So leaving aside long-term economic effects and sticking to your lane (which I can respect), what are your thoughts on the impact of the "lockdown" or whatever you choose to call it, on treatment of non-covid disease? I know in my jurisdiction ongoing treatment e.g. chemo etc. has continued uninterrupted, but in general, access to non-covid medical care is reduced and for anyone not already involved in a treatment program, there must be some whose conditions have gone undiagnosed, or whose diagnosis or surgery has been delayed (potentially leading to poorer outcomes later on)
This I agree with, but the tricky part is trying to determine precisely where the line of what is necessary is to be found. Part of this is because of the lagging nature of the indicators--the effects of a measure are often not fully apparent for 2-4 weeks (and the ripples from those, such as the economic issues, can take far longer. This means that a strong tendency to overcorrect is evident for many reasons, some medical/scientific, and others that are solely political.
This too is inaccurate or, at the least, misleading. Depending on the sources you use, the list of comorbidities is rather long, and can include such things as asthma, hypertension, and even obesity. Such issues impact vast portions of the population. Further, heavy exposure (close & prolonged) can put even the young & healthy at risk of severe infection, and this often impacts health care workers (which then creates secondary issues with caring for others).
So leaving aside long-term economic effects and sticking to your lane (which I can respect), what are your thoughts on the impact of the "lockdown" or whatever you choose to call it, on treatment of non-covid disease? I know in my jurisdiction ongoing treatment e.g. chemo etc. has continued uninterrupted, but in general, access to non-covid medical care is reduced and for anyone not already involved in a treatment program, there must be some whose conditions have gone undiagnosed, or whose diagnosis or surgery has been delayed (potentially leading to poorer outcomes later on)
I can speak generally about my system and specifically about my orthopedic group. Non-emergent and non-critical care for some conditions has been delayed or reduced, but there are multiple efforts to compensate. Telemedicine/telehealth has grown tremendously from the pandemic, and it's far easier to schedule telehealth visits now. For many things that might have otherwise required a primary care or urgent care visit (particularly those that can be fixed with a simple script or two), a few minutes with a smartphone can get you what you need. The other big push has been for an increase in preventative care--you know, getting patients to do what they are supposed to be doing to stay healthy. The focus on washing hands, wearing masks, and not touching faces can be a sort of a trial for some people to see if/how they can adopt the self-discipline necessary for employing measures to prevent (or, failing that, control) other conditions. Unfortunately, many of them really lack any self-discipline.
Sorry, dinner calls. More later.
According to the media, Covid is canceled now right? Once riots were on the menu it seems concerns for the virus went poof. I think we are going to have serious economic consequences from our lockdown, as well as small business that do survive now have some repairs to pay for. Stack that with what I would expect to see a huge surge in cases if the media had even a modicum of truth to their support of lockdowns.
Would it be a crazy conspiracy theory to suggest that the some on the left were so upset that businesses are reopening and the economy might recover, that they are behind the destruction as a way to get more favorable election returns?
Paul Joseph Watson, in a totally dorkmaster hat, explains how the UK defeated CoronaChan.
Love PJW. Hits the nail on the head with most of his videos.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.
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!
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.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:
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.
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!
Sweden smelled the sham, but why everyone else drank the KungFlu Kool-Aid might never be known or understood. The amount of coordinated ignorance in lockstep is stunning, as are the continued laughable lockdowns.
The next step in this dance will be interesting.
Will the protests be blamed for "a huge spike" (LOL) that requires the lockdowns to continue?
And if so, how do they "blame, yet not blame, because blame would be racist"?
Will the new story be "protests didn't cause any cases, but we must stay in lockdown because...reasons"?
Mark D. Levine @MarkLevineNYC (https://twitter.com/MarkLevineNYC/status/1268161323088719873) (Chair of New York City Council health committee. Representing District 7, Uptown Manhattan (Washington Heights, West Harlem, UWS).
Jun 3
Let's be clear about something: if there is a spike in coronavirus cases in the next two weeks, don't blame the protesters.
Blame racism.
And let's remember that the police are increasing covid risk by:
* using tear gas
* herding demonstrators into tight spaces
* putting people in crowded jails
Lol well Statista just released some numbers comparing Sweden to Norway/Denmark so I'm back to questioning. I guess we'd need to see Lockdown Deaths + Kung Flu Deaths versus each other but I don't think that'll ever happen. To hard to sort signal from noise.
Apart from being in a cushy white-collar job where I can work from home and being a lazy bastard who didn't want to have to commute to work anymore I was on the "this is all overblown and just a bad seasonal flu" from the get go. I'd been on the "what about the other 80% of people who are getting crushed" from the get go. Really pissed my wife off because she got fully on board with the media fear monger (despite teasing me in January for stocking up on emergency food).
The Norwegian economy contracted 4.7% in April from March but the outlook for the rest of the year now looks less bleak than it did in late April, Statistics Norway (SSB) said on Friday.
The mainland economy, which excludes the volatile offshore oil and gas production, is now forecast to drop 3.9% for the full year compared to the 5.5% fall predicted on April 24 when Norway was in lockdown to halt the novel coronavirus outbreak.
Sweden's highly contested response to Covid-19 left much of the economy open. Even so, the country is now headed for its worst recession since World War II.
Scandinavia's biggest economy will shrink 7% this year, Finance Minister Magdalena Andersson said on Tuesday. Shortly after she spoke, the debt office revealed an historic 30-fold spike in borrowing to cover emergency spending amid record job losses. A separate survey showed 40% of businesses in Sweden's service sector now fear bankruptcy.
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.
Yeah, I think questioning is good. According to Pat, the answers are known and further, your wife is participating in genocide. I consider that over-the-top ridiculous. There's a lot of controversy over the infection rate in Sweden, but I think the more telling issue is what's happening with the economy.Fuck you, you miserable piece of shit. Stop putting words in my mouth.
Fuck you, you miserable piece of shit. Stop putting words in my mouth.
I explicitly said, in fact it was the whole first paragraph of that very post, that we have incomplete information, and that we don't yet have a good grasp on the disease. And I provided sources backing that up. That's 180 degrees away from claiming the answers are known. I've pointed out flaws in the data on both sides, including things like the death rate in Sweden -- which is lower than the European or world averages, but higher than in the other Scandinavian countries.
The current estimate is each death lost to the coronavirus results in a loss of 11 or 13 years of life (men and women, respectively), so the 110K+ deaths works out to 1.3+ million years of life lost. One estimate suggest that more 700,000 life-years are being lost due to the economy shutdown, per month. Which is clearly not a good trade off, even if we assume the economic lockdowns had a major effect. Which is unlikely, because while it's still unclear how much of an effect the economic shutdowns had on the disease, the data is ambiguous. Even without considering the other ways a damaged economy hurts people, or how the infection fatality rate estimates have plummeted, that's a compelling argument for immediately and absolutely eliminating all the lockdowns.
But we don't need those relatively new assessments to recognize that public officials' completely one-sided attention to coronavirus deaths, and complete lack of attention to the economic costs, was criminal.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2020/03/27/how-economists-calculate-the-costs-and-benefits-of-covid-19-lockdowns
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/499394-the-covid-19-shutdown-will-cost-americans-millions-of-years-of-life
Fuck you too, Pat. You accuse people of fucking *genocide* if they don't agree with you, and then you act all wounded that I haven't been nice. Suck it up, snowflake. If you're going to accuse other people of genocide, then you should expect that you'll be called some names too.
The first link doesn't make any overall conclusion about the cost/benefit. And the second link is an *opinion* piece. The authors are qualified economists, but it's still an opinion by a few authors. Economists are not unified in condemning the lockdowns. For example, my sister is a Finance PhD who is a deputy director at the SEC, and she is divided on it as well.
All of this is based on the assertion about the 700,000 life-years per month that the shutdown is causing. But disagreeing with your asserted numbers isn't a crime - let alone *genocide*. I posted earlier about how economic recessions have previously lead to a *lower* mortality rate, not a higher one. Here's another article on that study - again, predating the coronavirus, and based on peer-reviewed studies.
https://www.businessinsider.com/study-recessions-unemployment-mortality-rates-2015-10?op=1
Based on a broad array of scientific data, Just Facts has computed that the anxiety created by reactions to Covid-19--such as stay-at-home orders, business shutdowns, media exaggerations, and legitimate concerns about the virus--will destroy at least seven times more years of human life than can possibly be saved by lockdowns to control the spread of the disease. This figure is a bare minimum, and the actual one is likely more than 90 times greater.I'm not familiar with Just Facts, but the article lays out its reasoning in detail, is extensively backed by references to good sources, the conclusions were vetted by a psychiatrist, and they use the most conservative results (in favor of lockdowns) from a suite of studies. It's devastating, and even if there are some valid critiques, the structure and references are a great resource.
Here's a very interesting article.
https://www.justfacts.com/news_covid-19_anxiety_lockdowns_life_destroyed_saved
I'm not familiar with Just Facts, but the article lays out its reasoning in detail, is extensively backed by references to good sources, the conclusions were vetted by a psychiatrist, and they use the most conservative results (in favor of lockdowns) from a suite of studies. It's devastating, and even if there are some valid critiques, the structure and references are a great resource.
Note the article is more than a month old, so this information has been out there for a while.
For those that say that the deaths of those from COVID are just nature killing off the infirm, are the deaths from lockdown/isolation not merely another shade of the same thing?
Target just announced early looting hours for seniors.
Turns out now that racism is a much bigger health concern among many of the learned than covid. I feel like I woke up in clown world when 2020 hit.
I thought this was fake or satire, but I was wrong.
Open letter advocating for an anti-racist public health response to demonstrations against systemic
injustice occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jyfn4Wd2i6bRi12ePghMHtX3ys1b7K1A/view)
Oh I do love the word stakeholder when someone is selling bullshit. We have a (former) superintendent of our kids school system and he could not use the word enough in layering a bunch of nonsense around a very obvious attempt to dumb down the curriculum at every turn.
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.
Old people get sick and die. If any of us live long enough to get into our 80s, we're most likely going to bite the hoagie by illness or disease. Flu kills 36k average in the USA every year and the vast majority of those are geezers. Winter kills the old and the sick. Always has, always will.
Since the whole "asymptomatic transmission" thing has turned out to be total bollocks
https://www.dailywire.com/news/fatality-rate-plunges-as-cdc-director-says-covid-cases-likely-10x-higher/
Uh huh...
I'm not speculating on fatality rates; I'm mentioning the steadily increasing numbers that have been hospitalized over the last month. These are people experiencing significant (but not necessarily life-threatening) cases. For these people, COVID-19 is going to hit them in their health while also having a direct (i.e., the cost of hospitalization) and possibly indirect (i.e., lost wages) financial impact. Thankfully the number of cases requiring ICU and ventilators is not rising at the same rate.
Anyone who thinks this is a real has been living under a rock or is literally retarded. Has there EVER been a "pandemic" in history where well people are told to stay home? How does that even make any sense? You quarantine sick people.
On Oct. 5, 1918, Seattle Mayor Ole Hanson made a stunning announcement.
He ordered "every place of indoor public assemblage in Seattle, including schools, theatres, motion picture houses, churches and dance halls closed by noon" that day, a Seattle Daily Times story said.
A memorable photo taken around that time shows a young man wearing what looks like a white surgical mask, standing in front of a downtown Seattle theater.
"All theatres CLOSED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE at request of Mayor," read a sign placed on the ticket booth.
It has a century since we've had a pandemic considered this bad, but quarantining the healthy was a well-documented measure in history. Many cities implemented similar restrictions for the Spanish Flu outbreaks of 1918. Earlier than that, it was done regularly. Cities used to take quite extreme measures, because plagues were far more deadly earlier in history. For example, below is a picture from Seattle during the 1918 plague.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4632[/ATTACH]
cf. Also this National Geographic article on how different cities implemented social distancing in 1918, and how it affected the death tolls then.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/03/how-cities-flattened-curve-1918-spanish-flu-pandemic-coronavirus/
Anyone who thinks this is a real has been living under a rock or is literally retarded. Has there EVER been a "pandemic" in history where well people are told to stay home? How does that even make any sense? You quarantine sick people.
You quarantine people who can spread sickness and disease. For many diseases you have to show symptoms before you become infectious. Covid-19 has an unusually long incubation period during which you are infectious but show no symptoms. And you can apparently catch the disease and be symptomless and still be infectious. So for the quarantine to be effective you need to quarantine apparently healthy people. Does this make sense?
You quarantine people who can spread sickness and disease. For many diseases you have to show symptoms before you become infectious. Covid-19 has an unusually long incubation period during which you are infectious but show no symptoms. And you can apparently catch the disease and be symptomless and still be infectious. So for the quarantine to be effective you need to quarantine apparently healthy people. Does this make sense?
Anyone who thinks this is a real has been living under a rock or is literally retarded. Has there EVER been a "pandemic" in history where well people are told to stay home? How does that even make any sense? You quarantine sick people.
How does it make any sense? Because idiots who claim to be scientists say so?
No, it doesn't. If I am "sick", but asymptomatic because I'm mid-40s and extremely healthy, and I spread it to other people who also get it, and maybe get a stuffy nose and have to miss work for a couple days, why should I have to be quarantined so a 90 year old grandma in a nursing home with colon cancer doesn't get sick and die from it, even though she'd have a higher chance of dying if she got the flu which is more deadly and ubiquitous?
So, no, it doesn't make any sense. It's total and utter horseshit. This disease is "just the flu", but not even as bad. Outside of literally a handful of cases, the only people dying are the elderly and sickly, and that is what we call life. Gotta die from something.
Yet the flu isn't filling hospital beds at anything close to the same rate. Even if you don't care about the people infected, you can see the strain that the rising numbers of hospitalizations are having on hospitals and those that work there.
Are those hospital beds being filled by people who are being hospitalized because of Covid-19?
So, no, it doesn't make any sense. It's total and utter horseshit. This disease is "just the flu", but not even as bad. Outside of literally a handful of cases, the only people dying are the elderly and sickly, and that is what we call life. Gotta die from something.
That's ok Brad, I'd love to live in your world where we haven't had all those excess deaths who just happen to test positive for Coronavirus (those who get tested, anyway).
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/weekending19june2020
Hope you don't have any aging relatives that you'll be coming into close contact with. They're the ones you are putting in danger. Stay safe.
Yes. The people in the ICUs are all on oxygen with the worst being intubated as they can't breathe on their own. Does that sound like "elective" surgeries to you? They have been cancelling elective surgeries so they have room in the ICUs for the COVID-19 patients.
Here's a link (for England, which is over the first peak).
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-19-declining-admissions-to-intensive-care-units/
If you look at the graph, you see that 90% of cases (at the peak) were on mechanical ventilators - which is now down to 30 (ish)%. America (apart from NY) is in the "approaching the peak" stage. So if things are the same for you as they were for us, 90% of your ICU patients will be on mechanical ventilators. Most of those are from COVID-19 symptoms, not elective surgeries. They have symptoms severe enough to put them onto mechanical respirators.
It's that 90% peak that the shutdowns are trying to make as short as possible - and remember that the 90% peak may hide excess deaths. If you've run out of mechanical respirators, that's not good for any new cases that need them.
Are those hospital beds being filled by people who are being hospitalized because of Covid-19?
Or are they people finally getting their elective surgeries that just happen to test positive for the antibodies and are asymptomatic or only have mild symptoms and therefore not at risk?
I would like to see the break down on that if you can provide some links.
Yes. The people in the ICUs are all on oxygen with the worst being intubated as they can't breathe on their own. Does that sound like "elective" surgeries to you? They have been cancelling elective surgeries so they have room in the ICUs for the COVID-19 patients.
Here's a link (for England, which is over the first peak).
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-19-declining-admissions-to-intensive-care-units/
If you look at the graph, you see that 90% of cases (at the peak) were on mechanical ventilators - which is now down to 30 (ish)%. America (apart from NY) is in the "approaching the peak" stage. So if things are the same for you as they were for us, 90% of your ICU patients will be on mechanical ventilators. Most of those are from COVID-19 symptoms, not elective surgeries. They have symptoms severe enough to put them onto mechanical respirators.
It's that 90% peak that the shutdowns are trying to make as short as possible - and remember that the 90% peak may hide excess deaths. If you've run out of mechanical respirators, that's not good for any new cases that need them.
I wasn't really asking about the UK...I was just curious why the death 'rate' in the US is a decreasing slope if the 'cases and hospitalizations' are 'spiking'?
I wasn't really asking about the UK...I was just curious why the death 'rate' in the US is a decreasing slope if the 'cases and hospitalizations' are 'spiking'?
You asked if there has ever been a pandemic where well people are told to stay home. I gave some information about social distancing efforts in history. Do you not believe me about the history? Or do you believe that these restrictions did happen in history, but you just don't care about the answer?
That's ok Brad, I'd love to live in your world where we haven't had all those excess deaths who just happen to test positive for Coronavirus (those who get tested, anyway).
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/weekending19june2020
Hope you don't have any aging relatives that you'll be coming into close contact with. They're the ones you are putting in danger. Stay safe.
GTFO with this fear mongering bullshit.
The goalposts keep moving from "flatten the curve" to "stop the spread" to "riots don't spread KungFlu" to our current "wear a face diaper to protect others!" Who knows what next week's CoronaChan lie might be?
I don't see the abject cowardly fear about wearing a mask. If it helps with keeping COV-19 figures down then why not wear a mask.
Problem like my neck and the woods and yours is that no one even really attempted any basic quarantine procedures. No social distancing and essentially hugging, kissing and shaking hands at every opportunity at every event. With no mandates in place beyond expecting people to do the right thing. Except unless forced to do so people are not going to do the right thing no matter what is a stake. If officials in Canada and the US had been more strict we would have probably been less impacted by the virus.
Everyone thinks they are immortal and immune to viruses up until they catch them and officials instead of doing the right thing worry about votes and hurting voters feelings and when both do something it's either too late or they are forced to do so. I am surprised that they are not giving out free masks at the very least across the USA. Or making it cheaper to buy them. At least for the moment you all lucked out on fines as the starting fee could go as high as 1000$ with 546$ added in before they relaxed quarantine procedures .
At the same time they should do what we do here when it comes to does not wanting to do any basic quarantine procedures or who refuse to take it seriously when visiting a dentist or someone similar. No mask and don't believe in the virus fine, sign this form that say we are not responsible for you getting the virus and you acknowledge any and all risks while not making us liable for anything. No you won't sign the form or wear a mask go see another service provider bye bye. What you think your going to go to the dentist with no protection and get sick then sue yeah good luck with that.
Slight clarification: the mask a person wears is not for their own protection; it is to protect others from them. When I wear a mask it is to keep anything I exhale from traveling as far as it would if I was barefaced--it doesn't stop things as small as a virus, but it does impede their spread by muffling the force of exhalation. These masks cut down on transmission so long as everyone is wearing them (i.e., my protection comes from others wearing their masks). In contrast, a respirator (which may look like a mask but works differently) and faceshields/goggles are intended to protect the one wearing them.
A mask must have some protective effect, otherwise all of those doctors and nurses wearing masks are either trying to protect their patients from being infected by the nurse or providing the nurse with a placebo so they dont think too much about how their patients are infecting them.
Anyone who thinks this is a real has been living under a rock or is literally retarded. Has there EVER been a "pandemic" in history where well people are told to stay home? How does that even make any sense? You quarantine sick people.(...)
You asked if there has ever been a pandemic where well people are told to stay home. I gave some information about social distancing efforts in history. Do you not believe me about the history? Or do you believe that these restrictions did happen in history, but you just don't care about the answer?
I believe you're conflating a specific example with an overarching, national campaign to keep people home. Or do you want to show me evidence the entirety of the US was locked down in the past?Your previous statement had nothing to do with city campaigns versus national campaigns. You asked whether historically there were campaigns like this in history, and I showed that there were.
(...)
Your previous statement had nothing to do with city campaigns versus national campaigns. You asked whether historically there were campaigns like this in history, and I showed that there were.
A hundred years ago, international travel was slower and less common, which limited the speed with which diseases spread. Covid-19 has spread far faster than the 1918 flu epidemic, but our ability to deal with it has also changed. Our medicine and standards have improved a lot since 1918. So yes, there are differences in the campaign today compared to the past. In the U.S., we have organized on a state level rather than a city level to handle social distancing measures.
Okay, so there are historic examples where people were told to stay home in some cities. Does that magically make the practice valid? Or is it brain-dead stupid?Some historical practices were smart, and some were dumb. To find out effectiveness, we should look at studies on how diseases spread in cities historically -- which is what epidemiologists do. I linked earlier to a National Geographic article about the death rates in different cities compared to their social distancing.
cf. Also this National Geographic article on how different cities implemented social distancing in 1918, and how it affected the death tolls then.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/03/how-cities-flattened-curve-1918-spanish-flu-pandemic-coronavirus/
RE: social distancing, explain how the virus is magically immune if you're rioting, but if you go to a bar you'll catch it. You can get it at Walmart if you're not wearing a facemask, but not at a waterpark without a facemask. You can go to a restaurant if you wear a mask, but you're allowed to take it off to eat, but if you go to the bathroom you better put it back on quick before it somehow invades your body. Also, don't forget that if you dare question the government about arbitrarily shutting down your business while simultaneously allowing the government itself to operate at maximum capacity you'll be fined $250. Oh and also you don't need a mask to vote, for some reason. But it's mandatory when getting a haircut!
These strike me as questions in bad faith.
That is LITERALLY what the orders state. I am not making this shit up. It looks and sounds retarded because it is. I couldn't make up crap this ridiculous if I tried. The only "bad faith" is people who continue to blindly accept what some fakeass scientists making millions of dollars off this scandemic says and ignore common sense.
I'll spell it out for you so you can easily understand: THIS IS A FUCKING HOAX.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/no-one-has-died-coronavirus/5717668
You gonna deny that those masks everyone is wearing do not reduce the risk of contracting a disease? Oh, it's a disclaimer on the fucking box itself.
(https://i.imgur.com/urB7VSX.png)
How about the fact that the CDC itself says the number of cases is probably 10X what is being reported, which means mortality rate is waaaaaay lower than previously claimed?
Whatever, done responding to you about this. Live in fear and cower, IDGAF.
Those are the same masks your dentist uses when examining your teeth, it's for your protection, so the dentists doesn't pass something to you.
The principle is the same, in case you've got the kungflu and don't know it yet you don't pass the Chinese virus as easy to others. Doesn't protect the wearer but those around him.
Which makes sense in closed spaces or crowded streets, not when you're far from other humans.
As for the true danger of the kungflu... I do believe that IF we ever are allowed to know the total numbers it will be proven to be a nothingburger.
The Lancet, to much ballyhoo and left-leaning media cheering, publishes a study showing, purportedly, that the 'cocktail' (hydroxylchloroquine + zinc and something else I can't remember) isn't effective against Covid-19. Much hooting and sneering from the peanut gallery, since U.S. President Trump had suggested it as a possible treatment.
It has a century since we've had a pandemic considered this bad,
The principle is the same, in case you've got the kungflu and don't know it yet you don't pass the Chinese virus as easy to others. Doesn't protect the wearer but those around him.
Asymptomatic transmission is bollocks. People know they're ill when they're ill.
As for the true danger of the kungflu... I do believe that IF we ever are allowed to know the total numbers it will be proven to be a nothingburger.
I disagree.
So does the ONS
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53320155
While the ONS survey includes relatively small numbers of positive swab tests (120 infections in all) making it hard to make any strong conclusions about who is most likely to be infected
Crappy small sample:
Reported on the biased BBC. Colour me utterly unimpressed.
Had someone claiming the other night that if you test 100 people and get six positives, and then test 1000 people and get 70 positives, the latter is way worse.
I was like 'wait, percentages wise isn't that the same, with maybe a 1 percent increase?'.
So, yeah, never believing anything any government agency says again.
Brad, can you give examples of what sources you might consider to be credible (and, for the bonus question, add in "why")? Statements like the one you made make you sound like a conspiracy theory nutter, and I have to hope it's just an act.
Brad, can you give examples of what sources you might consider to be credible (and, for the bonus question, add in "why")? Statements like the one you made make you sound like a conspiracy theory nutter, and I have to hope it's just an act.
CT nutter because I don't believe the government..?
Surely you're joking.
Maybe you should tell him which ones are trust worthy?
I don't see any value in automatically disbelieving anything that comes from a government affiliated source. Sure, be skeptical and verify, but do that with everything. The government isn't stuck on lying 100% of the time, and sometimes they really do have valuable information to share.
CT nutter because I don't believe the government..?
Surely you're joking.
I don't have a list. I tend to look at multiple sources on a story and see where they align and where they diverge to get a generally accepted middle version and then I accept that some details will likely never be clear to anyone (not even eyewitnesses). I'm OK with that because I don't feel the need to feel like I know everything. When I do speak about something, I try to stick to areas where I have firsthand knowledge and I share it for those that want to consider it when forming their picture of events.
Ohio instituted some 4 level health alert scale and at level 3 masks become mandatory everywhere, inside, outside, etc. The county I'm living in just got upgraded to level 3 last week when we reached the magical threshold of danger.
I'm guessing not enough people were going along with mandate because now they set up a hotline you can call to snitch on people who aren't wearing masks. It's kinda funny because during the announcement of the hotline the County Executive said "We want people to wear their masks - we want people to do it voluntarily."
He has since then also pointed out that violating the governor's order is a 2nd degree misdemeanor, punishable by up to 90 days in jail and a $750 fine. Sooooo... not so much on the voluntarily part then, is it.
What's the number? 'Cause back when NYC tried to institute a snitch hotline it didn't go well AT ALL.
Individuals who see others failing to abide by the mask requirement should call in complaints to the county's new hotline at 216-698-5050, or file complaints online at cuyahogacounty.us/maskexperience.
