Ron Paul Calls for the Firing of Dr. Fauci

Former Congressman Ron Paul, the Libertarian Party’s 1988 presidential nominee whose 2008 and 2012 Republican presidential campaigns brought notice to the libertarian movement, called for the dismissal of Dr. Anthony Fauci from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Paul made the comments yesterday during his YouTube show The Ron Paul Liberty Report.

See the video below:

Paul believes officials like Fauci intentionally overhyped the scale of the pandemic, including predictions about the number of deaths (down to 60,000 from 240,000) to claim the lower numbers were the result of their actions.  Moreover, he feels Fauci has emphasized the impending return of the coronavirus in the Fall so the populace will be conditioned to give up civil liberties willfully since the previous measures worked.

To curb misinformation, Paul suggests the firing of Fauci.  He does not believe this will occur because of Fauci’s heavy connections in the CDC Foundation, which billionaire Bill Gates owns and from which, Paul believes, Fauci benefits monetarily.  Therefore, he calls for a different kind of firing:

The people have to fire him. They have to fire him by saying he’s a fraud. He doesn’t give us any good information. They didn’t save us from ourselves!  His plan to give us total control over everybody . . . when things are getting back to normal, yes, people can return to work, and they do things, go to the golf course, if you get the stamp of approval. Your liberties are there if you get the proper stamp of approval from the government and say that you’re free of spreading any disease. But as this one goes away they’ll come up with another one.  It’s an excuse to have total control over the people. But I think the most important thing is people need to stop listening to him. If they’re going to listen to him, listen to him critically. What is he saying? What are other people saying?

Paul says people should listen to him and others like him because he approaches the coronavirus pandemic from the perspective of liberty.

55 thoughts on “Ron Paul Calls for the Firing of Dr. Fauci

  1. Matt Doney

    I firmly believe he has alternative motives and is pursuing an agenda destructive to our freedoms and Liberty with lies and mis-information. Dr Paul is absolutely correct.

  2. Tony From Long Island

    So many unbelievably reckless and irresponsible statements from Dr. Paul recently that I just shake my head. Might as well just throw away his book collection because I’ll never open them again.

  3. paulie

    So many unbelievably reckless and irresponsible statements from Dr. Paul recently that I just shake my head.

    Yeah, it’s unfortunate.

    Might as well just throw away his book collection because I’ll never open them again.

    You can sell or donate them. But there’s still a lot of good stuff there. You just have to take it in context, as with anything else.

  4. paulie

    Who, me? I’m guessing so since I doubt Tony has a bunch of books by Dan Behrman. Assuming yes, I am not sure what you mean by “feel the same”. Of course I would put any of Behrman’s statements in context, and feel it’s unfortunate when and if he makes some that are irresponsible. I haven’t followed him closely enough to know what all of them are. But I never have been an uncritical follower of him, or for that matter Ron Paul.

  5. dL

    Fauci is on record that freedom of association and commerce are to subsidiary to a vaccine being in place. Well, there isn’t likely to be coronavirus vaccine any time soon. There’s been no effective vaccine developed for SARs coronavirus that hit in 2003(or MERs that hit in 2012). Even if an effective vaccine is possible, it usually takes years for any vaccine to be safely developed and tested. I certainly wouldn’t consent to be a guinea pig for a vaccine rushed to production. Fauci and the CDC deliberately lied about the effectiveness of masks. Fauci–assuming he is a competent epidemiologist–is deliberately lying about 12-18 month horizon for a covid-19 vaccine. At least a safely tested one. So, yeah, he does represent the road quarantine lockdown to serfdom.

  6. paulie

    Fauci is on record that freedom of association and commerce are to subsidiary to a vaccine being in place.

    I’d have to look but I think he may have said vaccine or treatment. If remdesivir, antibody based blood or blood plasma treatments, etc, prove to be safe and effective, that may be good enough from his perspective.

    Well, there isn’t likely to be coronavirus vaccine any time soon. There’s been no effective vaccine developed for SARs coronavirus that hit in 2003(or MERs that hit in 2012). Even if an effective vaccine is possible, it usually takes years for any vaccine to be safely developed and tested.

    There’s been a lot more money, time and people focused on this one given the spread of the virus and what it had done to the world economy. You may well be right, but I’ve also seen lots of stories about various people claiming they have or soon will have vaccines that are effective. It remains to be seen.

    Fauci and the CDC deliberately lied about the effectiveness of masks.

    Most of what I have seen is that they are more useful to prevent others from being infected than in protecting yourself. Also, that when used incorrectly and/or repeatedly without proper cleaning that they can actually be counterproductive. The other big issue is making sure there are enough for health care workers.

    Fauci–assuming he is a competent epidemiologist–is deliberately lying about 12-18 month horizon for a covid-19 vaccine.

