Opinion INTERNATIONAL Politics: Adelaide Board Discussion Part 5

[ringo200]

https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-hits-nih-devastating-freezes-meetings-travel-communications-and-hiring

A reminder that Trump's pick to head the NIH spent the entire pandemic being wrong about everything and whinging about being attacked and silenced when this was pointed out, and now does victory laps about how he was actually right all along because truth, science, evidence are only useful when they are on your side for these people.

Bhattacharya co-authored the Great Barrington declaration outlining a focused protection approach to COVID.

To argue for this he used a paper he co-authored which claimed that COVID had a much lower mortality rate than others were suggesting because many more people than we realised had actually already caught COVID. At the time many pointed out the errors in his paper which predicted a death toll of roughly 20-40 thousand in America if 100 million Americans caught COVID. You can look up yourself how many actually died and how accurate he was here.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-coronavirus-as-deadly-as-they-say-11585088464

His co-author would later describe this estimate as 'way off', Bhattacharya just claims he was providing a range of estimates that included a lower and a higher range. If you read his article it is very clear that he was trying to argue the high range estimates which turned out to be pretty correct were flawed, and that the lower figures he was presenting were what we should be basing our response on.

Based on this inaccurate prediction he suggested the best response would be to protect the vulnerable (how? not really clear. Who is defined as vulnerable? not really clear but could be up to 1/3 of the population depending on how it's defined) while in their words "maximizing" infections among the non-vulnerable.

Great Barrington Declaration FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions about the Great Barrington Declaration.

gbdeclaration.org

Notice that some of the same people that argue we shouldn't be giving "experimental" vaccines to children were also arguing that we should be "maximising" the amount of children getting infected with a virus that at the time we knew very little about. We did not put the virus through phase 3 clinical trials, we had no idea what long term effects there would be, we had no idea what future variants might do to children.

Focused protection was a disaster in theory and in practice. In reality the way to protect the vulnerable was to reduce transmission among everyone.

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/sweden-failed-to-protect-elderly-in-covid-pandemic-commission-finds-idUSKBN28P1QC/

Critical weaknesses in shielding strategies for COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has led to a wide range of non-pharmaceutical interventions being implemented around the world to curb transmission. However, the economic and social costs of some of these measures, especially lockdowns, has been high. An alternative...

journals.plos.org

even under the unrealistic assumption of perfect shielding, hospitals would have been rapidly overwhelmed with many avoidable deaths among lower risk individuals. Crucially, even a small (20%) reduction in the effectiveness of shielding would have likely led to a large increase (>150%) in the number of deaths compared to perfect shielding. Our findings demonstrate that shielding the vulnerable while allowing infections to spread among the wider population would not have been a viable public health strategy for COVID-19 and is unlikely to be effective for future pandemics

This isn't a hindsight thing, this was obvious at the time

Public health organizations condemn herd immunity scheme for controlling spread of SARS-CoV-2

apha.org

the recommendations in the Great Barrington Declaration would haphazardly and unnecessarily sacrifices lives. The declaration is not a strategy, it is a political statement. It ignores sound public health expertise. It preys on a frustrated populace. Instead of selling false hope that will predictably backfire, we must focus on how to manage this pandemic in a safe, responsible and equitable way.

The suggestions put forth by the Great Barrington Declaration are NOT based in science.

As far as I can tell the main evidence they have that they were right is that people did not like lockdowns or school closures, which I mean, of course.

The new administration is an attack on science and truth. Even the ones that actually have relevant credentials are willing to fall in line and use the respectability of their titles to sane wash people like RFK jnr, pretending that he just has some reasonable concerns despite spending his entire life spouting nothing but unreasonable concerns.

 

[OneGreatClub]

https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-hits-nih-devastating-freezes-meetings-travel-communications-and-hiring

A reminder that Trump's pick to head the NIH spent the entire pandemic being wrong about everything and whinging about being attacked and silenced when this was pointed out, and now does victory laps about how he was actually right all along because truth, science, evidence are only useful when they are on your side for these people.

Bhattacharya co-authored the Great Barrington declaration outlining a focused protection approach to COVID.

