It's one thing if your Uncle Dave said he doesn't believe in time. But it would be a completely different conversation if the same words came out of a clockmaker.
Inspired by a tweet where a microbiologist expressed his disappointment after learning that one of their colleagues was an anti-vaxxer, Reddit user u/MoniMokshith made a post on r/facepalm, saying "I had to teach a historical geology class because the geologist who was supposed to teach [it] was a Young Earth Creationist."
The post immediately blew up. As of this article, it has over 98K upvotes. And that's not even the most impressive part. The comment section got filled with similar stories, with people talking about "professionals" who made a career despite their controversial -- and often contradictory -- personal views. Here are some of them.
Image credits: foamtherunway
This post may include affiliate links.
I'm an RN and worked with FAR too many people in the healthcare field as a whole (not just other nurses, but also lab workers, RT's, pharmacists, hell even some MD's) who think/thought COVID was a hoax or "greatly exaggerated" and are now refusing the new vaccine, even though we all KNOW how mRNA and vaccines work. Plenty of anti-maskers too. It's like they just used their degrees as tissue paper or something, I seriously don't get how you can learn what we learn, understand it well enough to practice in the field, and yet still allow political stances to override all that, it's freaking ridiculous.
It's not "stupidity", at least not in the traditional sense. It's tribalism, and allowing fear of others and a devotion to a culture war to over-ride their actual knowledge and common sense. Plus they have cultivated an approach, over decades, of simply dismissing things they don't want to be true. There's no climate change, covid is a hoax, the election was stolen - something happens that they don't like so they make up some s**t to explain it away. Once you're in that sort of mindset it's REALLY hard to break out. But it's not "stupidity" and we need to understand it because there are MILLIONS of these people and their devotion to lies will be the end of democracy and the planet if we let it.
Load More Replies...It's so weird, too, (warning, GenX-er here), when I was a kid, it was "get your vaccines or you can't go to school" (or summer camp, which I actually liked!) I had a job in a hospital when I was a teenager, there was a measles 'outbreak' (one case!!) and they just lined us all up and gave us a measles shot. It was just assumed that of course we would do this thing for the public good.
The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...I don't think it's a political stance . I think it's people using the information they have gained to make decisions in their lives . If your thoughts aren't the same as theirs , that's not surprising . People live different lives, learn different things and have different experiences . We also don't need to be rude to people who don't share our beliefs . We have to stop this social media fighting. It is f**king us up as a society honestly. It's worse than road rage because it's on such a grand scale . People are attacking strangers because they're so triggered. Be nice .
It is both, and sadly those that have made a choice based on actual scientific information (for example have pre-existing conditions that make vaccination a high risk) are often thrown into the same pot as those that refuse based on political stances. I do agree, though, that being outraged and condemning them online is the wrong way to go at it. Because people without pre-existing conditions who refuse vaccinations are not really basing their decision on science - science says it's better to vaccinate than not do it! - but on some weird 'gut feeling', and your gut is not actually smart.
Load More Replies...Is this in the US? I'm a medical professional in Denmark and I've not met a single person who works in any medical field who believes any of that crap. We do have anti maskers and anti vaxxers in Denmark, but I've only ever come across them online, never in person.
You live in a make-believe world. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Agree 100% with you. This is ignorance at it's finest and "tribe mentality" as well. I don't get it nor never will.
I'm a CVT who works with a veterinary surgeon who has been complaining about the mask requirement at work for over a year. We work in an OR and have been wearing surgical masks all day for over a decade, but suddenly he had a problem with it. He exhibited COVID symptoms and tested positive on three separate occasions throughout the year.
The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...No. If they do their job, follow the hygiene-rules and are good at the job they need to do, do not fire anyone just because they don't think the same way you do. Even if you are RIGHT, do not become a dictator of opinion. We need to be able as a society to have differences of opinion
Load More Replies...This probably gets a ton of downvotes, but the trials to these covid vaccines are still lasting, so even the manufacturers don't really know the extent of side effects or for how long the vaccine is even effective... I'M NOT AN ANTIVAXXER, but I've had some weird side efffects from a vaccine before and also from some medications and considering my familys ilnesse history, my doctor advised to not vaccinate now... So I kind of understand the situantion with covid vaccines, as this is a new technology and saying that anybody knows the full extent of how mRNA vaccines work, is not correct as the trial period is still on.
Hope this is useful to you. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Don't you know it. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Yes. There should be a lot of politicians, policy makers, heads of authority and medical professionals in jail for preventing you from seeing things like this: The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Just because you have a degree or learn particular skills and are good at them doesn't mean you're smart or that you're not naive. Unfortunately.
