• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Mask is gone: COVID-19 Concerns Shouldn't Shut Down Police Brutality Protests: Health Experts

Feb 25, 2013
7,643
6,645
1,135
I feel the need to post this again...


"
Scientists and Politics
A large majority of the public (76%) and nearly all scientists (97%) say that it is appropriate for scientists to become actively involved in political debates on controversial issues such as stem cell research and nuclear power.

Among the public, substantial majorities of Democrats (80%), independents (76%) and Republicans (75%) say it is appropriate for scientists to take an active political role on such issues. While older Americans (those older than 50) and less educated people are somewhat more likely to see scientists’ political involvement as inappropriate, majorities in all major demographic and political groups find this appropriate.

Most Americans do not see scientists as a group as particularly liberal or conservative. Nearly two-thirds of Americans (64%) say they think of scientists as “neither in particular”; 20% see them as politically liberal and 9% say they are politically conservative.

In contrast, most scientists (56%) perceive the scientific community as politically liberal; just 2% think scientists are politically conservative. About four-in-ten scientists (42%) concur with the majority public view that scientists, as a group, are neither in particular.

The scientists’ belief that the scientific community is politically liberal is largely accurate. Slightly more than half of scientists (52%) describe their own political views as liberal, including 14% who describe themselves as very liberal. Among the general public, 20% describe themselves as liberal, with just 5% calling themselves very liberal.

Most scientists identify as Democrats (55%), while 32% identify as independents and just 6% say they are Republicans. When the leanings of independents are considered, fully 81% identify as Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, compared with 12% who either identify as Republicans or lean toward the GOP. Among the public, there are far fewer self-described Democrats (35%) and far more Republicans (23%). Overall, 52% of the public identifies as Democratic or leans Democratic, while 35% identifies as Republican or leans Republican.

Majorities of scientists working in academia (60%), for non-profits (55%) and in government (52%) call themselves Democrats, as do nearly half of those working in private industry (47%).


Gaps in Political Values
The gap between the scientists’ political views and the public’s is seen across a broad spectrum of topics and issues. A far smaller share of scientists (40%) than the public (57%) agrees with the statement “when something is run by the government, it is usually inefficient and wasteful.”

Scientists also are less likely than the public to say that business strikes a fair balance between profits and the public interest: Just 20% of scientists express this view, compared with 37% of the public. And while 78% of scientists say that the government has a responsibility to care for those unable to care for themselves, a smaller majority of the general public (63%) agrees.

Just 14% of scientists agree that “we have gone too far in pushing equal rights in this country.” That compares with 41% of the public. Just a third of scientists – but a majority of the public (53%) – agrees that “the best way to ensure peace is through military strength.” (For more on the public’s political values and belief, see “Independents Take Center Stage in Obama Era,” May 21, 2009.)


"
 

Danny Dudekisser

I paid good money for this Dynex!
Oct 13, 2008
21,009
8,421
1,480
I don't think there's anything wrong with scientists weighing in on the ethics of scientific issues.

Police brutality isn't a scientific issue, and framing it within the context of COVID doesn't make it one.
 
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
Well, the way I see it...

If it is safe for people to protest then all businesses should be open and there should be no excuse for working from home.

If people can protest then they can go back to work. No need for extended unemployment benefits or another stimulus check.

Likewise, if it's "safe" for people to protest then there really isn't any need for mail-in ballots or remote voting in November either.
 

Plague Doctor

Member
Mar 23, 2015
2,722
3,313
705
I have to say the way the media is trying to juke between Covid unnecessary fearmongering and support of the Riots has be funny as fuck.

Taking this at face value, what the protest is about determines if the health risk is high or low.

That's where we are at.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

Torrent of Pork

Gold Member
Aug 29, 2018
4,011
8,316
600
35
Bartow, Florida, USA
This just keeps getting funnier and funnier

In two weeks we will know if this whole Covid thing was a sham or not. Funny to see all the serious warnings just get tossed out the window. I mean Whitmer was forcing people to stay home and mocking protesters and now she’s on the streets surrounded by people.
80% of symptomatic cases show symptoms within 3-5 days, it's been more than a week. The Wu-Flu should be decimating these people by now.

Where's the spike? (that is a rhetorical question, not one aimed at you)
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
44,466
87,814
1,355
Well, the way I see it...

If it is safe for people to protest then all businesses should be open and there should be no excuse for working from home.

If people can protest then they can go back to work. No need for extended unemployment benefits or another stimulus check.

Likewise, if it's "safe" for people to protest then there really isn't any need for mail-in ballots or remote voting in November either.

Well that’s just logical common sense in the face of their unethical hypocrisy.