    I don’t think he ever promised it would be ready in that time frame. I believe every statement from him I’ve heard is that it’s not likely to be ready any earlier, not that it couldn’t take longer.

    From what I have seen he doesn’t advocate for a total lockdown, either. And he has said that much more widespread availability of testing can help in making ending lockdowns safer. We can agree or disagree with his positions, but we shouldn’t exaggerate them.

  7. dL

    If remdesivir

    Gilead is seeking orphan status for that drug, which would give it monopoly privilege against any generic competitors. I.e, it would be prohibitively expensive. It has to be to be administered intravenously in a hospital. And as of now, the drug has no proof of clinical effectiveness. It’s being administered under the compassionate-use protocol(i.e, anecdotal effectiveness), just like hydroxychloroquine.

    There’s been a lot more money, time and people focused on this one given the spread of the virus and what it had done to the world economy.

    There has been a lot time and money spent on coronavirus vaccine research since 2003. No vaccine, no definitive clinically effective treatment. Yeah, with covid-19, the amount of money and research will substantially increase. Maybe you get an effective treatment/vaccine in 10 years. But I wouldn’t count on a vaccine. No vaccine for HIV. And It took 10/15 years to get an effective treatment for it. And Fauci is an old fucker. IIRC, he was a public figure at the height of the AIDs moral panic, and he didn’t exactly come off as an exemplary figure during that time.

    Most of what I have seen is that they are more useful to prevent others from being infected than in protecting yourself.

    I can’t believe you are still parroting that government talking point from March. Pauli, you need to review April government talking points because they’ve changed. The government now tells us masks are useful to protect yourself from getting the virus.

    From what I have seen he doesn’t advocate for a total lockdown, either. And he has said that much more widespread availability of testing can help in making ending lockdowns safer. We can agree or disagree with his positions, but we shouldn’t exaggerate them.

    [April 3: Dr. Fauci Says We Need a Nationwide Lockdown and We Need It Now]
    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/y3m9wj/dr-fauci-says-we-need-a-nationwide-lockdown-and-we-need-it-now

    [April 10 ‘The virus decides when we reopen’: Dr. Fauci says it’s too early to relax the lockdown]
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8208143/Fauci-says-not-time-amid-coronavirus.html

    [Fauci’s 12-18 month horizon for a vaccine is bullshit]
    https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-vaccine-quest-18-months-fauci-experts-flag-dangers-testing-2020-4

    [Typical Vaccine development timeline is 15-20 years]
    https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/11/researchers-rush-to-start-moderna-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-without-usual-animal-testing/

    Fauci is at the scientific crackpot forefront to turn a temporary quarantine to “flatten the curve”(which means to simply prevent people from getting infected at the same time…the area under the curves are still the same. It does not mean prevent people from getting infected) into a soviet state to centrally plan allowable associations based on government magic to produce a vaccine in 12-18 months. People may shrug their shoulders at a 12 month biometric surveillance state. They would probably do a little more than shrug if the actual figure of 10 years was out there. Of course, once something is in place, it never gets repealed, no matter how widely perceived the absurdity.

    So, yeah, fuck Anthony Fauci…

  8. paulie

    Gilead is seeking orphan status for that drug, which would give it monopoly privilege against any generic competitors. I.e, it would be prohibitively expensive. It has to be to be administered intravenously in a hospital. And as of now, the drug has no proof of clinical effectiveness. It’s being administered under the compassionate-use protocol(i.e, anecdotal effectiveness), just like hydroxychloroquine.

    It was an example, among many I did and did not name, including antibody based treatments (from whole blood to plasma to derivatives), to existing vaccines being repurposed, to new ones under development, to the drugs you mentioned and others. Granted none of it is proven yet, but there’s plenty of reason to hope. And seeking status =/= getting it. Granted, it could, but it could also go the other way, if that does happen to prove to be the safe and effective treatment.

  9. paulie

    There has been a lot time and money spent on coronavirus vaccine research since 2003. No vaccine, no definitive clinically effective treatment. Yeah, with covid-19, the amount of money and research will substantially increase. Maybe you get an effective treatment/vaccine in 10 years. But I wouldn’t count on a vaccine. No vaccine for HIV. And It took 10/15 years to get an effective treatment for it. And Fauci is an old fucker. IIRC, he was a public figure at the height of the AIDs moral panic, and he didn’t exactly come off as an exemplary figure during that time.

    HIV, like SARS, MERS etc, did not shut down a big chunk of the global economy. And, again, I’m not counting on a vaccine. I’m syaing that an effective treatment of some sort – including possibly a vaccine, but that’s far from the only possibility – may well be possible soon. Then again, you may be right. It could take ten years. I think both the optimistic case and the pessimistic one are entirely plausible, along with the virus evolving in either beneficial or malignant ways as well as herd immunity – hopefully developed over a long enough period of time so as not to overwhelm the medical system or cause more panic and shutdowns than we have seen to date.

