Educating Bed-Wetters

      68 Comments on Educating Bed-Wetters

A few days ago, I tweeted that coronahysteria has been useful for helping my daughter narrow down her list of colleges: she’s eliminating the ones that are currently closed or remote-only because it means the school is run by bed-wetting weenies who don’t actually care about educating the students.

That one got a few hundred likes and a few dozen retweets. But of course, a couple of college perfessors had to chime in to say their schools are remote-only right now – to protect the students! – and I really needed to teach my daughter to respect the science and blah-blah-blah.

Oh, dear.

One of the perfessors replied:

Sorry to lose a student to it, as it appears they could use some critical thinking skills to overcome their parents ignorance.

That’s the exact quote. Fascinating … we have a college professor who doesn’t know the singular student isn’t a plural they, and doesn’t know how to use the plural possessive case for parents ignorance. Talk about ignorance. There’s a school we’ll avoid.

The other perfessor teaches nutrition (and we all how rigorously scientific that field is), and informed me that my daughter was missing out, because she and the other perfessors have spent hundreds of hours learning new, cutting-edge teaching strategies.

Ah, well, if it’s new and cutting-edge, it simply must be better. You all remember how New Math and Whole-Language English classes led to generations of Americans highly proficient in math and able to construct grammatically correct sentences.

I replied:

I appreciate the college teachers who are chiming in to publicly claim their bed-wetter status. We can scratch their schools off the list.

Now, you’d think that would clue the nutrition perfessor that arguing it’s not safe for students to be in class would only further convince me to avoid her school. But no, she kept thinking she could persuade me. So I replied:

I appreciate you making the extra effort, but you’ve already established yourself as a bed-wetter whose school we’ll avoid. No need to keep proving the point.

That didn’t stop her. Instead, she adopted a condescending attitude I’ve found to be strangely common among nutrition perfessors. It goes something like this: I have a PhD in nutrition, and therefore I’m a real scientist, so I must educate this ignorant plebe.

That always goes over really well with me.

The perfessor kept trying to convince me that of course schools should be remote-only, because THE CASES, THE CASES, THE CASES! The CASES keep going up!

When I replied that college-age kids are at almost no risk whatsoever from COVID, the perfessor replied sure, that may be true, but if they go to classes, they’ll spread the disease! The medical system will be overwhelmed! The only safe course is keep them out of school!

I replied with a link to the latest casedemic video by Ivor Cummins. Here it is, in case you haven’t seen it:

The video is 37 minutes, but the perfessor replied in roughly two minutes, which of course means she didn’t watch it. Nonetheless, she felt qualified to dismiss it. She replied that the notion that cases are rising because of massive testing is yesterday’s smokescreen. Yes, she wrote that.

I replied:

She’s a teacher, but tries to dismiss facts and data anyone can look up with “that’s yesterday’s smokescreen.” And she wonders why I wouldn’t send my daughter to her school. Sorry, we prefer schools with teachers who are critical thinkers capable of making rational arguments.

After more back-and-forth — with her reneging on at least two promises to slow it down and make just ONE more effort to educate me on the very real threat we face because of THE CASES, THE CASES, THE CASES! — I’d finally had enough. I won’t italicize or number my thread of responses.  Here it is:

———————————————————————–

Since you don’t have the brains to stop proudly claiming your status as a bed-wetter, I’ll slow this down and explain it for you ONE last time. College kids are at near zero-risk from COVID. So you duck that with “but it’s to protect other people!”

There’s no evidence of young, healthy, asymptomatic people spreading the disease to others. There’s some speculation by professional bed-wetters, but no actual evidence. If the families of college kids feel at risk, they can dealt with it.

So based on no threat to the college kids, and no known threat to the people in their lives, you and the other bed-wetters have decided to go with remote-only teaching, depriving students of the most enjoyable aspect of college: life on campus with other students.

Is that to benefit the students? No, it’s clear to anyone with a half a brain it’s to benefit yourselves. By gosh, you LIKE not having to show up in the classroom, so you keep peddling b.s. about how this is saving lives through some mechanism not supported by any evidence.

