You know, I have traded only a couple of comments with a
person on Facebook about Dr. Fauci and whether or not he is guilty or not of a
crime. So here is the exchange:
Him - The studies of policies that supposedly reduced
transmission has bad methodology. Lockdowns caused more harm than they helped
prevent harm. I don't have "questions" that Fauci was wrong, I have
evidence he was wrong and lied. If you cannot acknowledge that, you don't
deserve the trust of the public, and your public health policies will be
rejected even when you may be correct in the future.
When you say not everything RFK says
is true that's accurate. We all notice you didn't say that about Fauci though
even though the same standard applies.
Me- 'he was wrong and lied" is the issue, isn't it?
Many countries had the recommendations and lockdowns in place before the U.S.
even started. And as time went on and numbers came in, recommendations changed
along with a lot of politicalization, social media fear mongering, and people
pushing unproven treatments...... Health officials were being smothered and
yelled over.
So, the issue was.... Did Fauci have
the best up to date current best practices and purposely choose not to follow
them? That would be negligence. Did politicians make mandates and
recommendations based on his guidance in good faith? If not, That would be
negligence for the politicians. In the end, I truly don't believe that Dr.
Fauci was being malicious at all. He was just doing the best he could with what
little he was given.
Him - Yes Fauci lied. Negligently. Maliciously. On purpose. His diary proves
it. As does his actions and the people he was funding and promoting prior,
during, and after the pandemic response. I don't "feel" or
"believe" this. I know this. These are facts. That is what the
evidence says.
Me - ok.... Give me the proof from his diary then .... Give
me the dates to look at and not cherry picked phrases like people do with the
Bible.
Him - sure. He said in his diary February of 2020 that the
mortality rate was 0.1 to 0.3%. in congressional testimony in that same month,
he said it was 3%. That's a fearmongering lie used to serve his agenda and gain
power.
Ok, so this is more than I usually get from any commenter. They
usually say something like “do your own research” or “if you are too stupid to
look something so easy to find then I am not going to do it for you” or “You
are just a shill” or some dismissive statement like that.
But this guy, he actually gave me something I can go and look
at for myself. So here it is –
The diary entry from February 8, 2020- ----Tom Frieden called me this AM and
we discussed various aspects of the outbreak. He and I are on the same page in
thinking tht (sic) this is acting like a bad influenza in its transmissibility
and that the denominator is much greater than 34,867 (above) making the case
fatality rate (CFR) more like 0.2-0.3 % rather than 2.0%
The statement of the same topic
from COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED
SIXTEENTH CONGRESS – March 11, 2020 page 29.
So, it clearly is not as lethal, and I will get to the
lethality in a moment, but it certainly spreads better. Probably for the prac
tical (sic) understanding of the American people, the seasonal flu that we deal
with every year has a mortality of 0.1 percent. The stated mortality over all
of this when you look at all the data including China is about three percent.
It first started off as two and now three. I think if you count all the cases
of minimally symptomatic or asymptomatic infection, that probably brings the
mortality rate down to somewhere around one percent, which means it is 10 times
more lethal than the seasonal flu.
----
So, here is the real question. . . Did Fauci lie with the
specific intent to do harm, manipulate, or gain power?
Well, read the statements.
Fauci said that he was “on the same page in thinking that. .
. . “ . . . . in thinking . . . .
Does that sound like he was confident or making a
determination based on evidence? Nope. He was just bouncing ideas off of his
friend and trying to figure out where this virus was heading. No only that, he
was making predictions based on what he already knew about the Flu virus because
the Corona Virus was in the same family and that is all he had to go on at the
time.
Then a few days more than a month later . . . over a month
later . . . . He is in front of a senate hearing and giving his statements of
expertise. Realize that a month with this virus is a long time and data was
pouring in fast and daily - - -
He starts with current data – “The stated mortality over all
of this when you look at all the data including China is about three percent.” This
is not a conjecture or guess. It is a calculation given the numbers that have
been reported up to this point.
But then – he goes on to make a reasonable assumption based
on his prior experience – “I think if you count all the cases of minimally
symptomatic or asymptomatic infection, that probably brings the mortality rate
down to somewhere around one percent” He knows that there are a lot of
undocumented cases because of asymptomatic infections so he makes a modified
best prediction on the more conservative side.
Look, a diary is not a researched and verified piece of documentation.
It is a place where you keep notes and brainstorm ideas. Then that is taken to
the lab or data and numbers are taken in so that you can crunch the stats to
support conclusions. He was just bouncing ideas back and forth with a colleague
in an attempt to figure out what was in the best interest of the American people
– in this case – how deadly this virus was. Did he write a different idea
than what he gave as testimony in the Senate Hearing over a month later? Yeah.
Not doubt. Did he purposely lie with the intent to misguide or give negligent
info in an attempt to gain power or purposely harm innocent people? No. There
is no evidence of that.
And that is the point, isn’t it? That is what this whole
thing is about – intent. If Fauci was purposely giving false information with
the intent to do harm then yeah – he should be charge with negligence. But you
can see with this example that he had no intent to do harm. In fact he was
avidly trying to do his best to figure out how to do the opposite and he used
all his considerable contacts and resources to do the best he could under the circumstances
he had.
And here is where people really show the worst part of humanity....... They gravitate towards anger, hostility, and violence. And then with no looking or verification, they take what they hear that identifies with those feelings and parrots them back like the skipping of a broken record.
Look at the comment or in the beginning of this blog - " I have evidence he was wrong and lied. If you cannot acknowledge that, you don't deserve the trust of the public".
"you don't deserve the trust of the public"...... And when I looked up the actual text and read the actual passages that he gave as a source, his claim was pretty weak. I saw no lies. I saw no purposeful intent for harm. I saw a lot of predictive language and conjecture based on evidence and experience. That is not lying, it is working with a real unknown virus in real time.
As I am finding though, the average online social media comment or is not really knowledgeable about science procedure and scientific methodology.
This is hands down just regurgitation of what his news source or media source has fed him. I can pretty much garuntee he did not go to the original sources and read them for himself. And that is where the truth lies. He just had someone agree with him because he wants to promote anger and hostility. He gets attention for that and it makes him feel validated to be able to bait people.
And what was his response to my comment? Well, here it is - " If you want medicine to gain any credibility back, you'll have to do a lot better than that."
All I hear in my head reading this is PeeWee Herman chanting, "I know you are bit what am I?"
I mean, there really is nothing more to say, right? They have nothing.
So, I ended it with this final response - "Aaron Voss At least I didn't just believe what your lackeys and bias feeding social media spoon fed me. I went straight to the actual source material and read it for myself. Then I quoted it verbatim to prove my claim. If all you got is "you'll have to do better than that", without any references or quoted material from original sources, then you are as shallow as the crap they post on social media you repeat like their pet parrot.
" you'll have to do better than that"..... Weak. Very weak."
" you'll have to do better than that"..... Weak. Very weak."
