We need Covid -19 briefings.

[fncceo]

The democratic report should not be used for political statements

View attachment 332620

So you aren't able to form an opinion about a non partisan science based briefing? I see you have already expressed your doubt about whether it could happen, but given those parameters, non partisan and science based, do you think we would be better off?

Most of the available literature is available, for a small subscription fee, from online medical libraries and journals.

Unless you're unable to read for yourself, there is no reason to be 'briefed' by anyone.

If you're unable to comprehend the literature, what good would the briefing be? There would be no possible way to judge the accuracy or veracity of the information disseminated in that briefing.

If you believe one political party has a monopoly on scientific data, you're too parochial to participate in the discussion at all.

This really is a case where DIY is the best solution.

 

[Marion Morrison]

The democratic report should not be used for political statements

View attachment 332620

So you aren't able to form an opinion about a non partisan science based briefing? I see you have already expressed your doubt about whether it could happen, but given those parameters, non partisan and science based, do you think we would be better off?

Fauci is a partisan scientist.
It's only a matter of time before...

 

[Marion Morrison]

This is seriously a self-owning OP.

 

[BULLDOG]

The democratic report should not be used for political statements

View attachment 332620

So you aren't able to form an opinion about a non partisan science based briefing? I see you have already expressed your doubt about whether it could happen, but given those parameters, non partisan and science based, do you think we would be better off?

Most of the available literature is available, for a small subscription fee, from online medical libraries and journals.

Unless you're unable to read for yourself, there is no reason to be 'briefed' by anyone.

If you're unable to comprehend the literature, what good would the briefing be? There would be no possible way to judge the accuracy or veracity of the information disseminated in that briefing.

If you believe one political party has a monopoly on scientific data, you're too parochial to participate in the discussion at all.

This really is a case where DIY is the best solution.

Right. According to you, we don't need to have news or weather reports either. Those things are easily found online. I've noticed that many refuse to even consider the possibility that a non partisan source for anything is even possible. I am truly ashamed of what we have evidently become.

 

[fncceo]

Right. According to you, we don't need to have news or weather reports either.

In fact, who waits around for weather reports these days. You get instantaneous, highly detailed, weather reports, for your specific locale on your phone when you want them.

Same thing for news. You can tailor your news feed from hundreds of different sources. Why rely on any single source?

 

[Indeependent]

Trump turned his daily briefings into campaign events, so we will lose nothing by him no longer doing them. However, for a while, we still need accurate daily science based reports of what is happening. I suggest Democrats have a daily report each day. The democratic report should not be used for political statements, but just for the scientific facts as they are known. I'm sure there are credible medical experts who are not afraid of Trump's response who could be called on to present the facts. Again, I repeat this should not be used as a political platform, but only a source for accurate information that we all will need for a while longer. Other than a quick introduction of the speaker, medical experts would be responsible for the briefing, and answering any questions about the virus that might arise. What do you think? Should we have accurate, science based briefings daily, or should we just not worry about it and hope everything works out OK?

So far there is only 1 scientific fact...
If you have a life threatening medical condition, stay home.

I'm guessing you get all your information from fox and right wing radio. There is much more information than that available.

Gee! I guess the over 100 MDs in my community are lying to me.
Please...more soup, Sir!

I don't mind being lied to, but it's insulting that you would think I would fall for that crap.

What crap?
Be specific?

You've already made it clear you couldn't comprehend the OP. Go away now.

There's nothing new to report you obnoxious piece of shit.
Have many of your friends have you spoken to in the last few days for in-hospital insight?
All you know is what come out of your tuchus.

Odd, but the leaders in the field seem to think there is lots of new information to dispense. I do speak to lots of doctors, and a few of them are friends. Doctors aren't the only experts with information to share. Epidemiologists probably wouldn't know which end of the stethoscope to use, but after their years of studying the subject, I'm interested to hear what new information they might have to share. No shortage of credible experts, and no doubt their information is needed by us.

