formulation for updated COVID vaccines that will roll out in
early fall. Last year, the vaccines were based on the XBB.1.5 variant, and only a few months later, the JN.1 variant became the dominant variant in the U.S.
that their COVID vaccine advisory group advises using the JN.1 lineage
as the antigen for the upcoming formulations of the vaccine. All of
these FLiRT variants are within the JN.1 family of variants.
to determine the fall 2024 COVID vaccine from mid-May to early June.
That gives them more time to see which of the FLiRT variants is becoming
the dominant one so they can fine-tune the WHO recommendation to what
they anticipate will be most prominent in the fall.
New COVID variants are likely to crop up after a decision is made—just as it did last summer—but the goal remains to select a formulation that, come fall, will match the circulating variants as closely as possible.
What are the usual symptoms and transmission timeline for FLiRT variants?
When
it comes to symptoms, we’re not seeing anything new or different with
these variants. We continue to see more mild disease, but that’s likely
not because the virus is milder, but because our immunity is so much
stronger now. After years of vaccinations and infections, most of the
population is better able to fight off an infection without as much
concern for severe disease.
The period of
infectiousness for these FLiRT variants remains the same as with JN.1
and previous omicron variants: After exposure, it may take five or more
days before you develop symptoms, though symptoms may appear sooner. You
are contagious one to two days before you experience symptoms and a few
days after symptoms subside. And as with previous variants, some people
may have detectable live virus for up to a week after their symptoms
begin, and some may experience rebound symptoms.
At-home testing remains a really important tool for knowing whether you could potentially infect others.
Are antivirals like Paxlovid effective against FLiRT variants?
Yes, the good news is that Paxlovid is still recommended for high risk individuals.
It still works against variants up to JN.1, and based on the sequencing
of the FLiRT variants, they should still be susceptible to Paxlovid, as
well as to antiviral drugs like molnupiravir and remdesivir. The
companies that produce these drugs are always testing them against new
variants to ensure they continue to be effective.
How can people protect themselves and their loved ones as we head into summer?
As
with any respiratory virus, even when case rates nationally are low,
it’s common to see infections increase in one area of the country but
not another. Keep an eye on case rates in your region or anywhere you
plan to travel, to know whether you should take additional precautions,
like wearing a mask or gathering in well-ventilated areas. Some local
health departments report on virus levels in wastewater, which can
signal an upcoming rise in cases. This is particularly helpful as people
experience more mild illness; those cases may not require
hospitalization, but they’ll still be detected in wastewater data.
It’s
always a good idea to keep a few COVID tests around the house in case
you start to feel sick. Testing—whether at home or in a health care
setting—will make sure you know what you're infected with, which can
inform the best treatment plan if you are in a high risk group or your
symptoms progress to more severe illness.
If you do feel sick, follow the CDC’s simplified guidance for respiratory illnesses. This is especially important if you plan to spend time with friends or family who are at higher risk of severe illness.
Aliza Rosen is a digital content strategist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
That's a gotcha question and you know it. I wouldn't answer specific funeral level questions or protests either, and get dragged into that political debate. If I was him, I would have repeated the guidance.
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
Fauci didn't recommend against the trump rallies either; he did however have the following to say in response to Gym Jordan's fishing expedition:
“I’m not favoring anybody over anybody. I’m just making a statement that is a broad statement, avoid crowds of any type, no matter where you are, because that leads to the acquisition and transmission.”
“I don’t judge one crowd versus another crowd. When you’re in a crowd, particularly if you’re not wearing a mask, that induces the spread"
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
That's a gotcha question and you know it. I wouldn't answer specific funeral level questions or protests either, and get dragged into that political debate. If I was him, I would have repeated the guidance.
I’m just saying that the implementation of Covid rules by the government didn’t seem consistent with any sort of science. That’s why my Aunt gets no funeral and George Floyd gets three. You can be defensive of Fauci and that’s fine. He did repeat the “guidance” in that instance I mentioned, and said it’s not for him to determine if protests should be shut down. But all the shut downs and whatnot start with his initial social distancing recommendations. He was like the blast-off point for the government to enact poor policies. And now, he’s testifying to not even knowing of any scientific studies that supports the mask and social-distancing mandates
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
That's a gotcha question and you know it. I wouldn't answer specific funeral level questions or protests either, and get dragged into that political debate. If I was him, I would have repeated the guidance.