Let's see... here we go:
Let's see... here we go:
So like the Gestapo, Stasi, NKVD etc? Snitch on your family/friends/coworkers/neighbors to get browny points with the dictator?
Well, it has worked for them before...
Interesting article I read a while back, forgot to post it here.
From the former Director of the Institute for Immunology at the University of Bern
https://medium.com/@vernunftundrichtigkeit/coronavirus-why-everyone-was-wrong-fce6db5ba809 (https://medium.com/@vernunftundrichtigkeit/coronavirus-why-everyone-was-wrong-fce6db5ba809)
Yeah I saw that. It gave me some hope, but it also seems like the recent numbers so far aren't bearing it out, at least in the USA. On the other hand, I've *also* seen evidence of -- how to put this neutrally -- data quality issues with contaminated tests and biased surveys that, if true, would weaken the integrity of the counterpoint. One thing is for sure, the politics around COVID are not improving the fog of war in dealing with the pandemic.
Yeah, I saw some stuff out of Florida where the test samples were showing 98+% positive....not to mention they don't seem to be telling you whether the testing is for active, just antibodies, etc.
Notice that the media seems to be talking number of cases but doesn't really talk about the number of deaths anymore...
So like the Gestapo, Stasi, NKVD etc? Snitch on your family/friends/coworkers/neighbors to get browny points with the dictator?
Yeah, I saw some stuff out of Florida where the test samples were showing 98+% positive....not to mention they don't seem to be telling you whether the testing is for active, just antibodies, etc.
Notice that the media seems to be talking number of cases but doesn't really talk about the number of deaths anymore...
Well, here (https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/florida-sets-single-day-record-for-coronavirus-deaths-with-132-adds-9100-new-cases/2261956/) is an example from Florida where they talk about deaths.
The same article also says, "In another worrisome development, the percent of tests coming back positive increased to 18.31% for all tests reported Tuesday and 15.02% for people who tested positive for the first time."
Do you have a source for your claim of "I saw some stuff out of Florida where the test samples were showing 98+% positive" that you can share? I find that highly suspect.
Anecdotally, my system (again, in Florida) is up to > 360 patients hospitalized d/t COVID19, and > 30 of them are in ICUs (I do not know how many are on ventilators). These numbers are FAR higher than what we had in April & May.
I'll see if I can find it again...it was a blurb about only 2 or 3 places and somebody was wondering if they had gotten some faulty tests because of the percentages.
As for deaths...for Florida that means a worst case 1.51% fatality rate and that is only IF they have identified every single positive case in the state AND the 4409 'COVID-related deaths' are actually 'COVID-caused deaths'
I can see why the media isn't reporting it like they were a month ago
The media has "news fatigue" on pretty much anything & everything. Just because they've eased up on reporting (and the degree of that might depend on what sources you're following) doesn't mean the problem is easing up.
Well, here (https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/florida-sets-single-day-record-for-coronavirus-deaths-with-132-adds-9100-new-cases/2261956/) is an example from Florida where they talk about deaths.
The same article also says, "In another worrisome development, the percent of tests coming back positive increased to 18.31% for all tests reported Tuesday and 15.02% for people who tested positive for the first time."
Do you have a source for your claim of "I saw some stuff out of Florida where the test samples were showing 98+% positive" that you can share? I find that highly suspect.
Anecdotally, my system (again, in Florida) is up to > 360 patients hospitalized d/t COVID19, and > 30 of them are in ICUs (I do not know how many are on ventilators). These numbers are FAR higher than what we had in April & May.
This is the follow up piece from yesterday, it seems they were misreporting the negatives leading to the 98+% positive rate.
https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/fox-35-investigates-florida-department-of-health-says-some-labs-have-not-reported-negative-covid-19-results (https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/fox-35-investigates-florida-department-of-health-says-some-labs-have-not-reported-negative-covid-19-results)
Today my count is 411 hospitalized, with 41 of those in ICU (and 29 of those on ventilators).
That's what hospitals are for.
When my dad was hospitalized for septic pneumonia in 2018-2019, there wasn't any shamdemic and yet during his 80 days of worthless suffering, the ICU was regularly near or at-max capacity and anyone not in immediate danger were moved over to "ICU stepdown", and some patients were shifted to sister hospitals. None of the staff expressed this was abnormal. Their only concern was the huge influx of traveling RNs who didn't know the hospital or its protocols.
And like my dad, most of the ventilator patients died. The doctors were all "hope, hope, hope" with my mom, but two old timers - a respiratory therapist and an ICU RN - took me aside and showed me the stats and odds so I knew what was coming.
We all want to be immortal. We all want to pretend we can be 70-80-90 Years Young!
But it's bullshit. We get old, we get sick, we get dead. If we're really lucky, we skip the sick part.
Something like 50,000 people die from the flu every year, yet the mainstream media didn't give a fuck about it until they realized that the Democrats were about to get crushed in the upcoming election because of the economy. All of a sudden we had these dubious models claiming that 2.5 million people were going to die in the United States unless the economy was shut down. It is upon this that the economic lockdowns and mask-wearing were based. When that was proven to be an outrageously ridiculous claim, did they suddenly say "sorry" and end the lockdowns? Of course not, they doubled down. It was just a flimsy excuse for crashing the economy.
There is very obviously no pandemic. No one is sick. And yet people are walking around with their faces covered. In the middle of July. And there is no scientific evidence that masks protect against the flu at all.
The only opinions from the scientific and medical communities that matter are from those that are paid by politicians and those that are paid to appear on CNN and MSNBC. For all other scientists and doctors it's STFU because no one is listening to you.
The average person doesn't read scientific and medical journals and at best they are midwits (https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Midwit)
I'm pointing out that there are hundreds hospitalized with COVID-19 as an unbiased account, but also as a factual counter to those that say it's the same (or less than) the flu. Our numbers for those with influenza (of any variety) has stayed at < 40 throughout this flu season.
Since the gov't is foolishly and bizarrely counting who dies WITH the KungFlu as if they died FROM the KungFlu (aka, How to Make Bad Data 101), and we know hospitals are chugging down that tasty Medicare bonus gravy for every case, there is zero reason to trust hospital numbers anymore. Healthcare systems which were constantly being investigated for Medicare fraud for decades are now given carte blanche to milk the system so...no surprise they'd milk the system.
If the various incentives for pushing the Shamdemic didn't exist in healthcare and the media, it would take up as much time on the nightly news as black-on-black crime.
But we gotta make sure any remaining American spirit is broken!! Fear da sniffles!!!
And you MUST wear your face diaper, whether out of fear or submission. OBEY!
America's Frontline Doctors SCOTUS Press Conference Transcript (https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/americas-frontline-doctors-scotus-press-conference-transcript?fbclid=IwAR0d5W5mDeTeygwGcBrcyJazXyfBANLWq69bs_VTyVb4MlREyiKxfEWuWAc)
This old shit again.
America's Frontline Doctors SCOTUS Press Conference Transcript (https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/americas-frontline-doctors-scotus-press-conference-transcript?fbclid=IwAR0d5W5mDeTeygwGcBrcyJazXyfBANLWq69bs_VTyVb4MlREyiKxfEWuWAc)
The video that transcript was taken from has been taken down for spreading false and misleading information.
I love how HappyDaze is blowing off all the contradictory data and opinions as misinformation.
It's nice to know he puts his information filtering trust in the hands of Facebook.
Greetings!
How fucking nice. This is all bullshit. People need to get back to work. The chances of anyone that is healthy and under the age of 60 getting the virus and dying is next to nothing.
Sick and compromised people should stay home, isolated from everyone else. All the healthy people need to get back to work and make a living.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
The video that transcript was taken from has been taken down for spreading false and misleading information.
Sure sign of someone promoting the Narrative over and against the facts. That he discredits himself in the process is invisible to him.
What's it like to be continually deluded because you put ideology above science?
You tell me asshole.
Multiple doctors explicitly saying HCQ works to mitigate COVID-19, video is scrubbed from the Internet. You claim it was due to "misinformation". At this point either you're ignorant as fuck, or actively trying to censor people. Tell me which one.
Hello, I'm Dr. Stella Immanuel. I'm a primary care physician in Houston, Texas. I actually went to medical school in West Africa, Nigeria, where I took care of malaria patients, treated them with hydroxychloroquine and stuff like that. So I'm actually used to these medications. I'm here because I have personally treated over 350 patients with COVID. Patients that have diabetes, patients that have high blood pressure, patients that have asthma, old people … I think my oldest patient is 92 … 87 year olds. And the result has been the same. I put them on hydroxychloroquine, I put them on zinc, I put them on Zithromax, and they're all well.
The answer is simple. Do a review of her 350 patients to see if she's telling the truth.
If she's lying, yank her medical license.
FIRE POWER DELIVERANCE MINISTRIES WITH DR STELLA IMMANUEL
Join our Deliverance Prayer Line: 712 432 0075. pin 835555#. Daily - 11pm – 12.30am US Central Time. The Violent Taketh it by Force. Do not Missed Tuesday Night Deliverance NIGHT on the prayer line.
Here's what I can find about Stella Immanuel. According to healthgrades, she is a pediatrician in Leesville, LA. She has one review with five stars from May 2019 saying "My visit was a Emergency room in Many La she provide excellent care".
https://www.healthgrades.com/physician/dr-stella-immanuel-28rnt
I cannot find any medical publications by her or other testimonials from her patients. I do find she is the author of five books on Amazon:
* Sustained Fire Until They Are Consumed (Occupying Forces Series)
* The Proverbs 31 Man: The Man At The Gate (Occupying Forces Series)
* Jesus Help The Church Has Been Caged (Occupying Forces Series)
* I Trust God As My Commander in Chief (The Occupying Force Series)
* Keys to Effective Spiritual Warfare (The Occupying Force)
https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Stella-Immanuel/e/B00JAC2TXK/ref=dp_byline_cont_pop_book_1
Here is her Twitter feed. She lists herself as in Houston, TX. Her bio is "Physician, Author, Speaker, Entrepreneur, Deliverance Minister, God's battle axe and weapon of war. Rehoboth Medical Center, Houston, TX. Fire Power Ministries."
https://twitter.com/stella_immanuel?lang=en
Her website, firepowerministry.org, is not active currently, but it is available on archive.org. It has a number of posts from her dated from 2011 to 2016. The headline for the main page is:
https://web.archive.org/web/20191229084700/http://firepowerministry.org/
She also has a number of Youtube videos. Her channel has the banner "People are healed and delivered by the hand of God / You don't need to be prayed for / The Holy Spirit does the work".
https://www.youtube.com/user/firpowerministries
I don't think that her ministry work should be evidence against her medical claims per se. However, I am concerned that her own self-published material has no medical testimonials or evidence, but instead only touts things like "PRAYER AGAINST MARINE WITCHRAFT OR WATER SPIRITS".
But I expect that somehow I'll just be accused of political bias and naiveté for investigating her this way.
The video that transcript was taken from has been taken down for spreading false and misleading information.
Here's what I can find about Stella Immanuel. According to healthgrades, she is a pediatrician in Leesville, LA. She has one review with five stars from May 2019 saying "My visit was a Emergency room in Many La she provide excellent care".
https://www.healthgrades.com/physician/dr-stella-immanuel-28rnt
I cannot find any medical publications by her or other testimonials from her patients. I do find she is the author of five books on Amazon:
* Sustained Fire Until They Are Consumed (Occupying Forces Series)
* The Proverbs 31 Man: The Man At The Gate (Occupying Forces Series)
* Jesus Help The Church Has Been Caged (Occupying Forces Series)
* I Trust God As My Commander in Chief (The Occupying Force Series)
* Keys to Effective Spiritual Warfare (The Occupying Force)
https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Stella-Immanuel/e/B00JAC2TXK/ref=dp_byline_cont_pop_book_1
Here is her Twitter feed. She lists herself as in Houston, TX. Her bio is "Physician, Author, Speaker, Entrepreneur, Deliverance Minister, God's battle axe and weapon of war. Rehoboth Medical Center, Houston, TX. Fire Power Ministries."
https://twitter.com/stella_immanuel?lang=en
Her website, firepowerministry.org, is not active currently, but it is available on archive.org. It has a number of posts from her dated from 2011 to 2016. The headline for the main page is:
https://web.archive.org/web/20191229084700/http://firepowerministry.org/
She also has a number of Youtube videos. Her channel has the banner "People are healed and delivered by the hand of God / You don't need to be prayed for / The Holy Spirit does the work".
https://www.youtube.com/user/firpowerministries
I don't think that her ministry work should be evidence against her medical claims per se. However, I am concerned that her own self-published material has no medical testimonials or evidence, but instead only touts things like "PRAYER AGAINST MARINE WITCHRAFT OR WATER SPIRITS".
But I expect that somehow I'll just be accused of political bias and naiveté for investigating her this way.
"But I expect that somehow I'll just be accused of political bias and naiveté for investigating her this way."
Third option. Your sources are shit. Your argument is shit. You are shit. Fuck off.
Here's what I can find about Stella Immanuel. According to healthgrades, she is a pediatrician in Leesville, LA. She has one review with five stars from May 2019 saying "My visit was a Emergency room in Many La she provide excellent care".
https://www.healthgrades.com/physician/dr-stella-immanuel-28rnt
I cannot find any medical publications by her or other testimonials from her patients. I do find she is the author of five books on Amazon:
* Sustained Fire Until They Are Consumed (Occupying Forces Series)
* The Proverbs 31 Man: The Man At The Gate (Occupying Forces Series)
* Jesus Help The Church Has Been Caged (Occupying Forces Series)
* I Trust God As My Commander in Chief (The Occupying Force Series)
* Keys to Effective Spiritual Warfare (The Occupying Force)
https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Stella-Immanuel/e/B00JAC2TXK/ref=dp_byline_cont_pop_book_1
Here is her Twitter feed. She lists herself as in Houston, TX. Her bio is "Physician, Author, Speaker, Entrepreneur, Deliverance Minister, God's battle axe and weapon of war. Rehoboth Medical Center, Houston, TX. Fire Power Ministries."
https://twitter.com/stella_immanuel?lang=en
Her website, firepowerministry.org, is not active currently, but it is available on archive.org. It has a number of posts from her dated from 2011 to 2016. The headline for the main page is:
https://web.archive.org/web/20191229084700/http://firepowerministry.org/
She also has a number of Youtube videos. Her channel has the banner "People are healed and delivered by the hand of God / You don't need to be prayed for / The Holy Spirit does the work".
https://www.youtube.com/user/firpowerministries
I don't think that her ministry work should be evidence against her medical claims per se. However, I am concerned that her own self-published material has no medical testimonials or evidence, but instead only touts things like "PRAYER AGAINST MARINE WITCHRAFT OR WATER SPIRITS".
But I expect that somehow I'll just be accused of political bias and naiveté for investigating her this way.
The video that transcript was taken from has been taken down for spreading false and misleading information.
It doesn't matter if she says the moon is made from green cheese, she was very explicit that she directly treated 350 COVID patients with HCQ and all of them fully recovered. For a scientist, you sure do hate empirical evidence.What I would look for is evidence beyond "She said it, therefore it's so." I looked specifically on healthgrades to see if there were any testimonials from patients who had been given HCQ for COVID-19 and reported successful treatment, and on her other online profiles to see if she had published anything with data about her treatments.
What I would look for is evidence beyond "She said it, therefore it's so." I looked specifically on healthgrades to see if there were any testimonials from patients who had been given HCQ for COVID-19 and reported successful treatment, and on her other online profiles to see if she had published anything with data about her treatments.
For empirical evidence, I'd want some documentation and corroboration by other parties. And if that is to be dispensed with, then I'd at least want to look at her qualifications and her history of other successful treatments.
For empirical evidence, I'd want some documentation and corroboration by other parties. And if that is to be dispensed with, then I'd at least want to look at her qualifications and her history of other successful treatments.
Here's what I can find about Stella Immanuel. According to healthgrades, she is a pediatrician in Leesville, LA. She has one review with five stars from May 2019 saying "My visit was a Emergency room in Many La she provide excellent care".
https://www.healthgrades.com/physician/dr-stella-immanuel-28rnt
I cannot find any medical publications by her or other testimonials from her patients. I do find she is the author of five books on Amazon:
* Sustained Fire Until They Are Consumed (Occupying Forces Series)
* The Proverbs 31 Man: The Man At The Gate (Occupying Forces Series)
* Jesus Help The Church Has Been Caged (Occupying Forces Series)
* I Trust God As My Commander in Chief (The Occupying Force Series)
* Keys to Effective Spiritual Warfare (The Occupying Force)
https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Stella-Immanuel/e/B00JAC2TXK/ref=dp_byline_cont_pop_book_1
Here is her Twitter feed. She lists herself as in Houston, TX. Her bio is "Physician, Author, Speaker, Entrepreneur, Deliverance Minister, God's battle axe and weapon of war. Rehoboth Medical Center, Houston, TX. Fire Power Ministries."
https://twitter.com/stella_immanuel?lang=en
Her website, firepowerministry.org, is not active currently, but it is available on archive.org. It has a number of posts from her dated from 2011 to 2016. The headline for the main page is:
https://web.archive.org/web/20191229084700/http://firepowerministry.org/
She also has a number of Youtube videos. Her channel has the banner "People are healed and delivered by the hand of God / You don't need to be prayed for / The Holy Spirit does the work".
https://www.youtube.com/user/firpowerministries
I don't think that her ministry work should be evidence against her medical claims per se. However, I am concerned that her own self-published material has no medical testimonials or evidence, but instead only touts things like "PRAYER AGAINST MARINE WITCHRAFT OR WATER SPIRITS".
But I expect that somehow I'll just be accused of political bias and naiveté for investigating her this way.
And that's without even going into her beliefs of evil spirits that fuck sleeping women to cause endometriosis and all that sweet CS bullshit about alien DNA in the medicine. The lady is a fucking loon.
Do you feel the same about all the other doctors making statements, or are you just hoping discrediting one doctor will make this all go away?
Ad hominem is the penultimate path for the hypocritical before they burst into flames.
There's nothing real on this site anymore
As for Dr. Immanuel's claims, I want her evidence. She says 350 patients recovered from the KungFlu using Trump juice. Great! Let's see the patient charts (anonymized of course) and let other doctors review the charts. Let's have an open discussion.Absolutely! If there is corroboration of the claims, then the data should definitely be considered together with other studies of hydroxychloroquine effectiveness. I'd particularly be curious to see about the ages of the patients, since Dr. Immanuel is listed as a pediatrician in HealthGrades. If the 350 patients are all pediatric, then full recovery isn't unusual since the mortality rate for children is extremely low even without treatment. But if the 350 are elderly, then it's much more significant. Without that data, though, it's hard to tell anything.
Taken together, given the fast-increasing number of COVID-19 patients and the urgent need for effective and safe drugs in the clinic, CQ and HCQ have potential, but controversial, characteristics to combat pathological inflammation associated with COVID-19. The recommendation CQ and HCQ as a preventive medication for healthy and asymptomatic infected persons, even for patients experiencing only mild symptoms in the early-stage of SARS-CoV-2 infection because of the immunosuppressive effects of the two drugs will diminish specific antiviral immunity, or as late stages therapeutic, still waits a proper double blind clinical trial. However, HCQ has been hypothesized to help controlling distinct effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as described above and compared to CQ, HCQ confers similar antiviral and anti-inflammatory effects while has fewer side effects, indicating HCQ is a more optimal selection for treating COVID-19. Importantly, when HCQ is used to treat COVID-19 patients, individual immune profiles should be thoroughly evaluated and considered. The above consideration offers a clear rational for a systematic evaluation of efficacy at the clinical level.
All I know is if I got that crap, I'd take the HCQ. Worst that could happen is I don't get any better, which is where I'd be if I didn't take it. So, again, why are you so adamant it doesn't work? Because OMB?I'm not a doctor and so I'm not saying anything definitively about what medicine you should or shouldn't take. However, I would strongly recommend against taking *any* prescription medicine without it being prescribed by your doctor. Almost any medicine can have major side effects, particularly if not taken in exactly prescribed dosages. From what I read, hydroxychloroquine has heart rhythm side effects among others. In the FDA released report, they included some specific details of the side effects:
In our evaluation of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine use in the setting of prevention or treatment of COVID-19, QT prolongation was the most frequently reported serious adverse event for both hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. Notably, 84% of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine cases reporting a serious cardiac adverse event also reported concomitant use of at least one other QT prolonging medication; 69% of the cases with a serious adverse cardiac event reported concomitant azithromycin use, with or without other QT prolonging medications. Fourteen cases were identified with ventricular arrhythmia, ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation; seven of these had a fatal outcome. Two of the ventricular arrhythmia cases also reported TdP, one of which was fatal. Two additional cases reported TdP, neither of these were fatal.
Until then, do you think it's justified to censor her and the other doctors? Because that's what's happening.I can't personally confirm about her claims either way, but it's the choice of particular news agencies how they want to handle it. I do think that uncorroborated medical advice is extremely sensitive and can potentially be dangerous, so sites should be wary when deciding about if and how to present such material. For example, Breitbart had originally shared the 40-minute video, but they have now stopped and released a new article which covers more about Immanuel's other beliefs alongside the HCQ claims.
Meanwhile every goddamn medical "expert" was shooting from the hip in March, telling us not to wear masks, for instance. Why weren't they censored?
This is all more fishy than going down on The Little Mermaid.
Greetings!What I'm talking about is that so many people here just want to spout their political bullshit and want to view every fucking conversation as thought the politics of it matter more than anything else. So much fucking us/them thinking and no self-reflection on it. I mean really, how the fuck does it help to fling the term "Marxist" around so easily yet object others doing the same with "Fascist"? The shit pile gets so deep, then there the assholes that want to ramp up this kind of shit and exalt in the violence that results. Fuck that. I've seen a lot of violence and it's effects. It's not something that should be seen as a "boy howdy do I hope it gets there soon so we X can kill all them Y" but all these internet tough guys seem to sing that song here loud and long. Even when violence is necessary, it should not be glorified (but neither should those that are required to take such actions be shamed, at least not from the necessary act--if they then act like assholes about it, then address that). Beyond that, so many in this place have embrace wacko extreme right conspiracy theories without any question that it's sickening even as they complain about the left wing nutters. So, I have now come to accept that this place is utterly full of shit, will always be full of shit, and there's no reason I shouldn't just dump on every stupid motherfucker here too.
Hey, HappyDaze! What do you mean by that?
I'm not a doctor and so I'm not saying anything definitively about what medicine you should or shouldn't take. However, I would strongly recommend against taking *any* prescription medicine without it being prescribed by your doctor. Almost any medicine can have major side effects, particularly if not taken in exactly prescribed dosages. From what I read, hydroxychloroquine has heart rhythm side effects among others. In the FDA released report, they included some specific details of the side effects:
Source: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2020/OSE%20Review_Hydroxychloroquine-Cholorquine%20-%2019May2020_Redacted.pdf
If you have a doctor you trust who prescribes it, then please listen to them.
I can't personally confirm about her claims either way, but it's the choice of particular news agencies how they want to handle it. I do think that uncorroborated medical advice is extremely sensitive and can potentially be dangerous, so sites should be wary when deciding about if and how to present such material. For example, Breitbart had originally shared the 40-minute video, but they have now stopped and released a new article which covers more about Immanuel's other beliefs alongside the HCQ claims.
https://www.breitbart.com/news/aliens-and-reptilians-us-viral-video-doctors-odd-beliefs/
Is Breitbart engaging in censorship? I think they're choosing what to report and pass on, which is what responsible news outlets do.
What I'm talking about is that so many people here just want to spout their political bullshit and want to view every fucking conversation as thought the politics of it matter more than anything else. So much fucking us/them thinking and no self-reflection on it. I mean really, how the fuck does it help to fling the term "Marxist" around so easily yet object others doing the same with "Fascist"? The shit pile gets so deep, then there the assholes that want to ramp up this kind of shit and exalt in the violence that results. Fuck that. I've seen a lot of violence and it's effects. It's not something that should be seen as a "boy howdy do I hope it gets there soon so we X can kill all them Y" but all these internet tough guys seem to sing that song here loud and long. Even when violence is necessary, it should not be glorified (but neither should those that are required to take such actions be shamed, at least not from the necessary act--if they then act like assholes about it, then address that). Beyond that, so many in this place have embrace wacko extreme right conspiracy theories without any question that it's sickening even as they complain about the left wing nutters. So, I have now come to accept that this place is utterly full of shit, will always be full of shit, and there's no reason I shouldn't just dump on every stupid motherfucker here too.
Absolutely! If there is corroboration of the claims, then the data should definitely be considered together with other studies of hydroxychloroquine effectiveness. I'd particularly be curious to see about the ages of the patients, since Dr. Immanuel is listed as a pediatrician in HealthGrades. If the 350 patients are all pediatric, then full recovery isn't unusual since the mortality rate for children is extremely low even without treatment. But if the 350 are elderly, then it's much more significant. Without that data, though, it's hard to tell anything.
There have been a number of published studies on hydroxychloroquine effectiveness, but as far as I know, it's still lacking a controlled double-blind test. There was a recent Nature paper on treatment using it:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41419-020-2721-8
The conclusion was:
From this, it sounds like there's potential but more study and especially a double-blind trial is warranted.
I'm not a doctor and so I'm not saying anything definitively about what medicine you should or shouldn't take. However, I would strongly recommend against taking *any* prescription medicine without it being prescribed by your doctor. Almost any medicine can have major side effects, particularly if not taken in exactly prescribed dosages. From what I read, hydroxychloroquine has heart rhythm side effects among others. In the FDA released report, they included some specific details of the side effects:
Source: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2020/OSE%20Review_Hydroxychloroquine-Cholorquine%20-%2019May2020_Redacted.pdf
If you have a doctor you trust who prescribes it, then please listen to them.