And you keep peddling b.s. about those CUTTING-EDGE! teaching strategies to convince yourselves you’re not depriving the students. Here’s a CUTTING-EDGE! strategy that’s proved its value over the centuries: get your lazy ass into the classroom and teach face-to-face.

Laughably, schools expect parents to pay full price for their kids to receive a remote “education” that could be replaced by any online teaching service already in existence. Keep it up; you’re proving yourselves unnecessary and it will come back to bite you.

Doubly laughably, you keep trying to convince us this is all about safety, doncha know. And yet schools have remained open in many other countries with no rise in hospitalizations or deaths. The “it’s to protect people!” b.s. won’t fly, no matter how many “cases” you cite.

And yet here you are, apparently thinking if you just link to this or that bit of nonsense, you’re going to convince me that by gosh, it really IS about protecting people! … even though college kids are at no risk. You wildly overestimate your powers of persuasion.

If you were actually intelligent, you would have realized days ago that every argument you make in favor of keeping your school closed is further evidence that you’re a bed-wetter who doesn’t care about the students, and thus someone to avoid like the plague — a real plague.

So the bottom line: any teacher not elderly or otherwise in real danger who argues for remote-only learning is a selfish, lazy slob who doesn’t mind depriving students of a true college experience, as long as it’s convenient for her. That’s a “teacher” parents will avoid.

———————————————————————–

End of the thread.

The word is slowly getting out: lockdowns didn’t do diddly … well, other than bankrupt countless businesses, vaporize countless jobs, and send the economy into a tailspin. Here are some quotes from an article in ZeroHedge:

The toll lockdowns have taken on human life and human rights has been incalculable. Increases in child abuse, suicide, and even heart attacks, all appear to be a feature of mandatory stay-at-home orders issued by politicians who now rule by decree without any legislative or democratic due process.

This was all done because some politicians and bureaucrats—who were in no danger of losing their large paychecks—decided it was a great idea to carry out a bizarre and risky experiment: forcing large swaths of the population to stay at home in the name of preventing the spread of disease.

… it’s now becoming apparent that lockdowns don’t work when actually tried. Earlier this month, for example, Donald Luskin noted in The Wall Street Journal:

Measuring from the start of the year to each state’s point of maximum lockdown—which range from April 5 to April 18—it turns out that lockdowns correlated with a greater spread of the virus. States with longer, stricter lockdowns also had larger Covid outbreaks. The five places with the harshest lockdowns—the District of Columbia, New York, Michigan, New Jersey and Massachusetts—had the heaviest caseloads.

In an August 1 Study, also published by The Lancet, the authors concluded “Rapid border closures, full lockdowns, and wide-spread testing were not associated with COVID-19 mortality per million people.”

A June study published in Advance by Stefan Homburg and Christof Kuhbandner found the data “strongly suggests” the UK lockdown was both superfluous (it did not prevent an otherwise explosive behavior of the spread of the coronavirus) and ineffective (it did not slow down the death growth rate visibly).

In fact, the overall trend of infection and death appears to be remarkably similar across many jurisdictions regardless of what non -pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are taken by policymakers.

Lockdowns are causing far more harm than good. They’re not saving lives. And yet many people whose jobs aren’t currently in danger want to stay in lockdown and keep schools closed for the simple reason that they’ve gotten used to working strictly from home and think it’s awesome. So they’ll look for any reason to say the threat is still HUUUUUGE, and by gosh, we just can’t go back to normal yet.

So let’s thank the teachers who publicly insist on keeping their classrooms closed. They’ve let us know they don’t give a rat’s ass about what’s best for the students, so we know to avoid them.


If you enjoy my posts, please consider a small donation to the Fat Head Kids GoFundMe campaign.
Share

68 thoughts on “Educating Bed-Wetters

  1. Lori Miller

    I don’t think I could be a college student these days. I didn’t like school to begin with and didn’t like living in the dorms when I was in the military. Add the creepy, depressing cult of wokeness and the dreck that passes for science and literature, and I’d be ready to stick my head in an oven.

    Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      I’d have to pick a college very carefully these days. If choosing for myself, I’d probably go to Hillsdale.

      Reply
  2. Archie Robertson

    Thanks for this excellent piece on the field in which I’m principally active, Tom!
    I teach English to student nurses in France. We have been instructed that masks are obligatory for teacher and students alike in all classrooms and lecture halls. This of course makes my job almost impossible: how can I model pronunciation if students cannot see my mouth, and how can I correct students’ errors if I can’t see theirs? In addition, students can chatter without me knowing who’s doing it, and their concentration is reduced by the distractions due to the masks.
    This of course is mandated by the French authorities, who are among the worst bed-wetters around. They are shit-scared of the casedemic, and haven’t yet realised that the serum tests detect viral fragments much more often than real active viruses, while the RT-PCR tests use far greater cycle counts than recommended by the manufacturers. I’ve heard values of 33 to 40 cited for these, while the absolute limit should be 30, and the result is in fact unreliable above 20. Thanks for linking to Ivor’s excellent summary!
    The upshot is mandatory masks in every indoor public space, in the streets of many cities, and even on some beaches! Of course, when sitting down in a restaurant or bar, people may take their masks off—but must put them back on to go to the toilet or pay the bill.
    So disobey? There’s an automatic fine of €135 for a first “offence”, rising to €1500 for a second or subsequent “offence”. All this despite very slowly rising hospital and ICU admissions, normal for the time of year, and an average death rate of 15 per day, tiny compared to the year-round average of 1800 per day.
    My protest? I write “Pour faire plaisir à Monsieur Castex” (Just to please Mr Castex) on my mask. I haven’t been fined for that… YET!

    Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      The authorities seem to have missed an important lesson of history: when authority demands and enforces obedience to laws most people know are stupid, respect for authority rapidly declines.

      Reply
  3. Nann

    My governor just said this yesterday “Social distancing and mask wearing isn’t limiting just COVID-19 spread, Baker says “Germs don’t have the ability necessarily to travel the way they have in years past.”” Yah think? Why then are schools still closed – why are businesses still closed. So due, hiding in our houses didn’t work, masks didn’t work, social distancing didn’t work…

    Yet, now three different medical studies have come out stating that Vitamin D is highly protective against Covid-19. Media downplays this… elected officials say nothing…. medical people try to suggest it isn’t true… for what purpose? Well of course there is the election but beyond that they are trying to run out the clock so that big pharma can get a vaccine (and the money for the vaccine). This is intolerable. We have to stand up at the polls in November and send a message this can never happen again.

    Reply
        1. Tom Naughton Post author

          I believe the last time that occurred, it didn’t work out so well in the long run. But I feel ya on the sentiment.

          Reply
          1. Firebird7479

            If we all have a chance to hit one hanging upside down in the time square like a pinata, a la Benito Mussolini…I’d be good with that!

            Reply
  4. Laura

    You’d think these professors would prefer to have students in school so their parents won’t know what kind of indoctrination their kids are getting.

    I saw a video on Facebook yesterday of a remote lecture recorded by a student. The humanities “perfessor” told her students that Donald Trump has had “four friggin’ years of a chance and he’s doin’ a crap job.” She went on to say “I’m sorry about this contentious situation that you’re being thrusted into.”

    Thrusted. Smh. How do people like this get a position teaching at any level, let alone college?

    Reply
  5. Trish

    During the H1N1 epidemic in 2009, two of my coworkers died from it. One was an obese man in his early sixties, but the other was a 29-year-old runner in otherwise excellent health. This was an office of roughly five hundred people.

    Did the powers that be shut down the office and make everyone work from home? Did mask wearing become mandatory?

    No. The only thing they did was close the salad bar in the cafeteria for a couple of weeks.

    I’m still trying to figure out how coronavirus became The One That’s Gonna Kill Us All. Also, people seem to equate testing positive with getting sick. The local paper loves to print OMG headlines like “Hundreds of college students test positive!”, then within the article it’ll say basically “oh, yeah, the majority of those are asymptomatic.” Head, meet desk.

    Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      I saw a graphic someone put on Twitter showing that THOUSANDS! of college students in one region have tested positive … resulting in zero hospitalizations or deaths. This is like ginning up a panic over a test showing ALMOST EVERYONE HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO THE COMMON COLD!

      Reply
    2. Nick S

      H1N1: 12,000 deaths in the US

      COVID-19: 200,000 deaths in the US, so far

      You can’t figure out why there’s a difference?

      Reply
  6. Tom Welsh

    “…informed me that my daughter was missing out, because she and the other perfessors have spent hundreds of hours learning new, cutting-edge teaching strategies”.

    I think I would prefer them to spend hundreds of hours learning the truth about nutrition. Rather than acquiring clever new ways to misinform students convincingly.

    Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      Whenever I hear the term “cutting-edge!” applied to teaching, the needle on my b.s. meter pins. It usually means we’re looking at the kind of new, bold, exciting and ultimately worthless nonsense so beloved by The Anointed.

      Reply
      1. Firebird7479

        Cutting edge just might be code for teaching students how to riot, loot and “peacefully protest” because that seems to be who is being recruited for all that nonsense.

        Reply
  7. Marie

    My daughter tried to go to college. She lasted two weeks before she had a complete emotional breakdown from feeling like she was in jail. We brought her home and she is continuing her classes remotely now. The level of stress, anxiety, and depression amongst our young people is huge. It’s not normal for young people to not congregate and be with their friends. Being confined to their dorm rooms with no guests permitted, everybody barking at them about social distancing and masks, just made it feel like being in solitary prison. This must end soon.

    Reply
      1. Firebird7479

        And the parents are being charged out the wazoo for it! The one thing that pissed off my nephew as his freshman year was shut down was that they were still going to charge full tuition despite online classes and other classes being completely canceled.

        At least my auto insurance provider gave me two small refunds to help ease the pain of the lockdown.

        Reply
        1. Kathy from Maine

          My insurance company gave me two $10 checks, too. Seeing as how my two cars have sat in the driveway for more than 99% of the time since March, they should have given me a full refund for that time. That $20 didn’t do much to ease the pain of the lockdown for me.

          Reply
  8. Anonymous

    My college recently had a few students test positive, so they’re locking down the whole campus. They’re telling students to stay on campus, but all classes are remote and students have to stay in their rooms except to go pick up take out meals in the dining hall or go for walks with no more than one other person. They’ll have to do that for at least two weeks, possibly longer. In addition, they’re taking the opportunity to test EVERY SINGLE STUDENT ON CAMPUS. I guarantee you they’re going to find a good number positive cases just by testing a ton of 18-22 year olds who have no symptoms and they’re going to play that up as if it’s the end of the world.

    Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      Yup. For college students, they may as well be testing for the common cold, but they’ll act is if they’ve discovered the polio virus spreading.

      Reply
  9. ben

    For a very balanced, thoughtful, discussion, I recommend the 2 recent Munk debates with Dr. Lena Einhorn and Dr. Sten Vermund!

    For example it’s unusual that in Ivor’s video where he analyzes Sweden, he doesn’t include Norway and Denmark which share similar SES population age demographics, highly synergistic culture , social traditions, etc.

    So why does Sweden have 4 times the deaths as Norway and Denmark? Is the Gompertz curve 4 times higher than it could have been?

    Ivor suggestion that the curves are pre-ordained.. yet Louisiana, Texas, Arizona curves seem to show it follows the state’s opening/closing policy. Perhaps keeping the pubs closed KEPT the rates low in Ireland?

    Reply
    1. Charles-Andre Fortin

      No he talk about them 1st look at the density population :
      https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Norden_pop_density.gif

      You see that except for Denmark, they are not even in the same ball park.

      2nd, if you compare the south of Sweden with Denmark you’ll remark they have the around same ICU, hospitalization and death ratio… He also explain many reason why these other country have lower death. In fact he did give us a study we 16 reasons (and yes the 16th more probable one is the lockdown) Most of the cases happen in care home just like in the province of Quebec (the worst on in canada and the f**king world, yet we had a very early lockdown) and in the capital Stockholm where the immigration is the highest among the Scandinavian country just like Montreal. Sweden also have the highest density of elderly in care home just like Quebec.