I’m just saying that the implementation of Covid rules by the government didn’t seem consistent with any sort of science. That’s why my Aunt gets no funeral and George Floyd gets three. You can be defensive of Fauci and that’s fine. He did repeat the “guidance” in that instance I mentioned, and said it’s not for him to determine if protests should be shut down. But all the shut downs and whatnot start with his initial social distancing recommendations. He was like the blast-off point for the government to enact poor policies. And now, he’s testifying to not even knowing of any scientific studies that supports the mask and social-distancing mandates
It was up to the administration to determine the final guidance, informed by the NIH and CDC. They are doctors and it's not their job to balance the other considerations. The Trump admin could have reverted to the guidance across most of Europe, which I think was 1 meter. They chose to follow the more conservative guidance.
By contrast, soon after Walensky took over as director of the CDC in 2021, she soon lowered the guidance to 3 feet and a mask in schools, which enabled much of the reopening.
BTW, the National Review is failing to include other parts of that discussion, that this 1955 study on droplets was part of how the CDC got there. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK143281/ While the NRO is better than most right wing reporting, it still has its clear biases. From the WashPo. Notice that the CDC started at 10, and the White House pushed back to 6. They could have pushed back to 3.
It’s still not clear who at the CDC settled on the six-foot distance; the agency has repeatedly declined to specify the authors of the guidance, which resembled its recommendations on how to avoid contracting the flu. A CDC spokesperson credited a team of experts, who drew from research such as a 1955 study on respiratory droplets. In his book, Gottlieb wrote that the Trump White House pushed back on the CDC’s initial recommendation of 10 feet of social distance, saying it would be too difficult to implement.
Oh yeah, Trump’s a big part of the problem too. For all his bravado about being in charge and being against this sort of government overreach, he sure let federal bureaucrats enact polices that he himself would now never take any accountability for. Mandating military members get the vaccine for example.
Hilarious...Raskin just said something like "I bet you (Fauci) wish they were treating you like a convicted felon because they seem to admire convicted felons".
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
I look forward to the next, “AH HA!” moment. Coming soon, 3, 2, 1…..And keep putting your faith in Gym Jordan. It’ll serve you well.
Opinion
Another Committee to Confirm Our Conspiracy Theories comes up short
Republicans could not prove that Anthony Fauci influenced the CIA on the covid lab leak theory.
Old conspiracy theories never die. They just fade into the congressional record.
Last fall, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), chairman of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, made an incendiary public accusation that, “according to information gathered by the select subcommittee,” Anthony Fauci “was escorted into Central Intelligence Agency Headquarters — without a record of entry — and participated in the analysis to ‘influence’ the agency’s review” to say that covid-19 did not originate from a lab leak. “Wenstrup reveals new allegations,” his news release boasted.
Another Republican on the panel, Rep. Richard McCormick (Ga.) declared definitively: “We now know that Fauci had a secret meeting with the CIA.”
Fox News, the New York Post and the rest of the right-wing conspiracy machine ran with it. And then — nothing. The subcommittee came up with no evidence to support the claim, supposedly made by a whistleblower, and nothing to challenge Fauci’s testimony that he hadn’t been to the CIA in 20 years. Appearing before the panel in a public hearing on Monday, Fauci, now retired after decades leading the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, ridiculed the idea that “I was parachuted into the CIA like Jason Bourne and told the CIA that they should really not be talking about a lab leak.”
So what did committee Republicans do after their Fauci-to-CIA conspiracy theory collapsed? They pretended it never happened. The Republican staff director, Mitch Benzine, during his time to question Fauci at the hearing, announced: “That was not an allegation made by the committee.”
Why would anyone have thought otherwise?
This follows a pattern. The Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, after holding several hearings that failed to produce anything other than warmed-over allegations about the so-called deep state, was panned even by right-wing media. The Oversight Committee investigation of Joe Biden’s “corruption” failed so thoroughly to find even a trace of wrongdoing by the president that Republicans have had to quietly shelve their impeachment ambitions.
On the covid panel, Republican House members had promised many a bombshell over the last year and a half.
“Evidence is mounting that American tax dollars helped develop COVID & Dr. Fauci purposely suppressed the lab leak theory to cover it up,” alleged Nicole Malliotakis (N.Y.).
“While many lost their loved ones, their businesses, and livelihoods, Dr. Fauci made millions,” Michael Cloud (Tex.) accused.
Covid “was manufactured in a lab funded by Fauci,” asserted Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.).
Yeah, no.