I can't personally confirm about her claims either way, but it's the choice of particular news agencies how they want to handle it. I do think that uncorroborated medical advice is extremely sensitive and can potentially be dangerous, so sites should be wary when deciding about if and how to present such material. For example, Breitbart had originally shared the 40-minute video, but they have now stopped and released a new article which covers more about Immanuel's other beliefs alongside the HCQ claims.
https://www.breitbart.com/news/aliens-and-reptilians-us-viral-video-doctors-odd-beliefs/
Is Breitbart engaging in censorship? I think they're choosing what to report and pass on, which is what responsible news outlets do.
Regarding masks, in March, I heard constant calls that masks and other PPE were desperately needed for health care workers. People were trying to organize to home sew masks to send to hospitals and clinics. I have a good friend who is an emergency room doctor, and she talked about the issues at her hospital. In the sources I read, the experts were quite clear about this. I had three N95 masks that I considered donating, but the package was already opened, so I didn't think they'd be accepted. It seems to me that many people improperly concluded from "Masks are desperately needed by health care workers" that "Masks aren't useful for anyone but health care workers."
In any case, wearing masks is a public health issue which is different than medical advice. Personally, I'd already been wearing a mask in February since I was in South Korea at the time. There, it was already common for people to wear masks, even before covid-19. I continued to use a mask upon coming back to the U.S.
What I'm talking about is that so many people here just want to spout their political bullshit and want to view every fucking conversation as thought the politics of it matter more than anything else. So much fucking us/them thinking and no self-reflection on it. I mean really, how the fuck does it help to fling the term "Marxist" around so easily yet object others doing the same with "Fascist"? The shit pile gets so deep, then there the assholes that want to ramp up this kind of shit and exalt in the violence that results. Fuck that. I've seen a lot of violence and it's effects. It's not something that should be seen as a "boy howdy do I hope it gets there soon so we X can kill all them Y" but all these internet tough guys seem to sing that song here loud and long. Even when violence is necessary, it should not be glorified (but neither should those that are required to take such actions be shamed, at least not from the necessary act--if they then act like assholes about it, then address that). Beyond that, so many in this place have embrace wacko extreme right conspiracy theories without any question that it's sickening even as they complain about the left wing nutters. So, I have now come to accept that this place is utterly full of shit, will always be full of shit, and there's no reason I shouldn't just dump on every stupid motherfucker here too.
Part of the reason South Korea has done as well us due to people wearing masks. And here in the US folks in states like Florida are dying due to the state government screwing things up. The president hawking bleach and drugs that may not do anything isn't helping.
There have been a number of published studies on hydroxychloroquine effectiveness, but as far as I know, it's still lacking a controlled double-blind test.
Idiots spreading fake news isn't helping. But here we are anyway.
Well then, idiot, stop being here spreading fake news.
Part of the reason South Korea has done as well us due to people wearing masks. And here in the US folks in states like Florida are dying due to the state government screwing things up. The president hawking bleach and drugs that may not do anything isn't helping.
TNMalt made a completely political, idiotic statement that directly went against the behavior you said you wanted on this discussion. Don't see you calling him out on pushing a political narrative without regard to facts. He hasn't said anything useful here, ever, so onto my ignore list he went. Would you like to join him?
I made a substantial response to your earlier statement, but you thought my response to him needed something from you? You are rapidly approaching the point where I don't believe what you are saying about anything.
Part of the reason South Korea has done as well us due to people wearing masks. And here in the US folks in states like Florida are dying due to the state government screwing things up. The president hawking bleach and drugs that may not do anything isn't helping.
I've told nothing but the truth, but I don't give a shit what the fuck you or anyone else in this fucking dumpster fire of a site thinks anymore. Ignore me, bitch. I don't care.
Part of the reason why so many people in the US are resistant to wearing masks is because so many "authorities" have blatantly lied to them about it in march.
People don't trust "authorities" that lie to them for some odd reason.
I've told nothing but the truth, but I don't give a shit what the fuck you or anyone else in this fucking dumpster fire of a site thinks anymore. Ignore me, bitch. I don't care.
It's interesting that not a single study existed about the effectiveness of mask wearing versus airborne viruses like the flu or cold.
And yet there are now 7 studies showing the therapeutic affects of HCQ for early treatment.
Still the "authorities" are claiming the former to be effective and the latter to be bullshit.
- Because of this someone just published a meta data study on masks[**] to the Lancet claiming they are effective. How convenient.
It's already been criticized by Harvard medical school and others.
[**] The study is based onhistorical data of health professionals who have contracted flu. No control group. Critics were rebuffed by authors stating it would be unethical to expose health care workers to the flu for the purposes of an actual study. Sound familiar.
I've told nothing but the truth, but I don't give a shit what the fuck you or anyone else in this fucking dumpster fire of a site thinks anymore. Ignore me, bitch. I don't care.
I started this thread in part to get the whole topic off the main board where it (mostly) doesn't belong and in part to hear more about your "frontline" experiences of all this. I hope you'll keep doing that. Not everyone here is all about deep conspiracies.
It's that the news and authorities are often flying by the seat of their pants on this issue
So why bother posting..? Serious question.
Yep. God, it's not like I'm even denying Covid exists, or that we shouldn't wear masks.
It's that the news and authorities are often flying by the seat of their pants on this issue, and it certainly doesn't help that the political parties are using the situation to make hay.
Yes indeed, I think that's been true from the get-go. I think in time, the post-game analysis will be full of what we did right, what we did wrong, what we did in time and what we did a little too late. Until then, we're flying by the seat of our pants and somewhat in the dark.
It's a scary place to be. I think the "other side" of the mask issue is so rabid because they want to be reassured that a piece of cloth on their face will make them immune to being infected.
Because I can vent shit at assholes like you. It's all you fucking do, so why not swim in the same shit as you and the other CS nutters here?
Repeat after me: the masks don't work that way! They ARE face diapers. They stop the shit the wearer exhales from traveling as far. They don't work like a fucking chastity belt and stop COVID from mouth/nose fucking the wearer. That's what a goddamed respirator is for, but most people are too fucking uniformed to know the difference. No, wearing a mask is to protect other people, and the fucking assholes that don't care about other (vulnerable) people are the types of shitheads that don't wear masks.
Why you mad, bro? Maybe get some mental help.
No, wearing a mask is to protect other people, and the fucking assholes that don't care about other (vulnerable) people are the types of shitheads that don't wear masks.
It's a scary place to be. I think the "other side" of the mask issue is so rabid because they want to be reassured that a piece of cloth on their face will make them immune to being infected.
TNMalt made a completely political, idiotic statement that directly went against the behavior you said you wanted on this discussion. Don't see you calling him out on pushing a political narrative without regard to facts. He hasn't said anything useful here, ever, so onto my ignore list he went. Would you like to join him?
I made a substantial response to your earlier statement, but you thought my response to him needed something from you? You are rapidly approaching the point where I don't believe what you are saying about anything.
I like how the response to your comment about other people being ignorant of how the masks work (or not) reframes it to pretend that you don't know how the mask is supposed to work.
Serious question: What exactly is a "CS nutter" and how do you know if you yourself or someone else is part of the "CS nutters"?
That's my entire objection to wearing one, and I refuse to as a form of protest. All of the sudden, masks save lives...Fraudci "reframed" the whole "masks don't do anything" to "we told people not to wear masks in March so we'd get them to doctors". He admitted to lying then (and if masks work, should be held accountable for the deaths of US citizens), so why should I believe him now? Of course, questioning the reasons behind any of these stupid orders just gets you screeched at and called an ignorant rube. You are NOT allowed to think for yourself whatsoever.
Yeah. I'll wear one basically to make other people feel more comfortable, even though for me it really doesn't make much sense most of the time. (I'm almost quarantined as it is, not having a lot of contact with much of anyone.) That is, the chances that I've even been exposed are vanishingly small. Sooner or later, I'll probably get it, because sooner or later everyone is going to get it. It's really no skin off my nose either way. The funny thing is that I get the flip side of what you are saying, in that people just assume because I'm not making a big stink about the mask, that I think it is necessary.
My own doctor is more hardline than I am on this. I'm only paraphrasing (e.g. not speaking for him on this public forum), but his general idea is that for people that don't have any of the complicating factors (elderly, diabetes, etc.), if we are all going to get it eventually, getting it in the middle of the summer would be better than the middle of this winter. That doesn't mean that people should be running out trying to get infected, but at a time when you getting plenty of sun, more exercise, immune system is in better shape, and so forth, is better than getting blindsided.
Not mad at all, you ignorant cocksucker; I'm just swimming in the pool everyone else pisses in, so why not take a dump too?
Serious question: What exactly is a "CS nutter" and how do you know if you yourself or someone else is part of the "CS nutters"?
Repeat after me: the masks don't work that way! They ARE face diapers. They stop the shit the wearer exhales from traveling as far. They don't work like a fucking chastity belt and stop COVID from mouth/nose fucking the wearer. That's what a goddamed respirator is for, but most people are too fucking uniformed to know the difference. No, wearing a mask is to protect other people, and the fucking assholes that don't care about other (vulnerable) people are the types of shitheads that don't wear masks.
I like how the response to your comment about other people being ignorant of how the masks work (or not) reframes it to pretend that you don't know how the mask is supposed to work.....
It is interesting looking back at what happened during the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic. There was the same anti-mask movement at that time so that makes it hard to blame on the current climate.
It is interesting looking back at what happened during the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic. There was the same anti-mask movement at that time so that makes it hard to blame on the current climate.
The CDC/NIH have been funding research on vaccines for HIV for 35 years.
Does anyone actually believe there will be a vaccine for the China flu a few months?
The CDC/NIH have been funding research on vaccines for HIV for 35 years.
Does anyone actually believe there will be a vaccine for the China flu a few months?
Retrovirus vs a flu virus, not the same thing.
Flu virus is not the same thing as a coronavirus
Through the power of alien DNA and the ejaculate of spirit rapists, our reptilian overlords already have a solution!
True that. How are those MERS and SARS vaccines coming along?
There are some who suggest lockdowns should continue until a vaccine is found.
That's irrationally optimistic and perhaps dangerous to the public health in the long term.
The CDC/NIH have been funding research on vaccines for HIV for 35 years.
Does anyone actually believe there will be a vaccine for the China flu a few months?
Apples and oranges. HIV is an entirely different critter than SARS-CoV.
That being said, the sturm und drang over chloroquine (particularly considering the 2005 study which found it effective versus SARS) makes me damned suspicious that someone's got stock in Remdesivir.
Q: On that note, Mr. President, last night, in tweets that were deleted by Twitter, you said that Dr. Fauci misled the country about hydroxychloroquine. How so?
THE PRESIDENT: No, not at all. I think -- I don't even know what his stance is on it. I -- I was just -- you know, he was at the -- he was at the task force meeting a little while ago.
I have a very good relationship with Dr. Fauci. You know, it's sort of interesting -- we've listened to Dr. Fauci. I haven't always agreed with him, and it's, I think, pretty standard. That's okay. He did not want us to ban our -- this -- this -- put up the ban to China, when China was heavily infected -- very badly, Wuhan. He didn't want to do that, and I did and other things. And he told me I was right, and he told me I saved tens of thousands of lives, which was generous, but it's -- you know, I think it's fact that I banned -- I did the ban on Europe. But I get along with him very well and I agree with a lot of what he's said.
So -- you know, it's interesting: He's got a very good approval rating, and I like that. It's good. Because remember, he's working for this administration. He's working with us, John. We could have gotten other people. We could have gotten somebody else. It didn't have to be Dr. Fauci. He's working with our administration. And, for the most part, we've done pretty much what he and others -- Dr. Birx and others, who are terrific -- recommended.
I would cite President Trump on this, from the White House site.
Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-press-briefing-july-28-2020/
So at least Trump is continuing to support and recommend him.
10,000 extra children dead per month due to the stupid response to the Kung-Flu, but hey, those don't count as hating granma right?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/virus-linked-hunger-tied-to-10000-child-deaths-each-month/2020/07/27/84d349ca-d059-11ea-826b-cc394d824e35_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/virus-linked-hunger-tied-to-10000-child-deaths-each-month/2020/07/27/84d349ca-d059-11ea-826b-cc394d824e35_story.html)
No, wearing a mask is to protect other people, and the fucking assholes that don't care about other (vulnerable) people are the types of shitheads that don't wear masks.
Categorically not interested. The only people I give a fuck about are my children. Everyone else can look after themselves, if you're a grown up, you are responsible for yourself. I owe you no obligation whatsoever.
Are people still buying all this "new normal" bollocks, that we should change the way we live for the sake of a virus that isn't all that deadly and is receding?
Categorically not interested. The only people I give a fuck about are my children. Everyone else can look after themselves, if you're a grown up, you are responsible for yourself. I owe you no obligation whatsoever.
Actually, if you are driving a vehicle (and in many other situations), you owe a duty of care to others - even if they're not your progeny. That's the law anyway, so good luck with your "F the rest of you" stance if you're involved in an accident! :-) Are you an anti-vaxxer? Or do you think they're idiots? Because your attitude is identical to the anti-vaxxers.I'm going to take a short break from being an asshole to thank you for posting a reasonable response to a fuckwit. I've given up hope, but I'm glad to see that others have not.
Actually, if you are driving a vehicle (and in many other situations), you owe a duty of care to others - even if they're not your progeny. That's the law anyway, so good luck with your "F the rest of you" stance if you're involved in an accident! :-) Are you an anti-vaxxer? Or do you think they're idiots? Because your attitude is identical to the anti-vaxxers.
The "new normal" lie is still being promoted heavily. "Back to the old normal" is being promoted almost as heavily. The "old normal" is dead and gone; there's no going back. And we are nowhere close to "new normal" yet, which means no one knows what "new normal" is going to be.
I'm going to take a short break from being an asshole to thank you for posting a reasonable response to a fuckwit. I've given up hope, but I'm glad to see that others have not.
I'm going to take a short break from being an asshole to thank you for posting a reasonable response to a fuckwit. I've given up hope, but I'm glad to see that others have not.
Greetings!
I have to confess, HappyDaze, I much prefer the intelligent, reasonable, good-natured and easy-going HappyDaze from before your recent transformation. The new HappyDaze seems angry, hostile, and bitter--seemingly with everyone. I believe that I have always been pleasant, fun, and respectful to you, HappyDaze. I have always thought we get along pretty good together, despite the occasional disagreement. There has been much we agree on together, and have fun with. I wish you only good things, HappyDaze, for you and your family. I don't like seeing my friend so angry and bitter.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Greetings!
I have to confess, HappyDaze, I much prefer the intelligent, reasonable, good-natured and easy-going HappyDaze from before your recent transformation. The new HappyDaze seems angry, hostile, and bitter--seemingly with everyone. I believe that I have always been pleasant, fun, and respectful to you, HappyDaze. I have always thought we get along pretty good together, despite the occasional disagreement. There has been much we agree on together, and have fun with. I wish you only good things, HappyDaze, for you and your family. I don't like seeing my friend so angry and bitter.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Take note of how your conciliatory and friendly note is responded to here, Shark. He basically says 'If you don't agree with me, you're a monster'.
I'd say he lost his mask and now he's just polishing his bona fides before making a return to TBP.
It's nothing new really. So many come here when they get banned from TBP yet expect the same kind of echo chamber as TBP.
Then pull shit fits when they don't get it as well as engaging in Oppression Olympics worthy of a first place gold medal.
What did they expect a regressive, repressive leftist echo chamber style forum to the equivalent of mostly opposite of the first.
At this point the worst thing that can be done is to let them post and no longer engage as they crave the attention. Take that away and when it comes to this forum they have nothing.
Then when the go back tail between their legs, bent over backwards, bending the knee they can claim how evil and unfair the posters were at the rpgsite and engage in verbal masturbatory sessions with each other.
Take note of how your conciliatory and friendly note is responded to here, Shark. He basically says 'If you don't agree with me, you're a monster'.
I'd say he lost his mask and now he's just polishing his bona fides before making a return to TBP.
Unfortunately, this is ALL too common now. Leftist freaking the fuck out over what are simple disagreements...it's kinda scary.
It's funny to me that the assholes here can't even tell who's an "-ist" and who's not other than by just saying that everyone that disagrees with them must be some kind of "-ist" because it fits their NPC-based us/them narrative.
You pathetic fuck. You already have your hard right echo chamber. Deny if if you like shitstain, but I can see right through you. You assholes attack posters you don't like then want them cancelled when they tell you to fuck off. You're just like those that you hate. You're NPCs.
Unlike you right?
Well, I'm new at being a raging, judgemental asshole, but seeing as you're a subject matter expert, pehaps you'd like to give me some pointers?
Yeah, because my comment wasn't about pointing how you are labeling everybody that disagrees with you ans -ist...
YES, I'm a raging judgemental asshole and proud of it, what I'm not is part of the far anything, and you seem to think that any disagreement with you is proof the one disagreing with you is part of some far something.
But seeing that you are truly incapable of speaking like an adult do kindly go fuck your mother and father.
Is that how they do it in Mexico? Is what will help me level up?
Categorically not interested. The only people I give a fuck about are my children. Everyone else can look after themselves, if you're a grown up, you are responsible for yourself. I owe you no obligation whatsoever.
Yep, we constantly tell gringos with a white savior complex to go fuck themselves. Now go fuck yourself fucking gringo.
Yep, we constantly tell gringos with a white savior complex to go fuck themselves. Now go fuck yourself fucking gringo.
Saw that comin' a mile away. Poor HappyDaze. I'm surprised he hasn't slapped you onto his 'ignore' list.
He's not very smart or mature.
Like all trolls ever.
Don't feed the troll I had a few responses to what he wrote why bother let him wallow in his Martyrdom while we can discuss and debate.
I have to confess, HappyDaze, I much prefer the intelligent, reasonable, good-natured and easy-going HappyDaze from before your recent transformation. The new HappyDaze seems angry, hostile, and bitter--seemingly with everyone. I believe that I have always been pleasant, fun, and respectful to you, HappyDaze. I have always thought we get along pretty good together, despite the occasional disagreement. There has been much we agree on together, and have fun with. I wish you only good things, HappyDaze, for you and your family. I don't like seeing my friend so angry and bitter.SHARK, there have been times when you have been reasonable, good-natured, and easygoing. But increasingly, I find that you are posting only anger and bitterness (examples below), and I think it has been reflected in the rest of debate here, since you are a prolific and influential poster.
Fucking Leftists are Marxists and traitors. They should live in fear. There shall be no mercy for them when the time comes.(Source) (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42390-It-doesn-t-matter-if-you-don-t-like-leftists&p=1140945&viewfull=1#post1140945)
I am comfortable with embracing violence. The 2nd Amendment is real, and I am well prepared. I do not have any moral compunctions about doing that which is right. Some men you just can't reach! If some men cannot be reasoned with, then a Glock 45 in their mouth will have them seeing my point of view very quickly.(Source) (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42390-It-doesn-t-matter-if-you-don-t-like-leftists&p=1141016&viewfull=1#post1141016)
No, no. If you oppose BLM you must be an evil racist!:mad:(Source) (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42335-BLM-Protester-Shoots-White-Woman-For-Saying-quot-All-Lives-Matter-quot&p=1141632&viewfull=1#post1141632)
Fucking morons. Leftists just need to be strapped down and lobotomized, and sterilized.
His loss. No spicy chicks from south of the border and no burritos for him :D
How is Mexico handling Covid, anyways? We're all about the conflicting requirements here (can't gather into groups but BLM riots are just fine, wear masks/don't wear masks/wear goggles, etc).
Yep, his loss.
South of the Rio Grande we're handling things just peachy, turns out the "right wing / Neo-Liberal" "opposition" cries that our dearly beloved comrade leader El Presidente wants to become a dictator (I kind agree), and at the same time they cry he's not being more like Xi JingPooh.
Turns out in México (allegedly) the 75% of covid deaths are of 100% healthy people, which means one of three things:
There's something in Mexican's genetic makeup that makes us more susceptible to the virus.
There's a totally different strain of the virus in México
Or the numbers are being fudged to hurt the dearly beloved comrade Leader El Presidente.
I happen to know first hand of 2 out of 3 cases where the death was due to cancer/heart attack and the death certificate states COD as the KungFlu. The thid one had diabetes and got the China Virus and died.
Something is rotten in the state of México. if I may paraphrase the great playwright.
So about like how it is here north of the Rio. Any cause of death becomes a "Covid-19 death" if an "official" test comes back positive. And the official tests have an exorbitantly high false positive rate.
Now imagine that OUR government bought the cheapest tests from China, that have the highest rate of false positives, I think they are about 30% correct, when they should be 80%
Now imagine that OUR government bought the cheapest tests from China, that have the highest rate of false positives, I think they are about 30% correct, when they should be 80%
Yep, his loss.
South of the Rio Grande we're handling things just peachy, turns out the "right wing / Neo-Liberal" "opposition" cries that our dearly beloved comrade leader El Presidente wants to become a dictator (I kind agree), and at the same time they cry he's not being more like Xi JingPooh.
Turns out in México (allegedly) the 75% of covid deaths are of 100% healthy people, which means one of three things:
There's something in Mexican's genetic makeup that makes us more susceptible to the virus.
There's a totally different strain of the virus in México
Or the numbers are being fudged to hurt the dearly beloved comrade Leader El Presidente.
I happen to know first hand of 2 out of 3 cases where the death was due to cancer/heart attack and the death certificate states COD as the KungFlu. The thid one had diabetes and got the China Virus and died.
Something is rotten in the state of México. if I may paraphrase the great playwright.
A local news station in Florida collated a number of so-called 'Covid' deaths where the cause of death was... pretty obviously not Covid. Like one poor bastard who blew his Ride check on a motorcycle and wound up street pizza.
The real fucktards are waving around poor Herman Cain, using him as a club. Conveniently, they leave out the fact he had stage 4 cancer and was undergoing chemotherapy.
It doesn't surprise me you're having issues with reporting. We're no better off.
I like the one in Florida that got his test back positive and was stunned with the results: Because he had gotten tired of waiting in line and gone home after signing up for the test but before having it administered to him. :D
A local news station in Florida collated a number of so-called 'Covid' deaths where the cause of death was... pretty obviously not Covid. Like one poor bastard who blew his Ride check on a motorcycle and wound up street pizza.
The real fucktards are waving around poor Herman Cain, using him as a club. Conveniently, they leave out the fact he had stage 4 cancer and was undergoing chemotherapy.
It doesn't surprise me you're having issues with reporting. We're no better off.
Herman Cain? The Republican that wanted to be the candidate? R.I.P.
Yep, I can see them taking that and using it as a political cudgel to destroy the economy AND get the Cheeto in Chief out of office.
I hope he wins in a landslide and to hear the lamentations of the soyboys.
SHARK, there have been times when you have been reasonable, good-natured, and easygoing. But increasingly, I find that you are posting only anger and bitterness (examples below), and I think it has been reflected in the rest of debate here, since you are a prolific and influential poster.
(Source) (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42390-It-doesn-t-matter-if-you-don-t-like-leftists&p=1140945&viewfull=1#post1140945)
(Source) (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42390-It-doesn-t-matter-if-you-don-t-like-leftists&p=1141016&viewfull=1#post1141016)
(Source) (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42335-BLM-Protester-Shoots-White-Woman-For-Saying-quot-All-Lives-Matter-quot&p=1141632&viewfull=1#post1141632)
Actually, if you are driving a vehicle (and in many other situations), you owe a duty of care to others - even if they're not your progeny. That's the law anyway, so good luck with your "F the rest of you" stance if you're involved in an accident! :-) Are you an anti-vaxxer? Or do you think they're idiots? Because your attitude is identical to the anti-vaxxers.
OK dumbfuck, do you wear pants? That's an obligation in the civilized world. Do you routinely yell out "Fire" in public places? No? Must be some sort of belief in the rules of civilization even if you're too much of an asshat to realize it.
He can talk out of his ass all he wants. No mask no service period. So he can try the tough guy bullshit all he likes he won't be served in most public places like restaurant and stores. Hope his family and him can survive without food and water. Sure their is Amazon hope it arrives on time.
Okay Kiero I'm interested in how thus works for you. I imagine that you and your family interact with the rest of society at some point though I may be wrong. I can see that you're absolutely happy, possibly well chuffed, at people dying due to that interaction. Do you see any possible way that this may affect your life? Just say that you are a carrier but because of your awesome, and it is quite awesome, physique it doesn't affect you but you pass it on to the 50yr old asthmatic headmaster of your kids school. Is that possible in your island world?
Our ancestors used to face worse then this all of the time and I guess built up some what of a tolerance to having their family seemingly struck down at random around them. However our current society with all of its soft corners and guardrails has not done much to prepare us for even such a mild pandemic as the Wuhan flu.
You pathetic fuck. You already have your hard right echo chamber. Deny if if you like shitstain, but I can see right through you. You assholes attack posters you don't like then want them cancelled when they tell you to fuck off. You're just like those that you hate. You're NPCs.
Well, I'm new at being a raging, judgemental asshole,
Yep, we constantly tell gringos with a white savior complex to go fuck themselves.
That has happened quite a bit...explain to me how hospitals getting $$$$ for positive results isn't resulting in massive corruption.
I don't think it is "theoretical" about debating with Marxist traitors. I have seen them up close, face to face, and I have seen them on video. Does anyone honestly believe these people can be reasoned with?
The problem with Covid is that it is not just a physical virus but also a mental virus as well.
Does anyone else have any recommended reading for building your mental toughness?