To argue for this he used a paper he co-authored which claimed that COVID had a much lower mortality rate than others were suggesting because many more people than we realised had actually already caught COVID. At the time many pointed out the errors in his paper which predicted a death toll of roughly 20-40 thousand in America if 100 million Americans caught COVID. You can look up yourself how many actually died and how accurate he was here.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-coronavirus-as-deadly-as-they-say-11585088464

His co-author would later describe this estimate as 'way off', Bhattacharya just claims he was providing a range of estimates that included a lower and a higher range. If you read his article it is very clear that he was trying to argue the high range estimates which turned out to be pretty correct were flawed, and that the lower figures he was presenting were what we should be basing our response on.

Based on this inaccurate prediction he suggested the best response would be to protect the vulnerable (how? not really clear. Who is defined as vulnerable? not really clear but could be up to 1/3 of the population depending on how it's defined) while in their words "maximizing" infections among the non-vulnerable.

Great Barrington Declaration FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions about the Great Barrington Declaration.

gbdeclaration.org

Notice that some of the same people that argue we shouldn't be giving "experimental" vaccines to children were also arguing that we should be "maximising" the amount of children getting infected with a virus that at the time we knew very little about. We did not put the virus through phase 3 clinical trials, we had no idea what long term effects there would be, we had no idea what future variants might do to children.

Focused protection was a disaster in theory and in practice. In reality the way to protect the vulnerable was to reduce transmission among everyone.

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/sweden-failed-to-protect-elderly-in-covid-pandemic-commission-finds-idUSKBN28P1QC/

View attachment 2209730

Critical weaknesses in shielding strategies for COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has led to a wide range of non-pharmaceutical interventions being implemented around the world to curb transmission. However, the economic and social costs of some of these measures, especially lockdowns, has been high. An alternative...

journals.plos.org

This isn't a hindsight thing, this was obvious at the time

Public health organizations condemn herd immunity scheme for controlling spread of SARS-CoV-2

apha.org

As far as I can tell the main evidence they have that they were right is that people did not like lockdowns or school closures, which I mean, of course.

The new administration is an attack on science and truth. Even the ones that actually have relevant credentials are willing to fall in line and use the respectability of their titles to sane wash people like RFK jnr, pretending that he just has some reasonable concerns despite spending his entire life spouting nothing but unreasonable concerns.

God help us when the next pandemic hits

 

[Mr_Moogle]

People posting images of their losses on TrumpCoin is my schadenfreude therapy. There are plenty of people to voted for Trump that will be screwed by his policies but it doesn't feel right to laugh at somebody being deported or losing their healthcare. With Cryptobros however, it's totally guilt free.

This one was a different meme coin but it never stops being funny.

 

[StonesThrow]

They are not the personality types who say whoops, sorry I made a mistake or i was wrong.

I don't mean say sorry, I mean just come out and say yeah it was and so what. They're are no consequences

 

[ADL9798]

Keep in mind that for the true believers there has been a decade long campaign of constant and intense criticism of mainstream media, academia, science and scientists, researchers. All of which obviously has some truth to it, I’m not aware of a perfect source of information yet.

But this allows the true believers to live in a world where nothing could ever really challenge their world view, there never has to be a moment of cognitive discomfort where you wonder if you may have got something wrong.

News article I don’t like it’s just because they’re biased. Academics say x but that’s just because they’re all ideologically compromised. Scientists say y but that’s just because they’re getting paid.

For the true believers it really does feel as close to the Orwell you must not just say 2+2=5 you must truly believe it as we have seen from a political movement.

Ted Cruz came out and accused a news site of lying for saying Musk appeared to do a fascist salute, something which is pretty clearly true. To be in the good graces of the party you must reject what your eyes tell you and listen to us.

Of course you should be aware of bias, financial interests etc.. but I’m not sure getting your information from Mike Cernovich instead of mainstream news is a step towards reality.

The centre-right have been on a slippery slope, digging themselves into a deeper and deeper hole for a while now.

You have to ask why they get so viscerally upset when people merely point out what are to any sane person, more and more obvious examples of christofascist theocracy influencing what was once a moderate led political right?

Increasingly, people are not only favouring one side of politics or the other, they are welding their entire identity and investing 100% of their self esteem and happiness into the trials and tribulations of 'their' political party. In extreme cases, they weld themselves to a single politician.

It's not enough to say you support most of a politician's policies but disagree with others, you need to support every single word that comes out of their mouth and excuse or ignore any and all repugnant behaviour no matter what.

You only need to look at some of the posters in the US Politics thread to see how deranged this cult-like behaviour has become for Trump supporters.

When your core beliefs and values are no longer your own but those of your political party, accepting the fact that fascist ideology is increasingly becoming mainstream for right wing politics is now an attack on you personally. It's tantamount to that person calling you a fascist.

