Coronavirus: Stanford doctors among leaders of global anti-lockdown

Interesting stuff coming from these doctors and scientists at Stanford university. This shutdown should have ended long ago.

“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,” the declaration states. “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.”


https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/10...leaders-of-global-anti-lockdown-movement/amp/

 

Those doctors are being portrayed by many as heretics. To the official narrative advanced by Fauci & Friends they are heretics.

Common sense and honesty are no longer operative in the US and certain western countries. Neither is the rule of law.

The dogma of the Church of the Poisoned Mind has subsumed the US culture. That's why it's best described as Plandemic.

 

Just like with AGW scientists with dissenting opinions and break liberal lockstep are ostracized

 

It seems appropriate that AGW dissenters are in "lockstep" with these group of "its all OK with COVID" while listing a huge number of supposedly supporters, with minimal and often specious agreement.

Sorry, while its possible that ultimately "herd immunity" may be effective, claiming its appropriate NOW without effective vaccine and, for God's sake, not knowing how long and effectively immunity is conferred after recovery is simply insane.

I think the "Theoretical Professor Theoretical Epidemiology" infectious disease is very appropriate to this pie-in-the-sky dream.

Tell us how long someone is immune after recovery, and how many. Then tgere could be a discussion.

The possibly severe effects of COVID need to be considered too, both lifetime and costs, in order to make this determination!

 

Thanks for the link. Very interesting. While the article mentions "focus on protecting the elderly and infirm who are most vulnerable" I didn't see any suggestion on how to do that. I would love to see things open up. The problem is so many people already seem unwilling to do their part to help protect the "most vulnerable" by simply wearing a mask. I guess we could take all the "elderly and infirm" and ship them off to some island as though they had leprosy.

Again, thanks for the link.
Rich

 

https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...mote-herd-immunity-declaration-signed-by-fake

These idiots claim that lockdowns are bad for society...and then recommend COMPLETE and virtually unending lockdowns for older people.

Make sense to you?

 

At risk people need to take extra precautions and things like certain shopping hours for them at grocery stores is a good example.

 

Your opinion verses many hundreds of doctors and scientists.

 

Gosh, from fact straight to hyperbole. How ever does your neck withstand that whiplash?

 

So are you willing to drop the retirement age to 55 in order to protect those folks?

No? I didn’t think so.


And how are those older folks going to get medical care? Receptionists, doctors, ambulance drivers/EMTs, delivery folks... all are going to be carrying the virus

 

Well?