I have to confess, HappyDaze, I much prefer the intelligent, reasonable, good-natured and easy-going HappyDaze from before your recent transformation. The new HappyDaze seems angry, hostile, and bitter--seemingly with everyone. I believe that I have always been pleasant, fun, and respectful to you, HappyDaze. I have always thought we get along pretty good together, despite the occasional disagreement. There has been much we agree on together, and have fun with. I wish you only good things, HappyDaze, for you and your family. I don't like seeing my friend so angry and bitter.
SHARK, there have been times when you have been reasonable, good-natured, and easygoing. But increasingly, I find that you are posting only anger and bitterness (examples below), and I think it has been reflected in the rest of debate here, since you are a prolific and influential poster.
Well, yes, Jhkim, I have been angry towards Leftist, Marxist, scumbags and BLM and Antifa traitors that want to hurt and kill good Americans, and take over and destroy America. In that regard, I would think any good American here would agree with me on that. I don't think I have become engaged with an angry, personalized debate here though--with members here. My anger has been directed towards the Marxist traitors that are marching against America in our wider society.I'm pretty sure I fall under the category of what you call a traitor to American society, as do most of my family, friends, and neighbors. In any case, even if I'm not, there's a wide range of views here on theRPGsite, and I'm sure there are others who are. This is not a safe space where such people are kept out.
I don't think it is "theoretical" about debating with Marxist traitors. I have seen them up close, face to face, and I have seen them on video. Does anyone honestly believe these people can be reasoned with?
We invented modern medicine for a reason. I sure woudn't want to live in a world where we went back to accepting women and children dying in childbirth, people dying from infection and disease as a common, routine matter of just being alive.
One thing I've said to friends and family is that Covid is likely so limited (but still serious) in effect is because of all our progress in medical science.
I do think that as we make the world a safer and more comfortable place, we lose the perspective that caused us to work towards that end.
Of course you would not want to live in world without modern medicine because modern medicine has made you a big softie who is not hard enough to live in a world without modern medicine.....
I say that with love knowing that I too am that big softie.
I'm pretty sure I fall under the category of what you call a traitor to American society, as do most of my family, friends, and neighbors. In any case, even if I'm not, there's a wide range of views here on theRPGsite, and I'm sure there are others who are. This is not a safe space where such people are kept out.
I'm pretty sure that I have even closer interactions than you do, as I live in the Bay Area and take part in liberal activism. For example, my church has a "Black Lives Matter" banner on it. I went with other members to the BLM protest in my town a few weeks ago. I knew one of the speakers there, and talked to him afterwards. I know you consider us to be evil snarling villains, but if you came by for services, you would be welcome.
There are people on my side that I disagree with as well as people on the other side that I disagree with, but that doesn't mean that I can't sit and have a beer with them and talk over out differences. I would hope that you could do the same.
Take note of how your conciliatory and friendly note is responded to here, Shark. He basically says 'If you don't agree with me, you're a monster'.
I'd say he lost his mask and now he's just polishing his bona fides before making a return to TBP.
I am always willing to have peaceful discussions. I'm not changing a damn thing though. I'm not backing down, not giving up my Bible, and not giving up my guns. As an individual person, Jhkim, YOU may be non-violent--but many people that support BLM and are involved in BLM and Antifa clearly disagree with you. Beyond having a peaceful discussion, it becomes clearer though, Jhkim--people on your side, want Marxism. They want segregation. They want Globalism, Cancel Culture, and shrieking hysteria. They also want abortion, and are against family values. They hate America, and view everything through a racist, victimhood lens. They don't support Christianity, and they love feminism.
We invented modern medicine for a reason. I sure woudn't want to live in a world where we went back to accepting women and children dying in childbirth, people dying from infection and disease as a common, routine matter of just being alive.
One thing I've said to friends and family is that Covid is likely so limited (but still serious) in effect is because of all our progress in medical science.
I do think that as we make the world a safer and more comfortable place, we lose the perspective that caused us to work towards that end.
You're telling me what my side thinks - but as I said, these are my family, friends, church members, and neighbors. Given that I see and talk to them all the time, I don't find your accusations convincing. I also think that if you came and hung out with us for a while - you wouldn't change sides, but you might be less quick to call for us being lobotomized and sterilized.
You've just gotten used to be treated like a subject expert and not being questioned, but now the CoronaChan narrative is falling apart at an increasingly faster rate and you're clinging to nonsense when you have the ability and education to analyze what's going on.
You're telling me what my side thinks - but as I said, these are my family, friends, church members, and neighbors. Given that I see and talk to them all the time, I don't find your accusations convincing. I also think that if you came and hung out with us for a while - you wouldn't change sides, but you might be less quick to call for us being lobotomized and sterilized.
The overwhelming majority of both Democrats and Republicans are ordinary people who want to live their lives in peace. They have differences, but they are neither violent nor extremists.
Oh, but that wouldn't fit SHARK's narrative. Besides, that fucker would rather just chum the waters and keep wearing his big grin while others tear into people...well, I'm not even sure SHARK really sees them as people, TBH.
Greetings!
So, when Marxist BLM leaders in Portland openly say that their goal is to destroy America, I'm supposed to feel all warm and fuzzy for them? When BLM founders admit that they are trained Marxists, and they want to destroy Christianity, the nuclear family, and destroy America and make America into a Marxist utopia--that all is just sweet and wonderful? And the "Democrats" that embrace BLM and Antifa--yeah, they are just sweet, tolerant and loving people, right? I'm supposed to believe that they are lying--they don't really want to destroy America, and force America into becoming a Marxist utopia? Yeah, right. Marxists oppose America, and want to destroy and overthrow America.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Destroy or transform? The America (or Christianity) that exists in this moment is not eternal. It will change as Americans (or Christians) change. Democracy means that changes the majority of the people want will eventually happen. Failure to understand that makes you a fossil. At some point, YOU might just become the "domestic enemy" of America...and in some eyes, you might already be there.
Marxists only know how to destroy; we have the history of the 20th century, covering multiple places and 100 million corpses as proof.
Marxists only know how to destroy; we have the history of the 20th century, covering multiple places and 100 million corpses as proof.
Not all that oppose the current way of things are Marxists (although some certainly are). Despite the loud rants of those pushing the us/them divides, not all of them are them (and not all of us are us...some are dumb-fuck NPCs).
No, some of them are useful idiots who enable the Marxists, and are swiftly disposed of when the commies get their way.
Greetings!
Well, I have the Holy Bible, the Constitution of the United States of America, and my BCM AR-15 rifle. If the day ever comes that I am considered to be a "Domestic Enemy" here in America, then our great country is fucking done. I'm ready, brother! You can take that to the fucking bank!
However, I won't back down to the goddamned Communists, and I won't go quietly. I sure as fuck won't be alone, either. Down at a local Mexican restaurant, Juan is the boss there. He's a patriot. Mike, a neighbor of mine--he's a policeman here in our little town. Katie, a checkout clerk at my local grocery store, she's a neighbor, too. Both her and her husband are patriots. Steve, the owner of my local auto mechanic shop, he will join me. Chuck, the owner of my barber shop down the road--he's a veteran, and a patriot. Maria, a Hispanic woman that works at a nearby Mexican restaurant--she and her husband Raul are armed and god-fearing patriots that love America. John, a policeman that also works at my local gun shop, I know he's armed and ready. My church is full of patriots. So is a nearby Mormon church, a Catholic church, a Baptist church, a non-denominational church, too--all are filled with patriots, all armed, and all ready. I have friends from Northern Idaho, Washington state, Oregon, down in California, and out in Arizona and Texas, too. Hell, I have friends right here on this website that are armed and ready, and who are just a phone call away. Many veterans, all armed, and all patriots that love America!
So, if the day ever comes that I am considered to be a "Domestic Enemy"--I will not be alone, and I will be in good company.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Destroy or transform? The America (or Christianity) that exists in this moment is not eternal. It will change as Americans (or Christians) change. Democracy means that changes the majority of the people want will eventually happen. Failure to understand that makes you a fossil. At some point, YOU might just become the "domestic enemy" of America...and in some eyes, you might already be there.
Destroy or transform? The America (or Christianity) that exists in this moment is not eternal. It will change as Americans (or Christians) change. Democracy means that changes the majority of the people want will eventually happen. Failure to understand that makes you a fossil. At some point, YOU might just become the "domestic enemy" of America...and in some eyes, you might already be there.
Democrats that do not bow down and embrace Marxism have been targeted and cancelled. Those few Democrats that do not embrace Marxism are pretty obviously not a majority, but a minority. You, Jhkim, are in denial. The Democratic party is a party ruled now by Marxists. You and your friends are certainly free to love Marxism all you want. That doesn't change the fact that Marxism is fundamentally hostile to America.I would say that the Democratic party is strongly controlled by Wall Street and corporations. So no, I don't think that the Democratic party are particularly Marxist, and they have strongly resisted progressives like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren who want to regulate Big Tech and other megacorps. I just don't think the Republican party is any better - and despite his noise about Amazon and others, neither Trump nor the Republicans in Congress have done much to reign them in.
Marxists only know how to destroy; we have the history of the 20th century, covering multiple places and 100 million corpses as proof.So the proof here is: "Stalin was a leftist. Stalin killed millions. Joe Biden is a leftist. Therefore Joe Biden wants to kill millions."
Greetings!
"Destroy or transform?" Well, as far as I'm concerned, no, we aren't transforming a goddamned thing. Our Constitution endures, and our Christian faith remains as well. Our heritage handed down to us by our fathers before us. Our principles, our heritage is eternal. Fuck "Hope and Change"! That worked out real well for America, now didn't it? Some weak, mushy jello-filled folks are all juiced and excited by always "changing"--but changing isn't always for the better. In fact, keeping hold of the old ways, embracing old customs, and holding fast to the wisdom of our forefathers is what preserves us to this day. Our Constitution has endured and guided us for over 200 years. Peoples and cultures that refuse to learn from the past are lost and doomed to failure and defeat.
Didn't you see the many videos that I and many others have posted here about BLM, Antifa, and the fucking Marxist threat? This shit is real, HappyDaze. It isn't some imaginary figment. Good Americans are being threatened, beaten, fired, oppressed, robbed, and murdered RIGHT NOW by these fucking Marxist traitors. Some people want to keep drinking the sweet Kool Aid of sleepy oblivion--but the threat to America, and freedom everywhere, is real and growing. Our friends in Australia, in Mexico, in Britain--they too know what we must fight against and resist.
I am sure not going to stick my head in the sand and pretend that it all just isn't real, I can take a fucking nap and everything will be fine!
Yeah, that's right. I'm a old school Tyrannosaurus Rex. I'm not in favour of always changing everything just because some brainless fucking brats have a tantrum and demand "change"! These fucking Marxists need to be shown something else entirely. Change? Yeah, instead of coddling these goddamned traitors I can think of some changes for them for damned sure!
I guess I'm just a terrible fucking monster because I'm a patriot, because I'm a Christian, and because I'm conservative and white. Well, too fucking bad. How about we make some changes that I fucking want? That millions of other patriotic Americans also want?
That's right. Come November, we will make some new changes, starting with re-electing Donald J. Trump as President of the United States of America. I imagine President Trump has some changes in mind for America, too. Yes, HappyDaze. Some change can be good! Get ready to embrace the changes, HappyDaze! Just imagine when TRUMP gets re-elected!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Maybe you missed it, but the Constitution can be amended and Christianity has changed--both officially and practically--since the time that America became a nation. That's transformation you dipship. To pretend that this is the same nation it was > 200 years ago is ridiculous, especially since I know you know history. You didn't swear to defend the America of your favorite fucking moment, you swore to defend a living country that can grow, even if it goes in directions you don't like. What a sad sack of a protector you are.
He didn't swear to defend ANY country, he swore to defend the Constitution itself. There is a distinct difference.
Yes, and that's the same Constitution that's constantly being reinterpreted and is subject to amendment when the people (even, or especially, the ones that he doesnt much respect) push hard enough.
What is being misinterpreted? What do you think needs to be amended?
I said reinterpreted. That's part of what the Supreme Court does. As for what amendments might be needed, that's not for me to say. However, there are a lot of angry American voices out there. In the past, that sometimes led to amendments.
You are correct, I was the one that said 'mis'-interpreted...and you went to the Supreme Court. Tell me now, which Article is the one which gives SCOTUS the right and duty to interpret the Constitution?
You don't get how it works do you? In my field, you don't get to be a subject matter expert without being questioned.
Now reasonable theories? Scientifically based theories? Fuck no, not here. You might believe them IRL, but not when here.
Here stupid shit pours out like a bad day after a Chipotle binge.
Dude, you've been flinging poo like a meth monkey.
So the proof here is: "Stalin was a leftist. Stalin killed millions. Joe Biden is a leftist. Therefore Joe Biden wants to kill millions."
I am opposed to left-wing authoritarian regimes like the Soviets as well as right-wing authoritarian regimes like Pinochet and others. Neither of those are proof of what American politicians are up to - which has more to do with bending over to corporations than anything else.
You missed out Mao and many others in there. But that isn't the point at all. Biden is happy to look the other way while communists like BLM and Antifa do their thing.
It has been more fun around here anyway.
True though I why people insist on engaging with a Troll is beyond me.
This is the poster in another thread who claims he thought that the Safety Toolkit was a product about keeping player character safe. When he damn well know it was an SJW woke as can be product. Could not be bothered to do basic research and accused the forum of overreacting about the contents of the product. This is the disingenuous Troll you all want to keep giving attention too. Go ahead I think he gets off on the attention he receives from you and other posters.
You missed out Mao and many others in there. But that isn't the point at all. Biden is happy to look the other way while communists like BLM and Antifa do their thing.
Just so long as it continues to line his and his family's pockets he's content. Very model of a modern plutocrat.
Yeah.
Can't remember if its been posted but check out tech founders net worth before and after the lockdowns. That rising line gets really steep upwards... in case anyone was wondering when/if we'll ever get out of lockdown. UBI here we come! Pick your megacorp that you belong to! I'm going with the unexpected Tootsie Roll/Everlast merger.
We've had the biggest experiment with UBI in the UK (9.5 million people on "furlough"), and it proved exactly what the naysayers said. That given the choice not to work some 80% of people will happily do fuck all. It's a disincentive to work and the result is that when our furlough scheme ends in October, unemployment will be in the millions.
You need to specify which troll you're talking about, because I'm the amusing one, motherfucker.
Sure maybe when your flinging poo all over the place while jacking yourself off.
I was going to put you on ignore that would be a victory for you of a sort.
At this point your non entity to me I could be having a beer with other posters like Kiero and Spinachcat who I have disagreements with. Youl could show up and verbal toss around your poo and you don't exist to me. Something is writing words ot's just words on a screen nothing more. In public you could wave your hands in my face and you also don't exist. Something is obviously in front of me. It takes space and volume, breathes in air beyond that nothing. Trolls are gonna troll and I am absolutely done with you.
It proved nothing about UBI. Certainly companies were happy to send people home when they didn't have to pay them because of the pandemic but there's nothing to say that people didn't want to work. The rise in unemployment will be because of the collapse of some industries due to the lock down not because of people choosing not to go to work, they didn't have that choice. Spikes in infections have been due to people having to go to work due to dodgy bosses like Sitel.
You talk shite like it was facts but it's still shite.
You've missed all the people celebrating that they're sunbathing and otherwise idling, then lots of public sector types coming up with flimsy excuses not to go back to work (teachers are the classic one there). Along with lots of employers realising they don't need half their staff, and furlough gives them the perfect opportunity to get rid of the most useless staff members, who will find they won't have a job to come back to in October.
What spikes in infection? Good luck discerning anything meaningful given there are likely high percentages of people who show symptoms no different to a cold. The government had to admit only today that their data on deaths is complete bollocks.
If coronavirus were really all that infectious, we'd see outbreaks centred on supermarkets. Which there haven't been. Any. Hardly any staff have come down with anything either, so unless working in a supermarket provides some sort of special immunity, it's pretty difficult to transmit. The only people who were ever at risk are those working in hospitals and care homes.
You've missed all the people celebrating that they're sunbathing and otherwise idling, then lots of public sector types coming up with flimsy excuses not to go back to work (teachers are the classic one there). Along with lots of employers realising they don't need half their staff, and furlough gives them the perfect opportunity to get rid of the most useless staff members, who will find they won't have a job to come back to in October.
What spikes in infection? Good luck discerning anything meaningful given there are likely high percentages of people who show symptoms no different to a cold. The government had to admit only today that their data on deaths is complete bollocks.
If coronavirus were really all that infectious, we'd see outbreaks centred on supermarkets. Which there haven't been. Any. Hardly any staff have come down with anything either, so unless working in a supermarket provides some sort of special immunity, it's pretty difficult to transmit. The only people who were ever at risk are those working in hospitals and care homes.
And meatpacking plants, at least here in the U. S.
Soem people liked having the time off, the bastards. The public sector is the most represented as not being furloughed, most teachers in my area have had time working in the hubs that are open for essential workers.
I cited the Sitel spike in infections, it's in the post you quoted. There's another in Aberdeen right now due to open pubs.
Supermarkets have been working with masks and social distancing. I agree with you that this has been a success that we can celebrate together. At a distance.
It's hard to figure out the exact amount of deaths in the UK or any other country but I'd favour the excess deaths data which certainly gives me pause.
That seems to have worked in such socialist hellgoles as New Zealand.
Someone from Scotland calling New Zealand a hellgole?
My irony meter just exploded. :rolleyes:
Sorry. Hellhole.
My wife is from Otahuhu. You're lack of appreciation of my irony doesn't even disappoint me.
Oh dear.
I don't know any NHS worker that was slacking off. They all had more duties in preparation for a possible surge and have had a very stressful time. I live in an area that got called the South Korea of Scotland because the excellent testing regime implemented by our local trust and my OT wife was in work more than usual.
So you didn't have a hub for your kids to go to, you weren't getting regular classwork through Classdojo or similar software? That's all done by people working. I know you think that people are basically lazy or something but it's in your head. Yes teachers have been worried about opening up schools, this doesn't mean they don't want to work although the may be wrong.
To be fair I'm in Scotland and we've avoided some of the shit show that is England. Supermarkets have had no track and trace so it's impossible to find out if your lax implementation has spread the virus.
Do you know what excess deaths is? This is different from what the government has been using and is why I refer to it. These are deaths above the expected amount for the time of year and this year they indicate that your assertions are a piece of nonsense. I'll give you that they may be due to something else, perhaps there's been a 67,000 rise in decapitation, but you'd have to give me something convincing. This indicates that the deaths are actually worse than we've been told.
You're right about the awful effects on our economy especially with Brexit about to make it worse. What you're wrong about is that we should have shut down faster and harder so we could come out of it quicker. That seems to have worked in such socialist hellgoles as New Zealand.
Good fucking lord. This idiocy again. People in supermarkets don't tend to stay within 6' of and another for > 10 minutes at a time since shopping requires them to move about. School setting are far more static, with significant numbers lingering in close proximity for extended periods of time. Fucking read the goddamned guidelines for preventing transmission. What kind of gamers are you people anyway?
Otahuhu is a hellhole? Shit man I have been to Scotland and Otahuhu and there is a reason why people willingly traveled 18000km in a leaky wooden boat to get away from the South Korea of Scotland.
And the air inside the supermarket forms a bubble around you and follows you around so no virus can escape the magical barrier.
If only an e-wall had been built to block stupidity like this from crossing the border.
Scratch a leftist, find a bigot.
Hey Biden says Latinos have diversity, it's just those damn blacks who are all the same!
And allegedly he doubled down on that too!
But hey, what can you expect from a good friend of a KKK grand wizard?
(can't wait for those Trump ads to start playing!)
Womp, womp
Medical advice is *not* the same as other forms of free speech. There is the idea that all doctors should be allowed to give medical advice freely over the Internet, and patients can choose who to listen to. From this perspective, then blocking medical advice is censorship.
However, there is also the idea that this is really dangerous. I believe in the free market of ideas more broadly, but in the case of medical advice, that is one area where the market should be regulated. I think hydroxychloroquine should be investigated - but the debate over it should happen in journals and professional groups, not over Youtube and other news media.
Medical advice is *not* the same as other forms of free speech. There is the idea that all doctors should be allowed to give medical advice freely over the Internet, and patients can choose who to listen to. From this perspective, then blocking medical advice is censorship.
However, there is also the idea that this is really dangerous. I believe in the free market of ideas more broadly, but in the case of medical advice, that is one area where the market should be regulated. I think hydroxychloroquine should be investigated - but the debate over it should happen in journals and professional groups, not over Youtube and other news media.
Journals and professional groups have proven to be unreliable. There is no good reason for internet platforms to act as censors when they don't know what they are doing.
Oh, we're back to the Leftists Are against Science! thread then.
Medical advice is *not* the same as other forms of free speech. There is the idea that all doctors should be allowed to give medical advice freely over the Internet, and patients can choose who to listen to. From this perspective, then blocking medical advice is censorship.
However, there is also the idea that this is really dangerous. I believe in the free market of ideas more broadly, but in the case of medical advice, that is one area where the market should be regulated. I think hydroxychloroquine should be investigated - but the debate over it should happen in journals and professional groups, not over Youtube and other news media.
Hydroxychloroquine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxychloroquine) was approved for medical use in the United States in 1955.[2] It is on the World Health Organization's List of Essential Medicines.[9] In 2017, it was the 128th most commonly prescribed medication in the United States, with more than five million prescriptions.
Medical advice is *not* the same as other forms of free speech. There is the idea that all doctors should be allowed to give medical advice freely over the Internet, and patients can choose who to listen to. From this perspective, then blocking medical advice is censorship.
However, there is also the idea that this is really dangerous. I believe in the free market of ideas more broadly, but in the case of medical advice, that is one area where the market should be regulated. I think hydroxychloroquine should be investigated - but the debate over it should happen in journals and professional groups, not over Youtube and other news media.
Did you see the video? Or you did like the twatwaffle and dismissed it because youtube? It talks about not a simple doctor but a PHD and professor of epidemiology and a published paper.
Forget that the Bad Orange Man talked about it and think.
Medical advice is *not* the same as other forms of free speech. There is the idea that all doctors should be allowed to give medical advice freely over the Internet, and patients can choose who to listen to. From this perspective, then blocking medical advice is censorship.
However, there is also the idea that this is really dangerous. I believe in the free market of ideas more broadly, but in the case of medical advice, that is one area where the market should be regulated. I think hydroxychloroquine should be investigated - but the debate over it should happen in journals and professional groups, not over Youtube and other news media.
Journals and professional groups have proven to be unreliable. There is no good reason for internet platforms to act as censors when they don't know what they are doing.That sounds like exactly the view I have concern about. Because you consider journals and professional groups to be unreliable, therefore you think Internet platforms shouldn't censor medical advice. Instead, people are free to post their medical advice without censorship, and the public can decide for themselves.
Did you see the video? Or you did like the twatwaffle and dismissed it because youtube? It talks about not a simple doctor but a PHD and professor of epidemiology and a published paper.The attempted ad hominem here is cheap and dumb. I have a clearly expressed position which has nothing to do with Trump -- it's about whether medical advice should be treated like celebrity gossip and hashed out over Youtube and Twitter by the public and politicians, or whether it should be handled in a professional context through research and journals. Shasarak has at least expressed a clear position against medical journals and organizations. While I disagree with him, he has at least addressed the issue.
Forget that the Bad Orange Man talked about it and think.
Regardless of the specifics over hydroxychlorquine, I think disregarding journals and professional groups in favor of the open Internet will result in a ton of people following bad advice and a lot more deaths and sickness.
We had one person of questionable motives and mental state decide she and her husband (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/arizona-woman-fish-tank-cleaner-trump-democrat) should drink a teaspoon full of fish tank cleaner because it kinda sorta sounded like "That stuff Trump was talking about."
That sounds like exactly the view I have concern about. Because you consider journals and professional groups to be unreliable, therefore you think Internet platforms shouldn't censor medical advice. Instead, people are free to post their medical advice without censorship, and the public can decide for themselves.
Regardless of the specifics over hydroxychlorquine, I think disregarding journals and professional groups in favor of the open Internet will result in a ton of people following bad advice and a lot more deaths and sickness.
The attempted ad hominem here is cheap and dumb. I have a clearly expressed position which has nothing to do with Trump -- it's about whether medical advice should be treated like celebrity gossip and hashed out over Youtube and Twitter by the public and politicians, or whether it should be handled in a professional context through research and journals. Shasarak has at least expressed a clear position against medical journals and organizations. While I disagree with him, he has at least addressed the issue.
I posted earlier in Post #165 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42126-Covid-the-quot-lockdowns-quot-etc&p=1142223&viewfull=1#post1142223) about a recent Nature article on hydroxychlorquine:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41419-020-2721-8
This is what the debate over hydroxychlorquine should look like - actual research and consideration, rather than politicized grandstanding.
Well, the professor published a paper in a journal, one more to add to the pile of research papers we're not allowed to talk about or risk getting banned from social media.
Why is it that pretending those doesn't exist is considered a good thing?
Edited to add:
There's a new study (I can't find it cuz I don't remember the name of the stuff), that found out an elevated level of certain stuff (Protein?) that is related with coagulation, higher levels on the infected cells and something the primary victims have in common is elevated levels of this stuff.
So HCQ is an antiviral, anti-inflammatory and anti-coagulant...
As for the drug, it's sold with prescription only, so why is there political and social pressure being exerted on physicians not to prescribe it?
Not the one I was talking about but... https://ashpublications.org/blood/article/136/4/489/460672/COVID-19-and-coagulation-bleeding-and-thrombotic (https://ashpublications.org/blood/article/136/4/489/460672/COVID-19-and-coagulation-bleeding-and-thrombotic)
Oh, we're back to the Leftists Are against Science! thread then.
The thread was actually entitled "Liberals are against Science!" although even that was a misnomer. Based on the responses, all it served to show was how "Conservatives are against Science!"