Documents and testimony the panel gathered over 18 months, while finding misbehavior by a grant recipient and by an adviser to Fauci, produced nothing to substantiate these wild allegations. The United States did not fund research that created the pathogen. Fauci didn’t lie about the U.S. role in “gain of function” research at the laboratory in Wuhan, China. He didn’t try to suppress the lab leak theory, or bribe people to reject it. He didn’t get rich off the pandemic, either — although he testified that he earned about $120 a year from an antibody he developed years ago.
And, so, when Fauci appeared before Congress on Monday, Republicans on the panel hit him with whatever else they could come up with.
Malliotakis scolded him for “cruel, horrific animal research” at NIH on beagles, piglets and rabbits.
"I’m puzzled as to what that has to do with the origins of covid,” Fauci replied.
Greene didn’t care what it had to do with covid. “As a dog lover, I want to tell you this is disgusting and evil,” she said, recommending “prison” for Fauci. She further informed the scientist that she would address him as “Mr. Fauci, because you’re not Doctor.” Democrats objected, and the committee spent several minutes bickering over proper decorum.
The dispute about Fauci’s honorific (he’s an M.D.) was all the more absurd because the chairman, Wenstrup, made a point in his opening statement of stating that “I am a physician” who during covid was "researching with another physician in Ohio to try and understand the pathology.”
Wenstrup did not mention that he is a podiatrist. Was he researching covid’s impact on the metatarsals?
But the constant repetition of the conspiracy theories is anything but amusing for, as Fauci testified, it has caused endless harassment of him and his family, including the arrests of two people “on their way to kill me.” He said he needs full-time security.
Yet Republicans on the panel, rather than focusing on lessons about masks, vaccines, and school and business closures that could save lives in the future, kept returning to the same conspiracy theories that are endangering Fauci’s life in the present. And Fauci kept batting them down.
He informed Debbie Lesko (Ariz.) that “you said about four or five things … that were just not true.”
He advised Jim Jordan (Ohio) to “look at the facts.”
And to Benzine, the staff director, Fauci offered a chuckle and a simple critique: “I know where you’re going, and you’re not going to get there.”
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
And i remember also some videos from synagogues in USA where they're packed like sardines..lol..
Athens 2006. Dusseldorf 2007. Berlin 2009. Venice 2010. Amsterdam 1 2012. Amsterdam 1+2 2014. Buenos Aires 2015. Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022 EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
''The United States did not fund research that created the pathogen. Fauci didn’t lie about the U.S. role in “gain of function” research at the laboratory in Wuhan, China.''.. that's a good one..lol..
Post edited by 23scidoo on
Athens 2006. Dusseldorf 2007. Berlin 2009. Venice 2010. Amsterdam 1 2012. Amsterdam 1+2 2014. Buenos Aires 2015. Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022 EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
And i remember also some videos from synagogues in USA where they're packed like sardines..lol..
I’m not sure what the lol is about. The Hasidic community in nyc was hit really hard by Covid.
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
And i remember also some videos from synagogues in USA where they're packed like sardines..lol..
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
And i remember also some videos from synagogues in USA where they're packed like sardines..lol..
I’m not sure what the lol is about. The Hasidic community in nyc was hit really hard by Covid.
I know what the lol is about... arrogance and apathy.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
And i remember also some videos from synagogues in USA where they're packed like sardines..lol..
I’m not sure what the lol is about. The Hasidic community in nyc was hit really hard by Covid.
I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month.
Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine.
And i remember also some videos from synagogues in USA where they're packed like sardines..lol..
I’m not sure what the lol is about. The Hasidic community in nyc was hit really hard by Covid.
I know what the lol is about... arrogance and apathy.
You know wrong..
Athens 2006. Dusseldorf 2007. Berlin 2009. Venice 2010. Amsterdam 1 2012. Amsterdam 1+2 2014. Buenos Aires 2015. Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022 EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
The Checkup With Dr. Wen: In defense of the 6-foot social distancing rule
Anthony Fauci didn’t deserve the abuse he received about the covid pandemic guideline.
Pandemic-era social distancing guidelines have taken a beating this week. Critics have argued passionately that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommendation to remain six feet apart was arbitrary, wrong and should never have been implemented.
I disagree. The guidance, like other public health recommendations, wasn’t perfect. But it did help to reduce transmission and was an important point of reference at a time when people needed simple, easy-to-follow guidelines.
Anthony S. Fauci, who during the pandemic was the nation’s top infectious-diseases expert, endured the brunt of the criticism during a bruising congressional hearing on Monday. Questions zeroed in on testimony he gave during a closed-door session in January that the six-foot rule “sort of just appeared” and “wasn’t based on data.” At times, the exchange devolved into personal attacks, with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) repeatedly refusing to address Fauci as “Dr. Fauci,” saying his medical license “should be revoked” and that he belongs in prison.