As this post proves. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...People that ignorant shouldn't be allowed to work in the healthcare industry.
I suppose you'd be the judge of that. Naturally. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Makes me wonder if your mum chewed lead paint chips also, or if it was just you. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...I have met way too many arrogant people in the medical field, most of them down right a-holes who should not be in a profession built to CARE for people
And they've instructed you that you can have a scientific consensus even though the idea contradicts the scientific methodolgy, and that they will let you know what's best for you, but just don't go looking for yourself, child. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Proof that a lot of these ppl work in these fields for money and not because the actually “care”
You're on the money, more or less, but the book will make a lot more sense if you turn it right way up. Never forget: scientific consensus. Think about it, laugh, and never, ever forget the lesson. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...My brother and his wife are two of them. Neither are doctors but work in the hospital system
Be thankful. You'll understand soon just how hard good doctors are to come by. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...And this, already, is where I truly cannot go on. I just can't, humanity has become too stupid, I'm leaving, bye
All of humanity? Excluding you? - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Every page on this site is a nightmare horror. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...There are a lot of antivaxxers and Covid hoax people in the medical field.
You certainly know what you're talking about. Perfect use of nomenclature... Clap f*****g clap. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Common sense slides off the table.... And Absolute Stupidity replaces it.
The problem is that you don't realise just how right you are. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Ditto. How can they do this? I get it with X-ray techs, who think they know more than they do (sorry, but it's true), but if you work in a hospital or even doc office.... You should know better, and leave your politics at home! .....
How can people have very strongly supported opinions on unsettled science? Isn't that what you want? If not, then you're a concern to the very notion of reason. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...I do not know what country you live in but I have taught trainee nurses and I would have serious doubts at many understand the science parts
I have a cousin in the health care profession who is the same way. Ignore facts and go with the conspiracy because .."ITS WHAT THEY WANT YOU TO BELIEVE, AND THATS HOW THEY TAKE OVER."
I did a massage course. You know, like those airy fairy hippy type women who just like to stand around in oil infused rooms with luxuries at hand relaxing while they get paid to project an aura of spirituality and non-materialism? Our teacher, a nurse of more than 30 years, massage therapist for 10, and used to lecture for students of nursing. She let us in on that our anatomy and physiology unit was well, well beyond what she needed to learn to become a nurse or teach to her students. But, why not. Accept the subliminal zeitgeist in the word of a glorified pill box, because: appeal to authority of the lowest denomination. I bet you hit every pothole in the parking lot. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...When my dad got the COVID vaccine his second dose made him pretty sick. His coworker/s (he’s a doctor) talked about how stupid it was to get the vaccine.
It's good to hear your dad's now found reasonable advice. He should keep his mind open on the subject, but it sounds as though he's got the best advice possible for now. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Your lack of elaboraton tells much. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...I agree most of you sheep are stupid, good luck with your health after jabs for a mortality rate less than 1%.
Here ya go, mate: The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...In my country health care professionals are required to have vaccinations for airborne-contacted deceases, including the seasonal flu and covid. So no-one forces you to get vaccinated, but then you just can't work anywhere with sick people, the elderly or infants. Simple as that.
Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Look up the 14th video of the series Perspectives on the Pandemic (15 episodes spanning more than a year) on the YT channel for Journeyman Pictures (decades-long highly acclaimed British journalistic organisation with some of the best journos in the world). It'll give you a description of why that might be a bad idea. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...It's insane.... although I think being in healthcare but not believing or practicing it should disqualify you to be a professional. It's like me ( atheist all my life) saying i have a right to be the pope but I don't believe in anything
There's believing in your profession, then there's psychophantic acceptance of every policy to gain favour by popularity rather than demonstration of validity. I really don't get how so many of you struggle so hopelessly to comprehend the difference. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...I'm sorry you have to work with these individuals. You are a vital part of the reason so many survived.
YT channel - Journeyman Pictures. British journalistic organisation that has been at the height of the industry, highly acclaimed, for decades. Check out the series "Perspectives on the pandemic" and you might come to realise that the exact opposite is quite likely true. If you ever had any responsibility, it is to understand. Never to blindly follow. Someone of your vintage ought to have learned that lesson by now. What happened? I recommend starting with the most recent episode and then proceeding in reverse order until you get a clear picture in order to save yourself time. I believe that there are 15 episodes in total, spanning a period of more than a year.
Load More Replies...Add to this group police officers and firefighters. A vast percentage won't be vaccinated against Covid.
With good reason. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...I don't even understand how that can be a political stance. It's just facts and information people refuse to understand. It's not even that complicated. Some people are just a little slower in the critical thinking department.
