Examples of Democratic Party leadership

CANON_Grow

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I got the opposite of the bolded from the excerpt. I admit ignorance regarding the bit before: about how hospitals get their PPE. Can you expand?

One thing I do remember is that one domestic maskmaker asked Washington if they should get on making more masks. However the lead time was four or five months, and Washington placed no order. No order, no committing to making the masks.
Click to expand...
Using the Defence Production Act could have forced not only the manufacture of masks, but also have the authority to order critical materials and they get priority over any other orders. The hospitals purchase PPE through brokers, not something a regular public citizen has access to (for the most part), and the FBI did step in make sure of that.
"Normally, Baystate Health vetted new suppliers and conducted cost-effectiveness analyses in a process that could take weeks. But now it had to decide within a few hours, lest another hospital or a government agency claim the N95s first."
www.nytimes.com

Inside the Chaotic, Cutthroat Gray Market for N95 Masks (Published 2020)

As the country heads into a dangerous new phase of the pandemic, the government’s management of the P.P.E. crisis has left the private sector still straining to meet anticipated demand.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-04-07/hospitals-washington-seize-coronavirus-supplies

There was a shortage of PPE, but it wouldn't have been made worse with the recommendation that everyone wear a mask or face covering as soon as they knew it was helpful to prevent more sickness.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
CANON_Grow said:
Totally agree. In no way am I saying he is similar to the other quacks, just that facts are facts, and he messed up on that one.
Click to expand...
I was never under the impression that authorities were telling us that cloth masks protected the user. I hear otherwise. The cloth face coverings were meant to keep our own spray contained. I also read advice to NOT purchase the good stuff because our health care providers needed them for their protection while caring for the sick.
 
Last edited:
CANON_Grow

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I was never under the impression that authorities were telling us that cloth masks protected the user. I hear otherwise. The masks were meant to keep our own spray contained. I also read advice to NOT purchase the good stuff because our health care providers needed them for their protection while caring for the sick.
Click to expand...
I didn't want to have to debate the deniers on the effectiveness of masks or face coverings, protect the user or the people around you, hence "to prevent more sickness".
CANON_Grow said:
but it wouldn't have been made worse with the recommendation that everyone wear a mask or face covering as soon as they knew it was helpful to prevent more sickness.
Click to expand...
To the bold, that was certainly stated. Both the articles I posted discuss the supply chain and issues that came up. The problem with them stating masks were not helpful when they knew that was not true is that it destroys any credibility for future advice. This wasn't 'they got the science wrong', it was actual disinformation. The next pandemic and all the people taking whatever is the next horse de-wormer can point to that lie and say they are just lying again, the elites protecting the elite; and now we all have to live knowing they may actually be doing that.

Sorry folks, didn't mean to sidetrack the thread. This is supposed to be about "Examples of Democratic Party leadership", which Anthony Fauci is certainly not part of.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
CANON_Grow said:
I didn't want to have to debate the deniers on the effectiveness of masks or face coverings, protect the user or the people around you, hence "to prevent more sickness".


To the bold, that was certainly stated. Both the articles I posted discuss the supply chain and issues that came up. The problem with them stating masks were not helpful when they knew that was not true is that it destroys any credibility for future advice. This wasn't 'they got the science wrong', it was actual disinformation. The next pandemic and all the people taking whatever is the next horse de-wormer can point to that lie and say they are just lying again, the elites protecting the elite; and now we all have to live knowing they may actually be doing that.

Sorry folks, didn't mean to sidetrack the thread. This is supposed to be about "Examples of Democratic Party leadership", which Anthony Fauci is certainly not part of.
Click to expand...
In the article from The Hill you posted --dated June 16 2020 so it was not contaminated with later findings about how well an N95 masks in fact protects its wearer. At the time, they knew it was best practice and does protect its wearer but as Fauci said, “Masks are not 100 percent protective. However, they certainly are better than not wearing a mask. Both to prevent you, if you happen to be a person who maybe feels well, but has an asymptomatic infection that you don’t even know about, to prevent you from infecting someone else,'

In an earlier paragraph, they distinguish "medical masks" from "face coverings" and later use "mask" in context with medical uses, so he's saying medical masks -- N95 or KN95 masks -- are not 100% effective, which is true to this day. His statement was vague because it was the state of our knowledge at the time.

So, I don't see what your beef is. Fauci DID NOT say "masks", meaning medical masks are ineffective. He did not mislead anybody into believing they were. He said "not 100% effective". If he had said anything else, he would have been misleading. He did not mislead when he said that. Because it's true. N95 masks are not 100% effective. They are very effective but not 100%

He said that to protect the people who were on the front line of the epidemic working to save the lives of people who were sick from chronic COVID, masks "were initially not recommended to the general public so that first responders wouldn’t feel the strain of a shortage of PPE. "

Sorry CANON, but I think you are wrong about this. The articles you posted did not cite Fauci or anybody in HHS or CDC saying what you claim in the words I put in bold in your post.
 