    Fauci is old, yeah. His history with the early days of HIV/AIDS was not entirely good or bad. In the beginning he was one of those who resisted allowing experimental treatments. Later on he was one of those who worked to loosen those guidelines.

  10. paulie

    From what I have seen he doesn’t advocate for a total lockdown, either. And he has said that much more widespread availability of testing can help in making ending lockdowns safer. We can agree or disagree with his positions, but we shouldn’t exaggerate them.

    [April 3: Dr. Fauci Says We Need a Nationwide Lockdown and We Need It Now]
    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/y3m9wj/dr-fauci-says-we-need-a-nationwide-lockdown-and-we-need-it-now

    [April 10 ‘The virus decides when we reopen’: Dr. Fauci says it’s too early to relax the lockdown]
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8208143/Fauci-says-not-time-amid-coronavirus.html

    [Fauci’s 12-18 month horizon for a vaccine is bullshit]
    https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-vaccine-quest-18-months-fauci-experts-flag-dangers-testing-2020-4

    [Typical Vaccine development timeline is 15-20 years]
    https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/11/researchers-rush-to-start-moderna-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-without-usual-animal-testing/

    None of those contradict what I said. He did advocate for a lockdown to flatten the curve. He’s also said that with testing and other measures it can be loosened up and done away with. He’s cautioned that if it happens what he considers prematurely that the result could be a rapid reescalation of the death spike to new heights, leading to longer and more damaging lockdowns or a massive crisis of another sort.

    “12-18 months” was what he said was a best case scenario for a vaccine based on previous experience, which was a cautionary response to the president’s claim that we would have a vaccine in a shorter time frame. However, that does not mean it can’t happen faster with more concentration of resources on the problem. It certainly doesn’t mean it can’t happen slower. It doesn’t say anything about drug therapies, finding already existing vaccines to be safe and effective for covid 19, antibody based treatments, long term herd immunity development, more widely available testing or other ways to fight the spread of the virus or mitigate its effects.

  11. paulie

    I can’t believe you are still parroting that government talking point from March.

    I’m not parroting anything. This is what articles I have read say, including recently. Yes, the government is now more in favor of the mask idea but that’s more of a “hope and prayer” thing along with protecting others from getting infected. It may also be that the mask shortage among health workers isn’t as bad as it was or as it was feared it would get. I haven’t seen anything saying that masks, especially other than the N-95 ones which are as far as I know still in short supply, are now considered an effective way to protect yourself. The government is pushing them more as a way to protect other people, as far as I know.

    Fauci is at the scientific crackpot forefront to turn a temporary quarantine to “flatten the curve”(which means to simply prevent people from getting infected at the same time…the area under the curves are still the same. It does not mean prevent people from getting infected) into a soviet state to centrally plan allowable associations based on government magic to produce a vaccine in 12-18 months.

    Thanks, I know what flatten the curve means. It remains a valid concern. Flattening it doesn’t mean it will stay flattened. However, it does buy time to get more prepared in terms of medical staffing and equipment, testing, and other ways to fight back against the virus. At this point Fauci is cautioning that the flattening is still too precarious and not enough of those other things have happened yet. He may be right or wrong, but he is neither saying that the current lockdown has to remain in place for 12-18 months nor anything like guaranteeing that a vaccine will be available that soon. We can agree or disagree with his position without exaggerating it.

  12. paulie

    From what I have seen he doesn’t advocate for a total lockdown, either.

    Bad choice of words. I meant continuing for a long time.

  13. dL

    to existing vaccines being repurposed

    There are no existing vaccines to repurpose for this.

    HIV, like SARS, MERS etc, did not shut down a big chunk of the global economy.

    The government has shut down a big chunk of the global economy, not covid-19. Covid-19 doesn’t hold a candle to HIV/AIDs, which has killed ~ 40 million people. If HIV came along today instead of the 1980s, governments would be shutting down shit down left and right. There was huge moral panic over AIDs when it first hit. It was an automatic death sentence. It wasn’t entirely known at first the extent of how it could be transmitted(saliva, vaginal fluid???). Governments simply didn’t have the technology nor the servility of a population bred by a generation of time under a 9-11 security state to do what they are doing today. So, thankfully, we Gen Xers were spared of having nightclubs and bars publicly banned out of existence.

    “12-18 months” was what he said was a best case scenario for a vaccine based on previous experience, which was a cautionary response to the president’s claim that we would have a vaccine in a shorter time frame.

    What previous experience? There is no previous experience of a coronavirus vaccine. The other pandemic Fauci is noted for as a public figure, HIV/AIDs, there will never be a vaccine. 12-18 months is not a best case scenario or a cautionary response. It’s a bullshit scenario. That being said, 12-18 “burn out by itself” scenario might not be bullshit.

