SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
U.S. Government Proposed Manipulating CDC Guidelines to Avoid Mask Shortages: Whistleblower:
The U.S. government proposed manipulating information about whether N95 masks worked to fight the spread of coronavirus in the general public, according to Dr. Richard Bright, a whistleblower who testified publicly for the first time on Thursday. The deception was an effort to avoid shortages and keep masks available for U.S. health care workers, but likely had a ripple effect throughout the country, leaving many people to believe that all masks are useless or even harmful during a pandemic. Bright's testimony is the first confirmation from a high-ranking official that the U.S. government actively sought to distribute incorrect information about N95 masks during the covid-19 pandemic.
Dr. Bright told the House Subcommittee on Health on Thursday about his attempts to warn others in the Department of Health and Human Services about the pending shortage of masks in January and early February, just as the novel coronavirus was spreading outside of China. Bright said that officials at the meeting simply said they would change the recommendations put out by the CDC to discourage the general public from buying masks.
"I indicated we know there will be a critical shortage of these supplies. We need to do something to ramp up production," Dr. Bright, the former top vaccine specialist at HHS, said of a meeting with HHS officials on February 7.
"They indicated if we notice there is a shortage, that we will simply change the CDC guidelines to better inform people who should not be wearing those masks, so that would save those masks for our health care workers," Dr. Bright testified.
"My response was, 'I can not believe you can sit and say that with a straight face'," Bright said. "That was absurd."
[...] Dr. Bright's entire 6-hour testimony is available on YouTube, and it's quite damning.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Sunday May 17 2020, @01:48PM (11 children)
Personally, I'm taking what I consider to be an exceptionally childish - yet effective - approach to "dealing with" the orange man. I ignore him whenever and wherever possible, and subtly belittle and ridicule those who extole his virtues. The Trump "supporters" I know aren't even offended when you make fun of him, they know how ridiculous he is, they mostly cling to the idea that the other choices would be worse for them. I disagree, but there's little point in trying to prove anything to a Trump supporter, facts and logic have little or no value to them - better to hit them with emotional persuasion, which is different for everyone.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2020, @03:54PM (1 child)
How is it childish to ignore a pathological liar?
(Score: 1) by hemocyanin on Sunday May 17 2020, @04:09PM
No shit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciXaP26TJBg [youtube.com]
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Bot on Sunday May 17 2020, @09:16PM (8 children)
Germans surrendered to Hitler because they knew Weimar was a slow death. Italians surrendered to Mussolini because the king said so but also because they were struggling with the death of agricultural society dictated by WWI. It's irrelevant to say Mussolini was a school teacher, Hitler a failing artist and they both didn't go above corporal rank in the army. Both were surely controllable or they would not have raised so high. Both had support from people who CORRECTLY assessed that keeping the status quo was a slow suicide. We have a similar situation now. You may not like those who choose Trump, I may not like those who choose a different hitler, e.g. AOC is promising. But the status quo is an engineered slow suicide, so I don't particularly blame who is manipulated into choosing a particular way out.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday May 17 2020, @10:21PM
The problem I see with mein Cheeto in Chief is that instead of a slow suicide he is pushing for a fast one.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday May 17 2020, @10:28PM (6 children)
So you're arguing that because people chose fascism last century, and had their reasons, we shouldn't blame them for doing it again?
Despite the fact that we know how that ended?
Weird.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 18 2020, @12:31AM (4 children)
Brown shirts were hired by companies because police failed to protect property from destruction by Antifa. The Weimar Republic had all of the features that "progressives" want. If you give someone 2 bad choices, they are going to choose 1 of them. So the point is to avoid painting ourselves into that corner. We have the benefit of history. But unfortunately, we teach history in such a way that makes avoiding it impossible. We teach that Hitler was bad, but not how to avoid getting another one because that would show that progressivism has been tried before and that it was an unmitigated disaster.
Speaking of 2 bad choices, maybe consider ranked choice voting.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday May 18 2020, @01:11AM (3 children)
Good lord.
What a strange worldview. It's almost like reality is optional.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 18 2020, @02:34AM
It's just another way of saying that the only thing worse than Trump was Clinton. Trump may be an ignorant buffoon, but he would have to do a lot more evil before he is worse than a hot war in Iran. Hillary and the MIC* were gearing up for that even before the election, her losing to Trump saved a lot of lives on both sides.
Search for the quote "Anyone can go to Baghdad. Real men go to Tehran."
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 18 2020, @03:12AM (1 child)
We were told that Hillary had a 99% chance of winning. Wrong. Trump colluded with Russia. Wrong. Reconsider whose reality is suspect.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 18 2020, @09:22PM
Ouch, we got some real flat earth level dimwits around here. Just going by simple reported facts you are wrong. Maybe you'll grow out of your infantile mindset.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday May 20 2020, @09:15PM
> Despite the fact that we know how that ended?
If this were an argument you shouldn't endorse anything remotely resembling SOCIALISM. Bernie, AOC, right out with the fascists.
You shouldn't invest money in any financial system...
oh wait this IS an argument.
Seriously, it is not like PEOPLE actually chose. They were presented with two alternatives. One, allowing the progress to snuff them out. Two, adhere to the controlled opposition in the name of some values, and then get blamed for having done so, so next gen will grow up wary of such values. Both alternatives embrace progress, which does not mean "something that gets better with time", means "unfolding of a plan".
For example the state of Israel was in the plan, the English caved in to terrorism and gave the land, Hitler, through terror, gave the people, even selecting them a bit.
Account abandoned.