(Total Views: 1036)
Posted On: 10/29/2020 3:48:08 AM
Post# of 153886
Did anyone else listen to DrFauci on yahoo fin ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfL2sespLnY
I think (and I have seen something like this many many years ago when I was involved with sales to gov departments) he (like a lot of senior gov people) often have a view of how things should be.
I think his view is fixated on attacking the virus. And this is the problem.
Hear him talk - he sounds like he should be jumping all over LL, but then he goes deep on vaccines. I think it is just hard wired now after all these years that he wants to see the solution fit a world view.
Does he ever ask himself - what is different to someone having a vaccine to build immunity, vs getting the virus and getting a shot so it can't hurt you and you just have your immune system create a custom immune response for your body ? I don't think he gets it, or even can get it.
I agree with DrBeen - i don't think he has done a good job where it matters - the response about masks was BS. The response should have been "we need masks", now solve the supply problem. Not "masks don't work, because we don't have enough masks" - that's a bureaucratic non science response. If all the doctors in the field and the world have masks, why tell everyone else - masks don't matter. If they didn't, why would every doctor / nurse (in the world) have masks. So why talk BS ?
So also, the supply of drug should not be a consideration. If it works - it works. Then ask - okay, how do we increase supply ? They are 2 different questions. If you work the other way, you may never solve it. ie. approval -> gets you $ -> $ gets you supply. vs no approval -> no $ -> no supply. Also, If you have limited the supply, the question is then how do you prioritize until you have supply.
More people need to understand the OODA loop.
What this country needs is a manhattan project type response - all the DrJ's , DrBP's , DrYangs etc working as one. Decouple the people from BigRx.
We don't need a bureaucratic leadership for this virus thing. (actually leadership in general would be good).
okay, done with my rant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfL2sespLnY
I think (and I have seen something like this many many years ago when I was involved with sales to gov departments) he (like a lot of senior gov people) often have a view of how things should be.
I think his view is fixated on attacking the virus. And this is the problem.
Hear him talk - he sounds like he should be jumping all over LL, but then he goes deep on vaccines. I think it is just hard wired now after all these years that he wants to see the solution fit a world view.
Does he ever ask himself - what is different to someone having a vaccine to build immunity, vs getting the virus and getting a shot so it can't hurt you and you just have your immune system create a custom immune response for your body ? I don't think he gets it, or even can get it.
I agree with DrBeen - i don't think he has done a good job where it matters - the response about masks was BS. The response should have been "we need masks", now solve the supply problem. Not "masks don't work, because we don't have enough masks" - that's a bureaucratic non science response. If all the doctors in the field and the world have masks, why tell everyone else - masks don't matter. If they didn't, why would every doctor / nurse (in the world) have masks. So why talk BS ?
So also, the supply of drug should not be a consideration. If it works - it works. Then ask - okay, how do we increase supply ? They are 2 different questions. If you work the other way, you may never solve it. ie. approval -> gets you $ -> $ gets you supply. vs no approval -> no $ -> no supply. Also, If you have limited the supply, the question is then how do you prioritize until you have supply.
More people need to understand the OODA loop.
What this country needs is a manhattan project type response - all the DrJ's , DrBP's , DrYangs etc working as one. Decouple the people from BigRx.
We don't need a bureaucratic leadership for this virus thing. (actually leadership in general would be good).
okay, done with my rant.
(15)
(0)