    This is what articles I have read say, including recently. Yes, the government is now more in favor of the mask idea but that’s more of a “hope and prayer” thing along with protecting others from getting infected.

    Do you have a recent citation for mask effectiveness being equivalent to a “hope and a prayer”?
    Here’s the new CDC recommendation
    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover.html

    NY Times
    [Best Masks]
    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/health/coronavirus-best-face-masks.html

    WHO is revising its earlier recommendation RE: the use of masks
    https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1247193055188451330

    I have no idea what you are reading.

    Thanks, I know what flatten the curve means. It remains a valid concern. Flattening it doesn’t mean it will stay flattened. However, it does buy time to get more prepared in terms of medical staffing and equipment, testing, and other ways to fight back against the virus.

    No, flattening the curve simply means flattening the peak of the slope of the curve. The area under the curve(i.e, the number of infections) remains the same. it is not a statement about mitigating the spread of the disease. Suddenly, flattening the curve has turned into preventing the spread of the infection until a vaccine is found, which I think few would accept if a realistic timeline(years, if ever) were being presented instead of some bullshit months scenario Fauci is out pimping.

  14. paulie

    There are no existing vaccines to repurpose for this.

    I’ve seen all sorts of articles about repurposing existing vaccines and other treatments for this virus, along with developing new ones. It’s premature to say that nothing will work for ten years, or even one year. It doesn’t necessarily have to involve developing a new vaccine from scratch, and may not be a vaccine at all. There are unprecedented resources focused on this. If everything else fails, herd immunity will probably develop within a couple of years. That’s far from ideal and will involve a lot of deaths. But hopefully if it’s spread out over that time it won’t create the sort of overwhelming chaos that it would create if it happened within a much faster timeline. In the meantime, more widespread testing, medical staffing, PPE and various other measures can mitigate some of that chaos. And perhaps some effective treatments can be developed during that time.

  15. paulie

    The government has shut down a big chunk of the global economy, not covid-19.

    Not entirely. A lot of it was already shutting down on its own due to people’s fear even without government edicts. That probably would have happened to a much greater extent if the spread happened faster. Granted, government certainly had a lot to do with it, including its bumbling prevention of allowing the market to create testing early on.

  16. paulie

    Covid-19 doesn’t hold a candle to HIV/AIDs, which has killed ~ 40 million people.

    Over almost 40 years worldwide, yes. Covid-19 spreads much more easily, thus has a lot more lethal potential.

  17. paulie

    What previous experience? There is no previous experience of a coronavirus vaccine.

    More broadly, other vaccines for anything. 12-18 months is a best case scenario for any kind of new vaccine. However, that was without such an intense global focus, so it’s not impossible it could be faster.

  18. paulie

    Do you have a recent citation for mask effectiveness being equivalent to a “hope and a prayer”?

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/apr/21/scientists-join-calls-for-uk-public-to-wear-homemade-face-masks-outdoors

    “The CDC advice in the US is pragmatic,” Griffiths said. “It recognises both the need to ensure the supply of masks for clinical situations where they are obviously needed at the same time as recognising that there could potentially be benefits in wearing ‘masks’ in public to prevent passing on the infection.”

    P: As I said, wearing the ‘masks’ is more of a measure to protect others than to protect yourself.

    Article: Ministers are deeply reluctant to recommend the use of even homemade masks amid concerns that people will rush to buy medical masks and leave the NHS facing even greater supply shortages.

    Public Health England recommends face masks for the NHS and in social care settings but does not advise healthy people to wear them outside. World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines state that while masks can help prevent people from passing on coronavirus, they are inadequate protection on their own from contracting it.

    Prof David Heymann, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who chairs an independent advisory group to the WHO emergencies programme that is managing the Covid-19 pandemic, said the purpose of wearing face masks was to prevent the wearer from spreading the virus if they were infected themselves.

    “Masks should not be worn by the general public to protect themselves as there is evidence that masks do not prevent infection by other respiratory infections such as flu,” he said.

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/best-coronavirus-face-mask-materials-new-study_l_5e99b576c5b6a92100e63129

    …”And remember: By covering your face in public, you are helping others to stay safe from anything you may be carrying. It’s more about their protection than your own. ”

    P: If your hope is that they will keep you from getting sick, it’s a hope and a prayer. The government probably does recognize some psychological/placebo benefit in addition to protecting others. But, I read a new article just a day or two ago that still says they can be counterproductive, especially if used repeatedly without proper cleaning or worn incorrectly. I think it was from the Guardian, but I didn’t save the link.

  19. paulie

    Since you cited CDC here’s what is currently on their site

    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover-faq.html

    “Why do you need to wear cloth face coverings?”