Now you cut that out, right now!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whataborman

eot

Member
Apr 13, 2012
12,642
4,452
800


Absolutely mindblowing
Whaaaaatttt the fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck
 

HeresJohnny

Member
Mar 14, 2018
9,720
22,451
750
Trust the scientists, they said. Well what should we do when the scientists are fucking retards? How can they conflate the reasons for people gathering and not social distancing and catching a disease? This is the dumbest shit ever lol.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
44,793
17,107
1,770
Best Coast
It'll be interesting to see how the narrative evolves in a couple of weeks if we see a spike in COVID cases. And even if we don't.
 

cryptoadam

Banned
Feb 21, 2018
24,156
51,425
1,215
The Lancet published a study because Orange Man Bad.

They also gave prestige to a total fraud database that may have been used for god knows what else, potentially a vaccine that could of killed everyone who took it.

But ya no one cares because Orange Man Bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeresJohnny

prag16

Member
Jul 12, 2012
12,033
4,155
860
The Lancet published a study because Orange Man Bad.

They also gave prestige to a total fraud database that may have been used for god knows what else, potentially a vaccine that could of killed everyone who took it.

But ya no one cares because Orange Man Bad.
This is one of the biggest retractions in the history of peer reviewed journal articles. (Not getting a ton of coverage in most quarters though, wonder why.)

Reading through all the circumstances of what happened here, the obvious question is of course "how the fuck did this get through peer review and published in the first place?"

The only possible answer is, as you say: "Orange Man Bad"

Hundreds or even thousands of unnecessary deaths may have taken place as a result; we'll never know for sure. But whatever it takes, acceptable losses. Because "Orange Man Bad".
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

cryptoadam

Banned
Feb 21, 2018
24,156
51,425
1,215
This is one of the biggest retractions in the history of peer reviewed journal articles. (Not getting a ton of coverage in most quarters though, wonder why.)

Reading through all the circumstances of what happened here, the obvious question is of course "how the fuck did this get through peer review and published in the first place?"

The only possible answer is, as you say: "Orange Man Bad"

Hundreds or even thousands of unnecessary deaths may have taken place as a result; we'll never know for sure. But whatever it takes, acceptable losses. Because "Orange Man Bad".

The problem is New England Journal used that database for another study and pulled the paper. It wasn't on HCQ it was on I think Cardiac drugs and ACE2 inhibiters.

What needs to happen is someone needs to investigate that company and the Senpa or whatever his name is guy. How the hell did someone look at what they said they had and believed it.

Like you said this should be the scandal of the century but its totally buried. Right along when the riots came along.

🤔
 

Meicyn

Member
Jan 22, 2010
2,131
517
1,080
Yep, Glenn is on the money about Dr. Fauci. The danger is still here. I’m glad he didn’t pander to the politics of the moment and stuck to the data.

I am genuinely fearful about the inevitable uptick in COVID cases as a consequence of the protests. Folks have a right to assemble, and I support the desire to see change occur for the better, but a price will be paid in lives. COVID is still a threat.
 

prag16

Member
Jul 12, 2012
12,033
4,155
860
Yep, Glenn is on the money about Dr. Fauci. The danger is still here. I’m glad he didn’t pander to the politics of the moment and stuck to the data.

I am genuinely fearful about the inevitable uptick in COVID cases as a consequence of the protests. Folks have a right to assemble, and I support the desire to see change occur for the better, but a price will be paid in lives. COVID is still a threat.
Or, the danger was never as bad as they claimed. It's been over a week since the protests started en masse. We shouldn't have to wait much longer to see the fallout (or lack thereof).
 
Aug 21, 2018
864
520
410
Or, the danger was never as bad as they claimed. It's been over a week since the protests started en masse. We shouldn't have to wait much longer to see the fallout (or lack thereof).
Tel;l it to Sweden ands those whoi die in old folk home
 
Jan 11, 2019
13,633
49,529
1,320
Tokyo, Japan
Are these actual doctors or people who’ve done a degree in public health? I’ve noticed that a lot of the critical race theory wackadoos started off with a bachelor of public health as a stepping stone to a PhD in what they really wanted to do. Like this retard who I saw screeching about white privilege on The Project last week:

 
Last edited:

Tell_men

Member
Apr 13, 2020
446
709
375
Here’s the CNN article on this:


This reads as they can get anyone to say anything to support their causes when they want it. Why did this not come out during the lockdown protests weeks earlier? I agree with the others in here, science has been weaponized for politics. Therefore, it can’t be trusted.

We’re back to where the left was encouraging people to eat out when they should have been shutting down. They are just as complicit as the right in covid case increases and deaths. I am watching my local county new and accumulated covid cases. We are on a second spike.



NEOGAF, you saw what happened in Italy and New York. You’ve heard about kids whose immune systems go into a toxic shock syndrome because they are running rampant trying to fight the virus. THESE ARE TRUTHS. This is going to get worse. THIS IS NOT A LIE. Hunker down.

