President Biden spoke with reporters today outside The Nantucket Tap Room where he said he decided on the ban out of an abundance of caution. He is Nantucket celebrating Thanksgiving with his family
* Fauci told CNN shortly before 8am on Friday that he thought a travel ban from southern Africa, in response to the new COVID strain, was unlikely
* He said his team was going to discuss Omicron, which originated in Botswana, with South African scientists later in the morning
* After their conversation, Fauci and other top scientists spoke to Joe Biden, who is currently on a Thanksgiving break with his family in Nantucket
* At 2:30pm Biden announced that he had decided to bring in a travel ban, which affects eight countries and comes into effect on Monday
Joe Biden is being accused of being a hypocrite after he announced a ban on travel from eight southern African countries in response to a new COVID variant despite previously claiming Trump's travel ban in 2020 was 'xenophobic.'
On Friday Biden, who is in Nantucket for a Thanksgiving break with his family, said travel will be banned from South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Lesotho, Eswatini, Mozambique, and Malawi.
U.S. citizens and green card holders will still be able to travel into the U.S. from the banned countries, but no one else will be allowed.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: It looks like no one is listening to him .... Fauci: US Must Study Data Before Deciding on Travel Ban Over New COVID Variant (VOA/Reuters).
It's not unusual for a politician to criticize an opposing party President for something, then turn around and do almost the same thing later. Hypocrisy? Yes, but then, everyone alive is a hypocrite.
ReplyDeletethe new and seemingly very very severe new strain calls for a ban and yet our editor thinks that an earlier statement prior to this latest mutation now makes Biden a hypocrite. Were he to not put a ban in place then this site would label Biden incompetent. Tip: give up trying to badmouth Biden nonstop and for forgiving Trump for every misstep that has made him called by presidential scholars one of our very worst presidents.
ReplyDeleteIt is generally a good idea to study something carefully before deciding on a major course of action. We know what the costs of travel bans are in terms of monetary costs and the enormous inconveniences these things cost. In contrast we don't yet know how dangerous this new variant is. More study is clearly needed.
ReplyDeleteAre they even serious about combating this at all? After all they're largely rejecting effective and relatively inexpensive options to treat this such as ivermectin and HCQ. It's becoming harder and harder to take these "experts" seriously.
Poster you troll. no decent man or woman of science knows to give that shit to anyone unless they have worms. why try to cause chaos here? Go solve the virus in your home country...they need more help than most other nations at this point.
ReplyDeleteThis post talks about science, yet Poster, who earlier noted when asked that he was vaccinated now raves about the horse crap that science tells us is not for humans to use. Lordy lord. If you are to earn your salary, trollster, at least keep your stories straight.
ReplyDeleteThere are some studies that explain how ivermectin works. It's very easy to find.
DeleteI know people who have used this successfully. Also, some of my contacts in the medical field have stated that when they tried to make this public they were censored. Ivermectin probably isn't right for everyone but it does have efficacy combined with minimal to no downside risks.
When you are confronted with this, you attack me as a troll. When unable to present your case based on merit you attack the messenger.
As for the vaccine, I took it because I did some international travel, would like to do more, and I interact with a number of at risk people. I probably will NOT be getting the boosters.
I can respect a frightened flight attendant who gets the vaccine because she needs her job to feed her family. I do not respect people who blindly follow what the media tells them.
I agree my home country, America, does need help here. With hypersensitive PCR tests that err on the side of false positives and the financial incentives to classify deaths as caused by COVID-19 we can be pretty near 100% certain that deaths are overstated and among those actually tested cases are overstated. There may be large numbers of people who had mild symptoms and never got tested. These numbers aren't known and the "cool kids" who lecture us about "science" have FUBAR this to the point we'll likely never have good numbers.
As long as they are ignoring viable and helpful treatment options such as ivermectin and HCQ they shouldn't be taken seriously. I will reiterate what I've said before. The vaccines are probably right for some people but not for everyone. To force a very dangerous vaccine on people that has limited efficacy is either very, very stupid or very, very evil. Making things even more problematic we have no idea what the long range effects are.
2:05,
ReplyDeleteI believe B Poster top be a troll. That is out of the way.
Now for you. You are full of shit. Ivermectin is for human use. The difference is the formulation and/or dosage.
"Ivermectin is a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved antiparasitic drug that is used to treat several neglected tropical diseases, including onchocerciasis, helminthiases, and scabies.1 It is also being evaluated for its potential to reduce the rate of malaria transmission by killing mosquitoes that feed on treated humans and livestock.2 For these indications, ivermectin has been widely used and is generally well tolerated.1,3 Ivermectin is not approved by the FDA for the treatment of any viral infection."
Last Updated: February 11, 2021
www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/ivermectin/
Japan, India and other places have used Ivermectin for COVID. Are you calling the Japanese stupid? The Indians?
Role of ivermectin in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers in India: A matched case-control study
"Conclusion: Two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis at a dose of 300 μg/kg with a gap of 72 hours was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers for the following month. Chemoprophylaxis has relevance in the containment of pandemic."
- NIH FEB 2021
The US used Remdesivir. According to some studies it had slight impact. Other studies showed patients were slightly worse off. The Great & Wonderful Dr. Fauci wanted to study Remdesivir, but not Ivermectin. He can invest in the former, but not the latter since its patent expired.
Why Remdesivir Failed: Preclinical Assumptions Overestimate the Clinical Efficacy of Remdesivir for COVID-19 and Ebola
- NIH
www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/remdesivir/
Personally, I am more iffy about Ivermentin than hydroxychloroquine. I know how exactly how hydroxychloroquine works. I do not know exactly how zinc works in the intracellular machinery. Neither do 'scientists', but they know it works. I do not how Ivermectin would work as an antiviral. But please note that Rogaine was a drug researched for heart patients and its off label use was for hair loss.
At worst Ivermectin is harmless. Doctors know safe dosages because it has been used for a generation. So let them prescribed it to people, who want it, and quit being a jackbooted Adolf Eichmann.
The first reason you are against it, is because Trump spoke positively that Ivermectin might be part of the answer. Can't have success and Trump re-elected. If Merkel, Boris Johnson, Macron or the Democrats hade come out for it first, you would be all for it.
The second reason is Big Pharma does not want to use anything off patent.
You are a troll yourself or you are stupid and shithead.
Excellent analysis regarding ivermectin. You correctly point out that we aren't sure exactly how it works. We just know that it does. I saw an article today that attempts to explain how it works. I'm still evaluating it.
DeleteOverall your analysis is spot on even though the insults directed at me and others don't add anything of value to the discussion. I would appreciate specifics on where you find fault with my analysis. When we discuss things civilly, there's the potential to gain much knowledge and wisdom.