At least with regards to this site and how those here that responded label themselves, you would be quite right. However, it's possible that the anti-science honeypot just unveiled their hidden Liberal sides. Or, most likely, that it's just the usual mix of shit-stirring assholes that make their idiotic claims and push them onto the "others" no matter who they are. As I've said, there really isn't anything real here.
Regardless of the specifics over hydroxychlorquine, I think disregarding journals and professional groups in favor of the open Internet will result in a ton of people following bad advice and a lot more deaths and sickness.
Outside of that one, incredibly dumb instance, how many people have taken Hydroxychloroquine outside of a doctor's prescription? I'm ready to be corrected, but I haven't heard of anyone.
And that, so far, is all that people are asking. That doctors be allowed to talk about their results from prescribing a drug.
But the bigger issue is how this is a call to end medical censorship, which as I said, I think is a bad principle. Medical advice is an area where there should be restrictions.
I'm not clear what you're advocating here. Are you advocating that there should be free speech about hydroxychloroquine, but not free speech about other drugs or medical advice? If so, what's your basis for making it an exception?
What I was trying to emphasize in the point you quoted is that this isn't specifically about hydroxychloroquine, but rather about all drugs and medical advice. There has been some misuse of hydroxychloroquine, as documented here, for example:
http://www.pharmafile.com/news/546051/us-reports-increase-hydroxychloroquine-misuse
But the bigger issue is how this is a call to end medical censorship, which as I said, I think is a bad principle. Medical advice is an area where there should be restrictions.
I'm not sure how you took it to mean that. Doctors should have free speech to talk about whatever they like, including their opinions on drug effectiveness.
In a country where the government representative told the public a bald faced lie about the effectiveness of masks, and then walked it back when caught out, I'm not quite sure who we can trust to disseminate medical information.
I sure don't want Facebook or Twitter to be making those decisions for us.
Even if you were right, do you want someone at Youtube or Twitter with their degree in grievance studies to be the one that is your censor?
Look at their success at "fact checking" non medical facts.
I'm not clear what you're advocating here. Are you advocating that there should be free speech about hydroxychloroquine, but not free speech about other drugs or medical advice? If so, what's your basis for making it an exception?
What I was trying to emphasize in the point you quoted is that this isn't specifically about hydroxychloroquine, but rather about all drugs and medical advice. There has been some misuse of hydroxychloroquine, as documented here, for example:
http://www.pharmafile.com/news/546051/us-reports-increase-hydroxychloroquine-misuse
But the bigger issue is how this is a call to end medical censorship, which as I said, I think is a bad principle. Medical advice is an area where there should be restrictions.
jhkim, are you familiar with the Lancet study on hydroxychloroquine? And how it was retracted, after questions came up about the data supplier (Surgisphere), and then Surgisphere just... poofed? (Seriously, that's the only way to describe it. They disappeared like a soap bubble hit by a bullet)I support having studies of hydroxychloroquine. And I agree that Surgisphere was a fake, duplicitous data supplier -- which The Lancet was taken in by. As far as I know - that data was exposed and rejected not by any right-wing source, but by other professional and media criticism. Here's Science Magazine on the scandal, for example:
Now do you understand why people are feeling a little hard done-by by the professionals? You want studies on HCQ? Sure, I'm in. Let's DO some studies. But you won't GET those studies because any work will be interpreted as promotion of the Orange Man Bad. And the left cannot give Trump a win, ever.
Womp, womp
I support having studies of hydroxychloroquine. And I agree that Surgisphere was a fake, duplicitous data supplier -- which The Lancet was taken in by. As far as I know - that data was exposed and rejected not by any right-wing source, but by other professional and media criticism. Here's Science Magazine on the scandal, for example:
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/mysterious-company-s-coronavirus-papers-top-medical-journals-may-be-unraveling
And that sucks. But the alternative being peddled here is to reject all professional review and study.
But the alternative being peddled here is to reject all professional review and study.
How many fake studies would you accept in your "journals"? 1 in 10, 2 in 10? 4 in 10 still good, still mostly scientific?
Wrong. The alternative being 'peddled' here is that partisan politics has affected the evaulation of certain medications, and that skepticism should be exercised against all claims, and that censorship of medical opinion makes no sense when there are people who are not even medical professionals, much less scientists, making the decisions on who to censor.
This 1000% But like when I am for free speech in other realms I'm labelled a natzee on this I'm labeled an anti-science right wing nutter.
While the "pro-science" suckers gladly drink the koolaid being poured down their throats by transnational megacorporations and call for even more censorship of those who dissent or dare question the narrative.
I'm still not sure what the endgame here is. It's clearly not a Conservative endgame because you just posted an anti-Conservative video so what does anybody have to gain by repressing a miracle cure to a pandemic that is killing tens of thousands?
I'm still not sure what the endgame here is. It's clearly not a Conservative endgame because you just posted an anti-Conservative video so what does anybody have to gain by repressing a miracle cure to a pandemic that is killing tens of thousands?
Money for an untested, proprietary vaccine.
Political power exercised against healthy people at low risk for contracting or dying of the disease.
Good enough?
Not really no.
Money for whom? Is the whole thing a conspiracy by big pharma? Seems a bit mental.
Political power for whom? The ruling party in the UK has a stonking big majority, Trumps place in power looks tenuous so mibbe.
This all seems awfy vague.
woopdee doo I'm not a conservative, neither am I a progressive.
As for the end goal? Power grab and get rich would be my guess.
Who is advocating against anything that's not the vaccine or an expensive new drug? Mind you I don't think THEY made everything up, but like our president said: "This comes like a glove for us" (Nos cayo como anillo al dedo) about the pandemic, see an opportunity and grab it. So the opposition (whoever they happen to be since here in México it's currently "the Right") and whoever saw the opportunity and is lining their pockets.
You're coming across more of a mad conspiracist which I'm sure you're not. Who are these vague enemies and what do they want? Isn't the idea that we've got a bit of the Old pandemics going on and the magic cure that was brought up by one bloke isn't so magic?
From the outside it all looks a bit nutty.
You're coming across more of a mad conspiracist which I'm sure you're not. Who are these vague enemies and what do they want? Isn't the idea that we've got a bit of the Old pandemics going on and the magic cure that was brought up by one bloke isn't so magic?
From the outside it all looks a bit nutty.
Who is "THEY"?
It must be some sort of international conspiracy as the pandemic reaction is international. How are "They" controlling governments of all stripes? What do "They" want from us?
You're coming across more of a mad conspiracist which I'm sure you're not. Who are these vague enemies and what do they want? Isn't the idea that we've got a bit of the Old pandemics going on and the magic cure that was brought up by one bloke isn't so magic?
From the outside it all looks a bit nutty.
Scientists do tend to go back and cull these things given time. While some crap gets through initially, look at how often it gets referenced in other peer-reviewed works. Really egregious examples of crap science are most notable for being isolated.
LOL, no no conspiracist, just highly skeptical of the narrative and seeing all the power grabs happen all over the world while the populace applauds or demands more to feel safe.
Sweden didn't go the destroy the economy route, look up their statistics, and all the right people hate on them.
If you accept crap science then it seems disingenuous to censor any science because "scientists tend to go back and cull these things given time" and you can "look at how often it gets referenced in other" work.
And you're coming across as either hopelessly naive or deliberately disingenuous.
The entire medical establishment, whatever label you want to hang on it, has two priorities when it comes to medicine:
1. Ongoing treatment, because that means recurring charges and thus recurring income.
2. Proprietary medications, including vaccines, because per-dose charges can be higher. In some cases, over 10x the price of an identical generic-branded medication.
Anything that functions as a one-time cure fails both of the above. Yes, there are such cures, especially surgeries which are expensive in themselves. But for any newly identified disease or condition, one or both of the two above is always the preferred means of addressing it.
Add to that the political dimension: Trump recommended the hydroxychloroquine-zinc-arithromyacin treatment. Therefore, that treatment cannot be discussed, because it would reflect well on him, and disrupt efforts by his political opponents to take advantage of the crisis for other political gain.
Do you read and comprehend ?
"Mind you I don't think THEY made everything up" There's a reason I said that and capitalized that word.
Now try and not adjudicate ill intent, try and steel man my position, what could be the reason I had to writing it like that?
An assorted group of individuals/corporations with common interests/goals can give the impression of a vast conspiracy where none exists. You don't need one to get the results we see, you just need a lot of sociopaths in charge of the corporations (most are) and a lot of corrupt/power hungry fuckers in the governments (most are).
The reason is to spare the common people, those that don't fact check and mine references, from fraudulent claims that might harm them. Yes, it is paternalism. I would love it if everyone were smarter about what they accept, but sometimes some protections help keep people from harming themselves and others.
Heck studies have shown that GPs are also influenced on their prescribing habits by the advertisements that they have seen.You don't have to tell me that. I regularly have to tell doctors NO to certain medications after researching effectiveness (both medically and cost-based), and that's in a specialty practice.
I'm reading but I'm truly not comprehending.
This would need a global group of f like minded coordinated people. Some sort of conspiracy likesay. An uncoordinated mess of governments unprepared for a pandemic make much more sense than your idea of organisations deliberately quashing the truth.
Yep, you're not comprehending, and I fear it is because you don't want to, since you quote me explaining how you don't need a conspiracy and yet you insist I'm peddling a conspiracy. Bye Felicia!
I'm still not sure what the endgame here is. It's clearly not a Conservative endgame because you just posted an anti-Conservative video so what does anybody have to gain by repressing a miracle cure to a pandemic that is killing tens of thousands?
Making Trump look bad.
The World wants to make Donald Trump look bad? Numerous countries are risking the lives of their citizens in a coordinated effort to humiliate him?
Dunno about other countries, but the Democrats here are definitley skewing things in an attempt to drive the "Orange Man Bad" narrative, at nearly any cost.
At a guess, I'd say other countries are just running with the narrative that the far left here in the states are attempting to push.
The World wants to make Donald Trump look bad? Numerous countries are risking the lives of their citizens in a coordinated effort to humiliate him?That's theRPGsite...keeping the crazy trains running on time is priority 1!
I think you're giving the influence of the US, and particularly the parts that are not in power, a bit more credit than they deserve in regards to the pandemic.
That's theRPGsite...keeping the crazy trains running on time is priority 1!
Then you're not explaining yourself. Clearly you can't explain yourself. Fair enough I'll accept that your ideas are half-baked nonsense.
I only came into this thread because of a stupid UBI claim. I didn't mean to break somebodies dream.
You don't have to tell me that. I regularly have to tell doctors NO to certain medications after researching effectiveness (both medically and cost-based), and that's in a specialty practice.
We like to imagine that medicine is based on evidence and the results of fair testing and clinical trials. In reality, those tests and trials are often profoundly flawed. We like to imagine that doctors who write prescriptions for everything from antidepressants to cancer drugs to heart medication are familiar with the research literature about these drugs, when in reality much of the research is hidden from them by drug companies. We like to imagine that doctors are impartially educated, when in reality much of their education is funded by the pharmaceutical industry. We like to imagine that regulators have some code of ethics and let only effective drugs onto the market, when in reality they approve useless drugs, with data on side effects casually withheld from doctors and patients.All these problems have been shielded from public scrutiny because they are too complex to capture in a sound bite. Ben Goldacre shows that the true scale of this murderous disaster fully reveals itself only when the details are untangled. He believes we should all be able to understand precisely how data manipulation works and how research misconduct in the medical industry affects us on a global scale.With Goldacre's characteristic flair and a forensic attention to detail, Bad Pharma reveals a shockingly broken system in need of regulation. This is the pharmaceutical industry as it has never been seen before.
Sorry but you're being hopelessly niave here. The US medical establishment may have those priorities but that's not true of other countries. Other countries have healthcare systems that aren't dependent on profit and prioritise reducing deaths.
That explains a lot to me. You're viewing the world through a lense perverted by something you see as normal but is anything but. If you only regard it as a national crisis you can't see beyond that.
That is hopelessly niave. You need to broaden your view.
Yeah, the one that has in front of him an explanation about how you don't need a conspiracy but insists the one doing the explaining is peddling a conspiracy just did a smart.
You're soooooooooo SMART (In your dreams)
But it's not a very good explanation. You've just waved your hands and talked about THEM. Somebody has mentioned a for profit healthcare system which at least covers one country.
"I don't like your explanation therefore you're peddling conspiracy theories hur dur!"
jhkim, are you familiar with the Lancet study on hydroxychloroquine? And how it was retracted, after questions came up about the data supplier (Surgisphere), and then Surgisphere just... poofed? (Seriously, that's the only way to describe it. They disappeared like a soap bubble hit by a bullet)
Now do you understand why people are feeling a little hard done-by by the professionals? You want studies on HCQ? Sure, I'm in. Let's DO some studies. But you won't GET those studies because any work will be interpreted as promotion of the Orange Man Bad. And the left cannot give Trump a win, ever.
So, the Surgisphere thing certainly muddied the waters re HCQ, but my understanding is that HCQ is still being trialled in various countries, including the U.S. (along with various other low-cost drugs no longer under patent protection). Sure the HCQ results aren't stellar at this point, but the studies continue. They ARE being done. I don't see where the alleged censorship and suppression come in.
"I don't like your explanation therefore you're peddling conspiracy theories hur dur!"
I'm having trouble engaging with your explanation because it amounts to "people are doing stuff for reasons". I'll agree that it's not a conspiracy theory because there's no theory just stuff.
I can engage with the medical establishment profiteering thing. I can see how somebody can get there, it just doesn't scale up in a world of socialised medicine so I can't get any further.
It's become crystal clear that either you're being intentionally obtuse or you're just dumb. In the spirit of Hanlon's razor I'm gonna go with you being just dumb.
Because immediately after the Lancet study hit, the FDA hit the brakes on ANY use of HCQ.
You can't tell me that wasn't a coordinated hit. That's NOT how things work.
In your world of socialized medicine the UK socialized medicine establishment was inflating the death numbers.
It's become crystal clear that either you're being intentionally obtuse or you're just dumb. In the spirit of Hanlon's razor I'm gonna go with you being just dumb.
I'm probably dumb.
The inflation of numbers is a weird thing. The UK government completely fucked up on how to do the numbers so I agree they're not trustworthy. Today they've just stopped providing them.
So that was crap.
At this point we started looking at excess deaths. Excess deaths are interesting because it's about variation from expected deaths in any given period. Weirdly this number has been higher than the UK governments numbers. From this you have to start looking at what's been different over the period, I ruled out trouser related accidents very early because lockdown meant less trouser wearing. So given this massive increase in excess deaths 67,000 last I checked, I'm currently looking at the biggest new killer in the news. I am open to suggestions for this statistic though, there has been an uptick in bicycle sales and they are dangerous.
Just explain it to me. Feel free to talk down as you point at facts and reasonable theories.
I already did, YOU went and said it was peddling conspiracy theories when I explained how you don't need one, thanks but no thanks I'm not wasting more time on you.
Almost like some of these accounts are being paid to post...
I already did, YOU went and said it was peddling conspiracy theories when I explained how you don't need one, thanks but no thanks I'm not wasting more time on you.
It sure does seem like some people have A LOT invested in pushing a narrative on the internet and will stop at nothing until you agree with them or are destroyed. Almost like some of these accounts are being paid to post...
It sure does seem like some people have A LOT invested in pushing a narrative on the internet and will stop at nothing until you agree with them or are destroyed. Almost like some of these accounts are being paid to post...
I already did, YOU went and said it was peddling conspiracy theories when I explained how you don't need one, thanks but no thanks I'm not wasting more time on you.
It does appear to be the case. And the vitriol when they get called out for their lies is trivially predictable.
Shareblue changed their name: https://americanindependent.com/
But it's still the same crap. There are a few other boards I post on that have users admitting they're paid per post, they don't even try to hide their obvious gaslighting attempts.
New Zealand is never coming out of lockdown, apparently. That's their government's brilliant solution to a seasonal virus they could have had herd immunity to by now.
Government surrender any measure of power and control? Perish the thought.
"Treason ne'er prospers; why, what's the reason?
If it doth prosper, none dare call it treason."
New Zealand is never coming out of lockdown, apparently. That's their government's brilliant solution to a seasonal virus they could have had herd immunity to by now.
New Zealand is never coming out of lockdown, apparently. That's their government's brilliant solution to a seasonal virus they could have had herd immunity to by now.
There's a vaccine? That's how you get herd immunity, by vaccination.
Polio, measles and smallpox didn't disappear because people got them, there were vaccines. Influenza is still deadly to many but it is kept to as low a risk as possible by vaccination. Without a vaccination herd immunity is incredibly unlikely.
What utter bullshit. We have coronaviruses, rhinoviruses, adenoviruses, noroviruses, influenza and countless others every single year, and acquire herd immunity without vaccination. Influenza is deadly to a small proportion of the most vulnerable, and the vaccine is a total waste of time.
Coronavirus is the common cold, you've had it dozens if not hundreds of times without ever being vaccinated against it. It isn't equivalent to polio, measles or smallpox.
What utter bullshit. We have coronaviruses, rhinoviruses, adenoviruses, noroviruses, influenza and countless others every single year, and acquire herd immunity without vaccination. Influenza is deadly to a small proportion of the most vulnerable, and the vaccine is a total waste of time.We *don't* have herd immunity to influenza -- that's why people keep getting sick and dying every year through flu season. What makes it less serious is simply that the fatality rate from influenza is very low. Between these four, the fatality rates according to the CDC are:
Coronavirus is the common cold, you've had it dozens if not hundreds of times without ever being vaccinated against it. It isn't equivalent to polio, measles or smallpox.
We *don't* have herd immunity to influenza -- that's why people keep getting sick and dying every year through flu season. What makes it less serious is simply that the fatality rate from influenza is very low. Between these four, the fatality rates according to the CDC are:
Influenza: fatality rate 0.02%
Measles: fatality rate 0.2%
Polio: fatality rate from 2% to 10%
Smallpox: fatality rate around 30%
Estimates vary on the fatality rate for covid-19, but most of them are at least 0.2%. The CDC currently puts its best estimate at 0.65%. That makes it more deadly than the measles, but still well below polio and smallpox.
Sources:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/flu.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/meas.html
https://www.cdc.gov/polio/what-is-polio/index.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/about/index.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html
We *don't* have herd immunity to influenza -- that's why people keep getting sick and dying every year through flu season. What makes it less serious is simply that the fatality rate from influenza is very low. Between these four, the fatality rates according to the CDC are:
Influenza: fatality rate 0.02%
Measles: fatality rate 0.2%
Polio: fatality rate from 2% to 10%
Smallpox: fatality rate around 30%
Estimates vary on the fatality rate for covid-19, but most of them are at least 0.2%. The CDC currently puts its best estimate at 0.65%. That makes it more deadly than the measles, but still well below polio and smallpox.
Sources:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/flu.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/meas.html
https://www.cdc.gov/polio/what-is-polio/index.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/about/index.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html
World death count due to Covid19 (IF their numbers are correct) 771,518 Source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:COVID-19_pandemic_data)
World population 7,800,000,000 Source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population)
771,518×100÷7,800,000,000 = 0.009891256
USA death count due to Covid19 171,000
USA population 328, 200,000
171000×100÷328000000 = 0.052134146
World death count due to Covid19 (IF their numbers are correct) 771,518 Source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:COVID-19_pandemic_data)
World population 7,800,000,000 Source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population)
771,518×100÷7,800,000,000 = 0.009891256
USA death count due to Covid19 171,000
USA population 328, 200,000
171000×100÷328200000 = 0.052102377
EDITED to correct the last operation was missing 200k gringos.
I'm not sure what you're intending to show from this. Countries vary widely in their number of deaths per population. Right now the U.S. has per capita covid-19 deaths around #8 in the world.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4767[/ATTACH]
Source: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/899365887/charts-how-the-u-s-ranks-on-covid-19-deaths-per-capita-and-by-case-count
That roughly matches with my own calculations and your calculation. Of course, it's possible that data from some countries are less reliable - like China or Iran - since countries report their own number of deaths. But the point is that the U.S. is not an outlier - it's in the middle of a bunch of countries in reported deaths per capita.
I'm not sure what you're intending to show from this. Countries vary widely in their number of deaths per population. Right now the U.S. has per capita covid-19 deaths around #8 in the world.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4767[/ATTACH]
Source: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/899365887/charts-how-the-u-s-ranks-on-covid-19-deaths-per-capita-and-by-case-count
That roughly matches with my own calculations and your calculation. Of course, it's possible that data from some countries are less reliable - like China or Iran - since countries report their own number of deaths. But the point is that the U.S. is not an outlier - it's in the middle of a bunch of countries in reported deaths per capita.
That works out to a little over 46 deaths per 100,000.
Interestingly enough, if we subtract just two states (NY and NJ), the death rate for the rest of the US drops by more than 10 to slightly over 35 deaths/100K. That's a 24% drop, and below France, Mexico, and Brazil.
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/NY,NJ,US/PST045219
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covid19-death-rates-us-by-state/
I agree about the numbers - but why would you exclude NY and NJ? With any country, if you exclude the previous hot spots, then you'll decrease the total. For example, if you exclude Sao Paolo from Brazil, then it decreases even more sharply. The Sao Paolo deaths are nearly a quarter of the country's. With any of these large countries, there will be previous hot spots that boost the total, as well as up-and-coming hot spots that are coming into play. The deaths are never evenly spread.
https://c19study.com/
So...we still going to pretend HCQ is an "unproven drug" as it relates to mitigating Chinavirus problems? "But aliens! Double-blind clinical trials! FAUCIIIIIIIIII!!!!!!"
A vaccine would be the absolute best way to avoid that and I hope one becomes available as soon as possible.
We have flu vaccines and we average 36,000 deaths annually in the USA from the flu (80k in 2018), so there is zero reason to believe a vaccine rushed through research, testing and into production is gonna be a panacea.
We have flu vaccines and we average 36,000 deaths annually in the USA from the flu (80k in 2018), so there is zero reason to believe a vaccine rushed through research, testing and into production is gonna be a panacea.
Plus, we'll see how many people even will take the CoronaChan vaccine. I doubt 50%, probably less if the vaccine is multi-step/multi-dose or needed annually.
The Stanford study from months ago proved the actual infection rate is at least 5 times (maybe 20 times) the number of known cases (confirmed by the LA study and the NY study, etc) and we've known the death numbers have been manipulated to the point of absurdity, so worrying about the Kung Flu sniffles with its 99.9% survival rate is becoming more laughable by the day.
But wear your face diapers! Or the boogie virus gonna getcha!
What is your standard of proof?
Results.
There are countless thousands of people who have benefited from HCQ to mitigate the effects of COVID-19; the ONLY argument against its effectiveness is based purely on religious dogma passed off as "science".
Results.
There are countless thousands of people who have benefited from HCQ to mitigate the effects of COVID-19; the ONLY argument against its effectiveness is based purely on religious dogma passed off as "science".
Results.
There are countless thousands of people who have benefited from HCQ to mitigate the effects of COVID-19; the ONLY argument against its effectiveness is based purely on religious dogma passed off as "science".
The only argument against its effectiveness are results from people using the scientific method who possibly counted the numbers? I'm sorry but I'm wary about the use of the word countless as a standard of proof. I like counting to be part of the process, I'm happy for the counting to be questioned as in the amount of deaths but some counting would be good. It doesn't have to be fancy counting either just counting.
Sure
Thank God you agree.
Whatever floats your boat, ace.
It claims to document all possible papers - but I don't yet see any endorsement or support that it accurately represents what it purports to. For example, I do see that it does not include one of the few randomized trials that have been done, this one:
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-4207
It does include the Boulware et al randomized trial, but it categorizes it as "positive" when the paper's conclusion was that there was no benefit. It classifies this as "see notes" and links to this page.
https://c19study.com/boulware.html
They show a graph and quote claiming that there is a benefit, then link to the NEJM paper. However, the graph they post doesn't appear anywhere in the paper or in the comments on it. I can't find the source of that graph or quote below it.
Hey, Brad. I'm glad that you want to support non-politicized science, which is a principle I agree with. In Post #436 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42126-Covid-the-quot-lockdowns-quot-etc&p=1145541&viewfull=1#post1145541), I had some specific criticisms of the c19study.com site. Have you looked at those?
I'd ask that you look at the c19study page on Boulware et al, and then compare to the paper itself. There appears to be a serious disconnect, and I can't find the source of the graph or quote that they present. Can you suggest where c19study gets that graph?
Hey, Brad. I'm glad that you want to support non-politicized science, which is a principle I agree with. In Post #436 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42126-Covid-the-quot-lockdowns-quot-etc&p=1145541&viewfull=1#post1145541), I had some specific criticisms of the c19study.com site. Have you looked at those?
I'd ask that you look at the c19study page on Boulware et al, and then compare to the paper itself. There appears to be a serious disconnect, and I can't find the source of the graph or quote that they present. Can you suggest where c19study gets that graph?
I'm responding to this post with a simple, "Not interested in discussing it further." You have your head so far up your own ass it's not even funny. For a scientist, you have an EXTREMELY politicized opinion about everything; and it's worse because you're so deluded about it not being political. So, yeah, whatever, IDGAF.
So...we still going to pretend HCQ is an "unproven drug" as it relates to mitigating Chinavirus problems?
There are some promising candidates, but it's worth remembering that lengthy and thorough clinical trials for vaccines exist for a reason.
The effects of influenza even with a vaccine is what's worrying me right now. We're soon going to be in the part of the year when healthcare systems are overloaded due to flu.
So yeah please wear your face nappy to stop spreading shit around.
I hope that it all just blows over and we can get back to a normal life.
Taking a look at New York City and what its liberal democrat leadership has done to it.
And that's fine. It just means NYC will be the hot spot for rebuilding and reinvestment in the 2030s.