The cognitive dissonance is overwhelming.

Rather than accepting this and taking the opportunity to create some separation between their core beliefs and values and those of their political party, their brain melts. It's much easier for these people to lash out at the messenger or dismiss every and any source of information as 'fake news' than to confront this reality.

The selectiveness of this is also hilarious. While throwing a tantrum any time it's even vaguely insinuated that any of their political team have done or said something a bit fascist, they will happily call anyone outside this bubble a communist. This is called projection.

 

[jenny61_99]

It's laughable the whataboutism shit.

Taking a still from a vid at a perfect time without any context at all...AND IT'S WITH HIS LEFT ARM LOLOLOL The Hitler Nazi salute is always right arm.

" was used as a greeting in Nazi Germany. The salute is performed by extending the right arm from the shoulder into the air with a straightened hand."


LOLOL Eagleboy2011 you've been sucked in yet again. You make a perfect Trumpite!

Someone I know posted this on FB today. A quick run through the "is this photo legit? app" soon proved it be altered/manipulated.

 

[jenny61_99]

My take on Elon salute - although it clearly looks like it, I’m 90% sure he didn’t mean it with Nazi intentions (that’d be low for anyone)

But holy **** how could you not have the foresight to think about what you are actually doing on such a public platform

I don’t want someone with such lack of foresight, and plain silliness in actions, as one of the world’s highest-tier voices

How they hell you came to that conclusion is beyond me. 100% it was the intended movement.

 

[arrowman]

We all tend to judge the words and deeds of public figures based on our prejudices/ preconceptions. We cut more slack for people we agree with, we judge those we disagree with more harshly. It's natural, it's human nature, and it's something you have to work on if you want to judge objectively.

But if you really believe that Musk was intentionally performing a literal Nazi salute, I'm sorry, but your brain is broken.

 

[Cap]

We all tend to judge the words and deeds of public figures based on our prejudices/ preconceptions. We cut more slack for people we agree with, we judge those we disagree with more harshly. It's natural, it's human nature, and it's something you have to work on if you want to judge objectively.

But if you really believe that Musk was intentionally performing a literal Nazi salute, I'm sorry, but your brain is broken.

Have tolerance and understanding for the Nazi salute guy but not boys and girls that are born a little different

I think that sums you up perfectly

 

[OneGreatClub]

Someone I know posted this on FB today. A quick run through the "is this photo legit? app" soon proved it be altered/manipulated.View attachment 2209840

This is definitely real
Though

 

[OneGreatClub]

We all tend to judge the words and deeds of public figures based on our prejudices/ preconceptions. We cut more slack for people we agree with, we judge those we disagree with more harshly. It's natural, it's human nature, and it's something you have to work on if you want to judge objectively.

But if you really believe that Musk was intentionally performing a literal Nazi salute, I'm sorry, but your brain is broken.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Oh dear

 

[Cap]

Oh dear

I see you are enjoying the leopards eating faces.

There another hilarious one, I can't find the link, I'm sure it will make its way there.

But a prominent MAGA influencer just had her partners US visa application cancelled because, he's an immigrant

She's vomiting hate online and it's hilarious

 

[ADL9798]

In the interests of having a sensible conversation with the grown ups, dragging this over from the other thread.

Serious question? Serious answer.

Not wanting to be reactionary and ignore the fact that in the US, Canada, Australia, UK and France right wing political parties were rejected and lost elections in 2020, 2021, 2022, 2024 and 2024 respectively, but yes I agree there is something to learn from their recent increasing popularity.

The patterns from history and echoes of the rise of right wing politics during the 1920s and 30s are quite obvious.

During periods of economic growth, people can put a roof over their heads, food on the table, pay their bills, etc. During these periods we overlook a lot of the inequality and differences across society because we feel generally optimistic about the future - a rising tide lifts all boats.

During periods of economic downturn when the tide starts going out, people understandably start looking for someone to blame and turn on each other.