CANON_Grow

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
In the article from The Hill you posted --dated June 16 2020 so it was not contaminated with later findings about how well an N95 masks in fact protects its wearer. At the time, they knew it was best practice and does protect its wearer but as Fauci said, “Masks are not 100 percent protective. However, they certainly are better than not wearing a mask. Both to prevent you, if you happen to be a person who maybe feels well, but has an asymptomatic infection that you don’t even know about, to prevent you from infecting someone else,'

In an earlier paragraph, they distinguish "medical masks" from "face coverings" and later use "mask" in context with medical uses, so he's saying medical masks -- N95 or KN95 masks -- are not 100% effective, which is true to this day. His statement was vague because it was the state of our knowledge at the time.

So, I don't see what your beef is. Fauci DID NOT say "masks", meaning medical masks are ineffective. He did not mislead anybody into believing they were. He said "not 100% effective". If he had said anything else, he would have been misleading. He did not mislead when he said that. Because it's true. N95 masks are not 100% effective. They are very effective but not 100%

He said that to protect the people who were on the front line of the epidemic working to save the lives of people who were sick from chronic COVID, masks "were initially not recommended to the general public so that first responders wouldn’t feel the strain of a shortage of PPE. "

Sorry CANON, but I think you are wrong about this. The articles you posted did not cite Fauci or anybody in HHS or CDC saying what you claim in the words I put in bold in your post.
Click to expand...
Here is his testimony from March 3rd, 2020, when asked directly if everyone should be wearing masks.
www.c-span.org

User Clip: Fauci asked about masks

Fauci asked about masks
www.c-span.org www.c-span.org

So you are correct that I was wrong, he didn't state they were not helpful. He stated that the general public shouldn't be wearing masks because it (covid) wasn't widespread in the community.

He has also stated what you quoted:
“The word that we got was that we were struggling to make sure we get personal protective equipment, including masks, for the health care workers, so the initial recommendation was: Don’t put masks on, because we’re going to be taking them away from health care workers,” says Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. “That understandably got interpreted as, we didn’t think masks were of any benefit.”
www.wired.com

How Masks Went From Don’t-Wear to Must-Have

Public health messaging and science have to work hard to stay in sync during a crisis. During the Covid-19 pandemic, they haven’t always succeeded.
www.wired.com www.wired.com


That's the same issue though. He certainly stated not to wear a mask, but his testimony was originally that it was not needed due to lack of community transmission when in reality they thought they were trying to save PPE for hospitals. IMHO that's misleading. The broken trust and not having ulterior motives is the issue, or my beef with what happened.
 
Offmymeds

Offmymeds

Well-Known Member
CANON_Grow said:
Here is his testimony from March 3rd, 2020, when asked directly if everyone should be wearing masks.
www.c-span.org

User Clip: Fauci asked about masks

Fauci asked about masks
www.c-span.org www.c-span.org

So you are correct that I was wrong, he didn't state they were not helpful. He stated that the general public shouldn't be wearing masks because it (covid) wasn't widespread in the community.

He has also stated what you quoted:
“The word that we got was that we were struggling to make sure we get personal protective equipment, including masks, for the health care workers, so the initial recommendation was: Don’t put masks on, because we’re going to be taking them away from health care workers,” says Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. “That understandably got interpreted as, we didn’t think masks were of any benefit.”
www.wired.com

How Masks Went From Don’t-Wear to Must-Have

Public health messaging and science have to work hard to stay in sync during a crisis. During the Covid-19 pandemic, they haven’t always succeeded.
www.wired.com www.wired.com


That's the same issue though. He certainly stated not to wear a mask, but his testimony was originally that it was not needed due to lack of community transmission when in reality they thought they were trying to save PPE for hospitals. IMHO that's misleading. The broken trust and not having ulterior motives is the issue, or my beef with what happened.
Click to expand...
I understand why Fauci did what he did. I had a client that bought a container of latex gloves when the AIDS scare had people scrambling to protect themselves. I've seen the vultures buying up all of the available generators to resell when hurricanes threaten. Capitalism sucks during crises.
 
Roger A. Shrubber

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Offmymeds said:
I understand why Fauci did what he did. I had a client that bought a container of latex gloves when the AIDS scare had people scrambling to protect themselves. I've seen the vultures buying up all of the available generators to resell when hurricanes threaten. Capitalism sucks during crises.
Click to expand...
"Capitalism", or it's truer name, profiteering, should be a crime during a crisis, with severe consequences...SEVERE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top