    “In light of new data about how COVID-19 spreads, along with evidence of widespread COVID-19 illness in communities across the country, CDC recommends that people wear a cloth face covering to cover their nose and mouth in the community setting. This is to protect people around you if you are infected but do not have symptoms.

  20. paulie

    I have no idea what you are reading.

    Wide variety of articles by way of google news from many different sources, as well as a sampling of the far right/trumptard/conspiracy counternarative frequently peddled on libertarian discussion groups.

  21. paulie

    Thanks, I know what flatten the curve means. It remains a valid concern. Flattening it doesn’t mean it will stay flattened. However, it does buy time to get more prepared in terms of medical staffing and equipment, testing, and other ways to fight back against the virus.

    No, flattening the curve simply means flattening the peak of the slope of the curve. The area under the curve(i.e, the number of infections) remains the same. it is not a statement about mitigating the spread of the disease.

    D’oh. Once again, I already know what flattening the curve means. It means the same number of cases over a longer period of time. The purpose is to keep health care systems from being overwhelmed. It buys time to get more testing done, increasing staffing and PPE, and, yes, develop treatments (including but not limited to vaccines).

  22. paulie

    Suddenly, flattening the curve has turned into preventing the spread of the infection until a vaccine is found, which I think few would accept if a realistic timeline(years, if ever) were being presented instead of some bullshit months scenario Fauci is out pimping.

    Nothing sudden about it. The goals of flattening the curve have remained the same all along. It isn’t necessarily until a vaccine is found, but it does give some extra time to work on one as well as other treatments such as drugs (including existing ones), antibodies, and so on. It also gives time to manufacture, distribute and process more tests, masks, and all sorts of medical staffing and equipment to deal with the developing situation. A lot of that can happen much faster than 12-18 months. In fact as Fauci himself has said a lot of it can happen within weeks.

  23. Be Rational

    Thanks to the communistic-authoritarian-styled narcissist in the White House, the US started dealing with the Covid-19 virus far too late. Trump was more worried about his re-election and surviving impeachment.

    (The Republicans blew their chance to unload this disaster by getting 34 Senators to go along and vote to remove the traitor Trump.)

    Had the US started massive testing, with isolation of the infected and tracking the spread of the virus – as many people including Dr. Fauci had urged in late January – the US would have never had such a high infection or high death rate and the current draconian measures would have never been needed. A handful of countries started early and have succeed in achieving a far lower total infection rate with no mandatory shut down of the economy by starting early with testing, tracking, isolating and treating everyone who was sick, closing schools but not businesses, voluntary social distancing, and 2-week quarantines for those exposed.

    Trump was and is the problem. Not Fauci.
    Trump is the one who needs to be fired.
    Trump is obviously mentally incompetent and should have been removed from office long ago on that basis.

    The US now needs tougher continuing policies to deal with the Covid-19 crisis. Some States have gone a too far on the mandatory lock-downs, but it’s way too soon to open everything up again.

    There was a time. now long -past, when Ron Paul was savvy, cogent and principled.

  24. paulie

    closing schools but not businesses

    What did they do about child care? In the US many parents don’t have money for someone to watch their kids while they go to work. Of course some kids are old enough to be on their own, but in the US it’s become a very high age on average. There was no such problem for me even well before my age hit double digits; I could comfortably be at home by myself all day, or take a bus around town or between cities, or be off playing by myself or with friends a mile or more from home for hours without my parents knowing where I was. This was even before I left the USSR at age 7 in 1979, and after we arrived in the US the next year.

    It’s very different for my sister’s kids growing up now. They can never be anywhere without her or a designated adult watching them. She’d probably be fined, jailed or both if she let them. Not that she would. Her third grader rides in a car booster seat. I never rode in one in my life. She rode in one as a baby (she’s almost 10 years younger and born in the US) but definitely not as a third grader.

    Covid has her working from home now, and her husband lost his job. And if they were both working and school was closed she might have the kids at my parents’ house. But a lot of American parents don’t have friends, neighbors or relatives who would watch their kids without pay, or money to hire anyone to do it.

  25. Darcy G. Richardson

    That’s a great comment by Be Rational. Trump was too slow in taking this pandemic seriously and, tragically, will likely be proven to be too quick in re-opening the country. Stay safe everyone.

  26. Be Rational

    closing schools but not businesses

    What did they do about child care?

    In countries outside the US, children are left alone at home at a far younger age. Preschool aged children already had childcare arrangements set up where needed, with family, friends, professional childcare or preschools, so no change was necessary, and school age children are generally considered old enough to be left at home for part of a day.

    Over-protectiveness is an expensive, unnecessary luxury beyond the reach of most families in most countries

  27. SocraticGadfly

    I suppose Ron Paul supports the reassignment of Dr. Bright, as well? Fauci, that’s Italian? Right? Halfway to being darker, like black folk, Maybe that’s in Paul’s mind, too. (And, yeah, Paul-tards, including Doney or Tony if they’re one, I went there.)

