Ya left a word out of your "quote", my man. I put it back in. I'm sure leaving it out was just an accident.tech37 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 5:17 pmWasn't calling to be suppressed? "There needs to be a quick and devastating published takedown of its premises"ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 4:50 pm110% fine with it.tech37 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 4:16 pm https://twitter.com/DrJBhattacharya/sta ... 30/photo/1
So everyone is A-Ok with the Collins' email? I love the use of "fringe" which includes a Nobel Prize winner.
Collins wasn’t calling for the GBD (basically herd immunity strategy) to be suppressed. It got lots of publicity when released in nov 2020.
Collins was calling for it to be responded to — you know free marketplace of ideas and all that. And folks decided the widely touted gbd wasn’t worth pursuing.
FYI, the Stanford Nobel laureate is not an md or an immunologist. Has no experience with infectious diseases. But the main gbd guys do. But folks were not convinced by their arguments.
Also, I’d note that the gbd was basically an anti lock down message pre vaccines. We were pretty much done with lock downs by the time it came out. Especially since the vaccines were right on the cusp of availability.
Publicly refuting another scientists idea IN WRITING (published) is the literal opposite of suppression.
You misread the email, Tech. So did your internet colleagues. Admit it, and move on. It happens to all of us.
Yes. A different path. Collins and Fauci obviously disagreed with that path.
You don't seem to get that you can throw stones at any choice or any path we'd take, Tech. GBD could have been a fine path, yep....that's entirely true. Or, it could have been a disaster. But, right or wrong, you have to pick a path