Supra genius Fauci warned Trump administration of the issue of pandemic preparedness/ surprise outbreak

[R. Hartono]

A man who can foresee a SURPRISE OUTBREAK of pandemic, it means its not a surprise for him. Supra genius beyond measures, or else.......................

Edited February 2, 2022 by R. Hartono

[one.opinion]

Epidemiologists and other health officials have known about potential pandemics for decades. Fauci is not unique by any stretch of the imagination. After all, we've seen near-pandemics twice in 20 years - from other coronaviruses, no less. An actual pandemic was a surprise to no one that has been paying attention.

[Sparks]

On 2/1/2022 at 11:57 AM, one.opinion said:

Epidemiologists and other health officials have known about potential pandemics for decades. Fauci is not unique by any stretch of the imagination. After all, we've seen near-pandemics twice in 20 years - from other coronaviruses, no less. An actual pandemic was a surprise to no one that has been paying attention.

The problem with your argument is that no Epidemiologist (or other experts) mentioned with such certainty that there would be a surprise pandemic.  Of course, we have learned there are reasons Dr. Fauci knew with such certainty.

[R. Hartono]

6 hours ago, Sparks said:

 Of course, we have learned there are reasons Dr. Fauci knew with such certainty.

Only him knows the reason.

[one.opinion]

Oh goodness, Sparks... You never get tired of making statements without bothering to check for accuracy, do you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic_predictions_and_preparations_prior_to_the_COVID-19_pandemic

I'm a molecular microbiologist, not an epidemiologist, and I still knew that there was a pandemic coming. I did not even guess it has been as bad as it has, but the eventuality was well-known.

It would be nearly impossible to see the two prior coronavirus spillover events (infection spilling from animals to humans) in the past two decades that were nearly pandemics and assume that a pandemic would not eventually occur.

[Sparks]

13 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Oh goodness, Sparks... You never get tired of making statements without bothering to check for accuracy, do you?

You pick Wikipedia as a fact check?  Goodness, back.   Just understand I am not al liberal, so I don't make 'liberal' statements.

13 hours ago, one.opinion said:

I'm a molecular microbiologist, not an epidemiologist

Well, we have no way of verifying that!

13 hours ago, one.opinion said:

I'm a molecular microbiologist, not an epidemiologist, and I still knew that there was a pandemic coming. I did not even guess it has been as bad as it has, but the eventuality was well-known.

So, you guessed that Trump would be surprised by a Pandemic?  That it would happen during the Trump Administration, like Dr. Fauci did?  Sorry, but I doubt that. 

1% deaths with Covid 19 (allegedly), or 1% deaths with the flu... 

Which is 'badder?'

13 hours ago, one.opinion said:

It would be nearly impossible to see the two prior coronavirus spillover events (infection spilling from animals to humans) in the past two decades that were nearly pandemics and assume that a pandemic would not eventually occur.

It didn't 'spill,' it was crafted. 

By the way, there is a PCR video in the video section that you should check out.  It looks like it was published 1 year ago, before the CDC gave up on PCR.  You can actually see Dr. Fauci talking about CT counts, and you can learn why the PCR is unreliable.  Kary is in there, too, a couple of times.

[one.opinion]

30 minutes ago, Sparks said:

You pick Wikipedia as a fact check? 

You should check it out some time. Wikipedia actually provides references, an example you could learn from.

[Sparks]

3 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

You should check it out some time. Wikipedia actually provides references, an example you could learn from.

The socialist site has a problem with censorship, and lying. 

[one.opinion]

20 minutes ago, Sparks said:

The socialist site has a problem with censorship, and lying. 

So just use the references. I’m reasonably confident it wouldn’t be too challenging for you.

[Sparks]

33 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

So just use the references. I’m reasonably confident it wouldn’t be too challenging for you.

You sure you don't want to hear Dr Fauci say that with a PCR CT count of 35 or more, that the odds [of a virus] being 'replication competent,' are minuscule?   That what you have detected at 36 or 37 CT is dead nucleotides.  That there is no way to culture these findings?  Dr. Fauci is telling the truth about this.

I remember you defending CT counts over 40, and 50.  The more CT, the merrier, was your explanation which convinces me you don't really understand PCR.