Trump Mocked After Claiming Magnets Don’t Work Underwater at Rally

[The Barbarian]

Right, but they tried to blame that one on Trump, when it's was pretty obvious that someone saying "we're looking into this drug, it could be a game changer (as naively optimistic as it may be)" -> "people ingest fish tank cleaner" is the normal pattern of events (as to imply that it was a "well, what did you expect, this is what happens when you tout a drug" type of thing, when that's obviously not the norm)

Well yes. The woman (who survived) said that she heard Trump's endorsement of the drug, found that it was in her fish tank cleanser, and she and her husband ingested it. Supremely stupid. But Trump's people, and even some who aren't Trump people, listened. The "bully pulpit" is a dangerous thing. Being president has some responsibilities.

But if she wasn't stupid, this wouldn't have happened.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I'm not sure that would help with building public confidence in our medical community.

With that particular cohort of people, the "U.S.S. Confidence" ship had already sailed.

More "thinking outside the box" solutions are sometimes required once you come to grips with certainly realities in the name of minimizing extraneous damage.

With regards to the anti-vaccine types of people, nothing you, I, the medical experts, the public officials, or the politicians were going to be able to say, do, etc... that was going to make them get vaccinated. Short of sending in the national guard and holding them down at gun point while a military doctor injects them with a J&J dose, there wasn't anything that was going to change their mind.

I think people could've entertained some of the out of the box ideas if enough people would've been able to come to that reality. ...but I think far too many were still arrogant enough as to think "if we just do this thing or threaten to take away this other thing, then they'll get vaccinated", ranging from "the carrot" to the "the stick"

- Free donuts
- $25 gift card
- $50 gift card
- Show them politicians getting the jab on TV
- Commercials showing famous athletes getting the jab
- Banning social media posts that were anti-vaccine
- Nightly mockery on late night comedy shows
- Taking away alternative quack solutions so they can't get them
- Vaccine mandates
- Threats of raising insurance premiums on people who were vaccinated


They tried all of it...None of it worked.

So, knowing that it's a "them getting vaccinated is off the table, 0%, never gonna happen, put it out of your mind" scenario...

What would be your Plan B? (for minimizing other types of harm)

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Well yes. The woman (who survived) said that she heard Trump's endorsement of the drug, found that it was in her fish tank cleanser, and she and her husband ingested it. Supremely stupid. But Trump's people, and even some who aren't Trump people, listened. The "bully pulpit" is a dangerous thing. Being president has some responsibilities.

But if she wasn't stupid, this wouldn't have happened.

...but I would hesitate to attribute certain forms of stupid actions to a person who touted something.

There is a distinction to be made.

For instance:
If I, as a hypothetical president, said "I think all kids should play with knives, I let my kids play with knives and it's the greatest thing ever, I encourage all parents to do the same" and a bunch of kids of parents who follow me get hurt, it would be reasonable to lay a good chunk of the blame at my feet (and not just blame the parents who were dumb enough to listen to me)

-- is very different than

If I said "Y'know, copper supports immunity and energy, that's why it's in Men 50+ multivitamins, I think it's great", and some idiot goes out and says "Rob said copper's good, so I ate this bag of pennies and now I need to go to the ER", I shouldn't be on the hook for that one.


With the fish tank cleaner story, in terms of potential culpability, it was more like the latter, but some media outlets tried to make it sound as if it was more like the former.

 

[wing2000]

With that particular cohort of people, the "U.S.S. Confidence" ship had already sailed.

More "thinking outside the box" solutions are sometimes required once you come to grips with certainly realities in the name of minimizing extraneous damage.

With regards to the anti-vaccine types of people, nothing you, I, the medical experts, the public officials, or the politicians were going to be able to say, do, etc... that was going to make them get vaccinated. Short of sending in the national guard and holding them down at gun point while a military doctor injects them with a J&J dose, there wasn't anything that was going to change their mind.

I think people could've entertained some of the out of the box ideas if enough people would've been able to come to that reality. ...but I think far too many were still arrogant enough as to think "if we just do this thing or threaten to take away this other thing, then they'll get vaccinated", ranging from "the carrot" to the "the stick"

- Free donuts
- $25 gift card
- $50 gift card
- Show them politicians getting the jab on TV
- Commercials showing famous athletes getting the jab
- Banning social media posts that were anti-vaccine
- Nightly mockery on late night comedy shows
- Taking away alternative quack solutions so they can't get them
- Vaccine mandates
- Threats of raising insurance premiums on people who were vaccinated


They tried all of it...None of it worked.

So, knowing that it's a "them getting vaccinated is off the table, 0%, never gonna happen, put it out of your mind" scenario...

What would be your Plan B? (for minimizing other types of harm)

My point was giving people placebos without their knowledge would only increase mistrust.
As to a Plan B. I don't know what more could have been done to incentivize vaccine resistors. The sad fact is certain politicians chose to politicize vaccine and exploit peoples fears for their own benefit. There's only so much public officials can do when people are isolated in their information bubbles.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

My point was giving people placebos without their knowledge would only increase mistrust.

Only if they find out lol.

Based on the NPR/CNN stuff I posted earlier, sounds like half of doctors admitted in surveys (pre-covid) that they do it somewhat regularly.

You or I could've been the recipients of placebos at some point or another without ever knowing it.

There's only so much public officials can do when people are isolated in their information bubbles.

I don't even think it's a bubble thing...those types of folks were the ones who most often go out of their way to try to invade other people's bubbles to evangelize their anti-vaccine beliefs.