I speak to them and we have our famous Facebook group.
There is no shortage of medically trained scientists who still have no new ideas about how to stop C19 other than staying away from the exhalations of others.
We all knew within 3 weeks that people with compromised systems were the main target and it took the press 4 months to say so.

I presume you also know that almost all MDs in large cities live way above their heads and their families are going to food banks.

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump turned his daily briefings into campaign events, so we will lose nothing by him no longer doing them. However, for a while, we still need accurate daily science based reports of what is happening. I suggest Democrats have a daily report each day. The democratic report should not be used for political statements, but just for the scientific facts as they are known. I'm sure there are credible medical experts who are not afraid of Trump's response who could be called on to present the facts. Again, I repeat this should not be used as a political platform, but only a source for accurate information that we all will need for a while longer. Other than a quick introduction of the speaker, medical experts would be responsible for the briefing, and answering any questions about the virus that might arise. What do you think? Should we have accurate, science based briefings daily, or should we just not worry about it and hope everything works out OK?

So far there is only 1 scientific fact...
If you have a life threatening medical condition, stay home.

I'm guessing you get all your information from fox and right wing radio. There is much more information than that available.

Gee! I guess the over 100 MDs in my community are lying to me.
Please...more soup, Sir!

I don't mind being lied to, but it's insulting that you would think I would fall for that crap.

What crap?
Be specific?

You've already made it clear you couldn't comprehend the OP. Go away now.

There's nothing new to report you obnoxious piece of shit.
Have many of your friends have you spoken to in the last few days for in-hospital insight?
All you know is what come out of your tuchus.

Odd, but the leaders in the field seem to think there is lots of new information to dispense. I do speak to lots of doctors, and a few of them are friends. Doctors aren't the only experts with information to share. Epidemiologists probably wouldn't know which end of the stethoscope to use, but after their years of studying the subject, I'm interested to hear what new information they might have to share. No shortage of credible experts, and no doubt their information is needed by us.

I speak to them and we have our famous Facebook group.
There is no shortage of medically trained scientists who still have no new ideas about how to stop C19 other than staying away from the exhalations of others.
We all knew within 3 weeks that people with compromised systems were the main target and it took the press 4 months to say so.

I presume you also know that almost all MDs in large cities live way above their heads and their families are going to food banks.

Perhaps I wasn't clear, or misstated what I was talking about. I'm not talking about just getting any available practitioner to give updates. I'm talking about the people leading the research teams.

 

[Indeependent]

Trump turned his daily briefings into campaign events, so we will lose nothing by him no longer doing them. However, for a while, we still need accurate daily science based reports of what is happening. I suggest Democrats have a daily report each day. The democratic report should not be used for political statements, but just for the scientific facts as they are known. I'm sure there are credible medical experts who are not afraid of Trump's response who could be called on to present the facts. Again, I repeat this should not be used as a political platform, but only a source for accurate information that we all will need for a while longer. Other than a quick introduction of the speaker, medical experts would be responsible for the briefing, and answering any questions about the virus that might arise. What do you think? Should we have accurate, science based briefings daily, or should we just not worry about it and hope everything works out OK?

So far there is only 1 scientific fact...
If you have a life threatening medical condition, stay home.

I'm guessing you get all your information from fox and right wing radio. There is much more information than that available.

Gee! I guess the over 100 MDs in my community are lying to me.
Please...more soup, Sir!

I don't mind being lied to, but it's insulting that you would think I would fall for that crap.

What crap?
Be specific?

You've already made it clear you couldn't comprehend the OP. Go away now.

There's nothing new to report you obnoxious piece of shit.
Have many of your friends have you spoken to in the last few days for in-hospital insight?
All you know is what come out of your tuchus.

Odd, but the leaders in the field seem to think there is lots of new information to dispense. I do speak to lots of doctors, and a few of them are friends. Doctors aren't the only experts with information to share. Epidemiologists probably wouldn't know which end of the stethoscope to use, but after their years of studying the subject, I'm interested to hear what new information they might have to share. No shortage of credible experts, and no doubt their information is needed by us.

I speak to them and we have our famous Facebook group.
There is no shortage of medically trained scientists who still have no new ideas about how to stop C19 other than staying away from the exhalations of others.
We all knew within 3 weeks that people with compromised systems were the main target and it took the press 4 months to say so.

I presume you also know that almost all MDs in large cities live way above their heads and their families are going to food banks.

Perhaps I wasn't clear, or misstated what I was talking about. I'm not talking about just getting any available practitioner to give updates. I'm talking about the people leading the research teams.

It must be very frustrating for them; they are working long hours and they know how much their work means to mankind.
Israel has isolated the anti-bodies and hasn't been shy about the media reporting it.
So we really do know what's going on to whatever extent it actually means.

 

[barn sour]

"This shouldn't be a political thing but Democrats should do it."

Do you hear yourself?

It's obvious that republicans won't do it. Democrats are the only ones who could. Again, I stress that it should not be used for political rhetoric. Scientifically based information about the virus, and that is all. I would oppose turning it into a political circus like Trump did.

It's kinda funny you actually think Democrats can do a single thing that doesn't turn into a political circus. Do you even live in this country?

I can see how hard it is for you to imagine somebody that wouldn't be as unethical as you, but I already said it would specifically not be used as a political platform. You can't stretch your mind to evaluate what I actually said instead of what you want to think I said?

So you're able to determine I'm "unethical" because I find you a bit naive? Odd.

Your ethics are obvious from the programs you advocate and the unethical politicians you support.

What kind of a fruit loop are you? You don't like being called naive, I guess. lol

 

[barn sour]

There was nothing hypothetical about asking if a non political scientific based briefing on the Covid-19 virus was worthwhile. I can't help that you are so deep into your rhetoric till you can't read he words for what they say, and respond appropriately, no matter if you think it is worthwhile or not. All your hair on fire efforts to change my question to suit your preconceived notions is the sign of an idiot Trump supporter, and exactly what I expect from you. Even if you stand on your toes, I don't think you will ever be able to post something over my head, dumb ass.

The part in red is the hypothetical. On what television channel do you think you'd find this "hypothetical" daily briefing? With your "preconceived notions", we'd have to rule out FOX, wouldn't we?

Try thinking before you make these kinds of suggestions.

 

[BULLDOG]

"This shouldn't be a political thing but Democrats should do it."

Do you hear yourself?

It's obvious that republicans won't do it. Democrats are the only ones who could. Again, I stress that it should not be used for political rhetoric. Scientifically based information about the virus, and that is all. I would oppose turning it into a political circus like Trump did.

It's kinda funny you actually think Democrats can do a single thing that doesn't turn into a political circus. Do you even live in this country?

I can see how hard it is for you to imagine somebody that wouldn't be as unethical as you, but I already said it would specifically not be used as a political platform. You can't stretch your mind to evaluate what I actually said instead of what you want to think I said?

So you're able to determine I'm "unethical" because I find you a bit naive? Odd.

Your ethics are obvious from the programs you advocate and the unethical politicians you support.

What kind of a fruit loop are you? You don't like being called naive, I guess. lol

Right wing name calling hasn't bothered me for years.

 

[BULLDOG]

There was nothing hypothetical about asking if a non political scientific based briefing on the Covid-19 virus was worthwhile. I can't help that you are so deep into your rhetoric till you can't read he words for what they say, and respond appropriately, no matter if you think it is worthwhile or not. All your hair on fire efforts to change my question to suit your preconceived notions is the sign of an idiot Trump supporter, and exactly what I expect from you. Even if you stand on your toes, I don't think you will ever be able to post something over my head, dumb ass.

The part in red is the hypothetical. On what television channel do you think you'd find this "hypothetical" daily briefing? With your "preconceived notions", we'd have to rule out FOX, wouldn't we?

Try thinking before you make these kinds of suggestions.

Hopefully on all networks. Again, non political. A public service only.

 

[barn sour]

"This shouldn't be a political thing but Democrats should do it."

Do you hear yourself?

It's obvious that republicans won't do it. Democrats are the only ones who could. Again, I stress that it should not be used for political rhetoric. Scientifically based information about the virus, and that is all. I would oppose turning it into a political circus like Trump did.

It's kinda funny you actually think Democrats can do a single thing that doesn't turn into a political circus. Do you even live in this country?

I can see how hard it is for you to imagine somebody that wouldn't be as unethical as you, but I already said it would specifically not be used as a political platform. You can't stretch your mind to evaluate what I actually said instead of what you want to think I said?

So you're able to determine I'm "unethical" because I find you a bit naive? Odd.

Your ethics are obvious from the programs you advocate and the unethical politicians you support.

What kind of a fruit loop are you? You don't like being called naive, I guess. lol

Right wing name calling hasn't bothered me for years.

Hey, calling you a fruit loop is sure a lot nicer than you calling me unethical. Somehow liberals think their name calling is more appropriate. Go figure.

 

[OldLady]

Trump turned his daily briefings into campaign events, so we will lose nothing by him no longer doing them. However, for a while, we still need accurate daily science based reports of what is happening. I suggest Democrats have a daily report each day. The democratic report should not be used for political statements, but just for the scientific facts as they are known. I'm sure there are credible medical experts who are not afraid of Trump's response who could be called on to present the facts. Again, I repeat this should not be used as a political platform, but only a source for accurate information that we all will need for a while longer. Other than a quick introduction of the speaker, medical experts would be responsible for the briefing, and answering any questions about the virus that might arise. What do you think? Should we have accurate, science based briefings daily, or should we just not worry about it and hope everything works out OK?

Doesn't your newspaper do that? Just the facts, any announcements or Covid related news?

The CDC website is factual.

Our Gov and the CDC Director or spokesman is on for an afternoon press conference at least 3 or 4 times a week on television.

Do you think we need something similar at the federal level? I almost think the information from the states would be more relevant. Of course, WaPo and NYT are covering the federal response and the Covid stuff is free access.

 

[barn sour]

There was nothing hypothetical about asking if a non political scientific based briefing on the Covid-19 virus was worthwhile. I can't help that you are so deep into your rhetoric till you can't read he words for what they say, and respond appropriately, no matter if you think it is worthwhile or not. All your hair on fire efforts to change my question to suit your preconceived notions is the sign of an idiot Trump supporter, and exactly what I expect from you. Even if you stand on your toes, I don't think you will ever be able to post something over my head, dumb ass.

The part in red is the hypothetical. On what television channel do you think you'd find this "hypothetical" daily briefing? With your "preconceived notions", we'd have to rule out FOX, wouldn't we?

Try thinking before you make these kinds of suggestions.

Hopefully on all networks. Again, non political. A public service only.

Another hypothetical. Or just wishful thinking.....

 

[BULLDOG]

"This shouldn't be a political thing but Democrats should do it."

Do you hear yourself?

It's obvious that republicans won't do it. Democrats are the only ones who could. Again, I stress that it should not be used for political rhetoric. Scientifically based information about the virus, and that is all. I would oppose turning it into a political circus like Trump did.

It's kinda funny you actually think Democrats can do a single thing that doesn't turn into a political circus. Do you even live in this country?

I can see how hard it is for you to imagine somebody that wouldn't be as unethical as you, but I already said it would specifically not be used as a political platform. You can't stretch your mind to evaluate what I actually said instead of what you want to think I said?

So you're able to determine I'm "unethical" because I find you a bit naive? Odd.

Your ethics are obvious from the programs you advocate and the unethical politicians you support.

What kind of a fruit loop are you? You don't like being called naive, I guess. lol

Right wing name calling hasn't bothered me for years.