I explain where your first error is. Science doesn't present facts. That's a misunderstanding. It uses the term fact, but it doesn't actually intend to imply "unshakeable, inalterable, eternal truth of the highest resolution". It simply says that, to the best ability that the data that is available can be understood, these are the best options. Note that I deliberately used the word these and not this. Your second error is this: you take for granted that politics, personal bias and difference of opinion are things that a lab coat and a degree elevates a person beyond. There is hardly any sillier notion. Third error: you spend a lot of time passively receiving information. Fourth error: even passively, the information you receive comes through one primary channel, represents one primary viewpoint. You've been very silly. Very, very silly in a very serious situation. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Dear dumb RN: They are not refusing the vaccine because they don't understand how m-RNA and vaccines work. They are refusing the vaccine because they are not at risk of dying of Covid, and because the long term risks of the vaccine are totally unknown. That makes the vaccine (for them and for most of the healthy population) a medically imprudent health risk.
Looks like you're all good, but here, anyway. The wood is thick in these parts. Best work together. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Well the president of the USA didn’t mask and made COVID political. But then he got COVID which apparently gave him super powers. 😂😂😂😂
The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Because they believe that governments are over stretching under the guise of covid, which they actually did. Precisely because they have medical knowledge they believe they have a deeper understanding to handle these topics.
The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...You don't know the half of it... - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Sure. People who trust their training certainly shouldn't oppose those who blindly follow. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Half of all medical professionals (of ALL professionals) graduate in the lower half of their class.
If they all had the same opionion then that would be an extraordinary statistic anomaly. Sounds like you're stroking the boat. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Which degree do you hold? A large number of people, all sharing a profession, all sharing training, and all sharing an opinion that the forced narrative is not the best, and you really want to force the notion that what they have in common is that their qualification ought to be retrogressively nullified? For sharing an opinion? You don't consider that there might be a reason why there is such a high number of professionals in that field who object to the forced narrative? You don't think that it could be indication that "scientific consensus", the most fanciful term to have ever entered the scientific vernacular, a field that insists on variety of hypotheses, might be an insidious falsification? Please, realise, you're taking part in a cult. You are not making any sense. And yet your statement fits exactly with what is being broadcast. Think about it. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
This is exactly the same process that’s involved when people believe in religion despite every fact provided by science.
Do you ever stop talking s**t, Jace? - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...The stupidity of these people is dangerous bc others look to them thinking they are experts. When the cervical cancer vaccine came out I had a huge row with my mum bc she didn't want me to get it. A friend of her's, a nurse, claimed that there was no such thing as a cancer causing HPV and so the vaccine was either a money grab or some toxic conspiracy
Mate... A large number of people, all sharing a profession, all sharing training, training that we're all supposed to trust, and all sharing an opinion that the forced narrative is not the best, and you really want to force the notion that what they have in common is that they are all foilhats? For sharing an opinion? An informed opinion? This is not "some vaccine". This is a first-of-its-kind-to-ever-be-used-in-history-brand-new-technology-untested-and-with-no-data-short-or-long-term-whatsoever-rushed-through-without-regular-precautions vacccine. A vaccine that was accepted for use a year ago, but which is using as its main ingredient a protein that only several months ago it was revealed in a trusted publication that it is toxic and also that the vaccine is not behaving as intended - it's delivering a protein that delivers an exaggerated immune response that would normally be isolated to the airways, into the bloodstream and directly to the heart, to the brain, hence the complications. The recent publication of the protein implies that while first time around, let's be generous and say few will have a significant reaction, but second time around more will - and what do we see? We see second injection, greater reaction. Take a guess what the implication is for the third and fourth are, the topup next year. What do you reckon about the fifth and sixth the year after? You don't consider that there might be a reason why there is such a high number of professionals in that field who object to the forced narrative? You don't think that it could be indication that "scientific consensus", the most fanciful term to have ever entered the scientific vernacular, a field that insists on variety of hypotheses, might be an insidious falsification? Please, realise, you're taking part in a cult. You are not making any sense. And yet your statement fits exactly with what is being broadcast. Think about it. - The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed. Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity. https://gbdeclaration.org/
Load More Replies...Scarier is the amount working in health care who have no understanding about the masks they are using. Surgical masks designed for healthcare use must conform to standards EN 14683:2019+AC:2019 which says if they are being worn against viruses they must be used in conjuction with a respirator device. This is because the basic maths tells you that a mask that filters only particles larger than 30 microns has less than a 1 in 100 chance of stopping a virus that is 0.3 microns in size. Factor in people touching the mask or not replacing them everytime after use along with bad fitting and that efficency drops even further. Stastically speaking, you stand a better chance of protection by constantly shouting rude words at the virus and taking only short breaths inbetween! The best mask for protection are N95 masks, but even they are not 100%
Viruses can't 'fly' out of you without a vector, which in this case is moisture droplets in your breath, so no, a surgical mask can't stop a 0.3 micron sized particle, but it will stop the moisture droplets the virus is carried in, and hence reduce the aerial spread, which is the point of surgical masks- not to protect the wearer, but the patient on the table
Load More Replies...This vaccine has been tested. Why do you say untested vaccine?