If you've ever noticed on FB, whenever a more left leaning outlet would post something pro-vaccine, there was never a shortage of anti-vaccine types jumping in to make snarky comments about "The Fauci Ouchy" or "The Clot Shot". Clearly lack of exposure to pro-vaccine info wasn't culprit behind behind their beliefs.

 

[Ceallaigh]

The data is real life experience. That's how they get it. I get your point; it's cold comfort to someone who isn't getting paid adequately, if you tell him that the vast majority of Americans are doing better. It's like when you point out that a vaccine will protect 96% of people from serious illness or death, and someone says "What if you're one of those 4%, huh? Tell me that!" People like that are why casinos get rich.

You're being unrealistic. Considerably more than 4% of Americans are struggling who weren't struggling a few years years ago.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Employers. As you see, they realize that if wages increase faster than prices, that will cut their profits. For decades, productivity has been increasing faster than wages, meaning employers get to keep more of the money employees make for them. Now it's being reversed. And they are letting their republican officials know that they want something done about it.

Which is why republicans are bemoaning the fact, and seeking a way to stop it.

In the same way, McCartin said, tropes about today’s labour shortages in industries like trucking, health care and the service industry get linked to the idea that people don’t want to work. “But that sidesteps the key issue, which is that a lot of jobs, for the amount of wear and tear and the hard labour involved — they just don’t pay enough,” he said. “Very often what this kind of rhetoric, whether it’s people don’t want to work or there’s a labour shortage, what that often speaks to is that wages simply aren’t attractive enough for workers.”

'No one wants to work anymore': Employers complaining about labour shortages may simply not be paying enough

Employers complaining about labour shortages may simply not be paying enough to get people to work for them. Read more.

financialpost.com

Many employers claim to favor free markets, but when it comes to wages, they suddenly hate free markets.

I don't have time to read the article but that sounds like the increasing degree of privilege that's taking place where people feel they should be paid beyond the skills of their job, or better yet get paid by the government to stay at home.

 

[Whyayeman]

I don't have time to read the article but that sounds like the increasing degree of privilege that's taking place where people feel they should be paid beyond the skills of their job, or better yet get paid by the government to stay at home.

Brilliant! I wish I had the magic dust sprinkle so that I could know what an article is about without having to take the trouble to actually read it.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Brilliant! I wish I had the magic dust sprinkle so that I could know what an article is about without having to take the trouble to actually read it.

I was replying to what was written by poster.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Well, managed to top his ignorance about nuclear. Impressive.

At least he said it with lucidity, unlike some politicians I can think of.

 

[Desk trauma]

At least he said it with lucidity, unlike some politicians I can think of.

Whatever you have to tell yourself.

 

[Larniavc]

Surprisingly many people go by what they experience first hand in day to day living as opposed to pretending it's not happening according to someone's data.

Thankfully that kind of person is not normally in charge of public policy.

 

[Larniavc]

At least he said it with lucidity, unlike some politicians I can think of.

Lucid.

"Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it’s true! — but when you're a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are — nuclear is so powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right, who would have thought? — but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners — now it used to be three, now it’s four — but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years — but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us, this is horrible."

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Whatever you have to tell yourself.

I don't think Trump is much of a scientist. Fortunately, that's not what he's going for. Frankly, with as much "off the cuff" speaking he does, I'm surprised he doesn't say a lot more "odd" stuff.

 

[Bradskii]

Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t work, but it certainly has a big effect if it’s on a stationary object."

Maybe that's why it didn't work for some people. They had to stand very, very still for an hour or so for it to be effective.

 

[The Barbarian]

My point was giving people placebos without their knowledge would only increase mistrust.

In vaccine trials, volunteers are aware that they will be randomly chosen to get either a does of vaccine or a placebo. The point is, neither the researcher nor the subjects should know who got what, because that could affect the interpretation of results.

 

[The Barbarian]

I don't think Trump is much of a scientist. Fortunately, that's not what he's going for. Frankly, with as much "off the cuff" speaking he does, I'm surprised he doesn't say a lot more "odd" stuff.

Trump once said that he understood the war in the Middle East better than any of the generals (almost all of whom had combat experience, while young Trump got a doctor's note to avoid the draft during the Vietnamese unpleasantness)

Trump (who is known as "Cadet Bone Spurs" by veterans like Tammy Duckworth and Gen. Jim Mattis) seems to hold himself out as an expert on pretty much everything.

13 Things Donald Trump Says He Knows “More About Than Anybody”​

MSN

 

[civilwarbuff]

Caption says "coal washing plant". I guess clean coal really is a thing.

It is crushed into a powder form so it can be transported by pipeline. Rarely used due to the massive amount of water necessary to transport it.

 

[The Barbarian]

Iron removal from kaolinitic coal gangue via magnetic separation after oxidizing calcination with the crystal structure of kaolinite protected​

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352492823018664

 

[wing2000]

In vaccine trials, volunteers are aware that they will be randomly chosen to get either a does of vaccine or a placebo. The point is, neither the researcher nor the subjects should know who got what, because that could affect the interpretation of results.

Right. I was referring to MD's prescribing placebos for regular medical care...not trials.

Or the physicians could've coordinated their game plan and gone the placebo route (which I was surprised to find out is actually legal, but evidently it is), let the person think they're getting ivermectin, so they're content and won't go running off to the livestock and feed store.
Per NPR: Of nearly 700 U.S. internal medicine doctors surveyed, almost half said they prescribe placebos regularly — two to three times a month.
Per CNN: In a recent survey done at the University of Chicago Medical Center, 45 percent of internists who filled out the anonymous questionnaire said they had used a placebo at some time during their clinical practice.

If half of doctors already had no qualms with regularly going the placebo route...seems like the covid/ivermectin situation would've been a good opportunity to employ that approach.