1. The GFC and COVID-19 smashed global economies on a scale not seen since the Great Depression, creating significant hardship for working classes and while the economy went backwards, the top end of town somehow managed to profit from their misery and increase their wealth on both occasions.
2. At the same time as these more obvious catastrophic short term impacts, there are a few long term issues which have been bubbling away but are now reaching a crescendo:
   • deliberate government policies including overly generous capital gains tax concessions have driven up the cost of housing astronomically over the past 30 years, putting even this most basic financial aspiration out of reach for younger people while compounding the wealth of older generations and property investors.
   • high income countries are increasingly outsourcing their manufacturing sectors to low income countries where cost of labour and production is far cheaper. This would have been fine had the vision actually materialised for this workforce to stay in school and develop skills to transition away from menial labour towards production of higher value goods and services. Once thriving communities and cities have been decimated by this - think Detroit.
   • The US has the added benefit of a healthcare system which is a complete mess and the single leading cause of bankruptcy.

As it was in the 1920s and 30s, right wing politics has been more successful in connecting with the working classes on this, and coming up with a message that resonates strongly. By contrast, left wing politics are losing touch with the common man. In particular (as the polls from the recent US election show), young men.

As in the 1930s, the right wing's message to these groups has been yet again largely about putting the blame for people's misery on immigrants and other minority groups as a diversion strategy to stop people pointing the finger at the finance sector, big corporations and 'the 1%'.

The other side to their recent rise in popularity is how this message has been delivered to the public. Just as JFK left Nixon in the dust with his use of television in 1960, Trump has made the Democrats look like the out of touch dinosaurs they are with his effective and targeted use of podcasts and social media - ably supported by allies like Elon Musk.

While not doubting for a second that because of this, Trump deserved to win the recent US election, I still maintain my stance that he will not solve any of the working classes actual problems, and will probably make some of them worse.

Case in point - I see one of his first Executive Orders was to reverse Biden's policy on caps for medication prices, driving the cost of insulin from $35 up to $700 per month. His proposed tariffs will have a similar impact on the cost of other essential goods.

But hey, at least he pwned Biden and Canada. Is this what making America great looks like?

 

[PeterSalt]

People posting images of their losses on TrumpCoin is my schadenfreude therapy. There are plenty of people to voted for Trump that will be screwed by his policies but it doesn't feel right to laugh at somebody being deported or losing their healthcare. With Cryptobros however, it's totally guilt free.

This one was a different meme coin but it never stops being funny.

Reminds me of the bloke who put his entire life savings in trump media shares when the market was peaking and basically blew the lot

No idea what they're worth now?

 

[PeterSalt]

We all tend to judge the words and deeds of public figures based on our prejudices/ preconceptions. We cut more slack for people we agree with, we judge those we disagree with more harshly. It's natural, it's human nature, and it's something you have to work on if you want to judge objectively.

But if you really believe that Musk was intentionally performing a literal Nazi salute, I'm sorry, but your brain is broken.

If you really believe Elmo was making a Pretorian salute, I'm a gunna find a bridge to sell you

Maybe it was the autism?

 

[OneGreatClub]

In the interests of having a sensible conversation with the grown ups, dragging this over from the other thread.

Yes he has seized the moment and given them someone to hate and blame all their woes on: immigrants, gays, trans, blacks, women.
Meanwhile while they are distracted and venting their outrage Trump, his family, his cronies and his Oligarchs are raking in their fortunes, consolidating their power and pulling the rug from under everyone.
With tech bros ruling the information space, MAGA will still be drawn to blame anyone except those they actually should be blaming.

Meanwhile the Dems have been pathetic in their messaging and haven’t reacted fast enough to a rapidly changing town square making them seem out of touch with the everyday man, even as their policies assist those who now despise them. . Many will be forever lost but tech bros will keep them engaged with fantasy worlds and games so they will hardly notice.
Europe seems to be waking up at least.

 

[OneGreatClub]

If you really believe Elmo was making a Pretorian salute, I'm a gunna find a bridge to sell you

Or a Trumpcoin

 

[PeterSalt]

Or a Trumpcoin

Hawk Tuah for me please?

 

[PeterSalt]

Came across this stat a little earlier .. I imagine that's there's a whole group of people fapping hard about trump and migrant deportations right now?

Though to be fair they're only just getting started

 

[Cap]

In the interests of having a sensible conversation with the grown ups, dragging this over from the other thread.

You would think the AU Govt would be looking at it with interest as seeing what they can avoid.

I think the main issues were not messaging on inflation and cost of living and allowing the now suddenly gone immigration issues to become bigger than they clearly are.

But Biden, whilst clearly still better than Trump should have stood down earlier and the Democrats would have got the message earlier that the US is not ready for a Black female president, regardless of her talents.

If you break it down, the Tories in the UK lost for similar reasons, although they had some other baggage.