As copied from Facebook, author unackowledged.
“Chickenpox is a virus. Lots of people have had it, and probably don't think about it much once the initial illness has passed. But it stays in your body and lives there forever, and maybe when you're older, you have debilitatingly painful outbreaks of shingles. You don't just get over this virus in a few weeks, never to have another health effect. We know this because it's been around for years, and has been studied medically for years.
Herpes is also a virus. And once someone has it, it stays in your body and lives there forever, and anytime they get a little run down or stressed-out they're going to have an outbreak. Maybe every time you have a big event coming up (school pictures, job interview, big date) you're going to get a cold sore. For the rest of your life. You don't just get over it in a few weeks. We know this because it's been around for years, and been studied medically for years.
HIV is a virus. It attacks the immune system and makes the carrier far more vulnerable to other illnesses. It has a list of symptoms and negative health impacts that goes on and on. It was decades before viable treatments were developed that allowed people to live with a reasonable quality of life. Once you have it, it lives in your body forever and there is no cure. Over time, that takes a toll on the body, putting people living with HIV at greater risk for health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, diabetes, bone disease, liver disease, cognitive disorders, and some types of cancer. We know this because it has been around for years, and had been studied medically for years.
Now with COVID-19, we have a novel virus that spreads rapidly and easily. The full spectrum of symptoms and health effects is only just beginning to be cataloged, much less understood.
So far the symptoms may include:
Fever
Fatigue
Coughing
Pneumonia
Chills/Trembling
Acute respiratory distress
Lung damage (potentially permanent)
Loss of taste (a neurological symptom)
Sore throat
Headaches
Difficulty breathing
Mental confusion
Diarrhea
Nausea or vomiting
Loss of appetite
Strokes have also been reported in some people who have COVID-19 (even in the relatively young)
Swollen eyes
Blood clots
Seizures
Liver damage
Kidney damage
Rash
COVID toes (weird, right?)
People testing positive for COVID-19 have been documented to be sick even after 60 days. Many people are sick for weeks, get better, and then experience a rapid and sudden flare up and get sick all over again. A man in Seattle was hospitalized for 62 days, and while well enough to be released, still has a long road of recovery ahead of him. Not to mention a $1.1 million medical bill.
Then there is MIS-C. Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children is a condition where different body parts can become inflamed, including the heart, lungs, kidneys, brain, skin, eyes, or gastrointestinal organs. Children with MIS-C may have a fever and various symptoms, including abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, neck pain, rash, bloodshot eyes, or feeling extra tired. While rare, it has caused deaths.
This disease has not been around for years. It has basically been 6 months. No one knows yet the long-term health effects, or how it may present itself years down the road for people who have been exposed. We literally do not know what we do not know.
For those in our society who suggest that people being cautious are cowards, for people who refuse to take even the simplest of precautions to protect themselves and those around them, I want to ask, without hyperbole and in all sincerity:
How dare you?
How dare you risk the lives of others so cavalierly. How dare you decide for others that they should welcome exposure as "getting it over with", when literally no one knows who will be the lucky "mild symptoms" case, and who may fall ill and die. Because while we know that some people are more susceptible to suffering a more serious case, we also know that 20 and 30-year-olds have died, marathon runners and fitness nuts have died, children and infants have died.
How dare you behave as though you know more than medical experts, when those same experts acknowledge that there is so much we don't yet know, but with what we DO know, are smart enough to be scared of how easily this is spread, and recommend baseline precautions such as:
Frequent hand-washing
Physical distancing
Reduced social/public contact or interaction
Mask wearing
Covering your cough or sneeze
Avoiding touching your face
Sanitizing frequently touched surfaces
The more things we can all do to mitigate our risk of exposure, the better off we all are, in my opinion. Not only does it flatten the curve and allow health care providers to maintain levels of service that aren't immediately and catastrophically overwhelmed; it also reduces unnecessary suffering and deaths, and buys time for the scientific community to study the virus in order to come to a more full understanding of the breadth of its impacts in both the short and long term.