Load More Replies...My high school biology teacher was a super religious creationist. He taught us about evolution while telling us how he thought it was all bulls**t. I always wondered why people go into professions that are directly opposed to their beliefs. Seems like a miserable existence.
It's because they want to prove it to themselves to try and answer the huge doubts they have about religious dogma
I’ve worked with an aerospace/aeronautical engineer once that believed the earth was flat. It was so weird because in order for the calculations to function properly, you have to take into account of the earth not being flat.
I’m an ICU nurse of about 10 years. I would occasionally float to our regular, non-icu and non-covid floors. Plenty of nurses who denied how serious covid was.
The cognitive dissonance is real. Of course none of them came up to help on our covid units
Degree is Psychology here. So many peers with devout faith, one brain dead moron took psychology as a way “to know god better” he told me and convert more to Jesus.
Once took a course literally called, “Belief in Weird Things” which was for Psych majors. 300 students enrolled, nearly half dropped out because they were offended at some point when we broke down their weird beliefs.
I'm all for people having faith in any religion or moral code, but they have to accept that others don't necessarily share those beliefs.
Used to be a science teacher and I always got flack on the evolution chapter from parents that were doctors. Like babe I hope you at least believe in bacteria and viruses evolving...
I've also come across many nurses who don't think mental illness is real.
Professional cook here. Near the beginning of the pandemic I heard about a Sous Chef I worked with in the past being an anti-masker. I asked through the grapevine why he washes his hands before and after handling food and the reply was “that’s common sense”. But somehow the scientific medical community saying that masks help prevent illnesses is just a big hoax. It’s beyond frustrating.
My friends uncle is a '5G gives you cancer while the government controls your mind' conspiracy theorist. He's a 5G installer
You should play along and ask him how he can do that to people and sleep at night.
My mom's really into homepoathy bulls**t (treating illnesses with the souls of elements or whatever). She's a pharmacist.
I think the homeopathy trend has more to do with the fact that many people haven't found the medical help they needed from traditional medicine.
I worked with a former airline PILOT who was/is a flat earther. He has since went back to being a pilot but I am not sure if he still thinks Earth is flat. When I pressed him on being a former pilot and believing malarkey he claimed the schools indoctrination into round earth didn’t work on him and that the pilots windscreen was a very thick and curved glass that made everything appear to be curved.
I remember a few Evangelists and one Catholic ( odd since most Catholics I know aren't creationists) in my major (geography) saying they knew the truth about the age of the earth, but had to lie on tests (classes like oil&gas, hydrology, geology,etc.) in order to get good grades.
How Christian are you when you break one of the 10 commandments and lie about your faith in order to get ahead?
Last career I had, knew people who were flat earthers and moon landing deniers...we were all satellite communications engineers.
I work with a medication aide that refuses to take medication and actively preaches god>medication. Apparently god isn’t paying her bills so she still keeps coming to work.
I know someone who doesn’t believe in germ theory. We work for a company that builds water sterilization.
I worked with a wildland firefighter who was a climate change denier. We fought more wild fires. We got way more OT over 3 years. Yet didnt believe it was true science and started to complain he couldnt enjoy his summers due to work....lol
Not at all surprising. My farrier is a professional fire fighter (his group takes their rig all over the Western US to fight those epic fires) big climate denier. Great farrier.
I know a dude who works in the oil field who doesn't believe in dinosaurs. "Fossil fuels"
He’s not right obviously but fossil fuels aren’t actually dinosaur-based.
I work with someone who thinks bloodletting is a cure-all.
I work in a children's cancer ward.
I work with a locomotive engineer who is a flat earther and also said that gravity is a hoax. I can laugh at the flat earth part but not believing in gravity on a fright train in the mountains seems a little crazy to me.
I work with two anti-vaxxers. They are nurses who work with elderly patients.
Recently found out that an anti-vaxxer worked at my step-father's retirement home and contracted Covid. The home's response was that with human rights they couldn't force her to get vaccinated. We all wanted her fired. We have the right to refuse her access to our relatives. It turned into a real s**t show.