Hey, calling you a fruit loop is sure a lot nicer than you calling me unethical. Somehow liberals think their name calling is more appropriate. Go figure.

The difference being that I'm right.

 

[barn sour]

"This shouldn't be a political thing but Democrats should do it."

Do you hear yourself?

It's obvious that republicans won't do it. Democrats are the only ones who could. Again, I stress that it should not be used for political rhetoric. Scientifically based information about the virus, and that is all. I would oppose turning it into a political circus like Trump did.

It's kinda funny you actually think Democrats can do a single thing that doesn't turn into a political circus. Do you even live in this country?

I can see how hard it is for you to imagine somebody that wouldn't be as unethical as you, but I already said it would specifically not be used as a political platform. You can't stretch your mind to evaluate what I actually said instead of what you want to think I said?

So you're able to determine I'm "unethical" because I find you a bit naive? Odd.

Your ethics are obvious from the programs you advocate and the unethical politicians you support.

What kind of a fruit loop are you? You don't like being called naive, I guess. lol

Right wing name calling hasn't bothered me for years.

Hey, calling you a fruit loop is sure a lot nicer than you calling me unethical. Somehow liberals think their name calling is more appropriate. Go figure.

The difference being that I'm right.

Haha....that'll do.

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump turned his daily briefings into campaign events, so we will lose nothing by him no longer doing them. However, for a while, we still need accurate daily science based reports of what is happening. I suggest Democrats have a daily report each day. The democratic report should not be used for political statements, but just for the scientific facts as they are known. I'm sure there are credible medical experts who are not afraid of Trump's response who could be called on to present the facts. Again, I repeat this should not be used as a political platform, but only a source for accurate information that we all will need for a while longer. Other than a quick introduction of the speaker, medical experts would be responsible for the briefing, and answering any questions about the virus that might arise. What do you think? Should we have accurate, science based briefings daily, or should we just not worry about it and hope everything works out OK?

Doesn't your newspaper do that? Just the facts, any announcements or Covid related news?

The CDC website is factual.

Our Gov and the CDC Director or spokesman is on for an afternoon press conference at least 3 or 4 times a week on television.

Do you think we need something similar at the federal level? I almost think the information from the states would be more relevant. Of course, WaPo and NYT are covering the federal response and the Covid stuff is free access.

The thread was started after Trump said he was going to shut down the task force, which would put an end to daily briefings. Trump's part of those briefings had turned into nothing more than a mini campaign rally, so his part would be no big loss. I was only hoping that we could get continued briefings by Fauci, and/or people of his caliber. I only mentioned the Democrats because I don't know of another group that might be interested in doing that, and could assure that all/.most networks would carry it. Perhaps I didn't make that clear, but many remarks here seem totally unrelated to what I actually said.

 

[Marion Morrison]

"This shouldn't be a political thing but Democrats should do it."

Do you hear yourself?

It's obvious that republicans won't do it. Democrats are the only ones who could. Again, I stress that it should not be used for political rhetoric. Scientifically based information about the virus, and that is all. I would oppose turning it into a political circus like Trump did.

It's kinda funny you actually think Democrats can do a single thing that doesn't turn into a political circus. Do you even live in this country?

I can see how hard it is for you to imagine somebody that wouldn't be as unethical as you, but I already said it would specifically not be used as a political platform. You can't stretch your mind to evaluate what I actually said instead of what you want to think I said?

So you're able to determine I'm "unethical" because I find you a bit naive? Odd.

Your ethics are obvious from the programs you advocate and the unethical politicians you support.

What kind of a fruit loop are you? You don't like being called naive, I guess. lol

Right wing name calling hasn't bothered me for years.

Hey, calling you a fruit loop is sure a lot nicer than you calling me unethical. Somehow liberals think their name calling is more appropriate. Go figure.

The difference being that I'm right.

Oh yeah? Well I'm more righter!