    And, per Tony from Long Island: As if Paul didn’t have many reckless statements long before this?

  28. dL

    Prof David Heymann, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who chairs an independent advisory group to the WHO emergencies programme that is managing the Covid-19 pandemic,

    “Masks should not be worn by the general public to protect themselves as there is evidence that masks do not prevent infection by other respiratory infections such as flu,” he said.

    That’s obvious bureaucratic bullshit. n95 masks, by definition, meet a production standard to filtrate 95% of airborne particles. They have a use case scenarios for any number of professions that entail exposure to hazardous particulates, including health care. Health care workers wear masks to protect themselves from patients, not vice versa. The mask disinformation campaign started because the bureaucrats worried that the general public would hoard up the supply of n95masks, thus creating an even more pronounced availability shortage for health care workers. The more pertinent question is whether a less exacting standard of mask might be effective. If you search on n95 mask and the flu(pulling up results that predate covid-19, thus bypassing the the more recent disinformation filters), the answer appears to be yes.

    [ ubiquitous surgical (or medical) masks are just as effective as the more expensive n95 respirator for for prevention of influenza or other viral respiratory illness]
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/09/190903134732.htm

    Conclusion:
    “The takeaway is that this study shows one type of protective equipment is not superior to the other,” she said. “Facilities have several options to provide protection to their staff — which include surgical masks — and can feel that staff are protected from seasonal influenza. Our study supports that in the outpatient setting there was no difference between the tested protections.”

    A decent mask against airborne viral infection is not a hope and a prayer, which is obvious common sense. What is not so obvious is that such may be just as effective as the much harder to get n95 respirator.

  29. dL

    Covid-19 spreads much more easily, thus has a lot more lethal potential.

    Highly infectious is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient one. The cold and flu viruses are much more infectious than HIV, but not nearly as lethal. Covid-19 is obviously more lethal than seasonal flu, but the extent it is more lethal is unknown. What first looked to be 1 out of 100 now looks to be quite possibly more like 5 out 1000(compared to 1 out 1000 for the flu).

  30. dL

    It’s premature to say that nothing will work for ten years

    That’s the standard/average time for development of an effective and safe vaccine, assuming one can be found. If it’s possible to safely reduce that time frame by 90% with a more efficient protocol, then why isn’t that protocol in place? I assume you recall the early days of the AIDs epidemic when Burroughs Wellcome pushed out a repurposed drug, AZT, as a treatment protocol. That stuff was poison, and it was being prescribed to asymptomatic patients. For many, the cure was worse than the disease. To refresh our memory, this was all chronicled in the movie, Dallas Buyers Club.

    I’m confused why expediency vs safety is wrong thinking when it comes to social distancing but right thinking when it comes to vaccine development. Google informs me there are ~ 70 candidates in development. I suppose a 2 year window might be met if you skipped over the animal trails and human trials involving people who already have the virus and instead deliberately infect a sample human population with the virus. And then run all the protocols in parallel instead of in sequence. But I’m certainly not going to voluntarily consent to being inoculated w/ a repurposed bovine TB vaccine rushed to market following that protocol. Mandating biometric proof of inoculation vis a vis some experimental vaccine with all liability waived as a condition to step outside your house is a 10 on the 1-10 tyranny scale.

  31. dL

    get more prepared in terms of medical staffing and equipment, testing, and other ways to fight back against the virus.

    Like when French researches proposed that nicotine may protect against serious/clinical covid-19 infection(due to the observation that smokers are seriously underrepresented with clinical infection), and the French government promptly bans online sales of nicotine products?

    https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-52415793

    Perfect encapsulation of how the state rolls. One obvious casualty of this pandemic has been your skepticism of government. I’m not the type of conspiracy theorist to think governments invented the virus in a bio lab or concocted a hoax pandemic, but I am the the type of conspiracy theorist to know governments would suppress or even ban simple, effective treatments in favor of outrageously expensive political economy of Big Pharma + a biometric surveillance regime.

  32. paulie

    Highly infectious is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient one. The cold and flu viruses are much more infectious than HIV, but not nearly as lethal. Covid-19 is obviously more lethal than seasonal flu, but the extent it is more lethal is unknown. What first looked to be 1 out of 100 now looks to be quite possibly more like 5 out 1000(compared to 1 out 1000 for the flu).

    Even supposing that is correct, 5 times deadlier, several times more infectious and no vaccine or effective therapy is a very bad combination. And even with recoveries there’s a much greater rate of severe and prolonged illness.

  33. paulie

    That’s the standard/average time for development of an effective and safe vaccine, assuming one can be found.