Recall that, at the start of the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 was a novelcoronavirus. Health officials knew little about it and assumed it behaved like other common respiratory viruses. Influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) are among the viruses that are transmitted predominantly via small droplets expelled when someone coughs, sneezes and breathes. These particles can land on someone’s nose, mouth or eyes, or they can be inhaled by those in proximity. They can also land on surfaces and infect people who touch them.
Over time, scientists learned that the covid-19 virus — and especially new variants of the pathogen — was highly contagious. Studies demonstrated that it not only spread via droplets, but also by much smaller aerosol particles. Whereas droplets are heavier and quickly fall to the ground, aerosols can linger and be carried over longer distances.
Public health guidance eventually pivoted toward improving ventilation as an infection control measure, as aerosol experts had long advocated. Today, the science is pretty well settled that covid-19 can be transmitted via both droplets and aerosols.
Critics of the six-foot rule are right in some ways. With aerosol transmission, someone could become infected even if they are further than six feet away. And, as Fauci suggested in his testimony, there have been no randomized-controlled trials looking at six feet of distancing vs., for instance, the World Health Organization’s more lenient recommendation of one meter, which is just over three feet.
But here’s what the six-foot rule got right: Droplet transmission remains one of two dominant routes of spread. A rule that reduces droplet transmission won’t curb all spread, but it can help protect people from the virus.
Moreover, I think Americans understood there wasn’t something magical about the exact distance. Did anyone really believe that being five feet away from others was dangerous while seven feet was safe? Rather, this guidance was based on a common-sense understanding that being in close contact with an infected person is risky.
This understanding is still correct. A large contact-tracing study published last year in Nature found that household contacts accounted for 6 percent of exposures to the covid-19, but 40 percent of transmissions. Most positive cases occurred after at least an hour of exposure, suggesting that prolonged close contact is of highest risk.
Another interesting study examined a cluster of covid cases on a 10-hour commercial flight with 217 passengers and crew. Of the 16 people who ended up testing positive, 12 were seated near the infected person. Seating proximity increased infection risk more than sevenfold.
As readers of the Checkup newsletter know, I often discussed the six-foot rule alongside two other ways to reduce transmission: being outdoors and masking. If the goal is to avoid covid, someone in an indoor crowded area should wear a high-quality mask, but it’s not necessary if they are outdoors or well-spaced from others. The six-foot rule provided a helpful starting point to help people decide what precautions they needed to take.
Don’t get me wrong: I think it’s crucial for lawmakers to discuss whether workplaces and schools needed to impose six-foot separation rules And I would love to have more research on how much mitigation measures such as social distancing and masking reduced transmission. We also need data on their very real harms. Such information is necessary to guide policy decisions moving forward.
But none of this means people were misguided in keeping their distance from potentially infected people. It also does not mean that we should disregard social distancing as a mitigation measure against other contagious diseases. If, for example, the avian flu outbreak progresses to human-to-human transmission, we might need to bring back distancing to reduce droplet exposure.
And it definitely does not mean that Fauci somehow misled the public. Those viewing Monday’s congressional testimony should ignore the partisan noise and focus on the calm responses from the physician-scientist who guided the country through a once-in-a-generation health crisis and continues to serve as the very model of a dedicated public servant.
this is the key point that idiots think is a gotcha, when there obviously has to be an easy defined and understood cutoff:
Moreover, I think Americans understood there wasn’t something magical about the exact distance. Did anyone really believe that being five feet away from others was dangerous while seven feet was safe? Rather, this guidance was based on a common-sense understanding that being in close contact with an infected person is risky.
Comments
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
It's amazing to me that so many people are willing to get into an enclosed flying metal tube for even a short flight- let a lone a long flight- without wearing an N95 mask. I guess a lot of people like a high-risk lifestyle. Not me, thank you very much!
Dr. Robert Redfield, the former Centers for Disease Control director, appears to be the latest person to come forward and criticize the COVID-19 vaccines he once praised during the China virus pandemic.
In a recent News Nation interview, Mayfield said major institutions such as the FDA and the CDC have lost credibility with the public after the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Those of us that tried to suggest there may be significant side effects from vaccines, we kind of got cancelled,” he said, “because no one wanted to talk about the potential that there was a problem from the vaccines.”
“But we have to be honest: Some people got significant side effects from the vaccine,” Redfield told show host Chris Cuomo. “I have a number of people that are quite ill, and they never had COVID, but they are ill from the vaccine. And we just have to acknowledge that.”
Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022
EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
The Biden administration said it has suspended from all federal funding programs the scientist at the heart of the lab leak theory of the origins of the coronavirus, and proposed blocking him from receiving federal funding in the future.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sent a letter to Peter Daszak on Tuesday, less than a week after the agency took similar action against Daszak’s organization, EcoHealth Alliance (EHA).
In the letter, HHS said it was holding Daszak responsible for EcoHealth Alliance’s failure to adequately monitor the activities of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and then subsequently failing to report on the lab’s high-risk virus studies.
Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022
EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
www.headstonesband.com
At the end of March, the KP.2 variant was causing about 4% of infections in the U.S., according to the CDC
, while its parental strain, JN.1, was causing over 50% of infections at that time. As of early May, KP.2 makes up about 28% of infections, overtaking JN.1 as the dominant variant.
KP.2 is one of several variants being referred to as “FLiRT variants,” named after the technical names for their mutations. The prevalence of these variants comes at a critical time, when experts are deciding how to formulate the fall COVID vaccine.
In this Q&A, Andy Pekosz, PhD, a professor in Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, explains what virologists like him are seeing, whether these variants might cause a summer wave of infections, and how people can protect themselves.
What are these “FLiRT variants”?
This is the term being used to describe a whole family of different variants—including KP.2, JN.1.7, and any other variants starting with KP or JN—that appear to have independently picked up the same set of mutations. This is called convergent evolution. They are all descendants of the JN.1 variant that has been dominant in the U.S. for the past several months.
The particular mutations that people refer to as “FLiRT”s or “FLip”s refer to specific positions in the spike protein—in this case, positions 456, 346, and 572.
Viruses like SARS-CoV-2 mutate frequently, and when they mutate to evade recognition by antibodies, this often weakens their ability to bind to the cells they want to infect. We then see mutations appear that improve that binding ability. This is a cycle we have seen many times with SARS-CoV-2. The fact that these different variants are picking up the same mutations tells virologists that this combination of mutations is helping the virus accomplish these goals most efficiently.
How do these mutations help the virus bind to cells while evading antibodies?
Two of these mutations—456 and 346—eliminate binding sites for antibodies that neutralize SARS-CoV-2. However, those same antibody binding sites are also important for the virus to bind to and enter cells. So in evading antibodies, these FLiRT variants may have also lost some ability to bind to their receptor. At the same time, the 572 mutation appears to allow the virus to more tightly bind to cells and ultimately cause an infection.
Do people who recently had COVID have any protection against infection from FLiRT variants?
A JN.1 infection should provide pretty strong protection against all the FLiRT variants. The difference between JN.1 and these variants is only one or two amino acid changes, so there are still a lot of other places antibodies can bind to. Infection from a variant older than JN.1 is less likely to offer as much protection.
Do we know yet how well the current COVID-19 vaccines work against the FLiRT variants?
Against JN.1, the vaccine designed around XBB.1.5 does generate some cross-reactive antibodies. Studies have not been yet done with some of these newer variants, but those are likely to be a little less cross-reactive. It’s also been several months since many people received their last dose of the vaccine, and that immunity wanes over time.
Back in February, the CDC recommended an additional dose of the current COVID vaccine
for adults 65 and older who received theirs in the fall. There is a question now of what the guidance will be going into the summer. We’ve seen fairly low uptake of these additional boosters when they’re recommended, even in high risk populations, so it’s unclear whether a third dose of the current vaccine will be recommended. If case numbers remain relatively low, it may not be necessary.
Should we anticipate these variants to drive a surge in cases this summer?
It’s certainly possible. The FLiRT variants would be high on my list of viruses that could cause another wave of infections in the U.S. That said, our definition of a wave has changed; while we still see case rates rise and fall throughout the year, we see much lower numbers of cases of hospitalizations or deaths than we saw in the first couple years of the pandemic.
And yet, while these waves are becoming smaller, they are still having the greatest impact on our susceptible populations: the elderly, people who are immunocompromised and those with other secondary medical conditions. Everyone can play a role in protecting those populations that remain the highest-risk when new variants cause an uptick in cases.
How might these variants impact plans for the COVID vaccine formula that gets updated for the fall?
This is the time of year when governing bodies like the WHO and FDA recommend a formulation for updated COVID vaccines that will roll out in early fall. Last year, the vaccines were based on the XBB.1.5 variant, and only a few months later, the JN.1 variant became the dominant variant in the U.S.
At the end of April, the WHO announced
that their COVID vaccine advisory group advises using the JN.1 lineage as the antigen for the upcoming formulations of the vaccine. All of these FLiRT variants are within the JN.1 family of variants.
Here in the U.S., the FDA has postponed its meeting
to determine the fall 2024 COVID vaccine from mid-May to early June. That gives them more time to see which of the FLiRT variants is becoming the dominant one so they can fine-tune the WHO recommendation to what they anticipate will be most prominent in the fall.
New COVID variants are likely to crop up after a decision is made—just as it did last summer—but the goal remains to select a formulation that, come fall, will match the circulating variants as closely as possible.
What are the usual symptoms and transmission timeline for FLiRT variants?
When it comes to symptoms, we’re not seeing anything new or different with these variants. We continue to see more mild disease, but that’s likely not because the virus is milder, but because our immunity is so much stronger now. After years of vaccinations and infections, most of the population is better able to fight off an infection without as much concern for severe disease.
The period of infectiousness for these FLiRT variants remains the same as with JN.1 and previous omicron variants: After exposure, it may take five or more days before you develop symptoms, though symptoms may appear sooner. You are contagious one to two days before you experience symptoms and a few days after symptoms subside. And as with previous variants, some people may have detectable live virus for up to a week after their symptoms begin, and some may experience rebound symptoms.
At-home testing remains a really important tool for knowing whether you could potentially infect others.
Are antivirals like Paxlovid effective against FLiRT variants?
Yes, the good news is that Paxlovid is still recommended for high risk individuals. It still works against variants up to JN.1, and based on the sequencing of the FLiRT variants, they should still be susceptible to Paxlovid, as well as to antiviral drugs like molnupiravir and remdesivir. The companies that produce these drugs are always testing them against new variants to ensure they continue to be effective.
How can people protect themselves and their loved ones as we head into summer?
As with any respiratory virus, even when case rates nationally are low, it’s common to see infections increase in one area of the country but not another. Keep an eye on case rates in your region or anywhere you plan to travel, to know whether you should take additional precautions, like wearing a mask or gathering in well-ventilated areas. Some local health departments report on virus levels in wastewater, which can signal an upcoming rise in cases. This is particularly helpful as people experience more mild illness; those cases may not require hospitalization, but they’ll still be detected in wastewater data.
It’s always a good idea to keep a few COVID tests around the house in case you start to feel sick. Testing—whether at home or in a health care setting—will make sure you know what you're infected with, which can inform the best treatment plan if you are in a high risk group or your symptoms progress to more severe illness.
If you do feel sick, follow the CDC’s simplified guidance for respiratory illnesses. This is especially important if you plan to spend time with friends or family who are at higher risk of severe illness.
Aliza Rosen is a digital content strategist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
Related:
Related Content
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
615 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205
Footer social
Footer menu primary
Footer menu secondary
Johns Hopkins University
Footer menu extra
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-investigates-nih-conspiracy-to-evade-foia-avoid-public-transparency/
Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022
EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022
EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
“I’m not favoring anybody over anybody. I’m just making a statement that is a broad statement, avoid crowds of any type, no matter where you are, because that leads to the acquisition and transmission.”
“I don’t judge one crowd versus another crowd. When you’re in a crowd, particularly if you’re not wearing a mask, that induces the spread"
https://www.fox5ny.com/news/i-dont-judge-one-crowd-vs-another-fauci-clashes-with-gop-lawmaker-over-protests-during-coronavirus
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/fauci-it-sort-of-just-appeared-that-six-feet-is-going-to-be-the-distance/
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
By contrast, soon after Walensky took over as director of the CDC in 2021, she soon lowered the guidance to 3 feet and a mask in schools, which enabled much of the reopening.
BTW, the National Review is failing to include other parts of that discussion, that this 1955 study on droplets was part of how the CDC got there. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK143281/ While the NRO is better than most right wing reporting, it still has its clear biases. From the WashPo. Notice that the CDC started at 10, and the White House pushed back to 6. They could have pushed back to 3.
It’s still not clear who at the CDC settled on the six-foot distance; the agency has repeatedly declined to specify the authors of the guidance, which resembled its recommendations on how to avoid contracting the flu. A CDC spokesperson credited a team of experts, who drew from research such as a 1955 study on respiratory droplets. In his book, Gottlieb wrote that the Trump White House pushed back on the CDC’s initial recommendation of 10 feet of social distance, saying it would be too difficult to implement.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Opinion
Republicans could not prove that Anthony Fauci influenced the CIA on the covid lab leak theory.