Well, thanks at least for giving a clear answer.
https://youtu.be/x5u-lJNsO7A?t=4420I watched briefly, but now the video has been taken down off of Youtube. I'm willing to watch it and give feedback if it is hosted somewhere else, but I didn't note down the exact title for further search.
https://medicine.yale.edu/profile/harvey_risch/
Going back on my statement somewhat and apologizing; I realize you were trying to be honest here (and I was drunk when I posted that...it was a long week). Watch that video (about the 1:30 mark, the link has the time queued up) and tell me you think this whole thing isn't political theater. Dr. Risch is literally putting his entire career in jeopardy to expose the bullshit being passed off as "science". He also gives some interesting info about Saint Fauci...
Also RE: masks - https://mobile.twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1297551231620194304
So yeah...total bullshit.
While research indicates masks may help those who are infected from spreading the infection, there is less information regarding whether masks offer any protection for a contact exposed to a symptomatic or asymptomatic patient. Therefore, the determination of close contact should be made irrespective of whether the person with COVID-19 or the contact was wearing a mask. Because the general public has not received training on proper selection and use of respiratory PPE, it cannot be certain whether respiratory PPE worn during contact with an individual with COVID-19 infection protected them from exposure.
So what this is saying is that masks can help prevent spread, but they are not a sure thing. Rather, they reduce chances fractionally. Further, masks are often misused - like not covering one's nose, for example, which I frequently see in my area.
Amazing how many gamers will push for every +5% bonus in a game but not in real life.Real life is a bit more visceral than fantasyland. Wearing heavy armor 24/7 is a lot less appealing when the player has to wear heavy armor, same with something like masks.
Real life is a bit more visceral than fantasyland. Wearing heavy armor 24/7 is a lot less appealing when the player has to wear heavy armor, same with something like masks.
Good lord, what the fuck kind of mask are you wearing that equates to heavy armor?Is there a facepalm emoji?
Good lord, what the fuck kind of mask are you wearing that equates to heavy armor?
If they are "lucky". If not, they'll go the Detroit route, and it will take them 50 years to even start pulling their heads out of their collective asses.
Amazing how many gamers will push for every +5% bonus in a game but not in real life.
So what this is saying is that masks can help prevent spread, but they are not a sure thing. Rather, they reduce chances fractionally. Further, masks are often misused - like not covering one's nose, for example, which I frequently see in my area.
Whenever flu season is afoot, I try to avoid anyone who looks sick, I wash my hands and use handsan, cover my mouth when I sneeze, etc. All of that is infinitely more effective than some dumbass mask that literally doesn't do much because people don't have the right kind (try finding them) or wear them incorrectly. Unless you're wearing an NBC suit, good luck avoiding a virus from some dude sneezing into a bandana. Masks are just optics; that's it.Yes, you need a seriously hardcore mask if you want to stop someone from walking up to you and squeezing a nanoscale virus through one of the holes. But Sars2 doesn't travel alone, it's suspended in droplets that are projected from your nose and mouth when you sneeze, cough, and speak. Those droplets are then carried in the air until they are precipitated onto a surface. So you don't need to stop the virus, you just need a barrier that aborts or redirects the airflow, or catches some of the droplets. This isn't perfect immunity, but that's not what we're looking for. The R0 is about lowering the odds of infection, and even a crappy mask works because you don't spray as much over anyone near you.
Yes, you need a seriously hardcore mask if you want to stop someone from walking up to you and squeezing a nanoscale virus through one of the holes. But Sars2 doesn't travel alone, it's suspended in droplets that are projected from your nose and mouth when you sneeze, cough, and speak. Those droplets are then carried in the air until they are precipitated onto a surface. So don't need to stop the virus, you just need a barrier that aborts or redirects the airflow, or catches some of the droplets. This isn't perfect immunity, but that's not what we're looking for. It's about lowering the odds of infection, aka the R0, and even a crappy mask works because it reduces your chance of being infected and reduces other people's chance of catching what you have.
https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/my-stay-home-lab-shows-how-face-coverings-can-slow-spread-disease
Counterargument: https://www.realhealthynews.com/swedish-dr-fauci-says-mask-evidence-doesnt-pass-sniff-test/I agree with what he's saying: "But to start with having face masks and then think you can crowd your buses or your shopping malls--that's definitely a mistake." Yes, if you use masks as an excuse to crowd people together, you're probably making things worse than you would if you kept people apart and maskless.
In my neck of the woods, what I'm seeing is that the best thing the mask does (and maybe the only effective thing) is remind people to pay attention to keeping some distance, not rubbing their eyes, etc. It even works on people not wearing the mask, because they see other people doing it! Those hand made crochet masks with loops so broad that you fit a straw through them work just as well for that.
Really? Here in Soviet Canuckistan the masks are a sacred talisman that allows one to violate the social distancing.
Yes, we've got our share of Karen's, but they are a little restrained by the threat of a "bless your heart" comeback. It's very clear that a lot of people are wearing the mask only the minimum necessary and as a form of politeness: "I don't think this does anything, but if it makes that elderly couple in the store feel a little safer, no skin off my nose," kind of attitude. I've heard many people say that in one form or another. Also heard a lot of, "Do you want me to put this mask on? No, ok, no problem."
That's pretty much my take on this. The elderly couple may not only feel safer, they may actually be safer. I've no idea how much, but even if the benefits to that couple are incremental, me wearing a mask in indoor public spaces is a tiny, tiny sacrifice to make for them. Not to mention, that elderly couple are my neighbours.
Holy shit! A mature, responsible attitude towards masking--on the RPGsite of all places! Wow...
And thank you.
Catching up on the back traffic around here I have a sense that you are now persona non grata and your endorsement can only be a rod for my back! LOL! But whatever.
Fuck the reputation economy. Don't react to people based on what other people might think of you, and assume they are a whole bunch of things because that's what you've been told. React to people based on what they say, and judge them based on your own assessments.
What I said. I'm not backtracking based on any "reputation economy." Just making an observation. To wit: you step out of line and suddenly you're an "SJW."
I'll concede, I'm still catching up, so maybe that's not a fair assessment. But so far, it's looking that way.
What I said. I'm not backtracking based on any "reputation economy." Just making an observation. To wit: you step out of line and suddenly you're an "SJW."
I'll concede, I'm still catching up, so maybe that's not a fair assessment. But so far, it's looking that way.
You seem to be arguing in good faith. The HD, not so much. That's the difference between a liberal and a SJW. Worse, he's a SJW pretending (badly) to be a conservative. I'll take honest disagreement over lying any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
Besides, I'm not so sure that HD isn't the banned Trippy Hippy as a sock puppet. There are a lot of similarities in their "arguments".
That's pretty much the kind of thing I saw and why I throw profanity, scorn, and ridicule at several other posters that think their shit doesn't stink. In reality, I'm easygoing and sensible, but around here, that's actually a poor fit for the tone of the site, so I decided to rebuild my character for this game.
Heh, easy going like a brick to the head. ;)
Just making an observation. To wit: you step out of line and suddenly you're an "SJW."I can't tell you how many conversations I've had where I post X, someone decides that means I support Y, and then goes off on me for supporting Y. I reply by saying no, I don't support Y, I just said X. Which you'd think would end it, because not only didn't I express any kind of support for Y, I never even mentioned it. And then I explicitly denied it. And even if all that wasn't sufficient, who's the subject matter expert on what I believe? Me, or someone with whom I've only exchanged a handful of posts? The only correct response would be to backtrack, and respond to what I actually said. But that never happens. Instead, they invariably double down, and keep attacking me for supporting Y.
Many SJWs are also social chameloeons claiming not to be an SJW yet seeing their actions in and out of the net they are pretty much SJWs. While claiming otherwise which is a smokescreen for the behavior and bullshit.
HZ claims to be a "conservative" yet in the thread about What does Conservatism mean to you is nowhere to be seen. If he really is a Conservative which I highly doubt why is he not posting in a thread about any and all things Conservative. It's more of their bullshit to let others think they are one of the gang yet very much apart of it.
This the result of manichean groupthink, where people have mentally divided the world into sides. Usually there are just 2, but occasionally there's some grudging acceptance of a small subset of heterodox positions. And then they look for signals that they use to immediately and irrevocably categorize people into one of those mental boxes. The signals they use to classify people are invariably trivial, not substantive. At most they're a single issue litmus test; at least, they're often just based on the use of a phrase or a term.
The reason the signals have to be superficial is because until you're slotted into one of their boxes, they can't respond. They only have a limited set of arguments, tailored to those prefabricated, imaginary mental models, so they can't deal with anything beyond that. Even their arguments aren't arguments in any real sense, because arguing involves listening to what the other person says, and responding to that. They're incapable of dealing with real people, with complex and contradictory beliefs. The boxes don't represent the human diversity of thought, they're just caricatures, imaginary goblins, or boogeymen.
Risk of Death Is 30% Lower for COVID-19 Patients Treated With Hydroxychloroquine (https://scitechdaily.com/risk-of-death-is-30-lower-for-covid-19-patients-treated-with-hydroxychloroquine/)
And that's after they've been hospitalized!
Recommendations of other studies are for better results in outpatient treatment.
Risk of Death Is 30% Lower for COVID-19 Patients Treated With Hydroxychloroquine (https://scitechdaily.com/risk-of-death-is-30-lower-for-covid-19-patients-treated-with-hydroxychloroquine/)
And that's after they've been hospitalized!
Recommendations of other studies are for better results in outpatient treatment.
INB4 jhkim "That's not a legitimate study!"No, as far as I can see, it's a legitimate study. Here's the actual article:
That's pretty much my take on this. The elderly couple may not only feel safer, they may actually be safer. I've no idea how much, but even if the benefits to that couple are incremental, me wearing a mask in indoor public spaces is a tiny, tiny sacrifice to make for them. Not to mention, that elderly couple are my neighbours.
Maybe because I'm working M-F you dumbass and I'll save making long posts for the weekend.
You gotta put the effort into those TikTok videos! There's so much competition between the nursing department / dance teams now so every hospital has gotta step up their choreography.I wish; what I've got to do is revamp a phone triage system to adjust for some scope of practice changes (or "clarifications" depending on how you want to look at them) while trying to incorporate the input from a huge herd of cats (MDs, PAs, and ARNPs) and filter out the wasted noise.
LOL. (https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/08/30/heres-the-shockingly-small-number-of-people-who-died-from-just-the-coronavirus-n2575306)
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website disclosed the shockingly small number of people who died from only the Wuhan coronavirus, with no other cause of death mentioned. Hold on to your hat because here it is: out of the 161,392 deaths in the CDC data, just six percent, about 9,700 deaths, were attributed to the coronavirus alone. According to the CDC, the other 94 percent had an average of 2.6 additional conditions or causes of deaths, such as heart disease, diabetes, and sepsis.
We crippled our nation for 9,700 deaths.
LOL.
Try again. It's the stats from the CDC itself.
Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. The number of deaths with each condition or cause is shown for all deaths and by age groups. For data on comorbidities (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR2-muRM3tB3uBdbTrmKwH1NdaBx6PpZo2kxotNwkUXlnbZXCwSRP2OmqsI#Comorbidities)
LOL. (https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/08/30/heres-the-shockingly-small-number-of-people-who-died-from-just-the-coronavirus-n2575306)
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website disclosed the shockingly small number of people who died from only the Wuhan coronavirus, with no other cause of death mentioned. Hold on to your hat because here it is: out of the 161,392 deaths in the CDC data, just six percent, about 9,700 deaths, were attributed to the coronavirus alone. According to the CDC, the other 94 percent had an average of 2.6 additional conditions or causes of deaths, such as heart disease, diabetes, and sepsis.
We crippled our nation for 9,700 deaths.
LOL.
I bet traffic fatalities are incredibly low once you eliminate everyone with a comorbidity. Nope, the high speed impact can't be held responsible if the people in the car have even one of: high blood pressure, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, or obesity. Fuck, cooking statistics is easy.
The most amusing thing to me is the fact that if you die in a high speed car accident and your corpse is tested positive for Wuhan flu then you get recorded as having died of Wuhan Flu.
The quality source for this "fact" would be?
Yes, and if you go directly to the CDC, you can see why the way Townhall presents it is duplicitous. They're trying to say that 94% of those that died with COVID didn't die because of COVID and that's not what it means. Take all of those that had HTN along with COVID; the HTN was not itself the immediate cause of death despite how Townhall wants to make it look, and it likely would not have been a cause of death without COVID for the vast majority of those with HTN.
I have to partially agree with HD here. As he points out, just because you have one or more comorbidities doesn't mean that Covid isn't the proximate cause of your death. Conversely, some number of Covid-recorded deaths could have happened regardless of having Covid (likely correlated with age (16% of age 85+ die every year) and number/severity of comorbidities).The death statistics would have to be recorded in such a way to reflect this. Hell, I would be happy if there was uniform recording methodology, rather than the ad hoc county/state reporting.I agree that some number of covid-recorded deaths could have happened regardless of covid. It's likely to be a small difference though, because covid-19 is very fast-acting and has swift mortality compared to the other leading causes like cancer and heart disease. Drawing statistics from all covid-19 infections means that statistics are consistent rather than depending on local practices and rulings on how to classify deaths, especially when most deaths do not have an autopsy to check. This is why the CDC also looks at excess death statistics as part of their covid-19 study. Here's the link on the excess death measurement:
The statistics that I find most interesting are that approximately 40% to 50% of Covid deaths are in nursing homes. Furthermore, if you look at deaths by age, 79% of Covid are age 65+, 58% are 75+, 31% are 85+ (i.e., like other illnesses (flu, pneumonia), the older you are, the more likely it is to kill you). Also, here in the Land of Enchantment, about another 40% are Native Americans on the reservations. The conclusions I draw are that the old and sick should have been locked down (like you would someone immunocompromised), which would have sufficiently flattened the curve to prevent deaths from inadequate care due to hospitals being overwhelmed. And they should have let the rest of us go about our business, thus avoiding lockdown-related deaths.I think that's a reasonable position. Mostly, I'm all for discussion of approach to handling it -- which is public policy and inherently involves a lot of trade-offs and choices. My concern is mostly for dismissal of the science that somehow the whole thing is a hoax that has simultaneously fooled opposing countries ranging from Iran to Brazil to Israel. My main question is the practicality of isolating the elderly when the virus is at high concentrations from spreading freely through the rest of the population. Many elderly live with younger family and/or depend on care from younger people, and are mostly *not* in nursing homes. It's a reasonable idea, and I'd want to see someone's plan about how it would work and the estimated effects.
From searching on "crash victim reported as covid-19 death"There have been errors and mistakes in covid-19 reporting on both sides, but my concern is that reading only about edge cases skews perspective as if they make a difference in the big picture. When you pile on a dozen 0.01% effects, you get an 0.12% effect -- which is still insignificant.
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/investigations/questions-over-the-accuracy-of-how-the-state-tracks-covid-deaths/283-0b1b7b6c-695e-4313-92cf-a4cfd7510721
https://cbs12.com/news/local/man-who-died-in-motorcycle-crash-counted-as-covid-19-death-in-florida-report
https://www.tristatehomepage.com/illinois-news/illinois-looking-to-remove-inaccurate-numbers-from-covid-19-death-toll/
Likely not enough to materially change the overall numbers. But it does undermine them. And when you start piling on...
You're not allowed to quote the fucking CDC, that bastion of unassailable scientific sovereignty, if their numbers don't match the media narrative.
Dennis Prager today saidAbiother worthless source of propaganda. Take a look at the fact checks and biases of both PJ Media and PragerU before you accept any "facts" from Dennis Prager.
Don't really know much about Prager, and the 1 in 3 seems to be an off the cuff type of comment because it's not sourced or even expanded on, but it's not an unreasonable number.Dennis Prager today saidAbiother worthless source of propaganda. Take a look at the fact checks and biases of both PJ Media and PragerU before you accept any "facts" from Dennis Prager.
So, if COVID was only responsible for 9K deaths, WTF caused all the excess deaths compared to last year? Because that's 200K people dead from "something", if it's not COVID. That's about 10% over the expected mortality. Something's doing it and if it's not COVID, what?Too early to say for sure. Probably a mixture of several things, such as:
Here's the NYT, which has a very strong bias in the other direction, saying that 1 in 3 small businesses in NYC will close due to the shutdowns:Restaurants are the canary in the coal mine of the economy. When they start crumpling, watch yourselves.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/03/nyregion/nyc-small-businesses-closing-coronavirus.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/03/nyregion/nyc-small-businesses-closing-coronavirus.html)
And here's a Yelp survey, which has been widely quoted by numerous news outlets (including leftist ones like CNN), which suggests up to 60% of restaurants, across the country, that were shutdown are gone for good.
https://www.yelpeconomicaverage.com/yea-q2-2020 (https://www.yelpeconomicaverage.com/yea-q2-2020)
Restaurants are the canary in the coal mine of the economy. When they start crumpling, watch yourselves.
That being said, between the rioting and Covid-19, a number of cities are going to be facing some, uh, interesting times.
Case in point: https://www.startribune.com/skyrocketing-demolition-costs-for-riot-damaged-properties-delay-rebuilding/572269302/ (https://www.startribune.com/skyrocketing-demolition-costs-for-riot-damaged-properties-delay-rebuilding/572269302/)
Do you think those businesses will return? Even the ones that have insurance that covers everything, they'll be pressured to move. Who wants to build (or insure) in a place where screaming hooligans might burn the building down on a whim?
Which is what's most important here regarding CoronaChan. It's just a "flu variant" - and so laughably obviously so - and if we weren't bullshitting the numbers left and right, we'd see 2020 was nothing more than a bad flu year.
Look at "excess deaths". It's the most interesting, and hardest to bullshit, stat.If anything it would underestimate covid deaths due to people being under various levels of lockdown and so fewer people dying from other causes, other diseases being spread less, etc.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-excess-deaths-tally-in-the-us-is-204691-in-7-months-so-covid-19-deaths-might-be-undercounted-2020-08-13 (https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-excess-deaths-tally-in-the-us-is-204691-in-7-months-so-covid-19-deaths-might-be-undercounted-2020-08-13)
Too early to say for sure. Probably a mixture of several things, such as:One commentator that I follow made the comment that it almost seems as if someone infected with the Wuhan virus is spending their regenerative power to fight it off and therefore if you are older and or have less left then you will die.
- COVID pushed some dying people over the edge sooner. In which case, the rate should taper off next year after the season flu does its usual number.
Given a group of people with the same age, sex, and long term conditions, we can assume those who die of the coronavirus were probably among those who would have passed away sooner.
You are right that we don't have the information yet. Given the state of the hysteria of the media, even when some people do have it, it is going to be somewhat difficult for the rest of us to get it, at least in a form we can reasonably trust.
Secondly, there seem to be a number of otherwise fit people who are badly affected by COVID and who develop serious ongoing heart/organ issues. These people are likely to have it much worse if/when they catch COVID again. So there seems to be a significant number of people who will start healthy, catch COVID, become vulnerable and then die when they catch the next wave of COVID. I don't have the stats (I suspect it's not been with us long enough to get them) on how big this particular issue really is.
Secondly, there seem to be a number of otherwise fit people who are badly affected by COVID and who develop serious ongoing heart/organ issues. These people are likely to have it much worse if/when they catch COVID again. So there seems to be a significant number of people who will start healthy, catch COVID, become vulnerable and then die when they catch the next wave of COVID. I don't have the stats (I suspect it's not been with us long enough to get them) on how big this particular issue really is.An absolutely tiny number of outliers. The vast majority of those hospitalised are over-65, suffering from multiple co-morbidities, and are overweight or obese. When looking at deaths, it's over 90% who have one or more of those factors.
And what percentage of Americans have one or more of those factors? It's not an absolutely tiny amount.Secondly, there seem to be a number of otherwise fit people who are badly affected by COVID and who develop serious ongoing heart/organ issues. These people are likely to have it much worse if/when they catch COVID again. So there seems to be a significant number of people who will start healthy, catch COVID, become vulnerable and then die when they catch the next wave of COVID. I don't have the stats (I suspect it's not been with us long enough to get them) on how big this particular issue really is.An absolutely tiny number of outliers. The vast majority of those hospitalised are over-65, suffering from multiple co-morbidities, and are overweight or obese. When looking at deaths, it's over 90% who have one or more of those factors.
And what percentage of Americans have one or more of those factors? It's not an absolutely tiny amount.I live in the UK, I couldn't really give a toss about Americans. Similarly, strangers who don't look after themselves aren't really my concern either.
Not concerned about others? Well, fuck you then buddy. If you don't care about the lives of others, why the fuck should anyone give a fuck about your freedom, you 'perfectly healthy' asshole?And what percentage of Americans have one or more of those factors? It's not an absolutely tiny amount.I live in the UK, I couldn't really give a toss about Americans. Similarly, strangers who don't look after themselves aren't really my concern either.
Utterly excessive and unnecessary laws restricting the freedom of perfectly healthy people at little risk concern me, on the other hand
Restaurants are the canary in the coal mine of the economy. When they start crumpling, watch yourselves.Restaurants come and go all the time, it's that 60% number that has me worried. I don't think we have a good feel for how badly this will decimate the small businesses.
That's the wrong question.And what percentage of Americans have one or more of those factors? It's not an absolutely tiny amount.Secondly, there seem to be a number of otherwise fit people who are badly affected by COVID and who develop serious ongoing heart/organ issues. These people are likely to have it much worse if/when they catch COVID again. So there seems to be a significant number of people who will start healthy, catch COVID, become vulnerable and then die when they catch the next wave of COVID. I don't have the stats (I suspect it's not been with us long enough to get them) on how big this particular issue really is.An absolutely tiny number of outliers. The vast majority of those hospitalised are over-65, suffering from multiple co-morbidities, and are overweight or obese. When looking at deaths, it's over 90% who have one or more of those factors.
Not concerned about others? Well, fuck you then buddy. If you don't care about the lives of others, why the fuck should anyone give a fuck about your freedom, you 'perfectly healthy' asshole?And what percentage of Americans have one or more of those factors? It's not an absolutely tiny amount.I live in the UK, I couldn't really give a toss about Americans. Similarly, strangers who don't look after themselves aren't really my concern either.
Utterly excessive and unnecessary laws restricting the freedom of perfectly healthy people at little risk concern me, on the other hand
Not concerned about others? Well, fuck you then buddy. If you don't care about the lives of others, why the fuck should anyone give a fuck about your freedom, you 'perfectly healthy' asshole?And what percentage of Americans have one or more of those factors? It's not an absolutely tiny amount.I live in the UK, I couldn't really give a toss about Americans. Similarly, strangers who don't look after themselves aren't really my concern either.
Utterly excessive and unnecessary laws restricting the freedom of perfectly healthy people at little risk concern me, on the other hand
You have a truly idiotic idea of what constitutes an essential liberty.Not concerned about others? Well, fuck you then buddy. If you don't care about the lives of others, why the fuck should anyone give a fuck about your freedom, you 'perfectly healthy' asshole?And what percentage of Americans have one or more of those factors? It's not an absolutely tiny amount.I live in the UK, I couldn't really give a toss about Americans. Similarly, strangers who don't look after themselves aren't really my concern either.
Utterly excessive and unnecessary laws restricting the freedom of perfectly healthy people at little risk concern me, on the other hand
I agree! Those who would give up a little temporary safety for essential liberty deserve neither...or something. ::)
Meanwhile, back in the real world, people have already been deputized into giving up their liberty to purchase the illusion of safety for a relatively minor subset of people. Yet somehow the question is why should those people already (presumably) enjoying their safety at the expense of other people’s liberty have to care about those people’s freedom? Muthafucka those people already effectively got their way (or at least the people purportedly speaking on their behalf did). This is about the people being sacrificed so that a relatively minor subset of the population can supposedly be saved.
Now I’m gonna get my fat asthmatic ass out for a walk—without wearing a mask! I’m not gonna keep my higher risk ass cooked up at home, racking up pounds and not expanding my lungs so I can become an even higher risk.
*literally walking out the door*
I personally wish HD would stop virtue signalling for me.This is theRPGsite, you dumbfuck. It's the mirror universe. Here, virtue signaling is ranting against public health and threatening to do violence to large groups of people that share some beliefs in common with the other. Well, you're not going to get your wish, bitch.
The US with lockdown has passed up Sweden with no lockdown in deaths per million.
Seems lockdowns weren't that necessary.
Not concerned about others? Well, fuck you then buddy. If you don't care about the lives of others, why the fuck should anyone give a fuck about your freedom, you 'perfectly healthy' asshole?What happened to taking responsibility for your own life?
What happened to taking responsibility for your own life?Taking responsibility for your own life and taking on the responsibility of being a member of society are not mutually exclusive unless you're going for some IRL emulation of a chaotic stupid alignment.
What happened to taking responsibility for your own life?Taking responsibility for your own life and taking on the responsibility of being a member of society are not mutually exclusive unless you're going for some IRL emulation of a chaotic stupid alignment.
Isn't all this grand government intervention supposed to help the little people? Because the giants like Amazon and Walmart and booming, while the small businesses are being hammered. The rich are doing fine, while the poor are struggling even more.
You have a truly idiotic idea of what constitutes an essential liberty.Not concerned about others? Well, fuck you then buddy. If you don't care about the lives of others, why the fuck should anyone give a fuck about your freedom, you 'perfectly healthy' asshole?And what percentage of Americans have one or more of those factors? It's not an absolutely tiny amount.I live in the UK, I couldn't really give a toss about Americans. Similarly, strangers who don't look after themselves aren't really my concern either.
Utterly excessive and unnecessary laws restricting the freedom of perfectly healthy people at little risk concern me, on the other hand
I agree! Those who would give up a little temporary safety for essential liberty deserve neither...or something. ::)
Meanwhile, back in the real world, people have already been deputized into giving up their liberty to purchase the illusion of safety for a relatively minor subset of people. Yet somehow the question is why should those people already (presumably) enjoying their safety at the expense of other people’s liberty have to care about those people’s freedom? Muthafucka those people already effectively got their way (or at least the people purportedly speaking on their behalf did). This is about the people being sacrificed so that a relatively minor subset of the population can supposedly be saved.
