Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Hangar Talk' started by MPB, Aug 2, 2022.
But doctors don't agree on this issue. In that respect, they are similar to pilots.
Let’s say we have a question about a Lycoming and we ask both a Lycoming engineer with the company with 30 years of experience problem-solving for them and an A&P at a small airport in, say, Kansas who has never even overhauled a Lycoming and they disagree. Whose opinion do we tend to value more? The one we WANT to believe?
I don't trust bureaucrats....
Yes. I've seen it happen here.
Good on ya. By “bureaucrats”, do you include church leaders? Where the paycheck comes from doesn’t determine if they’re a bureaucrat, right?
There are good bureaucrats and bad ones - regardless of where they get their paycheck. Blanket distrust seems, well, ill-considered.
Not the best example. There's been a number of times in my field the guys on the assembly lines know more about the behavior of the product than the factory engineers.
Or the times that stupid me without a degree had to explain to the engineers and architects why their designs wouldn't work. but hey they are the "experts."
My brothers friend is a doctor and through all this he's just shaking his head at all the crap we were/are being fed vs what was actually going on at his hospital with this.
You mean like the factory tech who says “that can’t happen,” but the local guy figures out how to fix it?
You sound like you need prayer.....
Considering how it spreads you probably didn't actually get it AT Oskosh but from someone you were traveling with or say an eatery etc on the way or prior.
Very difficult for the disease to spread in an open environment and virtually all the data suggests you can only get it through close, prolonged contact.
People dying from numerous other ailments and causes who test positive for Covid are ruled as "covid deaths", even in some cases accidental deaths.
Yessir and dying with it does not necessarily mean you died from it.
But I still scratch my head at the fact that the same people who say the vaccine is ineffective - at best based on cherry-picked “science” (and often more on belief than studies) tend to believe stuff like ivermectin is an effective treatment despite no evidence.
Propagandists have turned our country into a bunch of people who believe what they want rather than what’s actually reality. That’s actually a big part of how WWII got its start in Europe (the “big lie”).
LOL - you mean people praying that I’ll buy into the misinformation? That I’ll just drink the KoolAid? That seems ironic, huh? Praying for someone to believe “false witness” and all…
Can you link to the studies that show it’s ineffective?
yeah, look at all those people that got polio after the vaccine (but it wasn’t as bad). Lol
The results for the vaccines remain mixed and confusing. At a minimum for most people the vaccines seem to give you a leg up on fighting the disease should you become infected but are not particularly effective at preventing transmission or infection.
Results for using Ivermectin as a treatment have been mixed as well but positive enough that the FDA authorized it's use.
This disease and it's treatment have been horribly politicized from the beginning and that is antithetical to good science and medicine.
Once the one sided political advantage of demonizing such treatments the FDA quietly authorized the use of Ivermectin to treat Covid-19.
Treatment with ivermectin did not result in a lower incidence of medical admission to a hospital due to progression of Covid-19 or of prolonged emergency department observation among outpatients with an early diagnosis of Covid-19.
If the data shows vaccines to be ineffective or Ivermectin to be effective, I’m fine with personally revising my beliefs - I’ve done it many times over my medical career (hormone replacement therapy for menopause, and “magic finger wags” for prostate cancer screening come readily to mind). My beliefs are based on reason, not politics. And I don’t take studies at face value when considering a change in how I treat patients: the methodology and conflicts of interest are at least considered when reading them.
Again, we didn’t get to the moon or dramatically improve heart disease treatment or a bunch of other things through believing lies we wanted to believe. Doing that would bring us back to medieval thinking.
Salvation and well wishes bro.
Probably to shut up the idiots.
The studies proved it's effectiveness as a treatment so they approved it. There's no possibility this administration would have allowed it's approval otherwise.
Is that what they do?
On the contrary; idiots are their core constituency.
That press release seems to be addressing Paxlovid, not Invermectin.
ok...any studies where they used it as an early treatment instead of waiting for 7 days?
The problem was not the vaccines or the treatments, it was imposing them on other people, and telling people they were stupid if they didn't do what you thought was correct.
That’s the problem - defining reality. There are relatively few indisputable facts that everyone agrees on , most of what passes as consensus is just informed opinions that are always subject to change. Of course, if that’s the best we can do at the moment , then it often makes sense to go with it but these are most certainly not indisputable facts.
I am still waiting for someone to reconcile the fact that there seems to be no statistically significant differences in medical COVID outcomes between states that implemented strict measures ( lockdowns, mandatory masks etc) and states that did not.
I hope , as a society, we will try to explain this discrepancy at some point - there needs to be accountability for public executives at various levels responsible for implementing what we’re often life changing and drastic measures.
Your turn. Can you show me those?
It seems to me that seriousness and survivability is more about the individual than the treatment…if they could figure out why some of us have no symptoms while others die, they’d be on to something.
I’m not the one saying it’s ineffective. But the treatment that’s currently advertised on the radio says you need to get to your doctor right away to start in order for it to be effective, so it would seem an apples to apples comparison should be made.
Personally, I’m glad to be rid of smallpox - worldwide - because of vaccines. We’d still have it today if today’s “reality is what I want to believe” nonsense had dominated back a few decades.
Again, we did not become a great nation by believing lies about science we wanted to believe - because of our politics. It will be our undoing.
Try the green Skittles. I hear they work too. No proof they DON’T, that I’m aware of.
Salvation from what -Covid? Thanks!
If you’re going to worship science, make sure you’re consistent.
I don’t “worship” science - and I think you know that. I’m always willing to reassess my understanding of things and go with the best we know. That doesn’t seem universal on this thread.
Instead, it seems like people prefer to attack what others have developed through thorough research and tear it down just because they don’t like it - and offer no alternative solutions. I think a good term for that would be “intellectual vandalism”
When religious fervor clashes with science, the science frequently loses.
How many different viruses are there?
How many viruses have we managed to eradicate?
I think one of the big reasons there’s so much distrust of the science in this case is that there’s so much inconsistency in method…it looks like a lot of things pass or fail by test design as much as by the test itself.
Lying is not a very good way to make your case. Or did you just not bother to read the link you posted?
https://emergency.cdc.gov/newslette.... Food and Drug,using ivermectin for COVID-19.
And NO, Paxlovid is not Ivermectin.