      So just like the head of public safety of Sweden and Quebec said “We failed [hard] to protect the most vulnerable, the elderly.”

      If you really like stat and are willing to use google translate here the Stat for Quebec that did a very early lock down in March:
      https://www.inspq.qc.ca/covid-19/donnees
      https://www.stat.gouv.qc.ca/statistiques/population-demographie/deces-mortalite/nombre-hebdomadaire-deces.html

      He also talk about previous flu season. All three other country did have higher death rate if you look at the weekly death. Sweden had a previous very soft year. (Meaning more susceptible people.)

      Reply
  10. Bret

    The one positive outcome of this mess that I am fiercely HOPING for (hope not to be confused with optimism) is that a critical mass of citizens will learn that the deep state, corporate news media, & academia are NOT the people’s friends or allies. They are quite the opposite.

    In general each of these entities is collectively some combination of (a) morons whose credentials are worthless, (b) self absorbed narcissists who view the citizens (& their rights/freedom) with contempt & disdain, and ( c ) politically motivated or monopolistically platformed with compromised or nonexistent integrity.

    And this of course has nothing to do with the oh-so-good intentions of some of the individual actors in these blobs. What with the road to hell & what it’s paved with… As the Twitter professor aptly demonstrated, these actors are merely well programmed bots…conditioned loyal worker bees…not brilliant sages. They are either helping brainwash the masses or are brainwashed themselves, or both (and it doesn’t matter which).

    The more people understand this, the better off we will be. We cannot have people with voting rights, drivers licenses, and (perhaps most concerning of all) parental authority over human offspring who cannot manage to question authority or engage in critical thinking. That is a march to mass slavery. Always have to assume those in power will abuse that power if given a chance. We are the ones that allow that abuse by what we are willing to tolerate.

    Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      As a libertarian, I was hoping the authoritarian overreach would prompt people to realize many politicians consider themselves the people’s masters, not the people’s servants. Unfortunately, I’m seeing lots of people who want the politicians to be their masters.

      Reply
      1. Firebird7479

        Same here. Actually had people I’ve been friends with for a long time block me from their social media over this. Otherwise reasonably sane, good people have lost their cookies. Even worse is they are putting their money on a demented old man to win the Presidential election.

        It’s so bad that I may chose Trump over the Libertarian candidate, who, for the first time in 20 years, has shown me nothing worth voting for.

        Reply
        1. Bret

          Firebird, the age of Trump has shattered any faith I once had in the L party. It has been a huge red pill to say the least.

          I consider myself a small-l libertarian, but these politicians seem to have no conceptual grasp of strategic vision or effective persuasion. They just repeat the same message over and over, despite not garnering nearly enough attention to win.

          Trump is the antithesis of all of these flaws. Instead of trying to defeat powerful, influential liars with airtight logic (a losing strategy), he beats them at their own game, commanding attention with intensely provocative and persuasive oratorical tools, including fear and exaggeration. He kicks over hornet nests full of comfortable govt officials & corporate teat suckers, and exploits the ensuing chaos to his own advantage. He thrives on the instability that everyone else fears. Even in externally imposed crises (e.g. covid hysteria & race tension inflammation), he grabs the gun out of his enemies’ hands & uses it on them. He is destroying all of these false narratives, and the Democrats’ credibility in the process.

          This is what a winner looks like.

          The Democrats, although they do not possess Trump’s strategic genius, are still formidable enemies due to their disproportionately huge resources in the deep state, media, & academia.

          The LP candidates, meanwhile, look like out of shape basement dwellers entering the Tour de France with training wheels on. They have none of the aforementioned skills or advantages. I lost count of how many extremely dull or extremely cringe moments Gary Johnson brought on himself in 2016. Jorgensen so far seems determined to outdo him in dullness at least. It’s pitiful.

