Could not have said it any better, myself.I'm all for common ground. But we need to arrive there with reason, good info and proper discernment. The main issue is that right now, the "good info" is lacking. I don't trust your data or your sources, and you don't trust my data or my sources. So that hampers any reasonable dialogue. I don't blame that on us peons down here hashing it out on the streets. I blame that on the people that are supposed to be delivering us unbiased, truthful information. IMO, the CDC and Fauci have done irreparable harm to the medical profession with all of the goalpost moving and distortions (guidance on masks has shifted four times in a year and a half). If we are not given information that both sides can agree is pure, than we stand where we are right now... at each others throats.
Reason right now is lacking because we are being bombarded with all of these Tik-Tok/Youtube videos of either extreme cases or outright fabrications (raise my hand for engaging in some of that). Both sides are aiming to make emotional appeals. No room for reason and logic.
Oklahoma's ERs are so backed up with people overdosing on ivermectin that gunshot victims are having to wait to be treated, a doctor saysYou'll believe anything.
Oklahoma's ERs are so backed up with people overdosing on ivermectin that gunshot victims are having to wait to be treated, a doctor says
Patients overdosing on ivermectin backing up rural Oklahoma hospitals, ambulances | KFOR.com Oklahoma City
Patients overdosing on ivermectin are clogging Oklahoma ERs: Doctor
And no numbers or patients. Hospitals are filling up... we've heard that line before. It could be 2 yahoos that ran into a rural hospital and they turn that into the hospitals are filling up.All 3 links are about the same 1 rural doctor and his comment. No other source for the claim about the whole state of OK, just 1 Dr in the eastern part of the state.
Could not have said it any better, myself.
As I've said multiple times: the solution to a novel and complex problem will most always come from creative thinking, an openness to new ideas, the ability to consider less-popularized options, and good/reliable data.
And the studies didnt have actual numbers that could be referenced by the authors?It doesn’t sound like we’re talking about the same article, tbh. The people writing the article I’m referring to had nothing to do with the studies. It was just a review of several studies.
Based on how the article was written, it appeared to have been taken as well-established by the scientists in the Wisconsin study from August. Their study should explain whether that was an assumption and, if so, why they made it. Those tend to be based on other studies. If it was an assumption and was established pre-delta, then it may no longer be valid, but since they have more education and experience in this field than I do and were specifically studying Delta I’m good with discussing it as if their assumption was correct until given a more concrete reason not to.
Did you read the study or are you jumping to these conclusions without checking?And the studies didnt have actual numbers that could be referenced by the authors?
We have been making assumptions these experts know what they talk about. But we also keep hearing that they have never dealt with something like this before. We have seen them flip flop on stances, studies be pulled, numbers changed after the fact. What exactly are we trusting in?