The founder of allgov.com did not go to, let alone even attend, college. Anderson has been involved in healthcare policy for over a decade.
Please address the merits, if you can.
Jay Inslee vaccination mandate
- Thread starter BleedCrimsonandGray
- Start date
The founder of allgov.com did not go to, let alone even attend, college. Anderson has been involved in healthcare policy for over a decade.
Please address the merits, if you can.
He is not a biostatistician - his involvement in healthcare policy is 100% irrelevant.
Why would anyone hire you as a lawyer when clearly they can get just as good legal advice at Supercuts?
So, you're still not addressing the merits.
But, OK. How about this guy? Is he far enough to the left to be believed? Former Biden advisor.
Former Biden COVID adviser says cloth masks ineffective, suggests Americans start wearing N-95 masks
Former President Biden COVID-19 adviser and top epidemiologist Michael Osterholm admitted that typical paper masks are ineffective and suggested that Americans may need to switch to heavier duty N-95 masks to battle the new wave of cases in an interview on CNN Monday.
D (Qult45) gibbonsrotflmao - he most certainly is not. Do you really want to double down on that?
would you take investment advice from a plumber? Medical advice from a truck driver?
And to think you were the guy eviscerating Ed over the dental hygienist.
Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics: Who Is Jeffrey H. Anderson?
The director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics is traditionally an expert in statistics. But Anderson’s only background in statistics touted by the White House was his co-creation of a computer rankings system for college football. A prolific writer for right-wing publications and an early...www.allgov.com
Ouch!
Taihtsat
As my brother in law said after his colonoscopy prep, “ if you think it’s a fart, it’s not”.
The merits of this cats qualifications to be used as a trustworthy source for this discussion?
The problem is for your first choice you chose a source that is not only highly partisan but has no business expressing the opinion he did. Politics has no place in this and I don’t believe Osterholm is interested in making this political.So, you're still not addressing the merits.
But, OK. How about this guy? Is he far enough to the left to be believed? Former Biden advisor.
Former Biden COVID adviser says cloth masks ineffective, suggests Americans start wearing N-95 masks
Former President Biden COVID-19 adviser and top epidemiologist Michael Osterholm admitted that typical paper masks are ineffective and suggested that Americans may need to switch to heavier duty N-95 masks to battle the new wave of cases in an interview on CNN Monday.www.foxnews.com
Osterholm may very well be correct on cloth masks being ineffective but I think he’s really saying is that they’re a poor choice and you should do the maximum you can, which is an N95. I think that position is idealistic and not at all realistic. N95 masks are generally pretty uncomfortable to wear.
There is good evidence to suggest we should view masks more as a spectrum of effectiveness and this makes sense and I think Osterholm would probably agree with that.
It should be noted that in the past Osterholm has expressed his displeasure with anti maskers misinterpreting his opinion.
Osterholm’s own words from last year,
"At the outset, I want to make several points crystal clear:
Since you’re as lazy as WillieThePimp, I looked up the PhD political science curriculum at Claremont Graduate University. Make sure you look under Methods. Obviously not perfect since it’s today’s curriculum not 2001’s. You likely read that Anderson’s college degree was in economics and political science. A high school graduate that runs a government watchdog website must not be all that thorough.
PhD in Political Science - Claremont Graduate UniversityClaremont Graduate University
CGU's PhD in Political Science provides an in-depth understanding of politics and government and the underpinnings of national and global civil society.
www.cgu.edu
So if you can’t attack the messenger, you’ve got nothing. You listened to the interview, right?
And the whole point is that CDC is relying on bad studies. Just like Osterholm cautions against in that last bullet point.
Once again you demonstrate your complete lack of reading comprehension which makes your ability to practice in your chosen field a remarkable feat.
Do you think your high school graduate editor in chief and founder of allgov.com understands the academic rigor of a college degree in economics and political science, a master’s degree in politics or a PhD in political science?
And I assume that you didn’t listen to the interview. You certainly have not bothered to discuss the merits.
Of course, because PhD coursework in political science includes extensive study in biostatistics, epidemiology and virology. There is no doubt his knowledge, experience and intellectual capacity is all encompassing. Just as there is no doubt the academic rigor of your JD means you have mastery level knowledge and practice of all manner of physical and intellectual excrement.
You keep bringing up biostatistics, virology and epidemiology as if those nifty labels are relevant to relative quality of studies relied upon by the CDC or the statistical significance of the findings. Why is that?
You said he was a statistician, Willie said no he is not. And then you ironically say this, all the while attacking the messenger?Since you’re as lazy as WillieThePimp, I looked up the PhD political science curriculum at Claremont Graduate University. Make sure you look under Methods. Obviously not perfect since it’s today’s curriculum not 2001’s. You likely read that Anderson’s college degree was in economics and political science. A high school graduate that runs a government watchdog website must not be all that thorough.
PhD in Political Science - Claremont Graduate UniversityClaremont Graduate University
CGU's PhD in Political Science provides an in-depth understanding of politics and government and the underpinnings of national and global civil society.
"Oh look, a website critical of the government. Neat. Still attacking the messenger Willie."
Here's another site critical of his credentials for being qualified for this position.
Trump’s man in charge of US crime data is known for his football rankings
Jeffrey H. Anderson, Bureau of Justice Statistics head, doesn't appear to have much data experience, aside for a system supporting the reviled Bowl Championship Series.
qz.com
I haven’t once mentioned the CDC. Nor are they pertinent to what I discussed.
Nifty labels? Your inability to grasp why an individuals knowledge and experience in these subjects are relevant to their ability to assess these clinical trials are not my concern. Ask your stylist down at Supercuts. Better yet ask her to sit in for you on that conference call with that client this morning.
Lol.... You didn't just post a link of an article to a highly partisan news source did you? You are a leftist stooge. It would be like someone posting an article from InfoWars or something of that equivalency.You said he was a statistician, Willie said no he is not. And then you ironically say this, all the while attacking the messenger?
"Oh look, a website critical of the government. Neat. Still attacking the messenger Willie."
Here's another site critical of his credentials for being qualified for this position.
Trump’s man in charge of US crime data is known for his football rankings
Jeffrey H. Anderson, Bureau of Justice Statistics head, doesn't appear to have much data experience, aside for a system supporting the reviled Bowl Championship Series.
You said he was a statistician, Willie said no he is not. And then you ironically say this, all the while attacking the messenger?
"Oh look, a website critical of the government. Neat. Still attacking the messenger Willie."
Here's another site critical of his credentials for being qualified for this position.
Trump’s man in charge of US crime data is known for his football rankings
Jeffrey H. Anderson, Bureau of Justice Statistics head, doesn't appear to have much data experience, aside for a system supporting the reviled Bowl Championship Series.
The former Attorney General for the State of California is the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. He has a BA in econ and a law degree.
You've responded numerous times to an article critical of the CDC's reliance on observational studies, not clinical trials. Why try to split a very fine hair? It's like to consider the actual merits radioactive or something. Or maybe you're trying to reframe the discussion into something else.
Do you doubt that someone with a PhD in political science is capable of having an opinion on reliance on observational studies? Again, did you bother to look at the curriculum? Your high educated friend from allgov.com clearly did not.
Relevance to claiming a person appointed to government office is required to have some specific background?
Okay, well neat - agreed. After all, SCOTUS' don't need to be lawyers or judges. That wasn't the point here. You said Anderson was a statistician. Willie said he wasn't. He isn't. That's all I have to say about that.
I want to know about his college football computer model. Are the Cougs going to win 2 games or 3 this year?rotflmao - he most certainly is not. Do you really want to double down on that?
would you take investment advice from a plumber? Medical advice from a truck driver?
And to think you were the guy eviscerating Ed over the dental hygienist.
Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics: Who Is Jeffrey H. Anderson?
The director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics is traditionally an expert in statistics. But Anderson’s only background in statistics touted by the White House was his co-creation of a computer rankings system for college football. A prolific writer for right-wing publications and an early...
AKA, Pseudo-Science.... You know, basically how they've come to the conclusion that masks will prevent you from certain death.
Oh...I have been told the vaccine biggest "gift" is it keeps people that get covid from becoming seriously ill. A second benefit it helps eliminate the spread, or some of the transmission of the virus. Not sure why this is any different than any other disease. Knowledge isn't perfect. Things change with the disease and would seem to necessitate a change in protocol. Non- Hodgkin's lymphoma has several primary and secondary treatments. If treatment A doesn't work you think they just throw up their hands and say "you are screwed"?
They are looking for ways to mitigate covid 19. Are any of the options perfect? Nope. Masking is a pain in the ass, but if there is a reduction of transmission of 30%, let's just say that is a fair number, that is doing something to mitigate it.
What is odd, if there are 1000 patience in the hospital, it appears over 950 are not vaxed.
I know, I know, it doesn't affect your age group...YET. But a kid at children's, a year old got covid and died. A teenager in Florida, no underlying conditions got it and was on a ventilator. and was put into a coma for 11 days. Not sure why you think this virus will put the brakes on when it suddenly is in your wheelhouse in terms of age.
You do know that a child is far more likely to die from the flu than Covid right? So lets alter everything for the smallest denomination of people? Should we stop having children because there is a small chance the baby will be still born? Or have a chromosomal defect that permanently alters cognitive and physical development? We can talk about mitigating risks all we want but anecdotal outliers aren't status quo and shaping policy around that is like how politicians shape policy to best suit the loudest morons burning down their own cities and not the vast majority.
CIS I am all ears...what is your plan to mitigate the affects of covid, from economic to health? No vax, no mask, so do you of a different way to slow down the disease?
Your favorite public health official is in the news again.
New Details Emerge About Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab
More than 900 pages of materials related to U.S.-funded coronavirus research in China were released following a FOIA lawsuit by The Intercept.
theintercept.com
Story time:
I'm putting this here so as not to create another thread on covid.