    Again, granted, but:

    * Much more resources
    * Vaccines are not the only treatments being discussed
    * Herd immunity kicks in well before that, probably on the order of 2 years
    * Virus may mutate before that, and most times the mutations are in a benign direction, although not always
    * Increased testing and other measures mean there can be ways to mitigate the spread even without a vaccine or treatment – in weeks to a small number of months, not years

    I’m confused why expediency vs safety is wrong thinking when it comes to social distancing but right thinking when it comes to vaccine development.

    Because only a small number of people voluntarily participate in vaccine development trials. Social distancing on the other hand is meant to prevent a quick spread of the disease at perhaps 10-100 the annual death rate of the flu, with much more prolonged and serious illness among those who recover, overwhelming emergency response, health care, morgues, cemeteries, etc. And the much larger numbers of people involved are by and large not volunteers.

    Mandating biometric proof of inoculation vis a vis some experimental vaccine with all liability waived as a condition to step outside your house is a 10 on the 1-10 tyranny scale.

    Agreed. However, it’s inaccurate to suggest that is what Fauci is suggesting. He has made it clear that increased testing and ramping up health care and related systems to deal with the case load can be done in weeks to months, not years. Vaccines are far from the only treatment being developed but even without a treatment there can be a lot of mitigation in a much shorter time frame.

    You may also be confusing my personal opinion with Fauci’s. I have only argued that his stance should not be exaggerated, not that I agree with it. Personally I oppose mandatory shutdowns. I believe voluntary ones can be highly effective, and that the government has made the problem much worse by preventing tests which were available from being used early on, bureaucratically screwing up availability of medical and personal protective equipment with red tape, and many other things. I think mandatory lockdowns will cause a big backlash, which we are just starting to see. But between Fauci and the guy suggesting drinking or injecting bleach is the solution, Fauci isn’t the one I would suggest firing.

  34. paulie

    Like when French researches proposed that nicotine may protect against serious/clinical covid-19 infection(due to the observation that smokers are seriously underrepresented with clinical infection), and the French government promptly bans online sales of nicotine products?

    https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-52415793

    Perfect encapsulation of how the state rolls.

    Agreed, government routinely screws things up. Nevertheless it remains true that time buys the ability to get more prepared in terms of medical staffing and equipment, testing, and other ways to fight back against the virus.

  35. paulie

    I’m not the type of conspiracy theorist to think governments invented the virus in a bio lab or concocted a hoax pandemic,

    I think biolab is entirely plausible.

    but I am the the type of conspiracy theorist to know governments would suppress or even ban simple, effective treatments in favor of outrageously expensive political economy of Big Pharma + a biometric surveillance regime.

    Agreed again. That doesn’t change the fact that buying time does create the ability to ramp up the response in many different ways.

    One obvious casualty of this pandemic has been your skepticism of government.

    On the contrary, it has only reinforced it.

  36. dL

    Increased testing and other measures mean there can be ways to mitigate the spread even without a vaccine or treatment

    There already is a clinically effective prevention treatment regimen against severe covid-19 infection: adequate supplementation with vitamin D, zinc, Vitamin C. The same clinically preventive treatment protocol for flu and cold. Personally, I would also recommend adding l-arginine to that stack.

    There is never going to be a cure for a clinical infection once you already gotten it.

  37. paulie

    There already is a clinically effective prevention treatment regimen against severe covid-19 infection: adequate supplementation with vitamin D, zinc, Vitamin C.

    That’s an interesting claim, but I’m skeptical. What’s the evidence? Did it involve double blind studies and peer review?

    There is never going to be a cure for a clinical infection once you already gotten it.

    There’s no way to know what the future may bring. But even if you are correct there can still be effective therapies, as in mitigating the severity of symptoms and deadliness of the illness, in addition to the separate issue of cutting down on spread.

  38. dL

    That’s an interesting claim, but I’m skeptical. What’s the evidence? Did it involve double blind studies and peer review?

    Yes. The evidence for Vitamin D is strong and conclusive. The largest study ever done on it. 11,000 participants in 25 randomised controlled trials. Published in The British Medical Journal
    https://www.bmj.com/content/356/bmj.i6583

    ARDS and cytokine storms are not unique to coronavirus. There are lots of transmittable diseases that exhibit the pattern of being subclinical for some while inducing acute respiratory dysfunction for others. It’s not hard to poke around the NIH med journal to find other related Vitamin D studies.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4694332/

    Vitamin D research specific to covid-19 is obviously preliminary. But the preliminary research links ARDS-related mortality from covid-19 to vitamin D deficiencies.
    https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-21211/v1

    Vitamin C is not as conclusive, and most studies center around intravenous injection as treatment.
    https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-019-2717-x

    Zinc and sepsis
    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176069

    A substantial fraction of the population will have vitamin d and zinc deficiencies, particularly during fall/winter. Vitamin C not so much. Still, vitamin D, zinc along with C are wise things to supplement with in terms of optimizing immune system health.