          Reply
          1. Firebird7479

            I liked Gary Johnson. I think the pot smoking did him in. So did the Aleppo thing, even though most of the people in the US probably thought Aleppo was one of the Marx Brothers. (Hey, GWB couldn’t find Iraq on a map pre-911). People I know in New Mexico said the state actually thrived under his two terms.

            I love Michael Badnarik…a constitutional lawyer and scholar who could have out debated Obama on the Constitution.

            The guy I loved and still do is Ron Paul. I registered Republican for the sole purpose of voting for him in the primaries. Should have been a 2 term president, IMO. But what his campaigns showed us is how corrupt the media is in how they deal with candidates that don’t fit the narrative they want for the nation. How someone finishes 2nd in a primary but fails to appear on a leader board during the broadcast coverage of said primary is mind boggling. Now we see in this election that this is now the “new norm”.

            Reply
          2. Lori Miller

            That’s a very apt description of everyone involved.

            The Libertarian Party needs to get off of fringe issues like pot, hookers and Bitcoin. I’m a small L libertarian, too, but I’ve never been able to take their party seriously.

            Reply
            1. Tom Naughton Post author

              Same here. I stopped voting for the big L Libertarian party when it became obvious they have no intention of winning.

        2. Lori Miller

          I just logged out of a chat site where I’ve been a member for fourteen years with no intention of returning. In a thread about COVID, one of the moderators called someone a Karen over an innocuous comment. Another moderator had completely come unglued over COVID, but that was the last straw.

          Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      The bed-wetters won’t feel safe until after the election. If Biden wins, we’ll see a miraculous decline in the danger soon after he takes office, so everyone can get back to work and he can claim credit for the economic recovery that is bound to happen when we no longer suppress business activity.

      Yes, I’m that cynical about it.

      Reply
      1. Tom Naughton Post author

        Heh-heh … yeah, nothing convinces me it’s time to give up my guns like seeing rioters and looters destroying businesses and attacking innocent people while calling for a Marxist revolution and getting rid of the police. The irony is that now liberals who’ve never owned a gun are buying them.

        Reply
        1. Nick Slabaugh

          I own a buncha guns. Just think it’s a little silly to do nothing to stop criminals from getting guns, then whine about how bad gun crime is.

          Aren’t you an anti-state libertarian? But also pro-police-state?

          Reply
          1. Tom Naughton Post author

            I’m a libertarian who believes government’s legitimate purpose is to protect us from those who would deprive us of life, liberty or property through fraud or force. That requires police, courts and jails. I’m hardly in favor of a police state.

            To me, trying to stop criminals from getting guns is like trying to stop a virus from spreading. Lots and lots of effort, lots of innocent people’s rights trampled in the effort, and little to show for it.

            Reply
      2. Lori Miller

        Probably all of the suspects have a criminal record–heck, half the victims probably do.

        Gun violence is a lot worse in Chicago, where the state of Illinois makes it far more difficult to (legally) buy a gun. Contrary to popular belief, Illinoisans can’t just waltz over to Indiana and buy a gun under our state law. See Matt Christiansen’s video on all the hoops you’d have to jump through: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY4tF6RtRxk

        One thing we haven’t had here is riots in neighborhoods. We have lots of neighborhoods where rioters would be shot.

        Reply
  11. Torcuato Gemini

    “By gosh, you LIKE not having to show up in the classroom, so you keep peddling b.s. about how this is saving lives through some mechanism not supported by any evidence.”

    Seriously? Where are you getting this from? At my institution everyone I talked to HATES distance teaching/learning. Do you think it is fun to completely redesign our classes for online delivery? We want to show up in the classroom and interact with our students in person. Our students HATE distance learning as well. I teach at a 4-year state college, and it is THE STATE (not us) who has closed the college and forced us to teach online. I have even pleaded to my dean to let me at least have in-person non-mandatory office hours with small groups of students, masks, social distancing, whatever. I was told that under no circumstances I should meet with students anywhere on campus.

    “So let’s thank the teachers who publicly insist on keeping their classrooms closed. They’ve let us know they don’t give a rat’s ass about what’s best for the students, so we know to avoid them.”
    Yeah, no. That’s not how it works. I wish I had the power to not keep my classrooms closed.

    Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      This particular teacher expressed no interest whatsoever in returning to the classroom. The teachers in Los Angeles have issued statements that they won’t feel “safe” to return to class until a long list of purely political objectives are achieved, such as limits on charter schools and higher taxes on the wealthy. These aren’t teachers who want to return to the classroom.

      Glad to know there are teachers like you out there, but look again at the lines you quoted from me:

      So let’s thank the teachers who publicly insist on keeping their classrooms closed.

      That doesn’t describe you.

      Reply
  12. Nikki

    And now someone at the CDC is telling us that masks are just as effective as a vaccine will be. We all better hope he is wrong. Illinois has a mask mandate and recently extended it to require masks while dining outdoors anytime the waitstaff come to your table. So, you basically take the mask on and off 10 or so times per meal. Just off the top of my head: 1. filling water glasses, 2. waiter comes to introduce them self/talk about any specials, 3. order drinks and apps, 4. deliver drinks, 5 deliver apps, 6. regular order, 7. bring out order, 8. check on whether the order was good, 9. re-fill/re-order drinks, 10. bring drinks, 11. order dessert, 12. bring dessert, 13. check on dessert, 14. bring check, 15. pickup check, 16. return check after payment was taken. So, that’s 16 times you put your mask on and then take it off in a single (outdoor) meal. Is that insane to anyone else?

    So, even though we have this insanity in place, cases are still rising. There’s no talk of hospitalizations, so I guess there must not be many, but CASES! If this is what happens when wearing masks that are as effective as a vaccine, then why are we even bothering with a vaccine at all? We should probably just give up.

    Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      That statement by the CDC is flat-out nonsense. We’re told to wear masks because they (supposedly) protect other people from our droplets if we sneeze. Masks don’t protect the wearer, period. That has been studied several times.

      Reply
  13. Nick S

    Call me a bed-wetter, I suppose, but I tend toward the “abundance of caution” side of this equation. It seems overconfident to *assume* that young people with the virus won’t transmit it, since though the evidence is not massive, it does exist. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6937e3.htm

    I also just worry about a scenario where the virus *never* goes to extinction because we’re too confident and take half or no measures forever.

    All of that said, universities which have a good plan involving testing, mask use where appropriate, and quarantine/return procedures should by all means reopen – with care.

    Reply
    1. Tom Naughton Post author

      The virus will never be extinct. In all of human history, we’ve eradicated one virus: polio, which took many years and a gazillion dollars … but worth it, because that virus crippled kids.

      The “abundance of caution” argument fails to take into the account the unintended and likely worse effects of indulging the feel-good fiction that humans can stop the spread of the virus. I mentioned just some of those unintended effects here:

      https://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2020/07/30/bullies-bed-wetters-and-the-seen-vs-the-unseen/

      If that “abundance of caution” approach worked, we’d see better outcomes in countries and states that exercised the abundance of caution vs. those with light-touch approaches. But we don’t. They all follow the Gompertz curve for their region.

      The study you linked is like several others that all share the same flaw: they can test people and do contact tracing and say, “Aha! They were all at the same day-care facility, and now people they were in contact with have the virus!” but they don’t actually have any way of knowing where and from whom those any of those people picked up the virus. There are way too many uncontrolled variables. As one article critical of studies like these pointed out, they don’t know if everyone shopped at the same WalMart (a good chance they did, since big-box stores were open while others were forced to close). This is a classic case of confusing (on purpose, I suspect) association with cause and effect.

      To their credit, the authors acknowledged the flaw I just described:

      Finally, because the source for the outbreak at facility C was unknown, it is possible that cases associated with facility C resulted from transmission outside the facility.

      “Associated” applies to all such studies and should warn us we’re not necessarily looking at causation.

      Reply
      1. Nick S

        Don’t forget smallpox, rinderpest, and the multitude of bacterial diseases which are effectively extinct in at least many places. We *can* drive diseases to extinction or at least prevent them from being endemic over years with appropriate measures. If a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available, I think it’s very reasonable to think that we could make it either rare or extinct in the US.