Long story short, I was informed today that someone I was in contact with this past weekend tested positive. Shitty part is, she knew she was ill and hung out anyway, but thats another story...
So, we decide that my whole immediate family needs to get tested, just in case: my wife, my son and I. My wife was in the ER for an unrelated matter and when she informed them that she was exposed, they said they would test her. When she finally saw someone, they gave her a verbal survey and determined that "she probably didn't have it" and sent her on her way.
I called and checked around every pharmacy in town and there are virtually zero tests available on short notice; I did find an appointment for Sept 15th. Finally decided to take my son and myself to urgent care and when we saw the physician she informed us that the CDC recommends waiting another day or two to make sure viral loads are at their highest. Ok, so we schedule for Friday and then chit-chat. She tells me that health care is about to get 200x worse because there is a glut of medical workers who won't get vaccinated, and due to the mandate they will all lose their jobs. At this particular clinic, she said it was about half the staff, which is in line with the national average. I apologized for taking up their resources for a silly thing like getting tested when there are a lot of actual sick people out there, and she acknowledged that resources are stretched thin and that testing is low priority but still important.
So, a couple of things: is the better good served by having unvaxxed health care workers and keeping the system afloat, or by removing them from their jobs in order to... I'm not sure what, but I'm guessing someone somewhere determined that having less nurses and doctors was a good thing.
Another thing: people making policy have no idea what its like for the people with boots on the ground. A lot of this stuff looks good on paper or in someone's head, but the realities are very different and these same people are burying their head in the sand to the realities. The reality is that our health care system only has capacity to serve the severely ill, and if you're not then they simply don't (literally) have the time for you.
I'm putting this here so as not to create another thread on covid.
Long story short, I was informed today that someone I was in contact with this past weekend tested positive. Shitty part is, she knew she was ill and hung out anyway, but thats another story...
So, we decide that my whole immediate family needs to get tested, just in case: my wife, my son and I. My wife was in the ER for an unrelated matter and when she informed them that she was exposed, they said they would test her. When she finally saw someone, they gave her a verbal survey and determined that "she probably didn't have it" and sent her on her way.
I called and checked around every pharmacy in town and there are virtually zero tests available on short notice; I did find an appointment for Sept 15th. Finally decided to take my son and myself to urgent care and when we saw the physician she informed us that the CDC recommends waiting another day or two to make sure viral loads are at their highest. Ok, so we schedule for Friday and then chit-chat. She tells me that health care is about to get 200x worse because there is a glut of medical workers who won't get vaccinated, and due to the mandate they will all lose their jobs. At this particular clinic, she said it was about half the staff, which is in line with the national average. I apologized for taking up their resources for a silly thing like getting tested when there are a lot of actual sick people out there, and she acknowledged that resources are stretched thin and that testing is low priority but still important.
So, a couple of things: is the better good served by having unvaxxed health care workers and keeping the system afloat, or by removing them from their jobs in order to... I'm not sure what, but I'm guessing someone somewhere determined that having less nurses and doctors was a good thing.
Another thing: people making policy have no idea what its like for the people with boots on the ground. A lot of this stuff looks good on paper or in someone's head, but the realities are very different and these same people are burying their head in the sand to the realities. The reality is that our health care system only has capacity to serve the severely ill, and if you're not then they simply don't (literally) have the time for you.
People will push this to the very end but when push comes to shove almost all of them will do what they need to do to keep their jobs, even in industries where labor is in short supply. It’s dumb that a union welder can’t enjoy a joint when he gets home from a hard days work, but that guy knows he can be drug tested so he won’t. My daughter can pitch a helluva fit but once theres a threat of something important getting taken away from her, she gets back in line. Ultimately this won’t be a choice that has to be made, most people will cave at the end and get vaxxed.
One of my wife’s teaching assistants quit rather than getting the jab. She found a stay at home medical billing job. You’re assuming these folks care about their job enough and that no alternative employment is a available.
And you misinterpret this article how, exactly? Did we not already know that EcoHealth subcontracted research in wuhan from their original grant money?Your favorite public health official is in the news again.
New Details Emerge About Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab
More than 900 pages of materials related to U.S.-funded coronavirus research in China were released following a FOIA lawsuit by The Intercept.
At this point it stills appears that Fauci was accurate when he said there was no direct funding of GOF at the WIV. But we'll see as more information comes out. You can always keep wishing he gets canned. That's all I have to say about that
Last edited:
Sure that’s one example. Not saying that’s not going to happen. Most people in that position will do what they need to do to keep their job though. Always up to the individual whether the pain of staying is greater than the pain of trying to find something new…especially when you’ve invested time, training, and/or education for a chosen career path.
Are you that naïve to believe Fauci had no clue as to what EcoHealth was going to do with the grant money once it was disbursed by your Demi-God Fauci? The information recently obtained shows emails where Fauci tried to cover up he had knowledge of exactly that. Why in the hell are you continuing to running cover for this obvious corrupt government official? Are you brain damaged?