Old conspiracy theories never die. They just fade into the congressional record.
Last fall, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), chairman of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, made an incendiary public accusation that, “according to information gathered by the select subcommittee,” Anthony Fauci “was escorted into Central Intelligence Agency Headquarters — without a record of entry — and participated in the analysis to ‘influence’ the agency’s review” to say that covid-19 did not originate from a lab leak. “Wenstrup reveals new allegations,” his news release boasted.
Another Republican on the panel, Rep. Richard McCormick (Ga.) declared definitively: “We now know that Fauci had a secret meeting with the CIA.”
Fox News, the New York Post and the rest of the right-wing conspiracy machine ran with it. And then — nothing. The subcommittee came up with no evidence to support the claim, supposedly made by a whistleblower, and nothing to challenge Fauci’s testimony that he hadn’t been to the CIA in 20 years. Appearing before the panel in a public hearing on Monday, Fauci, now retired after decades leading the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, ridiculed the idea that “I was parachuted into the CIA like Jason Bourne and told the CIA that they should really not be talking about a lab leak.”
So what did committee Republicans do after their Fauci-to-CIA conspiracy theory collapsed? They pretended it never happened. The Republican staff director, Mitch Benzine, during his time to question Fauci at the hearing, announced: “That was not an allegation made by the committee.”
Why would anyone have thought otherwise?
This follows a pattern. The Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, after holding several hearings that failed to produce anything other than warmed-over allegations about the so-called deep state, was panned even by right-wing media. The Oversight Committee investigation of Joe Biden’s “corruption” failed so thoroughly to find even a trace of wrongdoing by the president that Republicans have had to quietly shelve their impeachment ambitions.
On the covid panel, Republican House members had promised many a bombshell over the last year and a half.
“Evidence is mounting that American tax dollars helped develop COVID & Dr. Fauci purposely suppressed the lab leak theory to cover it up,” alleged Nicole Malliotakis (N.Y.).
“While many lost their loved ones, their businesses, and livelihoods, Dr. Fauci made millions,” Michael Cloud (Tex.) accused.
Covid “was manufactured in a lab funded by Fauci,” asserted Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.).
Yeah, no.
Documents and testimony the panel gathered over 18 months, while finding misbehavior by a grant recipient and by an adviser to Fauci, produced nothing to substantiate these wild allegations. The United States did not fund research that created the pathogen. Fauci didn’t lie about the U.S. role in “gain of function” research at the laboratory in Wuhan, China. He didn’t try to suppress the lab leak theory, or bribe people to reject it. He didn’t get rich off the pandemic, either — although he testified that he earned about $120 a year from an antibody he developed years ago.
And, so, when Fauci appeared before Congress on Monday, Republicans on the panel hit him with whatever else they could come up with.
Malliotakis scolded him for “cruel, horrific animal research” at NIH on beagles, piglets and rabbits.
"I’m puzzled as to what that has to do with the origins of covid,” Fauci replied.
Greene didn’t care what it had to do with covid. “As a dog lover, I want to tell you this is disgusting and evil,” she said, recommending “prison” for Fauci. She further informed the scientist that she would address him as “Mr. Fauci, because you’re not Doctor.” Democrats objected, and the committee spent several minutes bickering over proper decorum.
The dispute about Fauci’s honorific (he’s an M.D.) was all the more absurd because the chairman, Wenstrup, made a point in his opening statement of stating that “I am a physician” who during covid was "researching with another physician in Ohio to try and understand the pathology.”
Wenstrup did not mention that he is a podiatrist. Was he researching covid’s impact on the metatarsals?
But the constant repetition of the conspiracy theories is anything but amusing for, as Fauci testified, it has caused endless harassment of him and his family, including the arrests of two people “on their way to kill me.” He said he needs full-time security.
Yet Republicans on the panel, rather than focusing on lessons about masks, vaccines, and school and business closures that could save lives in the future, kept returning to the same conspiracy theories that are endangering Fauci’s life in the present. And Fauci kept batting them down.
He informed Debbie Lesko (Ariz.) that “you said about four or five things … that were just not true.”
He advised Jim Jordan (Ohio) to “look at the facts.”
And to Benzine, the staff director, Fauci offered a chuckle and a simple critique: “I know where you’re going, and you’re not going to get there.”
They never do.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/06/03/fauci-testimony-congress-covid-conspiracy/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022
EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
that's a good one..lol..
Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022
EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022
EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
Prague Krakow Berlin 2018. Berlin 2022
EV, Taormina 1+2 2017.