        As you correctly point out, there are costs to mitigation measures, some quite large, and those should be weighed against the benefits. I tend to agree that total lockdowns are not feasible now in the US, if they ever were (not that we ever had any *total* lockdowns), but most of the mitigation I’m wetting the bed over right now is “don’t pack people together indoors”, “wear masks”, and “trace contacts of infected people.” These are not “lots of people die of stress” type interventions.

        Reply
        1. Tom Naughton Post author

          I believe death from COVID will become rare — or to be more accurate, it will reach the rate of death from flu, pneumonia, etc. — very soon. We certainly haven’t been able to prevent tens of thousands of people from dying of those viruses every year, and I doubt we ever will. We all die from something eventually.

          I’m certainly not getting a vaccine that was rushed through the process. I don’t have that much faith in the FDA.

          “Don’t pack people together indoors” has already destroyed restaurants, music clubs, the livelihood of musicians and other performers, etc. — I’m very aware of this by virtue of living near Nashville. Losing your livelihood definitely induces stress. To me, the reasonable solution would be to warn people that packing together makes them more likely to be infected, then let them decide if they want to take that risk.

          Reply
      2. Firebird7479

        “we’ve eradicated one virus: polio, which took many years and a gazillion dollars … but worth it, because that virus crippled kids.”

        And now Bill Gates’ version of the polio vaccine gives kids — polio.

        Reply
        1. Bret

          Bill Gates could have served the earth much better by making the products he developed cheaper, more efficient, and less buggy…rather than waiting for Google to render them obsolete.

          Instead he is developing and pushing vaccines–a topic entirely out of his wheelhouse of expertise–including in this situation where the virus is much likelier to subside before a safe & reliable vaccine is developed. No surprise he came out against the HCQ prophylactic intervention.

          Like all smug, self-important elites, his good intentions are paving the road to hell.

          Reply
          1. Firebird7479

            His father was a Eugenicist and he’s followed in his footsteps. The man who wants to cull the herd also wants to give you a vaccine for your health. 🤦‍♂️

            People are taken in by the sweaters and the Mr. Rogers persona.

            Reply
            1. Craig

              People forget that Bill Gates was the epitome of what people hate about capitalism. He was a ruthless, cutthroat businessman who destroyed any potential competitors fast and without remorse. Now that he’s got more money than he could ever spend, and promised to give it to charity after he’s dead and can’t enjoy the money, people see him as some saint. Media distorts reality quite well.

  14. Laurie Lentz-Marino

    The ‘germ theory’ of disease is NOT correct. I’m a biochemist, microbiologist, immunologist. Antoine Bechamp in the 19th century, researched this (and Pasteur plagiarized him- kinda like Ancel Keys destroyed John Yudkin)
    … It’s the ill TERRAIN that induces disease. And if you eat sugar, carbs, seed oils and take statins, get flu shots, don’t get enough sun, don’t do earthing, get enough sleep, vitamins, miss CONTACT with other humans, breathe in too much of your own CO2 with the focking masks —- your terrain is Focked UP !!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Sally Fallon and Dr Tom Cowan have a new book out called “The Contagion Myth’… Deficiencies or starvation and toxins induce disease. I’ve conducted RT-PCR in a biochemistry lab. “Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction” is MEANINGLESS for diagnosis of this ‘virus’. So are antibody tests. The ‘virus’ is a normal informational packet from cells, exosomes, to indicate there is damaged TERRAIN afoot, and changes need to be made. ALSO, highly recommend a youtube with Dr Cowan “The Heart Is NOT a pump”

    Reply
    1. Bret

      Laurie, I agree completely. One of the most tragic — and simultaneously most hilarious — aspects of the modern west is watching so many people with big credentials (PhDs, decorated scientists, etc) miss the big picture entirely.

      It’s as if they are trapped down in the weeds of their subfield of science without having ever established a basic biological and evolutionary logical foundation, or at least an accurate one.

      Weston Price’s Nutrition & Physical Degeneration should be required reading in 9th grade, and should have been for the past 90 years.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.