It will kill old and healthy alike. It will kill protesters from the lockdown protests, the police brutality protests, and many others that wouldn’t have gotten it if it wasn’t for these protests. Your politicians and media don’t care if covid gets you, either side.

Damn it, we were less than a month away from fully having this under control. Do not under estimate how infectious and deadly this is. China is still is not reporting how many actually died. The Italy and New York bloodbath is the best indicator of what’s coming.

MiyazakiHatesKojima MiyazakiHatesKojima I am not a bullshitter. Trust me. Sound the alarms.
 

iconmaster

Banned
Jul 18, 2013
7,492
14,151
1,060

Here’s an article with some of the quotes:https://www.businessinsider.com/dr-fauci-protests-perfect-set-up-for-spreading-covid-19-2020-6

It is a difficult situation," Fauci said. "We have the right to peaceably demonstrate, and the demonstrators are exercising that right...it's important to exercise your constitutional rights to be able to demonstrate, but it's a delicate balance, because the reasons for demonstrating are valid. And yet, the demonstration itself puts one at an additional risk.”

Good for him. I would just point out that there are also constitutional rights besides the right to protest which we ought also be able to exercise while balancing risks for ourselves.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
29,304
70,100
1,375
USA
dunpachi.com
Here’s the CNN article on this:


This reads as they can get anyone to say anything to support their causes when they want it. Why did this not come out during the lockdown protests weeks earlier? I agree with the others in here, science has been weaponized for politics. Therefore, it can’t be trusted.

We’re back to where the left was encouraging people to eat out when they should have been shutting down. They are just as complicit as the right in covid case increases and deaths. I am watching my local county new and accumulated covid cases. We are on a second spike.



NEOGAF, you saw what happened in Italy and New York. You’ve heard about kids whose immune systems go into a toxic shock syndrome because they are running rampant trying to fight the virus. THESE ARE TRUTHS. This is going to get worse. THIS IS NOT A LIE. Hunker down.

It will kill old and healthy alike. It will kill protesters from the lockdown protests, the police brutality protests, and many others that wouldn’t have gotten it if it wasn’t for these protests. Your politicians and media don’t care if covid gets you, either side.

Damn it, we were less than a month away from fully having this under control. Do not under estimate how infectious and deadly this is. China is still is not reporting how many actually died. The Italy and New York bloodbath is the best indicator of what’s coming.

MiyazakiHatesKojima MiyazakiHatesKojima I am not a bullshitter. Trust me. Sound the alarms.
It's good to be wary of upcoming danger, but the Second Wave ain't it. Be safe but we're not entering an apocalypse. If you distrust China's official reporting then it stands to reason that you should distrust China's response. I said at the very beginning that a communist nation has every reason to give a strong show of force, and everyone followed China's extreme example

Also the incidence of COVID among people who stayed locked in was higher than those who worked "essential services", so can we finally just admit that the lockdown was an ill-advised, ill-conceived idea? The disease was around months before the first "official" cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MiyazakiHatesKojima

eot

Member
Apr 13, 2012
12,642
4,452
800
Last edited:

iconmaster

Banned
Jul 18, 2013
7,492
14,151
1,060
He's not really saying anything is he though? He's just trying to not piss anyone off.
I don't envy his position

I think he is trying not to upset anyone, but in the process managed to say the thing that should have been said from the beginning.
 
Aug 21, 2018
864
520
410
Lots of states and countries blew up when it came to protecting the nursing homes, including Sweden. Doesn't change the fact that outside of the elderly this is not a very serious virus at all.
Actually Sweden admit their policy is a mistake, causihng many live.
 

prag16

Member
Jul 12, 2012
12,033
4,155
860
Actually Sweden admit their policy is a mistake, causihng many live.
That's not what they said. As is often the case you have to go beyond the headlines.

They failed to protect nursing homes like most of the world. But read the rest of Anders Teggrell's comments for context.


You also have Norway admitting that they now think the lockdown was an unnecessary overreaction.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: infinitys_7th

Korranator

Member
Jun 7, 2004
1,005
152
1,460
Scientist have long been the pawns of politics. It's how they get money to research their projects. Government grants, or University funding.

Doctor's have been in the pockets of big pharma for so long it's ridiculous. There's no money in a cure. Just feed them prescription drugs.
 

prag16

Member
Jul 12, 2012
12,033
4,155
860
Scientist have long been the pawns of politics. It's how they get money to research their projects. Government grants, or University funding.

Doctor's have been in the pockets of big pharma for so long it's ridiculous. There's no money in a cure. Just feed them prescription drugs.
Yep, that's what a lot of people can't see or won't admit. 'Science' has had a very large 'pay for play' component for a very long time.