I used to work with a geologist who used to think minerals ("crystals") could heal you even from cancer.
Which is hilarious because some minerals can cause cancer or are dangerously toxic. Asbestos and cinnabar, for example.
I work in defense. No one there believes government creates jobs. We only get paid by government.
I work with a cancer biologist who fell for the alkaline diet hype. She got persuaded by somebody who is 1000x less educated in the matter than she is.
I’m an aircraft mechanic and I work with a guy who believes in chemtrails.
My mom is a geologist and she worked with someone who was a young earth creationist. That person's excuse was "god created rocks that were 4.6 billion years old". I guess if it works it works, but that makes no sense to me
One of my teachers (it wasn't a biology teacher) made me do a homework to prove that dinosaurs aren't mammals as, for him, mammals are animals with lungs.
I worked with a guy who’s previous job had been designing missile launch systems who also thought the earth was flat, I’m not entirely sure how he slept at night
I worked with someone who had a PhD in genetics but was young earth creationist. She couldn’t seem to comprehend phylogenetic diagrams, useless as supervisor to PhD students, seeing as she was incapable of discussing a number of highly relevant topics.
Honestly, research, publication and supervisory skills are totally different anyway. I know a number of PhDs who were horrific supervisors. One actually got banned by the department from taking female grad students as she was horrifically emotionally abusive to them and they had to scramble to find new supervisors. No one would ever warn the incoming students though.
My 4th grade science teacher and my 9th grade history teacher are moon landing deniers...
If someone tells you they don't believe in the moon landing, just look them dead in the eye and say "you believe in the moon?!?!?"
I had to teach a historical geology class because the geologist who was supposed to teach is was a Young Earth Creationist.
I've met a PhD in Chemistry from a top 5 university that was anti-vax. Their PhD work actually involved the analysis of heavy metals in an environment and how it impacted a childs likelihood to develop autism. I got into it with them, and they were able to reference a handful of scholarly papers to justify their stance.
Honestly, having a PhD myself, its not about intelligence but more about the ability to complete tasks on time. A lot of really smart people never finish cause they are either perfectionists or terrible at time management. And A LOT of scholars cherry pick information to fit their points of view
Note: this post originally had 33 images. It’s been shortened to the top 30 images based on user votes.
Steven Brandenburg was a licensed pharmacist by the state of Wisconsin who deliberately left 500 doses for the Moderna vaccine fall below temperature, which were then injected into hopeful patients ineffectively. The ignorant will only do evil if the enlightened allow them where only good is needed.
Nice bit of gossip. What's your point? While I'm here: you know the name of the inventor of mRNA? His name is Robert Malone: Spike protein is very dangerous, it's cytotoxic (Robert Malone, Steve Kirsch, Bret Weinstein) https://youtu.be/Du2wm5nhTXY ; Maybe it was the worst choice for the best reason.
Load More Replies...The youtube show 'Today I Found Out' did an episode on the flat earth conspiracy and concluded with (roughtly) these words: "It's always imprtant to note that many of the core psychological quirks that make flat earthers believe the earth is flat in spite of all the evidence of the contrary, exist in all of us. We all have firmly held beliefs that simply arent true and are based on the same level of evidence. Yet we tenuously cling to them and no amount of evidence is going to convince us otherwise. But luckily for most of us the absurdity isn't quite so easy to spot, allowing us to feel superior to those with alternate ideas."
Albert Einstein said that the two most common things in the Universe were hydrogen and stupidity. A lot of these dips have no business being in their professions!
Load More Replies...I was reprimanded by a nurse at my ob/gyn for choosing to get my tubes tied after having twins, our first and only children. Found out later she had 10 kids and was devoutly Mormon. I'm a Protestant with tattoos, wild colored hair, and a comprehensive knowledge of power tools. I live in an area with a high Mormon population. With very few exceptions, most of them are extremely nice and would never do something like that! (The yelling at me for my choices, I mean. There are LOTS of kids around here 😏)
I work for a major hospital and one of my coworkers refuses to get the flu shot each year because she doesn't like the side effects and claims she's never had the flu so what's the point. I used to work in front of her in the office before the pandemic and I'm so glad we work from home now. I'm high risk for everything due to an autoimmune disease and she knew it, but didn't want to protect herself and others because she didn't like how the shot made her feel (I have violent reactions to vaccines because of aforementioned autoimmune disease, but I suck it up because the flu could literally kill me). You work for a HOSPITAL, you know perfectly well healthy people can get horrible reactions to the flu all the time and it's worse when they don't have any history of the vaccine. They offer you this for FREE, just get it FFS and stop being selfish. She has a kid in the same boat as me now, so I'm hoping she changes her tune.