Now I’m gonna get my fat asthmatic ass out for a walk—without wearing a mask! I’m not gonna keep my higher risk ass cooked up at home, racking up pounds and not expanding my lungs so I can become an even higher risk.
*literally walking out the door*
Bitch please, you seem to care about economy as an essential liberty, but it's based on mutual relationships and you've said you don't care about what happens to others. So basically, you only care about others in a parasitic way when you no longer can suck from them. Well, keeping sucking, you pathetic piece of shit.You have a truly idiotic idea of what constitutes an essential liberty.Not concerned about others? Well, fuck you then buddy. If you don't care about the lives of others, why the fuck should anyone give a fuck about your freedom, you 'perfectly healthy' asshole?And what percentage of Americans have one or more of those factors? It's not an absolutely tiny amount.I live in the UK, I couldn't really give a toss about Americans. Similarly, strangers who don't look after themselves aren't really my concern either.
Utterly excessive and unnecessary laws restricting the freedom of perfectly healthy people at little risk concern me, on the other hand
I agree! Those who would give up a little temporary safety for essential liberty deserve neither...or something. ::)
Meanwhile, back in the real world, people have already been deputized into giving up their liberty to purchase the illusion of safety for a relatively minor subset of people. Yet somehow the question is why should those people already (presumably) enjoying their safety at the expense of other people’s liberty have to care about those people’s freedom? Muthafucka those people already effectively got their way (or at least the people purportedly speaking on their behalf did). This is about the people being sacrificed so that a relatively minor subset of the population can supposedly be saved.
Now I’m gonna get my fat asthmatic ass out for a walk—without wearing a mask! I’m not gonna keep my higher risk ass cooked up at home, racking up pounds and not expanding my lungs so I can become an even higher risk.
*literally walking out the door*
Muthafucka the economy's in shambles and people's livelihoods have been destroyed. All so that we can pretend that locking down the entire planet will somehow save a tiny portion of the population that isn't even guaranteed to die from this shambug. You have no notion of WTF essential liberty is.
Taking responsibility for your own life and taking on the responsibility of being a member of society are not mutually exclusive unless you're going for some IRL emulation of a chaotic stupid alignment.My responsibility for other adults ends at the point at which I pay taxation at the Higher Rate. I'm not obliged to give the first shit about another adult, who is responsible for themselves.
Taking responsibility for your own life and taking on the responsibility of being a member of society are not mutually exclusive unless you're going for some IRL emulation of a chaotic stupid alignment.My responsibility for other adults ends at the point at which I pay taxation at the Higher Rate. I'm not obliged to give the first shit about another adult, who is responsible for themselves.
Try again:Try: fuck off.
"In English tort law, an individual may owe a duty of care to another, to ensure that they do not suffer any unreasonable harm or loss. If such a duty is found to be breached, a legal liability is imposed upon the tortfeasor to compensate the victim for any losses they incur."
An argument which has been attempted many a time in court, especially by that class of men who choose to represent themselves - typically with an ill result.You shouldn't have any problems referencing appropriate court cases and precedents, then.
An argument which has been attempted many a time in court, especially by that class of men who choose to represent themselves - typically with an ill result.
And if I lived in England, you might have a point. Fortunately God blessed me by making me an American where socialist bullshit can die in a fire.Try again:Taking responsibility for your own life and taking on the responsibility of being a member of society are not mutually exclusive unless you're going for some IRL emulation of a chaotic stupid alignment.My responsibility for other adults ends at the point at which I pay taxation at the Higher Rate. I'm not obliged to give the first shit about another adult, who is responsible for themselves.
"In English tort law, an individual may owe a duty of care to another, to ensure that they do not suffer any unreasonable harm or loss. If such a duty is found to be breached, a legal liability is imposed upon the tortfeasor to compensate the victim for any losses they incur."
Try: fuck off.
You shouldn't have any problems referencing appropriate court cases and precedents, then.
You want evidence for the assertion that telling the court to fuck off leads to a bad result for you?What is the point you are trying to make here? We will or should get sued if we don't abide by the mask totem cult and someone dies of COVID?
Whenever the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention determines that the measures taken by health authorities of any State or possession (including political subdivisions thereof) are insufficient to prevent the spread of any of the communicable diseases from such State or possession to any other State or possession, he/she may take such measures to prevent such spread of the diseases as he/she deems reasonably necessary, including inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination, and destruction of animals or articles believed to be sources of infection.That's broadly written, but look at the examples: They're all intended to deal with an outbreak at a specific address. There's not a single hint that it's intended to allow the CDC to preemptively impose such grand costs on individuals and businesses across the country, so the order seems far beyond any possible interpretation of the delegated authority. More than that, the authority is vested in the Director of the CDC, yet the person who signed this order is Nina B. Witkofsky, Acting Chief of Staff. It's unclear who higher in the chain of command was even aware of it.
Funny for all this talk of the law, I don't see State Congresses in the US passing laws. Governors are creating mandates with their pens.Our feckless governor tried to make his fiat mask mandate a crime subject to fines and imprisonment until our still sane state attorney general said it would be against the law to make make that rule without approval of both houses of the state legislature.
Apology acceptedTry again:Try: fuck off.
"In English tort law, an individual may owe a duty of care to another, to ensure that they do not suffer any unreasonable harm or loss. If such a duty is found to be breached, a legal liability is imposed upon the tortfeasor to compensate the victim for any losses they incur."
Kiero has stated he lives in the UK, so perhaps I do have a point?And if I lived in England, you might have a point. Fortunately God blessed me by making me an American where socialist bullshit can die in a fire.Try again:Taking responsibility for your own life and taking on the responsibility of being a member of society are not mutually exclusive unless you're going for some IRL emulation of a chaotic stupid alignment.My responsibility for other adults ends at the point at which I pay taxation at the Higher Rate. I'm not obliged to give the first shit about another adult, who is responsible for themselves.
"In English tort law, an individual may owe a duty of care to another, to ensure that they do not suffer any unreasonable harm or loss. If such a duty is found to be breached, a legal liability is imposed upon the tortfeasor to compensate the victim for any losses they incur."
That’s basically where a lot of this country is at; governors ignoring their state constitutions to make illegal edicts that are wrecking people’s lives.No, in a lot of states it's perfectly legal. Most state constitutions place few limits on the powers of the legislative branch, and many of those have granted the governor sweeping emergency powers. This is less about states willfully violating their own laws, and more about how few limits are in place.
My favorite bit of insanity... in that it proves just how utterly stupid the decision-making is... happened when I was picking up lunch for my dad at Taco Bell. The management decided they wanted to reduce contact even further so they have you put your payment in a cup instead of just handing it to the gloved worker. Then the worker has to pull the payment out and either swipe the card or make change WITH THEIR HANDS, put it back in the cup and give it back to you.They started doing that at McDonald's, around here. I agree, it's completely idiotic. A germ-infested intermediary is worse than no intermediary at all.
I believe you know exactly what I'm talking about and are pretending to be mentally disabled.Try: fuck off.
You shouldn't have any problems referencing appropriate court cases and precedents, then.
You want evidence for the assertion that telling the court to fuck off leads to a bad result for you?
No, in a lot of states it's perfectly legal. Most state constitutions place few limits on the powers of the legislative branch, and many of those have granted the governor sweeping emergency powers. This is less about states willfully violating their own laws, and more about how few limits are in place.Not legal in Illinois except for 30 days. Gee, I think they might have exceeded 30 days by now. But the powers that be don't care about legality in Illinois. (same with marijuana, illegal immigrants, etc).
Gee, if only there weren't other provisions of the Illinois Code (like Section 5-45 of the Illinois Administrative Procedures Act (https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=000501000HArt%2E+5&ActID=83&ChapterID=2&SeqStart=2100000&SeqEnd=6400000)) and Illinois Administrative Code (https://www.cyberdriveillinois.com/departments/index/register/volume44/register_volume44_issue_34.pdf) the Governor could rely on. And if ONLY those rules didn't specify a 150 day limit instead of a 30 day limit. AND IF ONLY THOSE RULES didn't further exempt emergency rules made for Title 77.It's been over 150 days so your point on that is completely irrelevant. I doubt you are a lawyer any more than I am. In a Democrat supermajority state, the Democrats don't even have to go to court. They do what they like in many cases. And this "emergency" is a scam and opens the doors for many other so-called "emergencies." Maybe we can have one every flu season or maybe only in Presidential election years.
Damn, it's a shame that Governors in most states don't have multiple laws with which they could exercise emergency authority and that they only have 1 way to do it. It's really a shame. A shame that there's no common law understandings of emergency powers either that supplement such provisions where the law does not specifically override them.
Maybe if you were this passionate about things outside of an internet message board, you could make a difference and get people elected who will treat the law the way you think it works. (If you think governors don't have broad, sweeping powers during times of emergency, you're wrong. If you think legislatures have sufficiently locked these down, you're wrong. If you think legislatures probably should claw some of that power back away from the executive, well then you and I agree.)
You didn't look at the date that rule was published did you? Nor did you notice the exception I already pointed out.Oh I read it. It was snarky and arrogant, like I'm supposed to start the political movement that topples the Illinois Democratic machine instead of bitching on an Internet forum...
EDIT: Also, you may want to check your reading comprehension. I didn't tell you what to do with your time.
Oh I read it.Reading does not equal comprehension.
It was snarky and arrogant. . .True.
. . . like I'm supposed to start the political movement that topples the Illinois Democratic machine instead of bitching on an Internet forum...Stranger things have happened, but if that's what you took from it then maybe you need to examine why YOU feel that way. Because that's not what I wrote.
I voted in every election since I was 18. When I realized after living in IL for 43 years that my vote was meaningless, I left.So you gave up instead of fighting. It happens, and it's OK. Not everyone is born to be a fighter.
Again, I can't say I understand the "exception you pointed out" which is just a sentence. Your link leads to pages of legalese.Ahhh! Now we're getting somewhere. If you had started with a statement that you don't understand, I'd have been happy to help you understand.
But if you're trying to tell me the people that ignore federal immigration law and federal marijuana law really care about the legality of these mandates I can only shake my head.Not at all. I'm telling you that before you get all huffy about something you don't understand, maybe you should do the Conservative thing: take a step back and figure out what actually happened, what it actually means, and how it impacts you, society, and liberty.
An argument which has been attempted many a time in court, especially by that class of men who choose to represent themselves - typically with an ill result.You do realise that torts (with the exception of fraud) have only civil remedies available, right?
Glad to see a fellow Hoosier on the board.
Nashville city government doesn’t want to confirm good news (link to Nashville local news network affiliate report)Yeah. Saw that one this morning...
https://t.co/HAEicSwYzc (https://t.co/HAEicSwYzc)
CoronaChan will continue until the people say NO.Federalism works both ways. If Trump's not allowed to bring federal troops in to quash treasonous (and I use that word deliberately) insurrectionists, he can't tell states to stop screwing around and get back to work.
Until then, there's only individual disobedience.
It's so obviously a political tool (and has been for months). I rank Trump allowing the lockdown to continue past Easter (or having one at all) as Trump's major failure, and sadly, after 7 months, the easily broken people of this country have become conditioned into obedience by the MSM's daily litany of fear.
His wrong decision might well cost him re-election, and with that loss, next up is the loss of the nation to the marxist's "re-imagining" of America.
But after seeing people driving with masks on, eating outside by moving their masks aside to shove food in their piehole, watching them panic about masks while the next moment they are touching doors, ATMs, cash and their face...does America even deserve to continue?
I rank Trump allowing the lockdown to continue past Easter (or having one at all) as Trump's major failure, and sadly, after 7 months, the easily broken people of this country have become conditioned into obedience by the MSM's daily litany of fear.You’re succumbing to another media narrative here though; that President Trump has anything to do with the ongoing lockdowns or that he can legally stop them.
You’re succumbing to another media narrative here though; that President Trump has anything to do with the ongoing lockdowns or that he can legally stop them.I think he could. The Supreme Court has almost completely ignored the 9th and 10th amendments, and interpreted the commerce, supremacy, and general welfare clauses so broadly that there are no clear limits to federal power. More than that, a challenge would have to wind through the courts, so any resolution is months or years down the line. If a mandate was overthrown or curtailed, it would amount to an after-the-fact rebuke, rather than actually stopping an overreach. In the meantime, it would likely stand, because both the courts and the legislature have a long history of deferring to the executive during a crisis. For a similar example, look at how the CDC just ruled that tenants don't have to pay their landlords, nationwide. Which is much greater exercise of power, because it's a confiscation of wealth that overrides private contracts. And they did it just by putting a notice in the Federal Register.
You’re succumbing to another media narrative here though; that President Trump has anything to do with the ongoing lockdowns or that he can legally stop them.Darth Cheney and Obama were happy to exercise questionable uses of executive power to circumvent what was generally understood as separation of powers, and Trump could have done the same.
There is no joy in enjoying my first Lamb Korma in four fucking years. I'm ready to go back to 'what is this and why is it swimming in grease' land, where I can at least sit and eat my mystery casseroles and my excellent and mostly cheap steak in peace and without sounding like darth vader's wimpy cousin.I live in LA where I have the world's cuisine all around. I can walk to a dozen 4-star restaurants by wandering a mile or two. But I'd FAR rather cook something at home or go on a picnic than wear a face diaper surrounded by CoronaClowns larping they're in an ebola movie.
(but not the suburb of Lacey... which no long has the Indian restaraunt I used to go to...)Was that the place out in front of the Fred Meyer?
(but not the suburb of Lacey... which no long has the Indian restaraunt I used to go to...)Was that the place out in front of the Fred Meyer?
Absolutely incredible the lengths they will go to, to preserve the narrative that a seasonal virus that is of little threat to the majority, that has passed is somehow still a going concern. It wasn't even in the top 10 causes of death last month. There are only a handful of people hospitalised. But of course it's the second wave is only two weeks away...Covid-19 reporting is often sensationalist, but that's what the news does about everything from terrorist attacks to fires. It's not like it's a peculiarity of U.S. reporting or politics - countries ranging from Israel to South Korea have all treated considered this an extremely dangerous disease.
I think one of the spooky things about Covid-19 is how unpredictable it is. Still, to me, there is something that does not quite ring true when people claim that certain attitudes are "unscientific", e.g. I have seen some old folks who refuse to wear masks unless they have to, people saying things like "they don't believe in science". To me, it is actually about values rather than data. It is clearly not the black death, nor even the Spanish flu. We make potentially decisions like driving every day. How much do we value the freedom to move about and breathe freely vs. the potential for catching or transmitting this disease? How many deaths are "acceptable"? (you could also add, how many people have died from the lockdowns, due to losing their jobs, depression, or people going nuts?) Clearly the old folks should be careful, but the conclusion you draw is actually pretty arbitrary. Different European countries have had wildly differing rules for handling it, and who's to say that they are wrong?Absolutely incredible the lengths they will go to, to preserve the narrative that a seasonal virus that is of little threat to the majority, that has passed is somehow still a going concern. It wasn't even in the top 10 causes of death last month. There are only a handful of people hospitalised. But of course it's the second wave is only two weeks away...Covid-19 reporting is often sensationalist, but that's what the news does about everything from terrorist attacks to fires. It's not like it's a peculiarity of U.S. reporting or politics - countries ranging from Israel to South Korea have all treated considered this an extremely dangerous disease.
Do you have a source about the top 10 claim? From what I see, the average deaths per day is still around 800-900 per day in August, which puts it at #3 or #4. For the year, it's the #2 or #3 leading cause of death. For it to not be in the top ten, the death rate would have to be less than 130 deaths per day.
Treatment and the death rate getting better, but there's still a ton of cases. I just found out this week that my ex-mother-in-law in Houston had a fever and tested positive, which made my son very worried for his grandmother. She seems to be recovering well, but she described it as very scary. I agree that it's not a threat to the majority, but there's millions of people at risk for it still.
(you could also add, how many people have died from the lockdowns, due to losing their jobs, depression, or people going nuts?)
Covid-19 reporting is often sensationalist, but that's what the news does about everything from terrorist attacks to fires. It's not like it's a peculiarity of U.S. reporting or politics - countries ranging from Israel to South Korea have all treated considered this an extremely dangerous disease.I'm in the UK, I'm talking about the UK, where more people died from influenza in August than covid. Our daily deaths are in the single figures lately. The uptick in "cases" isn't matched with a proportionate uptick in hospitalisations or deaths. Because the virus already killed all the most vulnerable people, and ultimately isn't all that deadly.
Do you have a source about the top 10 claim? From what I see, the average deaths per day is still around 800-900 per day in August, which puts it at #3 or #4. For the year, it's the #2 or #3 leading cause of death. For it to not be in the top ten, the death rate would have to be less than 130 deaths per day.
Treatment and the death rate getting better, but there's still a ton of cases. I just found out this week that my ex-mother-in-law in Houston had a fever and tested positive, which made my son very worried for his grandmother. She seems to be recovering well, but she described it as very scary. I agree that it's not a threat to the majority, but there's millions of people at risk for it still.
I think one of the spooky things about Covid-19 is how unpredictable it is. Still, to me, there is something that does not quite ring true when people claim that certain attitudes are "unscientific", e.g. I have seen some old folks who refuse to wear masks unless they have to, people saying things like "they don't believe in science". To me, it is actually about values rather than data. It is clearly not the black death, nor even the Spanish flu. We make potentially decisions like driving every day. How much do we value the freedom to move about and breathe freely vs. the potential for catching or transmitting this disease? How many deaths are "acceptable"? (you could also add, how many people have died from the lockdowns, due to losing their jobs, depression, or people going nuts?) Clearly the old folks should be careful, but the conclusion you draw is actually pretty arbitrary. Different European countries have had wildly differing rules for handling it, and who's to say that they are wrong?
I'll tell you what isn't acceptable: to put millions out of work (causing tens of thousands of deaths from suicides alone, never mind all the misery that flows from that level of unemployment) just to give a few thousand of the oldest and sickest people a few extra months of life.
I do not want anyone to call me a science denier which is why I personally follow the WHO recommendation to not wear a mask.There's a call for you from someone named 'Karen'... :D
The science is settled people.
Just got an email from Karan wanting to sell me 3000kg of Chloroquine Phosphate. Must have been sorted to my junk mail by accident cause seems totally legit.I do not want anyone to call me a science denier which is why I personally follow the WHO recommendation to not wear a mask.There's a call for you from someone named 'Karen'... :D
The science is settled people.
Sorry, Kiero. I missed what country you were from. Yes, after a huge peak in April, it seems like covid-19 deaths in the UK have now tapered off. Policy should be different based on what is going on in that country or area.Covid-19 reporting is often sensationalist, but that's what the news does about everything from terrorist attacks to fires. It's not like it's a peculiarity of U.S. reporting or politics - countries ranging from Israel to South Korea have all treated considered this an extremely dangerous disease.I'm in the UK, I'm talking about the UK, where more people died from influenza in August than covid. Our daily deaths are in the single figures lately. The uptick in "cases" isn't matched with a proportionate uptick in hospitalisations or deaths. Because the virus already killed all the most vulnerable people, and ultimately isn't all that deadly.
Do you have a source about the top 10 claim? From what I see, the average deaths per day is still around 800-900 per day in August, which puts it at #3 or #4.
I'll tell you what isn't acceptable: to put millions out of work (causing tens of thousands of deaths from suicides alone, never mind all the misery that flows from that level of unemployment) just to give a few thousand of the oldest and sickest people a few extra months of life.Within First World countries, economic recession does mean an uptick in suicides -- but it also means a downtick in many other causes of death, from traffic accidents to heart disease.
Lockdowns also don't seem to work. Not only are the states and countries that didn't lock down doing better economically, but the locations that lifted their lockdowns saw a drop in the transmission rate.Comparisons between different countries are always problematic - because their rates of infection and death differ due to differing populations and behavior. More crucially, whether government enacts a lockdown is not random. Countries are unlikely to institute lockdowns unless the covid-19 death rate is high. In order to compare between countries, you need to address this correlation. It's like concluding that hospitals don't make people healthy, because if you go in them, you see lots of sick and dying people -- and people outside of hospitals are less sick. But that's because people mostly go to the hospital *because* they are sick.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.20078717v1
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53664354
https://fee.org/articles/sweden-now-has-a-lower-covid-19-death-rate-than-the-us-here-s-why-it-matters/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8347635/Lockdowns-failed-alter-course-pandemic-JP-Morgan-study-claims.html
https://www.jpmorgan.com/country/US/en/research/covid-19-across-markets
Some of the effects of public policy were predictable (like the devastating effects due to the economic lockdowns or shoving sick people into nursing homes), but some of it was not. This is a very weird virus, and hasn't been behaving as expected. The drop in R0 after lockdowns were lifted, for instance. Or how death rates in Italy are correlated not with tight family groupings with multiple generations living in close proximity, as originally reported, but by the fragmentation of those tight family groupings -- the number of nursing home beds is a strong correlate. There's even some speculation that the hospitals are making the outbreak worse (though it's worth emphasizing that the latter is just speculation).It is peculiar in many ways, and I appreciate the links to actual studies. I hadn't seen the study on Italy before - but it makes sense to me that nursing homes would be particularly vulnerable.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/05/200521151904.htm
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233329
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/covids-metamorphosis-has-lockdown-made-the-virus-more-deadly
Lockdowns also don't seem to work. Not only are the states and countries that didn't lock down doing better economically, but the locations that lifted their lockdowns saw a drop in the transmission rate.
Comparisons between different countries are always problematic - because their rates of infection and death differ due to differing populations and behavior. More crucially, whether government enacts a lockdown is not random. Countries are unlikely to institute lockdowns unless the covid-19 death rate is high. In order to compare between countries, you need to address this correlation.That's true, but it's an inherent problem with the field. Once we start talking about spread in the wider population and government policy, we've moved beyond biology to the macro social sciences and collective human behavior, where it's almost impossible to run controlled experiments with controls and predictions that are made and then tested. Instead, we have to rely on historical data, and not only does knowing how it works out beforehand make predictions suspect, but cherry picking and biases mean people looking at the same events come to completely opposite conclusions (this happens all the time -- look at how many different things are blamed for causing the Great Depression, for instance), building models and theories to fit historical patterns is rarely predictive in useful ways, and there are always excuses when they fail. Nonetheless, in this time of the coronavirus, places like Sweden, Japan, Belarus and so on are the closest we'll find to a control group. I have less faith than you in controlling for all relevant factors, because that decision itself is so highly subjective and can lead to almost all the problems with historical data.
The paper from the first link does not have any discussion about the inherent correlation of lockdowns and death rate. Further, it has a single author whose field is oceanography. It has not yet been peer reviewed. I don't inherently dismiss it, but I don't think it should be taken as the final word. The lack of any approach to the systematics seems like a major missing piece.
I think Sweden's approach isn't crazy and I can understand advocating for it - but I think there are arguments both ways, which come down to rationally comparing evidence. Sweden has still had a huge economic recession, and it has a higher infection and death rate than it's neighboring countries Norway and Finland. Comparing it to Italy and Spain is more like apples and oranges.
Now, if you wanted to make an economic claim, these were mostly OK sources (the last 3 more than the first 2). If you wanted to make claims about the transmissible curb and the lockdowns, these sources seem weak, at best.I never said it was the final word, I just provided a source. I find it entertaining how many people with disparate backgrounds are publishing papers on sars2 -- which isn't completely inappropriate. A lot of researchers with medical backgrounds lack the statistical skills needed for these kinds of analyses, and we've been overvaluing people with M.D.s next to their names and undervaluing people with other skills. A virologist is an expert on diseases, but a masters or Ph.D. in some statistical field is often better at this kind of analysis, especially if it's combined with epidemiology. The area where it really became criminal, though, is economics. The public health lead in one state -- who has zero background in economics and never even worked in the private sector in her life -- kept talking about how the pandemic would affects the economy, how the lockdowns and other measures they took were to "save the economy", and how not locking down would be so much worse. Her statements were taken as the Word of Science!, when she literally has less background in the area than the average person on the street.
I don't understand the last comment. From my point of view, you're the one who has strong faith in your sources. I'm claiming that I don't have a problem with Sweden's approach, but also don't have a problem with Norway's approach -- because I think there is room for uncertainty within the range of research results.Comparisons between different countries are always problematic - because their rates of infection and death differ due to differing populations and behavior. More crucially, whether government enacts a lockdown is not random. Countries are unlikely to institute lockdowns unless the covid-19 death rate is high. In order to compare between countries, you need to address this correlation.That's true, but it's an inherent problem with the field. Once we start talking about spread in the wider population and government policy, we've moved beyond biology to the macro social sciences and collective human behavior, where it's almost impossible to run controlled experiments with controls and predictions that are made and then tested. Instead, we have to rely on historical data, and not only does knowing how it works out beforehand make predictions suspect, but cherry picking and biases mean people looking at the same events come to completely opposite conclusions (this happens all the time -- look at how many different things are blamed for causing the Great Depression, for instance), building models and theories to fit historical patterns is rarely predictive in useful ways, and there are always excuses when they fail. Nonetheless, in this time of the coronavirus, places like Sweden, Japan, Belarus and so on are the closest we'll find to a control group. I have less faith than you in controlling for all relevant factors, because that decision itself is so highly subjective and can lead to almost all the problems with historical data.