I reject the notion that it's "just a virus" and we'll all get it eventually. What a careless, lazy, heartless stance.”
6
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
8 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Someone on here posted a remark about attitudes to precautions, and especially the so called freedom movement, but it is worth repeating as often as possible, if only because it seems simple enough for even the most stupid to understand. (Maybe not.)
"How would it have been in 1941 if all the people in London, living during the bombing raids, had said. I am going to make my own mind up if I put up blackouts on my house at night, or if my lights shine. Its my freedom."
Fernapple
Level 9
July 19, 2020
4
I don't see any comment in this thread about "attitudes to precautions" or the freedom movement.
@LovinLarge No, sorry, I did not mean on this thread, I meant on this site, it was about two days ago.
@Fernapple Pardon me, I misunderstood.
Although all of those people who put out their lights made up their own minds to submit to authority and follow the law or just realized that it was in their own best interest to turn off their lights. In fact that's one if the problems with religion is the requirement of submission to an external authority which is quite different than the necessity of law to keep the peace between people living together in communities.
I'm not following how it pertains to this thread, though.
@LovinLarge It refers to the writen bit not the video, but the point is, that sometimes it is in everyones best interest including their own, for the leadership to give a clear direction, and for everyone to follow it even if that means acting mindlessly.
Its sometimes called the wisdom of Solon, (you will have to look that up). But what it means is that in America everyone drives their cars on the right hand side of the road, while in England we all drive on the left. Both work equally well, and generally everyone gets where they are going quickly and safely. But foolish people, could because of that, say that it does not matter which side people drive on, if both work equally well. But if everyone did decide that they would just drive on whatever side they liked, there would be chaos, lots of accidents and it would take everyone, including those who thought they could gain a small advantage by going on the wrong side, ten times longer to get where they were going.
Some people may think that they gain an advantage, especially an economic one, by not wearing a mask, but if everyone puts a mask on all the time, however mindlessly. Then the outbreak may be over sooner, which brings everyone an economic gain in the long term, far larger than the short term gains. These people need to learn that sometimes obeying rules, for the good of society may hurt in the short term but you gain in the long run yourself because we are all part of that society.
@Fernapple There's no reasonable argument against what you've said and you've explained it well. Not to detract from your point, my only quibble is that I don't think such actions are taken mindlessly, nor do they need to be.
Here in the US, it is a faction of the conservative element that opposes masking as a freedom issue. My theory is that conservatism is a form of Attachment Disorder in that they have a diminished sense of community, which explains why they don't feel a responsibility to do their part to protect the community by wearing a mask. The very first thing our federal goverment should have done was to issue PPE including masks to all residents and ensure that there would be enough PPE for the foreseeable future. PPE is not cheap and most of it is disposable. Availability may have helped.
My point is that mindless submission to an external authority is not desirable and the fundamental problem is selfishness, which is common to other uniquely American problems. They want the full benefit of the community while contributing absolute least.
@LovinLarge Yes it is not exactly mindless, that is perhaps a bad choice of words, but I could not think of a better. It is only mindless in the sense that the rules can sometimes be arbitary, and you have to respect them regardless of that. Mindless respect for authority is never generally good.
But that is where the blackout point comes in. If just one person, opened their shutters, there is only one light, which is not going to guide the bombers to the city, because one light does not make a city, it could after all be just a farmer in a field with a lamp looking for sheep. But if five or six people break the rules, thinking I am only one person, without even known one another or planning it, , then everyone is in danger, everyone in society sometimes depend on everyone pulling together as a whole.
@Fernapple There is no stronger proponent of your community good principles than I. I am always looking for new arguments to convince the naysayers so I thank you for it. As I understand it, even one light that could be seen from above was enough to identify a bombing target so your example may be the most powerful of all.
I just watched part of the video and think that she has missed a point about immunity. It is not so much about the circulating antibodies as it is about the ability of the body's memory B or T cells that ramp up the response when there is a new infection. [medicalxpress.com]
itsmedammit
Level 8
July 19, 2020
1
Post implies that the originator is not aware that chicken pox is caused by a herpes virus. It is true that it is a different herpes than the one indicated in the second paragraph, but it seems like a sloppy start to a long post, so I didn't read it. I would feel as though I need to verify everything.
itsmedammit
Level 8
July 19, 2020
1
This post has been edited AFTER my questioning the original attempt that claimed that it was a Fauci quote. 
FearlessFly
Level 9
July 19, 2020
1
If this is quoting Fauci, where is the link to the source ? (I don't find it)
If it isn't, whose 'quote' is it ?
FearlessFly
Level 9
July 18, 2020
0
Was posted on Facebook, copied as is. Regardless of who authored it, I think it’s pretty spot on.
@Barnie2years On the blue-sky planet I live CRITICAL THINKING does NOT work that way !
If the claim is that is from Fauci, there needs to be a source for that claim !
The alternative (especially from FB) is to label it FAKE NEWS. 
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool"
[brainyquote.com]
@Barnie2years also "copied as is" (especially without linking to the source) is a copyright violation -- all it would take is one disgruntled user (perhaps a religious interloper) to report it.
@Barnie2years I agree a source is preferable as a matter of assessing credibility, but my experience is that online, including this site, most factual allegations including quotations are not referenced properly (especially memes!) and the worst offenders are the conservatives, many of whom don't know how facts are established or understand the significance of evidence.
Yesterday some con on here was making allegations against Antifa when the article he linked didn't even mention Antifa. When I called him on it, he continued to insist that it did. That's an old con trick, referencing an article and pretending the article says something it doesn't. I've seen them reference articles that weren't even related to the issue under discussion.
In the case of a quotation, the source, date and context are preferable. I don't see anything contentious in your post and I was glad to have the opportunity to read it. Citation is preferable but nothing to get your panties in a bunch over.
@LovinLarge . . . hmmm -- "factual allegations" -- is that DoubleSpeak for "alternative facts" ?
@FearlessFly Here is the link. Actually the "Town of Oyster Bay News" didn't reference it either.
@LovinLarge Like others on this website, I don't/won't do FB, and by itself. FB is NOT a source. Especially not a CREDIBLE/VERIFiABLE source !
@FearlessFly That is where the text came from and the FB post does not identify a source so yes, the FB post is the source.
@LovinLarge "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool"
@FearlessFly "Factual allegations" are facts alleged without supporting evidence.
@FearlessFly I don't let other people tell me what my first principle should be. I have the education, experience and accomplishments to make all significant decisions for myself.
@Fred_Snerd . . . yea, I almost jumped on that one too -- confirmation bias.
. . . btw, apart from math, even science doesn't prove anything (sometimes disproves things).
@Fred_Snerd I qualified that as my online experience, which is unprovable.
Implicit in saying one group is the worst is that there are other offending groups.
@maturin1919 . . . a good read : 
[goodreads.com]
@Fred_Snerd Thank you, I believe I was in defence mode by that point. I do want to be held to the highest standard and I know I can trust you to do so civilly. I do make mistakes and overgeneralize sometimes, but in the larger scheme of things I'm not sure how truly important those things are or whether they warrant a public roasting.
Anyway, a fine Sunday morning to you.
@LovinLarge that was my point. The information was valid, regardless of the source. I added the video, which says much of the same. I also took Fauci’s name off it, because a quick search didn’t come up with this exact quote. But it did come up with interviews with Dr. Fauci where he made statements of a similar vein. I if those who have an issue with the point of the statement want to produce contradictory findings or statements go for it. If they just want to whine about the state of Internet information, start a post on that subject. Some people just need to have the last word, and thrive on mockery. I don’t waste my time.
@maturin1919 . . . philosophers have been "discussing" 'truth' at least since the ancients.
@Barnie2years Yes, I agree with and support you. Also, I looked through that page you got the article from and they reference Dr. Fauci frequently so I think this situation is understandable.
I apologize for making such a mess of your thread. I am here for community and positive interaction but I have a weakness when I see someone being unjustly ridiculed so I'm a bit worried about how that is going to play out if there are people here for the purpose of criticizing others. I hope this is not the case.
Please continue to post information that you think might be useful to people like this post was for me.
@LovinLarge 
It takes far more than a fly to get me upset. Words are just that. Words. I post what I find interesting. If someone shows me a mistake, I have no problem making corrections. I could not locate the exact quote, but the piece makes a very valid point. So I got rid of the reference. You spent way more time arguing with Fly than I would have wasted. 
@Barnie2years I did not challenge the substance despite challenging the Fauci claim. I appreciate you editing-out that reference. I added my 'edited' comment in order that my original 'complaint' wouldn't be left 'stranded'.
IMO, (even inadvertant) improper claim(s) is how 'fake news' is propagated.
I don't think anyone should be chastised for calling-it-out (not that you did).
@FearlessFly I don’t mind being called out on a mistake. I will verify the that it is a mistake and have no issue with publishing a retraction or just deleting the whole thing. I have also called out others errors. If they are corrected, I will delete my post, not extend the argument. I find that easier than leaving an outdated complaint dangling or trying to explain it after the correction was made. Just saying! The whole thing didn’t upset me, takes way more than that.
@Barnie2years He didn't upset me either, in fact it was a valuable lesson in just what you said, wasting time. Once I identify the time wasters (in person, also) I never give those individuals the time of day again. I will stick with my commitment to give everyone a chance, but it only takes one interaction to upset the apple cart.
I am finished with this thread. I stand by everything I said and everything you said. See you again.
When it first broke out in the US, the first thing my dr did was ask me for end of life instructions. I can't put into words how much I do not want to catch that thing. I only go out once a week and when I do I wear mask and gloves and keep the hell away from people. I have to admit, it is taking its toll in loneliness.
This info from the great dr Fauci was helpful to me, thank you. He is a truly great man, unlike the truly ungreat Pumpkin.
LovinLarge
Level 8
July 18, 2020
3
I get the impression it is NOT from Fauci.
@FearlessFly On what basis?
@LovinLarge . . . as I alluded, I tried searching for MULTIPLE series of words and came-up-empty !
Do you think such a large (alleged) quote from Fauci would be hard to find ? REALLY ?
I like to have an open mind, but not so open that my brains fall out.
@FearlessFly I found the text with no problem. It bears no reference to Dr. Fauci. I don't know why it was linked to him. He may or may not be the source. I tend to be more concerned with substance than form and I liked it. I have too much going on to cry over something like this.
@LovinLarge Your "concern with substance" sounds suspiciously like the confirmation bias fallacy -- you liked it and "fell-for-it"
If it is demonstrated to be an ACTUAL Fauci quote (I doubt it), so be it.
WHY defend what appears to be fake news ?
@FearlessFly You don't know how to distinguish between form and substance.
Even if the text is not attributable to Dr. Fauci, you've presented no contrary evidence that would defeat its substance and until you do, you are In no position to discredit it.
@FearlessFly I didn't write the article. A credited article would carry more credibility. I don't see anything contentious in the article. You called it "fake news" without any indication what was fake or on what basis. That onus rests with you.
@LovinLarge "you've presented no contrary evidence that would defeat its substance"
btw, that is another logical fallacy -- straw man !
I made NO claims pro/con about the substance at all !
Perhaps you might consider 'upgrading' your "decision making"
@LovinLarge EVEN the OP has edited the post to remove the "Fauci" claim !
QED
@FearlessFly You wrote "WHY defend what appears to be fake news?" Then you wrote "I made NO claims pro/con about the substance at all !"
You are dishonest. You are rude. You chose to create a problem in a situation that could have been resolved civilly. You are the type of person I avoid. If you address me again, I will block you because you are without credibility.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.