Post 790, ya unbelievable dumbass.
Information about Dr. David Kim, ya gibbering monotreme.
If you want to know this information, YOU look it up.
Post 709, ya useless oxygen thief.
Got any other questions that either have been answered repeatedly just TODAY or can be found with a simple google search?
Yes…only not by a method that could result in others being infected, since he was CONTAGIOUS.
They wouldn’t have told him that. Give it up already.
I’m actually pretty surprised. I think the case for “thoughtless asshole” is pretty water-tight, so to hear people say Sounds perfectly reasonable to me! makes me question either their intelligence or their motivations or both.
Post 790 says nothing about a doctor giving advice to Speaker. It simply says that a doctor spoke to him on the phone. You are assuming that Doctor Kim spoke to him on the phone and advised him about quarantines.
Sorry, but your assumptions won’t cut it without any cites.
Dumbass, indeed.
Sorry, but Post 709 doesn’t contain the quote you claim it does.
What if Speaker had spoken to some low-level CDC beaurocrat and that person had said “ya know, if you become contagious, it might be necessary to quarantine you, but we need to talk to the doctor first”
Then CDC could honestly (haha) claim that it initiated conversations about the need for isolation.
And your claim about a doctor advising him he might need to be quarantined would be completely wrong.
i.e. you have been caught in another lie.
Whether he was or he wasn’t doesn’t affect my anology.
Yeah, and no doctor or government agency has ever advised a patient to do something harmful to him or herself. Riiiiiiiiight.
Are there only two choices? “Biggest asshole ever” or “perfectly reasonable”?
You’re have to be more specific what paper you’re talking about; the thread is 16 pages now.
For the zillionth and first time, the issue is not merely contagiousness. And I still don’t see anything offered by you, the great cite-demander.
Correct.
The actions the CDC requested were reasonable in light of the potential public health risk.There’s really no way to make the CDC’s request unreasonable simply by pulling out the most ridiculous actions you can think of and trying to make them an analogy: What if they told him to hammer nails into his head?? What if they told him to rape a monkey??? Why? Because two thinks have to be at least minimally analogous for an analogy to exist, much less work. So I guess my reply is what I generally say when presented with a stupid so-called analogy: If my aunt had balls, she’d be my uncle.
You don’t dispute they told him not to fly, do you? Because that’s the issue for me. AFAICT, he never would have been quarantined if he hadn’t demonstrated his inability or unwillingness to voluntarily comply with the CDC’s requests. Health authorities don’t quarantine as a first option; they quarantine as a last resort. Or they did until now – next time we can assume they will quarantine much earlier, or at least impose significant travel restrictions.
No. It’s not disobeying them that makes him an asshole; it’s completely doing the opposite and potentially endangering the public health thereby. As I said before, there are two reasonable options when the CDC says You may present a public health hazard. Don’t get on a plane. You can put yourself in their hands and trust them, or you can independently determine whether their conclusion is medically and epidemiologically valid, by consulting your own doctors and running your own tests, while refraining from endangering the public health until you know if the CDC is wrong or not. This of course takes time and money, but if you have both, go crazy. But because you cannot ASSUME they are wrong, the one thing you do NOT do is race off and do exactly what they told you not to do, and to hell with the unknown public health implications.
Thoughtless asshole. If you are quoting me, please do so correctly. And, yeah, those are pretty much the two options: Reasonable (not an asshole) or unreasonable (an asshole). Now, you can argue about where he rates on the asshole scale (is he a 2 or a 10?) but IMO there isn’t much doubt based on his actions that he’s on there someplace. He was told by the CDC not to fly. He knew he was on the no-fly list. He knew he had XDR-TB. So what did he do? He flew to the Czech Republic and then flew to Canada. Why? Because he was worried that he’d get stuck in that third-world cesspit, Italy. And that was a dilemma he wouldn’t have been in in the first place if he hadn’t hurried off to Europe (two days before scheduled to leave) without knowing the exact nature of his illness – an illness he knew before he left was probably serious enough to warrant extended treatment at a specialized hospital.
He was selfish. He was irresponsible. He made a series of bad choices that caught up with him in Italy, and he wasn’t willing to live with the consequences of them, so he made a couple more. He evaded the authorities and exposed people to a very dangerous disease in order to achieve his own selfish agenda. He did a grave disservice to every person with a dangerous communicable disease who in the future won’t be trusted as he was, as a direct result of his irresponsibility. He was a first-class, gold-plated asshole.
So, I give you a link to the head of the CDC saying “A doctor called Speaker in Rome and talked about medical isolation with him”, but since the realm of inference and simple commonsense logic is beyond your feeble grasp, you think that means I’m making a huge leap somewhere and “assuming” that Dr. Kim spoke to him on the phone and advised him about quarantines, and so you apparently want a link with those specific words in it?
How on Earth did you manage to get through school? Oh, wait…I’m sorry. I’m doing that assuming thing again, and thinking you actually made it through school.
My error…it was in post 657, the second link provided.
If you’d bothered to read any of the links in my posts as you argue with me and call me a liar, you’d have know that, though.
Then I’d expect you to give me a cite saying that, since you’re so fond of that. Except you’d never be able to find such a cite, while I, on the other hand, can produce this
Okay, got any evidence for that wonderful story you just made up about a low-level CDC “beaurocrat” talking to Speaker? Or, indeed, the name of anyone ELSE from the CDC who talked to Speaker by phone in Rome?
Or are you just going to stamp your feet and call me a big meanie-head liar again?
You’re right, because it’s a retarded analogy to begin with.
And you have a cite showing that the CDC wanted him to do something harmful to himself in this case? Other than “my ass”, which appears to be the source of all your other assertions, that is.
BTW, nothing sets the stage for a night out like a nice discussion on TB. Instead of having fun, I’ll be all worried about who’s coughing on me. 
Post 704. And if you haven’t read enough of the thread to know what paper is being discussed, might I suggest that you aren’t in a position to argue that I’m demanding cites left and right but refusing to provide them when asked?
The issue you raised is that I’m not providing cites.
Please show me a few times in this thread when people have demanded cites from me and I haven’t provided them. You’ve read the whole thread carefully, right? Right?
Ok, so if you refuse to obey a CDC instruction that you think (or should think) is reasonable, then you are an asshole. But if you justifiably think it’s unreasonable, then you’re not an asshole. Right? Right?
Another reasonable option is to demand that the CDC explain the basis for its instruction. Wait a second – that’s what Speaker actually did!!
Look at the title of this thread!!
So if I think that what he did showed poor judgment but was not outrageous, am I in the “biggest asshole ever” camp or the “perfectly reasonable” camp?
You gave me no such link. Anyway, I’m getting tired of your lies.
Of course not. I’m not claiming that actually happened because I’m not a liar like you. However, there’s just as much evidence for the scenario I presented as there is for your own flights of fancy.
Retarded means that you’ve given up on arguing why it’s wrong. So you resort to childish insults.
I might, but that’s not the claim I made. You claimed, basically, that neither a government agency nor a doctor would never advise somebody to do something harmful to themselves. Would you like a cite showing that at some time, either a doctor or a government agency advised somebody to do something harmful to themselves?
Which assertions? And please don’t lie again.
Awww…are you getting cranky? Trying to duck and weave the evidence getting to be too much for you?
No there isn’t. Wanna hold a vote of thread readers?
When you can show that the fact that some government agency somewhere told someone to do something harmful to themselves has the least bit of bearing on this situation, where no one at any agency told anyone to do something harmful to themselves, sure.
If you can’t, then shut up and stay on topic.
Let’s start with the one about the “low-level CDC “beaurocrat”” and move on to the CDC telling Speaker to do something harmful to himself.
Ya great big waste of DNA
Look, are you claiming that the CDC would never tell anyone to do something harmful to themself or not? It’s a yes or no question.
Ok let’s start with that. Here’s what I actually said:
Do you see the first two words in my quote? I understand that reading is kind of hard for you, but do you see those two words? Do you know what they mean?
Calling you on your lies is getting kind of old.
Did they tell Speaker to do something harmful to himself in this case or not? It’s a yes or no question.
Yes. I also know what the words “However, there’s just as much evidence for the scenario I presented as there is for your own flights of fancy” mean. And I know that you have yet to provide a single cite for anything you’ve said through this whole thing. Unlike me (deny it as you like).
Did your parents have any children that lived?
Your pretending I’ve lied got old several pages ago.
Deal with it, pink boy.
I don’t know.
Now how about you answer my question:
I’ll repeat for you:
Ok, since you seem to know what “what if” means, you must know that I was not actually claiming that the conversation I described took place.
So why did you characterize it as an assertion?
Please show me what I said that you think requires a cite. Don’t lie. Just use the quote feature.