Forum > The RPGPundit's Own Forum

Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.

<< < (4/853) > >>

Spinachcat:
Paul Joseph Watson, in a totally dorkmaster hat, explains how the UK defeated CoronaChan.

SHARK:

--- Quote from: Spinachcat;1132518 ---Paul Joseph Watson, in a totally dorkmaster hat, explains how the UK defeated CoronaChan.


--- End quote ---

Greetings!

Paul Joseph Watson is fucking *hilarious*! I've seen many of his programs. They are awesome!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

KingCheops:
Love PJW.  Hits the nail on the head with most of his videos.

That being said I totally regret questioning Sweden's approach and getting exasperated at all the usual Swedophiles talking about how wonderful they are.  In this particular case -- they were right!

jhkim:

--- Quote from: KingCheops;1132561 ---Love PJW.  Hits the nail on the head with most of his videos.

That being said I totally regret questioning Sweden's approach and getting exasperated at all the usual Swedophiles talking about how wonderful they are.  In this particular case -- they were right!
--- End quote ---
Even if someone does turn out to be right, that doesn't mean you shouldn't have questioned it!! What I find most exasperating about the covid-19 issue is how many people default to an answer based on their politics without questioning it -- and furthermore, anyone who holds a different view is clearly insane and/or brainwashed.

Covid-19 is a very new disease, and different studies have found significantly different infection fatality rates as well as other differing features. There has been little time for in-depth analysis, and the conditions vary a lot from country to country. I don't think that six months is sufficient for absolute knowledge of it. We're moving very quickly in studies -- but rushed studies tend to produce inconsistent results.

I'm not convinced that there is a single best approach to public health that works best for every community and country. Some countries have done better than others in terms of rates, but much of that is probably due to differing conditions - not because of the different government response.

Pat:

--- Quote from: jhkim;1132591 ---Even if someone does turn out to be right, that doesn't mean you shouldn't have questioned it!! What I find most exasperating about the covid-19 issue is how many people default to an answer based on their politics without questioning it -- and furthermore, anyone who holds a different view is clearly insane and/or brainwashed.

Covid-19 is a very new disease, and different studies have found significantly different infection fatality rates as well as other differing features. There has been little time for in-depth analysis, and the conditions vary a lot from country to country. I don't think that six months is sufficient for absolute knowledge of it. We're moving very quickly in studies -- but rushed studies tend to produce inconsistent results.

I'm not convinced that there is a single best approach to public health that works best for every community and country. Some countries have done better than others in terms of rates, but much of that is probably due to differing conditions - not because of the different government response.
--- End quote ---
That's largely correct, they were acting on imperfect knowledge, and they still don't have a good grasp of the disease. This does take time, but it's also bringing into stark contrast a number of shortcomings. For instance, it's highlighting the deficiencies in the approval processes, which have done tremendous damage (like the FDA refusing to allow anyone except the CDC to develop a test), or have been waived without any damage (and thus shown how much is completely unnecessary). It's also worth noting that much of the "research" related to COVID-19 has been terrible, by the standards of evidence-based medicine:
https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m2045
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3124652/

Another problem is the government agencies have been far too cautious, in some ways. Clinical guidelines or agency standards generally require a high degree of evidence, which just doesn't work when something's new. One example is masks, which common sense tells us should block at least some of the viral load (and worked quite effectively in Asia), but the lack of explicit studies supporting it meant far too many agencies (like the CDC again) were recommending against them, until they did the hamster test. This isn't out of the realm of medical science: Individual physicians have to make subjective decisions all the time based on incomplete evidence. We need to find a middle ground for new and emergent health threats. This would even help in normal times, because there are always new or poorly understood health threats, and waiting until they're sure ends up killing a lot of people.
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa644/5848814
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2763852

By contrast, governments have also been far too reckless, when it comes to areas outside their expertise. The economy is the classic example, and if the world was just they'd be trying all the people who were instrumental in shutting down the economy for genocide.
https://wellbeingtrust.org/areas-of-focus/policy-and-advocacy/reports/projected-deaths-of-despair-during-covid-19/
https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/policy_brief_on_covid_impact_on_children_16_april_2020.pdf

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version