If Wednesday was the final act of Donald Trump’s circus, @RepMoBrooks is one of the ringmasters. For weeks now, he has been lying to the public and whipping people into a frenzy that he and crew were going to “stop the steal” Wednesday.
More from Trump
It’s not clear how Dr. Sean Conley has determined Trump will no longer need to isolate only 10 days after symptom onset.
Looks like the CDC Guidelines say Trump should be in the category that needs to isolate for 20 days after symptom onset.👇
Plus ...
2. Fauci on Thursday used a (test-based) approach, in which case, per Fauci:
Trump needs to isolate for 10 days after symptoms RESOLVE (not symptoms onset) and then two negative tests.
Note: based on his coughing on Hannity last night, Trump’s symptoms haven’t resolved yet.
3. Here’s a longer quote from Fauci (via @MarionRenault):
https://t.co/oRdrtxQe80
4. Also noteworthy: on Hannity last night, Trump wouldn’t say he’s tested negative.👇
Thus failing one of the conditions required by Fauci for Trump to be considered no longer contagious.
5/5. This resource on coronavirus (UpToDate) has been specially made available to the public. It describes the test-based and non-test-based approaches.
Looks like the CDC Guidelines say Trump should be in the category that needs to isolate for 20 days after symptom onset.👇
Plus ...
Severe COVID Pneumonia defined as low oxygen sats <94 % as confirmed by the President\u2019s chief of staff, in addition to other clinically consistent information: shortness of breath to name one.
— Vin Gupta \u201c\U0001f637!\u201d MD (@VinGuptaMD) October 9, 2020
That buys 20 days of isolation. At 74 with co-morbidities, \u2066@CDCgov\u2069 is right pic.twitter.com/fR3jc9jYQI
2. Fauci on Thursday used a (test-based) approach, in which case, per Fauci:
Trump needs to isolate for 10 days after symptoms RESOLVE (not symptoms onset) and then two negative tests.
Note: based on his coughing on Hannity last night, Trump’s symptoms haven’t resolved yet.
Dr. Fauci: "If the President goes 10 days w/o symptoms & they do the tests-then you could make the assumption, based on good science, that he is not infected. But you have to make sure you go through those particular benchmarks delineated in the CDC guidelines." #AMRstaff
— Andrea Mitchell (@mitchellreports) October 8, 2020
3. Here’s a longer quote from Fauci (via @MarionRenault):
https://t.co/oRdrtxQe80
4. Also noteworthy: on Hannity last night, Trump wouldn’t say he’s tested negative.👇
Thus failing one of the conditions required by Fauci for Trump to be considered no longer contagious.
Mark the date, we have reached the point where even Sean Hannity is asking Trump simple questions that the president can\u2019t or won\u2019t answer https://t.co/HgMpIsOCJn
— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) October 9, 2020
5/5. This resource on coronavirus (UpToDate) has been specially made available to the public. It describes the test-based and non-test-based approaches.
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x