  39. dL

    * Herd immunity kicks in well before that, probably on the order of 2 years
    * Virus may mutate before that, and most times the mutations are in a benign direction, although not always

    Except viral mutations negate herd immunity, which is why getting a seasonal cold or flu does nothing to protect you from getting it again next season. You’re not making any sense.

  40. paulie

    Thanks for the links to research on vitamins. It goes well beyond my level of expertise to evaluate it, but let’s take it as a given that they generally boost immunity. I don’t think there’s been any specific research on vitamins and covid 19, or at least nothing in your cites unless I missed something, but let’s say we take it as a given that it’s not an exception to the general immunity benefits but short of a vaccine.

    On the other hand there are not yet proven drugs or therapies which mitigate the severity of covid symptoms once someone is infected and or reduce the mortality rate, but there could be any number of these and they won’t necessarily take a year much less ten years to develop and produce, especially given the level of focus on this. There are also other mitigation strategies to help prevent more rapid and out of control spread such as more widespread testing which could be made available a lot sooner and reduce any need for distancing. Distancing can also continue to be practiced on a voluntary basis to some degree, and I am sure will be – to some extent.

    No one, including Fauci, is arguing for the current level of mandatory shutdowns or worse for years on end. I certainly don’t endorse any such thing and didn’t to begin with.

  41. paulie

    Except viral mutations negate herd immunity, which is why getting a seasonal cold or flu does nothing to protect you from getting it again next season. You’re not making any sense.

    Yes, they do mutate but herd immunity still provides some level of protection because they have similarities. Also, most mutations tend to be in a benign direction, although not all. The similarities between different flu strains make continuing vaccine development easier, and the differences make it an ongoing issue. But the combination of imperfect herd immunity and adaptive vaccination mitigate the spread of adapting flu strains. It’s why the overall flu infection and death levels are much lower now than a hundred years ago. That hasn’t happened with corona yet, so 1918-20 death levels are still quite possible, or higher since the population grew since then.

  42. dL

    I don’t think there’s been any specific research on vitamins and covid 19, or at least nothing in your cites

    I did have a cite, the UK’s Queen Elizabeth Hospital Foundation Trust and the University of East Anglia that links vitamin D deficiency to covid-19 related ARDS dysfunction. Preliminary, but it is consistent with established research on other transmittable diseases like influenza.

  43. dL

    Yes, they do mutate but herd immunity still provides some level of protection because they have similarities

    I would recommend ignoring popular news sites as a research source. Stuff like this:
    [How Herd Immunity can slow the spread of coronavirus]
    https://www.cnet.com/news/herd-immunity-what-it-is-and-how-it-can-slow-the-spread-of-coronavirus/

    Covid-19 is not the measles. I would hope Dr. Vinetz of Yale Medicine was taken out of context by the cnet journalist with regards to analogizing a possible covid-19 herd immunity to the measles.

    Instead, I would recommend perusing scientific sites to get accurate scientific information. For example,

    [Why you need one vaccine for measles and many for the flu]
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150521133628.htm

    to see why using the measles to reason about covid-19 is junk science.

    It’s too early to say if covid-19 will behave entirely like seasonal flu, where antibodies from an infection or a vaccine only protect you for a few months. But it certainly will not be like the measles…one and done

  44. paulie

    I never said it would be one and done. And I’ve followed some of the links to science sites. The point was never that a vaccine would be a one and done; but you can scroll up and see what I actually said in context so there’s no point in repeating myself yet again.

  45. paulie

    Preliminary, but it is consistent with established research on other transmittable diseases like influenza.

    Thanks, I missed that earlier. As far as I know the rest of what I said still stands.

  46. SocraticGadfly

    I’d fire Toady Fauci for being a Trump Toady. But certainly not for the reasons Batshit Ron wants.

    He’s breaking at least the spirit of his Hippocratic Oath.

  47. paulie

    I’d fire Toady Fauci for being a Trump Toady.

    He’s done what he felt he had to do to remain part of the briefings and decisionmaking team. Otherwise he would have been gone. From his perspective that would have had negative consequences for public health and morale. If he’s fired you certainly won’t see someone who’s less of a Trump toady in his place.

  48. dL

    The link between vitamin d deficiency and covid-19 ARDS dysfunction is starting to get some press.

  49. dL

    Some, yeah. Not all of it good, however:

    Vitamin D is indeed not much of a treatment for ARDS once you get it. It’s preventative. I wouldn’t recommend going out for a jog to treat a heart attack, but diet and exercise might just prevent that heart attack from ever happening. There really isn’t any treatment for severe ARDS except putting you on a ventilator. You might instead want to adopt a preventative regimen to minimize that from happening.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *