Public health “experts” are beclowning themselves as the protests grow during alleged lockdowns.
A new study from Harvard suggests that people should wear a mask (among other things) while having sex to stop the spread of the coronavirus.
The research, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, ranked frisky situations based on how likely it is to catch coronavirus while in the act. Researchers recommend wearing a mask for the riskiest sexual scenario: sex with people other than those with whom one is quarantined.
If you have an out-of-house coronavirus crush, the study says, besides keeping your mask on, you should avoid kissing, any oral-to-anal act and anything else that involves semen or urine. Shower before and after, and clean the space with alcohol wipes or soap.
The study also mentions that having sex with people who are together in quarantine is safer, but there is still a risk. For instance, if one partner goes outside to run an errand and is exposed to the virus, they can transmit it to the other. Even if that person is ultimately an asymptomatic carrier, they can still infect the other.
Source: New York POst
Everyone is now Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman.
Way to dehumanize sexual intimacy, public health professionals!
This is happening at the same time as more and more “health professionals” are supporting massive protests.
ClashDaily initially covered that here:
Protesting against “systemic racism” is a cause worthy enough to risk exposure to a novel coronavirus that has killed over 111,000 Americans and at least 393,000 people worldwide (plus the number of dead that China isn’t reporting.)
What wasn’t worth the risk were your:
- job or business
- financial security
- ability to feed your family
- children’s education
- ability to visit family and friends
- ability to worship corporately
- visits elderly relatives in nursing homes
- sporting events
Now that some guy in Minnesota was unjustly killed by a cop who had numerous complaints against him, well, that’s proof-positive of systemic racism and worthy of wide-scale protests that have devolved into riots.
Public health “experts” are just fine with that. After all, the right to “peacefully protest” is a Constitutional right. (Just don’t mention to them that the “free exercise of religion” is mentioned in the same amendment a little earlier on.)
For months, public health experts have urged Americans to take every precaution to stop the spread of Covid-19—stay at home, steer clear of friends and extended family, and absolutely avoid large gatherings.
Now some of those experts are broadcasting a new message: It’s time to get out of the house and join the mass protests against racism.
Johns Hopkins epidemiologist Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo tweeted, “We should always evaluate the risks and benefits of efforts to control the virus. In this moment the public health risks of not protesting to demand an end to systemic racism greatly exceed the harms of the virus.”
We should always evaluate the risks and benefits of efforts to control the virus. In this moment the public health risks of not protesting to demand an end to systemic racism greatly exceed the harms of the virus. https://t.co/s9DagyjQ1J
— Jennifer Nuzzo, DrPH (@JenniferNuzzo) June 2, 2020
“We should always evaluate the risks and benefits of efforts to control the virus.”
That’s literally what the anti-lockdown protesters were saying! But they weren’t “woke” so they were ignored. They just wanted to, you know, not go bankrupt and be able to feed their families and not be forced into poverty.
Here’s the tweet from Tom Frieden saying that the risk of contracting COVID outdoors is “tiny.”
The threat to Covid control from protesting outside is tiny compared to the threat to Covid control created when governments act in ways that lose community trust. People can protest peacefully AND work together to stop Covid. Violence harms public health.
— Dr. Tom Frieden (@DrTomFrieden) June 2, 2020
Just a couple of weeks ago, Frieden appeared on Your World With Neil Cavuto to discuss the coronavirus and some cluster cases that occurred in mid-late May. Frieden hasn’t been a big advocate of the open/close strategy and suggests “a level of gradations” and allow people to make the decisions for themselves, but he added, “What you do also affects others.”
We’ve been told that people protesting lockdowns were “killing grandma” but the protests for George Floyd and “systemic” racism wasn’t just acceptable–it’s a societal duty.
“Their rules appear ideologically driven as people can only gather for purposes deemed important by the elite central planners,” Brian Blase, who worked on health policy for the Trump administration, told me, an echo of complaints raised by prominent conservative commentators like J.D. Vance and Tim Carney…
…Was it fair to decry conservatives’ protests about the economy while supporting these new protests? And if tens of thousands of people get sick from Covid-19 as a result of these mass gatherings against racism, is that an acceptable trade-off? Those are questions that a half-dozen coronavirus experts who said they support the protests declined to directly answer.
“I don’t know if it’s really for me to comment,” said Karan.He did add: “Addressing racism, it can’t wait. It should’ve happened before Covid. It’s happening now. Perhaps this is our time to change things.”
“Many public health experts have already severely undermined the power and influence of their prior message,” countered Flier. “We were exposed to continuous daily Covid death counts, and infections/deaths were presented as preeminent concerns compared to all other considerations—until nine days ago,” he added.
An excellent point that the daily COVID death count has suddenly stopped now that there are mass protests all over the country.
Many conservatives stayed at home and obeyed the rules–it’s what they tend to do. But it now appears that those rules were malleable and based on politics, not public health.
I’m not sure what will be worse for public health officials if there is a massive second wave of outbreaks due to the massive protests or if there isn’t one.
Either way, these public health “experts” have thoroughly undermined their own credibility, and that is dangerous for all of us, no matter what your politics are.