It's sad to think none of this was necessary.
Science supports this statement now. And Science will likely support this statement in the future.
The data is clear.
I've struggled to understand how data could be so perverted, then I came across this statement by Carl Jung... https://twitter.com/Austen/status/1260689299458027525
Science supports this statement now. And Science will likely support this statement in the future.
The data is clear.
I've struggled to understand how data could be so perverted, then I came across this statement by Carl Jung... https://twitter.com/Austen/status/1260689299458027525
CV is not about data, nor Science, nor what is good for the average individual, nor what is good for the whole.
CV is about a few powerful interests maximizing their personal gain.
And the group follows along, because well, that's what groups do.
https://twitter.com/mistergoodgod/status/1260545239128903680?s=19
CV is about a few powerful interests maximizing their personal gain.
And the group follows along, because well, that's what groups do.

Cuomo tries to tell you his decisions were based on Science.
They were not. https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1260762455074131969?s=19
They were not. https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1260762455074131969?s=19
What about the models used in the decision to shelter-in-place.
Also not science. https://twitter.com/mattwridley/status/1259930776780627969?s=19
Also not science. https://twitter.com/mattwridley/status/1259930776780627969?s=19
While those pandemic modeling programs weren't science to begin with, the decisions by Cuomo, other state Governors, other countries, et al, didn't take into account secondary costs of shelter-in-place.
That's not science either. https://twitter.com/latimes/status/1259848488780804096?s=19
That's not science either. https://twitter.com/latimes/status/1259848488780804096?s=19
When the media talked about reinfection from CV, that wasn't based on all the science we've ever known about viruses. Antibodies do provide immunity.
Of course they did. It was just more non-science to suggest otherwise. https://twitter.com/NYTScience/status/1259475953673265152?s=19
Of course they did. It was just more non-science to suggest otherwise. https://twitter.com/NYTScience/status/1259475953673265152?s=19
Now, children are being impacted by a new type of problem. Multi-inflammatory syndrome. Some have said it's linked to COVID-19.
That's not science.
CV can't be the cause if it's not present in all cases.
Common among all cases: lockdowns. https://twitter.com/JimmyVielkind/status/1260599548831031297?s=19
That's not science.
CV can't be the cause if it's not present in all cases.
Common among all cases: lockdowns. https://twitter.com/JimmyVielkind/status/1260599548831031297?s=19
There is some science to all of this.
The well-established science suggests indoor confinement is bad for your immune health.
Increased viral loads
Reduced physical activity
Reduced Vitamin D
Reduced O2
Not to mention isolation leading to mental health issues.
The well-established science suggests indoor confinement is bad for your immune health.




Not to mention isolation leading to mental health issues.
Counting the number of COVID-19 fatalities is also not science.
For science does not allow for such discretion. https://twitter.com/Giambusso/status/1260914959229358082?s=19
For science does not allow for such discretion. https://twitter.com/Giambusso/status/1260914959229358082?s=19
Here's some actual data on fatalities, however.
Total fatalities in 2020 is running below 2018 levels and inline with the average of recent years.
Even below average if you took into account population growth. #Science https://twitter.com/YossiGestetner/status/1260820623464566785?s=19
Total fatalities in 2020 is running below 2018 levels and inline with the average of recent years.
Even below average if you took into account population growth. #Science https://twitter.com/YossiGestetner/status/1260820623464566785?s=19