A degree does not prove that someone has good reasoning or critical skills. A degree merely proves that the student is capable of producing material that satisfies certain basic criteria.
Load More Replies...With Anti-Vaxers no amount of logic or reason is going to sway their opinion so you really need to fight fire with fire so I have come up with a batshit crazy conspiracy to combat them. My conspiracy theory is that the Anti-Vax movement was created by an evil patriarchal cabal that is determine to bring down feminism and lock women out of having careers of their own. Rational for this is before vaccines were readily available the child mortality rate was 20 times than it is today (and this is the case only 100 years ago go back further and it was a lot higher) so if a couple wanted a couple of kids that reached adulthood they needed to have 5-6 kids just to hedge their bets (in developed counties where Vaccines are readily available and accepted not only does it reduce infant deaths from disease but also reduces SIDS by 50%) which means the years that women spend today building and developing their career was instead spent pumping out and looking after babies.
This is one of the sleaziest, gossipy, low standard pages I've seen on this site. And sleaze is this site's specialty.
This clearly shows what I am preaching for years; our educational system is pretty broken. You literally can be an idiot but with a bit of cleverness you can slip through the system to get academical titles. There is a guy in the German neonazi party who is a history teacher. How the hell you know our history and still be a homophobic racist? There are people with doctor or professor titles who firmly believe the earth is flat. Our system is almost 100 years old and barely evolved for decades
A lot of the comments here mock professionals for having doubts/questions within their field of expertise. But maybe people have these doubts BECAUSE they have extra knowledge about the topic. I have a PhD in immunology and am quite wary of the COVID vaccines, because I know how it works, and how it is completely different from a conventional vaccine. Meanwhile, 9 out of 10 people I talk to have no idea how the novel mRNA vaccine works, and think I am a loony anti-vaxxer. Oooook
That is called ultracrepidarianism. Everyone do it, we have an opinion on everything without having any knowledge in this field. We all do that. Against or pro nuclear power?: unable to explain trully how this work but still opinionated, it's valid on every topic, it's human nature. As a ethologist, sometimes i comment about animals facts or share some knowledge and i'm downvoted, because you know "i had many dogs in my life so i know better than a scientist who spend 5 years to study that field" or "because my vet said so" ( a vet is specialised in medicine, not behavioral biology/psychology for example). But we all are ultracrepidarians, it's human to pick a side even (and sometimes even strongly) if we truly know nothing about the matter. I know that i know nothing.
Load More Replies...I love these robust discussions! Most Pandas restore my trust in humanity which gets a beating regularly.
It amazes me how all the Pandas are so SURE of their beliefs. They post that anyone that disagrees must me crazy. Use some humility. Higher power, vaccines, CDC, climate change, racism, Biden, Trump...believe or not your opinions on the might be wrong
Science, unlike religion, isn't about "belief". It's about testing things and proving whether they work or don't.
Load More Replies...College level course and we had a guest speaker. He was a research physician who had recently studied the efficacy of acupuncture. They put up a cloth sight barrier so the patient could not see what they were using. Turns out if you are poked with a toothpick you have the same result as being poked with an acupuncture needle. So, confirmation bias leading to placebo effect. One student was so upset she yelled at the speaker and left the room Sorry not sorry to burst your bubble.
I'm an ICU doctor and many of my colleagues and nurses still have not gotten the vaccine because they "don't need it" or "it needs to be studied more" or '"it might give me infertility"
Why would people take over a profession that challenges their beliefs? And how can they believe things despite evidence? I sense a lot of existential crisises in their lives
Well, I was in the US military, despite being an ardent pacifist. Though I will admit that being in the US military is what turned me into a pacifist.
Load More Replies...To be honest not many of these are that surprising now that I think about it. Sometimes even the most intelligent beings tend to possess questionable or outright dumb opinions, especially some of the widely regarded and celebrated philosophers of the past.
Yes, because everywhere else in the world people are brilliant and have perfect knowledge of the truth.
Load More Replies...TRUE LIFE TESTIMONY OF HOW MY DAD WAS CURED FROM CANCER.> I am Brown. My Dad has been suffering from (CANCER) disease for the past 2 years. He had constant pain, During the first year, we all had faith in God that I would be healed someday. This disease started circulating all over his body, after going through ( 5 ) chemotherapy and Radiatherapy for 1year and he has been taking Cytotoxic, monoclonal Antibodies, (MABs) treatment from his doctor he was tired of life, he wanted to commit suicide, few months ago i decided to go on search in the internet if i could get any information concerning the cure for Cancer, on my search i saw a testimony of Mrs Sharon from USA who has been cured from (CANCER) by this great Dr. Alabi and she drop the email address of Dr. Alabi: bestherbalcure@gmail.com.. and also advised we should contact him for any sickness that he would be of help, so i wrote to Dr. Alabi telling him about my Dad (CANCER) he sent us the natural herbal remedies through D
Okay.... its time to start the down voting. This site is filled with one of the largest groups of sheep and close minded people I have ever seen. You all make me lose any hope I ever had for humanity. It makes me physically ill to see how far behind as a race we are. I couldn't care less about your comments and "opinions". You'll all down vote this because you are prisoners of your own mind. I feel so sorry for you all...
You know whenever somebody uses "sheep" as a degoratory term I view the post to be utter bollocks. Of course just one of those opinions you don´t care about while still writing yours.
Load More Replies...My cousin is a nurse and rants about how Covid vaccines are ineffective. So, yeah...
80-90% of all Middleeast population do not believe in Evolution including scientists, engineers, doctors, professors etc; even the biologists
hope u r alwys inside ur house... so there is less possibility of spreading the virus... u maybe healthy... good fr u..
Load More Replies...Steven Brandenburg was a licensed pharmacist by the state of Wisconsin who deliberately left 500 doses for the Moderna vaccine fall below temperature, which were then injected into hopeful patients ineffectively. The ignorant will only do evil if the enlightened allow them where only good is needed.
Nice bit of gossip. What's your point? While I'm here: you know the name of the inventor of mRNA? His name is Robert Malone: Spike protein is very dangerous, it's cytotoxic (Robert Malone, Steve Kirsch, Bret Weinstein) https://youtu.be/Du2wm5nhTXY ; Maybe it was the worst choice for the best reason.
Load More Replies...The youtube show 'Today I Found Out' did an episode on the flat earth conspiracy and concluded with (roughtly) these words: "It's always imprtant to note that many of the core psychological quirks that make flat earthers believe the earth is flat in spite of all the evidence of the contrary, exist in all of us. We all have firmly held beliefs that simply arent true and are based on the same level of evidence. Yet we tenuously cling to them and no amount of evidence is going to convince us otherwise. But luckily for most of us the absurdity isn't quite so easy to spot, allowing us to feel superior to those with alternate ideas."
Albert Einstein said that the two most common things in the Universe were hydrogen and stupidity. A lot of these dips have no business being in their professions!
Load More Replies...I was reprimanded by a nurse at my ob/gyn for choosing to get my tubes tied after having twins, our first and only children. Found out later she had 10 kids and was devoutly Mormon. I'm a Protestant with tattoos, wild colored hair, and a comprehensive knowledge of power tools. I live in an area with a high Mormon population. With very few exceptions, most of them are extremely nice and would never do something like that! (The yelling at me for my choices, I mean. There are LOTS of kids around here 😏)
I work for a major hospital and one of my coworkers refuses to get the flu shot each year because she doesn't like the side effects and claims she's never had the flu so what's the point. I used to work in front of her in the office before the pandemic and I'm so glad we work from home now. I'm high risk for everything due to an autoimmune disease and she knew it, but didn't want to protect herself and others because she didn't like how the shot made her feel (I have violent reactions to vaccines because of aforementioned autoimmune disease, but I suck it up because the flu could literally kill me). You work for a HOSPITAL, you know perfectly well healthy people can get horrible reactions to the flu all the time and it's worse when they don't have any history of the vaccine. They offer you this for FREE, just get it FFS and stop being selfish. She has a kid in the same boat as me now, so I'm hoping she changes her tune.
A degree does not prove that someone has good reasoning or critical skills. A degree merely proves that the student is capable of producing material that satisfies certain basic criteria.
Load More Replies...With Anti-Vaxers no amount of logic or reason is going to sway their opinion so you really need to fight fire with fire so I have come up with a batshit crazy conspiracy to combat them. My conspiracy theory is that the Anti-Vax movement was created by an evil patriarchal cabal that is determine to bring down feminism and lock women out of having careers of their own. Rational for this is before vaccines were readily available the child mortality rate was 20 times than it is today (and this is the case only 100 years ago go back further and it was a lot higher) so if a couple wanted a couple of kids that reached adulthood they needed to have 5-6 kids just to hedge their bets (in developed counties where Vaccines are readily available and accepted not only does it reduce infant deaths from disease but also reduces SIDS by 50%) which means the years that women spend today building and developing their career was instead spent pumping out and looking after babies.
This is one of the sleaziest, gossipy, low standard pages I've seen on this site. And sleaze is this site's specialty.
This clearly shows what I am preaching for years; our educational system is pretty broken. You literally can be an idiot but with a bit of cleverness you can slip through the system to get academical titles. There is a guy in the German neonazi party who is a history teacher. How the hell you know our history and still be a homophobic racist? There are people with doctor or professor titles who firmly believe the earth is flat. Our system is almost 100 years old and barely evolved for decades
A lot of the comments here mock professionals for having doubts/questions within their field of expertise. But maybe people have these doubts BECAUSE they have extra knowledge about the topic. I have a PhD in immunology and am quite wary of the COVID vaccines, because I know how it works, and how it is completely different from a conventional vaccine. Meanwhile, 9 out of 10 people I talk to have no idea how the novel mRNA vaccine works, and think I am a loony anti-vaxxer. Oooook
That is called ultracrepidarianism. Everyone do it, we have an opinion on everything without having any knowledge in this field. We all do that. Against or pro nuclear power?: unable to explain trully how this work but still opinionated, it's valid on every topic, it's human nature. As a ethologist, sometimes i comment about animals facts or share some knowledge and i'm downvoted, because you know "i had many dogs in my life so i know better than a scientist who spend 5 years to study that field" or "because my vet said so" ( a vet is specialised in medicine, not behavioral biology/psychology for example). But we all are ultracrepidarians, it's human to pick a side even (and sometimes even strongly) if we truly know nothing about the matter. I know that i know nothing.
Load More Replies...I love these robust discussions! Most Pandas restore my trust in humanity which gets a beating regularly.
It amazes me how all the Pandas are so SURE of their beliefs. They post that anyone that disagrees must me crazy. Use some humility. Higher power, vaccines, CDC, climate change, racism, Biden, Trump...believe or not your opinions on the might be wrong
Science, unlike religion, isn't about "belief". It's about testing things and proving whether they work or don't.
Load More Replies...College level course and we had a guest speaker. He was a research physician who had recently studied the efficacy of acupuncture. They put up a cloth sight barrier so the patient could not see what they were using. Turns out if you are poked with a toothpick you have the same result as being poked with an acupuncture needle. So, confirmation bias leading to placebo effect. One student was so upset she yelled at the speaker and left the room Sorry not sorry to burst your bubble.
I'm an ICU doctor and many of my colleagues and nurses still have not gotten the vaccine because they "don't need it" or "it needs to be studied more" or '"it might give me infertility"
Why would people take over a profession that challenges their beliefs? And how can they believe things despite evidence? I sense a lot of existential crisises in their lives
Well, I was in the US military, despite being an ardent pacifist. Though I will admit that being in the US military is what turned me into a pacifist.
Load More Replies...To be honest not many of these are that surprising now that I think about it. Sometimes even the most intelligent beings tend to possess questionable or outright dumb opinions, especially some of the widely regarded and celebrated philosophers of the past.
Yes, because everywhere else in the world people are brilliant and have perfect knowledge of the truth.
Load More Replies...TRUE LIFE TESTIMONY OF HOW MY DAD WAS CURED FROM CANCER.> I am Brown. My Dad has been suffering from (CANCER) disease for the past 2 years. He had constant pain, During the first year, we all had faith in God that I would be healed someday. This disease started circulating all over his body, after going through ( 5 ) chemotherapy and Radiatherapy for 1year and he has been taking Cytotoxic, monoclonal Antibodies, (MABs) treatment from his doctor he was tired of life, he wanted to commit suicide, few months ago i decided to go on search in the internet if i could get any information concerning the cure for Cancer, on my search i saw a testimony of Mrs Sharon from USA who has been cured from (CANCER) by this great Dr. Alabi and she drop the email address of Dr. Alabi: bestherbalcure@gmail.com.. and also advised we should contact him for any sickness that he would be of help, so i wrote to Dr. Alabi telling him about my Dad (CANCER) he sent us the natural herbal remedies through D
Okay.... its time to start the down voting. This site is filled with one of the largest groups of sheep and close minded people I have ever seen. You all make me lose any hope I ever had for humanity. It makes me physically ill to see how far behind as a race we are. I couldn't care less about your comments and "opinions". You'll all down vote this because you are prisoners of your own mind. I feel so sorry for you all...
You know whenever somebody uses "sheep" as a degoratory term I view the post to be utter bollocks. Of course just one of those opinions you don´t care about while still writing yours.
Load More Replies...My cousin is a nurse and rants about how Covid vaccines are ineffective. So, yeah...
80-90% of all Middleeast population do not believe in Evolution including scientists, engineers, doctors, professors etc; even the biologists
hope u r alwys inside ur house... so there is less possibility of spreading the virus... u maybe healthy... good fr u..
Load More Replies...