I wish i was the souvenir you kept your house key on..
Opinion
Anthony Fauci didn’t deserve the abuse he received about the covid pandemic guideline.
Pandemic-era social distancing guidelines have taken a beating this week. Critics have argued passionately that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommendation to remain six feet apart was arbitrary, wrong and should never have been implemented.
I disagree. The guidance, like other public health recommendations, wasn’t perfect. But it did help to reduce transmission and was an important point of reference at a time when people needed simple, easy-to-follow guidelines.
Anthony S. Fauci, who during the pandemic was the nation’s top infectious-diseases expert, endured the brunt of the criticism during a bruising congressional hearing on Monday. Questions zeroed in on testimony he gave during a closed-door session in January that the six-foot rule “sort of just appeared” and “wasn’t based on data.” At times, the exchange devolved into personal attacks, with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) repeatedly refusing to address Fauci as “Dr. Fauci,” saying his medical license “should be revoked” and that he belongs in prison.
Recall that, at the start of the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 was a novelcoronavirus. Health officials knew little about it and assumed it behaved like other common respiratory viruses. Influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) are among the viruses that are transmitted predominantly via small droplets expelled when someone coughs, sneezes and breathes. These particles can land on someone’s nose, mouth or eyes, or they can be inhaled by those in proximity. They can also land on surfaces and infect people who touch them.
Over time, scientists learned that the covid-19 virus — and especially new variants of the pathogen — was highly contagious. Studies demonstrated that it not only spread via droplets, but also by much smaller aerosol particles. Whereas droplets are heavier and quickly fall to the ground, aerosols can linger and be carried over longer distances.
Public health guidance eventually pivoted toward improving ventilation as an infection control measure, as aerosol experts had long advocated. Today, the science is pretty well settled that covid-19 can be transmitted via both droplets and aerosols.
Critics of the six-foot rule are right in some ways. With aerosol transmission, someone could become infected even if they are further than six feet away. And, as Fauci suggested in his testimony, there have been no randomized-controlled trials looking at six feet of distancing vs., for instance, the World Health Organization’s more lenient recommendation of one meter, which is just over three feet.
But here’s what the six-foot rule got right: Droplet transmission remains one of two dominant routes of spread. A rule that reduces droplet transmission won’t curb all spread, but it can help protect people from the virus.
Moreover, I think Americans understood there wasn’t something magical about the exact distance. Did anyone really believe that being five feet away from others was dangerous while seven feet was safe? Rather, this guidance was based on a common-sense understanding that being in close contact with an infected person is risky.
This understanding is still correct. A large contact-tracing study published last year in Nature found that household contacts accounted for 6 percent of exposures to the covid-19, but 40 percent of transmissions. Most positive cases occurred after at least an hour of exposure, suggesting that prolonged close contact is of highest risk.
Another interesting study examined a cluster of covid cases on a 10-hour commercial flight with 217 passengers and crew. Of the 16 people who ended up testing positive, 12 were seated near the infected person. Seating proximity increased infection risk more than sevenfold.
As readers of the Checkup newsletter know, I often discussed the six-foot rule alongside two other ways to reduce transmission: being outdoors and masking. If the goal is to avoid covid, someone in an indoor crowded area should wear a high-quality mask, but it’s not necessary if they are outdoors or well-spaced from others. The six-foot rule provided a helpful starting point to help people decide what precautions they needed to take.
Don’t get me wrong: I think it’s crucial for lawmakers to discuss whether workplaces and schools needed to impose six-foot separation rules And I would love to have more research on how much mitigation measures such as social distancing and masking reduced transmission. We also need data on their very real harms. Such information is necessary to guide policy decisions moving forward.
But none of this means people were misguided in keeping their distance from potentially infected people. It also does not mean that we should disregard social distancing as a mitigation measure against other contagious diseases. If, for example, the avian flu outbreak progresses to human-to-human transmission, we might need to bring back distancing to reduce droplet exposure.
And it definitely does not mean that Fauci somehow misled the public. Those viewing Monday’s congressional testimony should ignore the partisan noise and focus on the calm responses from the physician-scientist who guided the country through a once-in-a-generation health crisis and continues to serve as the very model of a dedicated public servant.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/06/06/fauci-social-distancing-6-feet-covid-pandemic/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Moreover, I think Americans understood there wasn’t something magical about the exact distance. Did anyone really believe that being five feet away from others was dangerous while seven feet was safe? Rather, this guidance was based on a common-sense understanding that being in close contact with an infected person is risky.
www.headstonesband.com