Soloist wrote: ↑Thu Apr 17, 2025 4:17 pm
Granted. I will point out though, that you think the numbers are lower than what the officials think. You think that them saying the cases are under reported is inaccurate based off of what you were saying.
I have no idea what the actual prevalence is.
Seriously?
If you yourself would refuse to do it why are you disputing what they’re saying about under reported cases? You are arguing both sides
The last time contact tracing was used, it was used to make sure we couldn't work or attend school. I'm not participating in those games again.
If public health officials want to increase trust, the ball is in their court.
Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Thu Apr 17, 2025 10:43 am
Under reporting is bad, because it will suggest you have less of a problem than you do, and will not make adequate preparations. If you have a really major measles outbreak, you need to be standing up your pediatric ICU for a large influx of cases, you can't do that overnight.
Zero actual evidence it's underreported.
Is there any evidence of pediatric ICUs being flooded?
Patients being airlifted 200-300 miles away? Normally that means local hospitals have no ICU beds. Normally, that happens when there is “no room at the inn.”
Soloist wrote: ↑Thu Apr 17, 2025 11:38 am
Yeah, the cases being reported suggest measles is a lot worse than it is if we disregard underreporting.
You can’t have it both ways. Either it’s been underreported or it’s more severe than you’re saying.
The actual way to assess an epidemic is not through self reporting.
Actual public health practice is through other means (surveys, etc.)
So the real question is why officials are whining about “underreporting” at all. Sounds like they are lazy and don’t want to do their jobs - one of which is rebuilding trust with the public.
THEIR JOB IS TO PREVENT UNNECESSARY DEATHS AND DISABILITY. Do you actually know anyone in the public health community? I doubt it, seriously.
Soloist wrote: ↑Thu Apr 17, 2025 4:17 pm
Granted. I will point out though, that you think the numbers are lower than what the officials think. You think that them saying the cases are under reported is inaccurate based off of what you were saying.
I have no idea what the actual prevalence is.
Seriously?
If you yourself would refuse to do it why are you disputing what they’re saying about under reported cases? You are arguing both sides
The last time contact tracing was used, it was used to make sure we couldn't work or attend school. I'm not participating in those games again.
If public health officials want to increase trust, the ball is in their court.
Firing the likes of RFK junior would be a good start.
Soloist wrote: ↑Thu Apr 17, 2025 11:38 am
Yeah, the cases being reported suggest measles is a lot worse than it is if we disregard underreporting.
You can’t have it both ways. Either it’s been underreported or it’s more severe than you’re saying.
The actual way to assess an epidemic is not through self reporting.
Actual public health practice is through other means (surveys, etc.)
So the real question is why officials are whining about “underreporting” at all. Sounds like they are lazy and don’t want to do their jobs - one of which is rebuilding trust with the public.
THEIR JOB IS TO PREVENT UNNECESSARY DEATHS AND DISABILITY. Do you actually know anyone in the public health community? I doubt it, seriously.
Soloist wrote: ↑Thu Apr 17, 2025 4:17 pm
Granted. I will point out though, that you think the numbers are lower than what the officials think. You think that them saying the cases are under reported is inaccurate based off of what you were saying.
I have no idea what the actual prevalence is.
Seriously?
If you yourself would refuse to do it why are you disputing what they’re saying about under reported cases? You are arguing both sides
The last time contact tracing was used, it was used to make sure we couldn't work or attend school. I'm not participating in those games again.
If public health officials want to increase trust, the ball is in their court.
Firing the likes of RFK junior would be a good start.
RFK Jr. taking a leading role is one of the biggest things that could lead to a restoration of trust in government health organizations at all.
JohnH wrote: ↑Thu Apr 17, 2025 9:41 pm
RFK Jr. taking a leading role is one of the biggest things that could lead to a restoration of trust in government health organizations at all.
This RFK Jr. who appears to have no idea what autism actually is, yet based his anti-vax campaign on autism misinformation?
HE is going to lead to a restoration of trust in government?
1 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
JohnH wrote: ↑Thu Apr 17, 2025 9:41 pm
RFK Jr. taking a leading role is one of the biggest things that could lead to a restoration of trust in government health organizations at all.
This RFK Jr. who appears to have no idea what autism actually is, yet based his anti-vax campaign on autism misinformation?
HE is going to lead to a restoration of trust in government?
While we might disagree on much and agree on a few things, I think this one is being distorted from what he means. I don’t think he is referring to all autistics and he's only distorting autism if he was.
I didn't watch the entire speech and I really don't care to nor do I overly like this guy.
Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Fri Apr 18, 2025 4:40 pm
Quite the opposite, he comes from a “fact free” universe, and sooner or later, it will be apparent. Just hope too many are not harmed in the process.
That is simply your opinion. Not everyone agrees on what the "facts" are. And I am getting a bit tired of the "science" priesthood acting like they have a monopoly on truth when in fact they are very, very far from it.
"Public health" authorities told us we need stand 6 feet apart. It turned out that was not based on facts or science. I do not trust "authorities" that behave the way they did in 2020.