It also reflects more generally on the state of the science around COVID-19. Have you seen the retractions at the Lancet and the NEJM? I provided links many pages back on how weak most of the research on the topic has been, when measured against the standards of evidence-based medicine. Many highly influential studies that had a great impact on public policy were based on a tiny number of completely non-representative cases. Much of this is inevitable when it comes to a new disease, because massive randomized double-blind studies require a huge investment in time, money, and human resources. But we needed better messaging, that explains to the public not just what the latest study said, but the degree of certainty. Which is of course anathema to politicians, who want to be able to present clear easy solutions.While politicians generally suck -- I think it is reasonable to speak in clear simple terms when trying to explain things to the general public. The details should be available and up for debate among those more deeply involved, but having a clear and simple front-line message is a usual part of leadership. (i.e. Politicians suck, but using clear and simple language to communicate to the public isn't one of the main reasons they suck.) When government agencies like The Fed equivocate and give hedging answers emphasizing error bars, it can hurt consumer and citizen confidence, which can have negative effects on its own.
A disease is a public health issue, but lockdowns are an economic issue, so we should be hearing from both types of experts. But there's never been an economics Fauci -- and no, the Secretary of the Treasury doesn't count. He's an executive who came up through IT; he has no real economics training at all. The government and the news have almost entirely focused on public health officials, and taken their statements on economic matters as holy writ, which is nonsense. It's sheer ignorance on display when people like Cuomo proclaim that it's about saving lives, and that any life lost is too much, while they completely ignore all the people who will die or suffer serious effects because of the shutdowns. I mentioned earlier in the thread the UN report stating that hundreds of thousands of children were expected to die due to the lockdowns, (https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/policy_brief_on_covid_impact_on_children_16_april_2020.pdf) to the report from Well Being Trust that they expected as many as 75,000 suicides attributable to the disease in the US alone, (https://wellbeingtrust.org/areas-of-focus/policy-and-advocacy/reports/projected-deaths-of-despair-during-covid-19/) not to mention all the news coverage from places like India or Mexico on the horrendous effect the shutdowns have been having on the extremely poor.I'm not an economist and so I'm not taking a definite position on the economic effects, but some things stand out to me. First of all, many people attribute all of the economic downturn to the lockdowns, which is nonsensical. As one analysis puts it, "The evidence suggests that the labour markets of all countries were severely hit by the pandemic, but Sweden performed slightly better than its neighbours."
The whole purpose of that argument is to suppress the number of cases at any one time, in order not to overwhelm the hospital system, not to reduce the overall number of cases. In other words, Sweden front-loaded their deaths, but the rest of the world is catching up, and will eventually reach comparable numbers. Just at a much higher economic cost.Here you're making a definite prediction - that you know for sure how the rest of the world will compare with Sweden, while previously you had been claiming that there is not great data on covid-19 - and furthermore claimed that *I* was the one with faith in my sources.
A few interesting links
https://accadandkoka.com/episodes/episode126/ non-MD epidemiologist (on kidney disease) on covid data
https://accadandkoka.com/captivate-podcast/episode140/ it's a minority view, but she makes a strong argument that we've reached herd immunity
https://accadandkoka.com/captivate-podcast/episode143-2/ difficulties with observational trials (gets a bit abstruse)
https://accadandkoka.com/captivate-podcast/episode131/ NJEM/Lancetgate
https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/#latest tries to summarize the latest news/science (new source to me, familiar with some of the stuff like cross-immunity, but others I'm not so sure about -- links are great, tho)
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31035-7/fulltext#%20 hard lockdowns don't protect the vulnerable
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/499394-the-covid-19-shutdown-will-cost-americans-millions-of-years-of-life one of the few attempts at an economic cost/benefit analysis of the shutdowns
https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/insight/2020/economic-impact/ estimate of economic damage
https://bfi.uchicago.edu/working-paper/covid-19-is-also-a-reallocation-shock/ 32-42% of jobs lost are permanently gone
https://bfi.uchicago.edu/working-paper/how-are-small-businesses-adjusting-to-covid-19-early-evidence-from-a-survey/ small businesses dying
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2677445 mortality increases based on the economic shock
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/5/2/21241261/coronavirus-modeling-us-deaths-ihme-pandemic the models suck
This is why I find it frustrating talking to you. I never said anything like that. Look at the context -- you were talking about controlling for various factors when comparing data between countries. My entire paragraph is addressing that point, and the final sentence is my conclusion that I don't have as much faith as you do that they can control for those factors in a useful way. It requires some bizarre contortion to read a statement where I'm expressing uncertainty and jump to the conclusion that it's an expression of blind faith.I don't understand the last comment. From my point of view, you're the one who has strong faith in your sources. I'm claiming that I don't have a problem with Sweden's approach, but also don't have a problem with Norway's approach -- because I think there is room for uncertainty within the range of research results.Comparisons between different countries are always problematic - because their rates of infection and death differ due to differing populations and behavior. More crucially, whether government enacts a lockdown is not random. Countries are unlikely to institute lockdowns unless the covid-19 death rate is high. In order to compare between countries, you need to address this correlation.That's true, but it's an inherent problem with the field. Once we start talking about spread in the wider population and government policy, we've moved beyond biology to the macro social sciences and collective human behavior, where it's almost impossible to run controlled experiments with controls and predictions that are made and then tested. Instead, we have to rely on historical data, and not only does knowing how it works out beforehand make predictions suspect, but cherry picking and biases mean people looking at the same events come to completely opposite conclusions (this happens all the time -- look at how many different things are blamed for causing the Great Depression, for instance), building models and theories to fit historical patterns is rarely predictive in useful ways, and there are always excuses when they fail. Nonetheless, in this time of the coronavirus, places like Sweden, Japan, Belarus and so on are the closest we'll find to a control group. I have less faith than you in controlling for all relevant factors, because that decision itself is so highly subjective and can lead to almost all the problems with historical data.
Your position seems that you know for sure that the lockdowns don't work and do not save lives, and no country should use a lockdown.Nope. My position is that lockdowns may save lives (in the short term, at least -- see the flatten the curve discussion) -- but lockdowns also cost lives. We need to stop counting lives lost in hospital beds, while ignoring all the deaths of despair and the shortened lifespans caused by the economic shutdown.
While politicians generally suck -- I think it is reasonable to speak in clear simple terms when trying to explain things to the general public. The details should be available and up for debate among those more deeply involved, but having a clear and simple front-line message is a usual part of leadership. (i.e. Politicians suck, but using clear and simple language to communicate to the public isn't one of the main reasons they suck.) When government agencies like The Fed equivocate and give hedging answers emphasizing error bars, it can hurt consumer and citizen confidence, which can have negative effects on its own.I disagree completely. "Preventing panic" is used all the time as an excuse to lie to the public. I find that despicable from a moral standpoint, but also from a practical one. Once you start lying to the public (and it is lying when you pretend to have simple answers when they don't exist), you lose all public trust, which defeats the entire purpose of these kind of agencies.
I'm not an economist and so I'm not taking a definite position on the economic effects, but some things stand out to me. First of all, many people attribute all of the economic downturn to the lockdowns, which is nonsensical.I never made that argument. I made the opposite, in fact, earlier in this very post.
1) I have not read the full Well Being Trust paper yet - but 75,000 American suicides due to covid seems unbelievable, given that there are less than 50,000 suicides per year in the U.S.You should probably adjust your expectations. The British Journal of Psychiatry estimates there were 10,000 suicides related to the 2008 recession over a span of 3 years, which was a far milder from a psychological standpoint because it didn't force a highly social mammal into lengthy social isolation. The WBT paper is also both broader and narrower in scope (tries to account for all related deaths, but country-specific). I'll try to dig it up, but I don't think that was the source I was looking for. I think I originally read a comparable estimate (70K? 90K?) from another organization.
3) The U.N. report on children in Third World countries is bleak - but it also isn't factually contradictory to claims of saving lives within New York when it was having a spike in covid-19 deaths. I would be interested in seeing strategies about how to save many of those children. I suspect one of those would involve sending more food aid to Third World countries.Food aid to foreign countries mostly goes to prop up local regimes, and little reaches the people who need it. People who talk about how we just need X dollars to end global poverty ignore that we've spent many times that amount and it never worked.
No, no, and no. Again, you're ignoring the context. I'm not making a prediction, of any sort. I'm explaining the logic behind the "flatten curve" argument.... considered the lockdowns to be a short-term, temporary measures to flatten the curve. The whole purpose of that argument is to suppress the number of cases at any one time, in order not to overwhelm the hospital system, not to reduce the overall number of cases. In other words, Sweden front-loaded their deaths, but the rest of the world is catching up, and will eventually reach comparable numbers. Just at a much higher economic cost.Here you're making a definite prediction - that you know for sure how the rest of the world will compare with Sweden, while previously you had been claiming that there is not great data on covid-19 - and furthermore claimed that *I* was the one with faith in my sources.
Your position seems that you know for sure that the lockdowns don't work and do not save lives, and no country should use a lockdown.Nope. My position is that lockdowns may save lives (in the short term, at least -- see the flatten the curve discussion) -- but lockdowns also cost lives. We need to stop counting lives lost in hospital beds, while ignoring all the deaths of despair and the shortened lifespans caused by the economic shutdown.
And it's become very clear, based on an overwhelming amount of evidence, that the shutdowns cost more lives than they save.You say "nope" - but this is exactly what I meant. You claim to know for certain about the lives saved and cost from the lockdowns - that the sum effect of the lockdowns is "very clear". To you, the science is settled and that there is no question.
You say "nope" - but this is exactly what I meant. You claim to know for certain about the lives saved and cost from the lockdowns - that the sum effect of the lockdowns is "very clear". To you, the science is settled and that there is no question.No again. Look, words matter. Certain means indisputable. I don't think any of this beyond dispute. I don't think the science is settled (incidentally, that's a very icky phrase). Those are your words, and I completely reject them. Science is based on evidence, not on inviolate beliefs. I think there's a lot of evidence against the lockdowns, especially given the weight of the burden of proof, but that doesn't translate into absolute surety. Taking what I say, and replacing the words with words with completely different meanings, completely transforms the meaning.
This is in contrast to our seeming agreement elsewhere that the disease is very new, and there is a lot of uncertainty about it. Furthermore, I don't think that the economic life cost is cut-and-dried either. There's considerable evidence that mortality is reduced in economic recession, which is lives *saved* rather than lives *lost*. I'll respond in more detail later, but I think this is the root of our clash.
To adapt Rumsfield's construction, the number of unknown unknowns have diminished.
Not directly, but if we have a poor grasp on something, and then we start getting a handle on it, then by inference we can assume what we don't know has decreased.To adapt Rumsfield's construction, the number of unknown unknowns have diminished.
That seems like it would be a hard thing to measure.
OK, but you have nothing to really use for measuring whether you now know enough for it to matter at all. If you increase your understanding by 1000% it sounds great...until you later discover you only started at less than 0.0001% understanding...and later still find out that figure was being extremely generous.Not directly, but if we have a poor grasp on something, and then we start getting a handle on it, then by inference we can assume what we don't know has decreased.To adapt Rumsfield's construction, the number of unknown unknowns have diminished.
That seems like it would be a hard thing to measure.
That's true in the abstract, but this is a disease. We have some knowledge of how they operate, so there's a framework in place we can use to assess what we know and don't know. It probably won't suddenly grow to kaiju size and stomp Tokyo, after all.OK, but you have nothing to really use for measuring whether you now know enough for it to matter at all. If you increase your understanding by 1000% it sounds great...until you later discover you only started at less than 0.0001% understanding...and later still find out that figure was being extremely generous.Not directly, but if we have a poor grasp on something, and then we start getting a handle on it, then by inference we can assume what we don't know has decreased.To adapt Rumsfield's construction, the number of unknown unknowns have diminished.
That seems like it would be a hard thing to measure.
There's considerable evidence that mortality is reduced in economic recession, which is lives *saved* rather than lives *lost*.If this is true, we should endeavour to be permanently in recession. Good luck taking that as your election platform :)
If this is true, we should endeavour to be permanently in recession. Good luck taking that as your election platform :)
Of course, there's also quality of life...
Yep. jhkim is absolutely right that the overall deaths drop during a recession -- but nobody likes recessions. Which really highlights how we make decisions. We take risks every day, like driving to the restaurant and possibly getting in a car crash, instead of ordering delivery, because we value a good, interesting life with many experiences more than being safe shut-ins. So the argument that we need to take every measure possible to eliminate any possibility of death just isn't a choice real humans would ever make on their own.There's considerable evidence that mortality is reduced in economic recession, which is lives *saved* rather than lives *lost*.If this is true, we should endeavour to be permanently in recession. Good luck taking that as your election platform :)
Of course, there's also quality of life...
We could get lucky and the increased interest in alternative schooling may break the union's back.There's been a big surge in interest in home schooling. I don't have any direct experience, but from what I've heard, the tools for home schooling have really improved in the last few years. The resources and support available has gotten a lot better, so it's not as daunting as it once was.
People are starting to realize how garbage the public education system has become thanks to online schooling this year.
It may be the one positive thing to come out of the WuFlu lockdown...
If this is true, we should endeavour to be permanently in recession. Good luck taking that as your election platform :)
Of course, there's also quality of life...
You are talking about leftists. They want everyone to have equal quality of life...equally poor and miserable.
We could get lucky and the increased interest in alternative schooling may break the union's back.There's been a big surge in interest in home schooling. I don't have any direct experience, but from what I've heard, the tools for home schooling have really improved in the last few years. The resources and support available has gotten a lot better, so it's not as daunting as it once was.
People are starting to realize how garbage the public education system has become thanks to online schooling this year.
It may be the one positive thing to come out of the WuFlu lockdown...
I don't recall where I heard it, but somewhere I saw someone claim that while capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth, socialism/communism is the equal distribution of poverty.It's a quote widely attributed to Winston Churchill.
A lot of the problem stems from the question of labor and its worth. Labor in itself has no intrinsic value; any value it possesses is derived from the results of said labor.That's one of the root problems with socialism: It's based on the labor theory of value. Which is part of classical economics -- Adam Smith used it in The Wealth of Nations. But it was also the biggest failure of classical economists. None of their theories could explain why diamonds, which are fundamentally useless trinkets, are worth more than water, which is necessary to life. More generally, they couldn't explain why some things cost more than others, so they fell back on the idea that it was based on the amount of work it took to bring those things to market. Which is clearly wrong, because not only are workers with certain skills valued more than workers with other skills, but digging holes and then filling them again is work, but completely pointless (yes, I'm making a dig at Keynes).
Yeah, but I think you got the particulars right. I've been working on reading Thomas Sowell's stuff, so some of this is pretty familiar.A lot of the problem stems from the question of labor and its worth. Labor in itself has no intrinsic value; any value it possesses is derived from the results of said labor.That's one of the root problems with socialism: It's based on the labor theory of value. Which is part of classical economics -- Adam Smith used it in The Wealth of Nations. But it was also the biggest failure of classical economists. None of their theories could explain why diamonds, which are fundamentally useless trinkets, are worth more than water, which is necessary to life. More generally, they couldn't explain why some things cost more than others, so they fell back on the idea that it was based on the amount of work it took to bring those things to market. Which is clearly wrong, because not only are workers with certain skills valued more than workers with other skills, but digging holes and then filling them again is work, but completely pointless (yes, I'm making a dig at Keynes).
More than that, accounting for different values of work, and even capital, doesn't really explain prices. That had to wait until the marginal revolution in the late 19th century, when they figured out prices aren't based on labor or capital, but on what the next person who buys something is willing to pay. If that theoretical person has plenty of water, then they're going to put a very low value on buying even more water. OTOH, buying diamonds, even at an exorbitant price, might start looking attractive, since their basic needs are already met. (Diamonds are also scarce, so supply & demand.) This is what economists mean when they talk about marginal costs, or the costs on the margin -- it's the price a person who hasn't bought something yet, but is next in line if the prices drop, is willing to pay.
This is also why a lot of calculations that just sum up values don't work in the real world. If the current price for something is $1 and you sold 1,000 in the last year, that doesn't mean 10,000 of the things are worth $10,000. Because the people who bought the 1,000 last year were the 1,000 people who valued it at $1 or more. If someone else out there was willing to pay $1 for it, you would have sold 1,001. The 1,001th person might be interested in the product, just not enough to spend $1. So to get 10,000 people to buy it, you need to lower the price. Therefore the value of 10,000 is not 10,000 times the current price. And to bring it back to labor, wages are just another price. They're set based on a worker's marginal value to the next employer.
The marginal revolution is the foundation of literally every modern school of economics, except socialism.
And for no particular reason, I segued into a basic economics lesson....
We could get lucky and the increased interest in alternative schooling may break the union's back.There's been a big surge in interest in home schooling. I don't have any direct experience, but from what I've heard, the tools for home schooling have really improved in the last few years. The resources and support available has gotten a lot better, so it's not as daunting as it once was.
People are starting to realize how garbage the public education system has become thanks to online schooling this year.
It may be the one positive thing to come out of the WuFlu lockdown...
And for no particular reason, I segued into a basic economics lesson....
Yeah, but I think you got the particulars right. I've been working on reading Thomas Sowell's stuff, so some of this is pretty familiar.Sowell's Basic Economics is a good starting point for anyone interesting in economics. Or Henry Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson. Those are probably the two easiest entry points for a general audience.
Another angle to consider for labor is how much training and skill it requires. Artificially overpricing labor (via minimum wage) leads to such fun things as hiring illegals to pay under the table or the exploration of new systems such as automated cashiers. I am astonished we haven't had a resurgence of automats, to be honest.
The WHO estimates the seasonal death rate from the flu is ~1%.You added a decimal point. The case fatality rate for seasonal influenza is about 0.1%, but that's only based on the documented cases. The actual infection fatality rate is estimated at half to quarter that.
The WHO is now estimating that 760 million world-wide have been infected with the Wuhan virus.
IF that is accurate and the number of confirmed deaths (~1 million) is accurate, then the fatality rate is only 0.13%.
That makes the mortality rate 3%. That's actually very high for a rabidly infectious disease where we have therapeutics and basic treatments. Bubonic plague's mortality rate, when treated, is between 1% and 10%. (Now, when treated, COVID's rate is probably significantly lower than 3%, but I don't have that data easily on hand.)That's way too high. Here's a source that collates the estimated infection fatality rates of COVID-19 from numerous studies in various countries:
The WHO is now estimating that 760 million world-wide have been infected with the Wuhan virus.
IF that is accurate and the number of confirmed deaths (~1 million) is accurate, then the fatality rate is only 0.13%.
It's not. The WHO says you are off by double and then an order of magnitude: there are around 35 million cases, not 760 million. You can check their dashboard.
WHO: 10% of world’s people may have been infected with virus (https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-archive-united-nations-54a3a5869c9ae4ee623497691e796083)
All I can say is look at the dashboard, since DocJones listed the WHO as his source. (https://covid19.who.int/ (https://covid19.who.int/))You're making a mistake. You're confusing the number of confirmed cases with the total number of cases. The number you're deriving is the case fatality rate (CFR), not the infection fatality rate (IFR). The IFR is the real death rate, but takes population-wide tests to estimate. The CFR is available earlier, but it's not a very useful number. Particularly for a disease with a large number of asymptomatic cases, and where the symptoms can be very mild and are hard to distinguish from other diseases.
Confirmed Cases: 35,347,404
Deaths: 1,039,406
That's about 3%. I make no claim to that being right or wrong, just that's what the raw math is.
There's been a big surge in interest in home schooling. I don't have any direct experience, but from what I've heard, the tools for home schooling have really improved in the last few years.
Collectives, comrade?There's been a big surge in interest in home schooling. I don't have any direct experience, but from what I've heard, the tools for home schooling have really improved in the last few years.
This is correct. Home schooling is NEVER going to be easy. To truly succeed (doubly so if the child has special needs), it requires active and consistent parent involvement, parent discipline of themselves and their children and continuous research by the parent into the learning process.
Beyond the obvious tools like online classes and educational videos, the most interesting and powerful "new" tool is local homeschooling parents uniting in collectives where they share best practices, volunteer tutoring using their prime skills and group activities and field trips. My friend's son is in a "homeschool" soccer league! They play against other homeschool leagues and charter schools.
As much as I loathe social media, I must admit it's been a positive for this growth in homeschool collectives might not have happened without Farcebook.
Collectives, comrade?
One of the most functional and stable forms of collective is purely voluntary.
Collectives, comrade?
Is there some sort of problem with 'voluntary' collectives?? Sounds like freedom of association to me.
There's been a big surge in interest in home schooling. I don't have any direct experience, but from what I've heard, the tools for home schooling have really improved in the last few years.
This is correct. Home schooling is NEVER going to be easy. To truly succeed (doubly so if the child has special needs), it requires active and consistent parent involvement, parent discipline of themselves and their children and continuous research by the parent into the learning process.
Beyond the obvious tools like online classes and educational videos, the most interesting and powerful "new" tool is local homeschooling parents uniting in collectives where they share best practices, volunteer tutoring using their prime skills and group activities and field trips. My friend's son is in a "homeschool" soccer league! They play against other homeschool leagues and charter schools.
As much as I loathe social media, I must admit it's been a positive for this growth in homeschool collectives might not have happened without Farcebook.
One of the most functional and stable forms of collective is purely voluntary.
Collectives, comrade?
Is there some sort of problem with 'voluntary' collectives?? Sounds like freedom of association to me.
Of course, most leftists get their panties in a twist when you point out it's a monastery or convent.
Useful education of any kind is not easy. Home schooling is not unique in that respect. There always questions scale with education. Student/Teacher ratios are barely starting that discussion. Obviously, home schooling has a ceiling for scale that means those issues are always there.
However, there are also problems with scale on the other end. There are problems with institutionalized anything. Obviously, there are questions of motivations for all involved. Thus there are times when home schooling is less trouble than the other available alternatives. You can "buy back" a lot of lost ground from the difficulties of home schooling simply from the fact that home schooling means the kids typically get more sleep and have less of their time wasted during the day.
Brad,
I had two kids that went home school K-12. If you ever want to discuss anything about it in particular, feel free to PM. Glad to hear it is working out great for you.
The Lockdowns and limited retail hours in Ohio contributed to the permanent shutdown and closing of the store where I have worked for 17 years.
No more Gaming store in the nearby mall for me to go work in.
-Edmund C
Has anyone seen the Great Barrington Declaration from a few days ago?
https://gbdeclaration.org/
The epidemologists (not bureaucrats like Fauci) saying all along we should have not done the lockdowns. Just like Sweden, Belarus, and now Netherlands are doing.
Further protections for the oldest with this disease was the sensible path.
I don't know all the motivations or the weightings of those in our insane mainstream media but this has to be the biggest and most successful hysteria in world history.
I just don't understand what they're afraid of.
I just don't understand what they're afraid of.That's the way most of the world felt on in September 2001. In response to an attack killing thousands, the West started wars which have since killed a couple of million people - and are still going 19 years later. 3,000 dead led to wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Mali, Syria, and so on and so forth. So you might expect 225,000 dead from a virus has some response - well, from some parts it has an hysterical overreaction, and from other parts it has no reaction at all.
I just don't understand what they're afraid of.That's the way most of the world felt on in September 2001. In response to an attack killing thousands, the West started wars which have since killed a couple of million people - and are still going 19 years later. 3,000 dead led to wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Mali, Syria, and so on and so forth. So you might expect 225,000 dead from a virus has some response - well, from some parts it has an hysterical overreaction, and from other parts it has no reaction at all.
The nature of Western government is that it has only two possible states: apathy and panic.
Drugs, satanic child abuse, drugs again, terrorism, pandemic, whatever - every decade or so there's a moral panic about something or other, and the government brings in a bunch of new laws and imprisons or kills a bunch of people, mostly for no real reason.
The nature of Western government is that it has only two possible states: apathy and panic.
My mom's been homeschooling since the '80s, and I grew up in these sorts of collectives or whatever with a sports group and various weekly classes with other homeschool kids back in the early 2000s. Perhaps these practices are new to many areas in the US, but not out here in my part of California at least. I was also involved in a few different charter schools in the area too, mainly just for the financial help with schoolbooks and supplies during high-school, which I completed by taking classes for double-credit at a local community college.There's been a big surge in interest in home schooling. I don't have any direct experience, but from what I've heard, the tools for home schooling have really improved in the last few years.
This is correct. Home schooling is NEVER going to be easy. To truly succeed (doubly so if the child has special needs), it requires active and consistent parent involvement, parent discipline of themselves and their children and continuous research by the parent into the learning process.
Beyond the obvious tools like online classes and educational videos, the most interesting and powerful "new" tool is local homeschooling parents uniting in collectives where they share best practices, volunteer tutoring using their prime skills and group activities and field trips. My friend's son is in a "homeschool" soccer league! They play against other homeschool leagues and charter schools.
As much as I loathe social media, I must admit it's been a positive for this growth in homeschool collectives might not have happened without Farcebook.
Q: Who starts and fuels the panic?I just don't understand what they're afraid of.That's the way most of the world felt on in September 2001. In response to an attack killing thousands, the West started wars which have since killed a couple of million people - and are still going 19 years later. 3,000 dead led to wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Mali, Syria, and so on and so forth. So you might expect 225,000 dead from a virus has some response - well, from some parts it has an hysterical overreaction, and from other parts it has no reaction at all.
The nature of Western government is that it has only two possible states: apathy and panic.
Drugs, satanic child abuse, drugs again, terrorism, pandemic, whatever - every decade or so there's a moral panic about something or other, and the government brings in a bunch of new laws and imprisons or kills a bunch of people, mostly for no real reason.
I normally don't engage in heated political debates while creating a product, etc, but honestly disliked the fact I was forced to vote on paper because there was no other option. What's the difference between touching a keypad to checkout at a grocery store, or standing in line at the pet store!? The answer is, none. I see the news outlets playing with numbers that don't exist in order to favor Biden, and then there's the whole talk of taking weeks or months to find out who really won and I don't think that's how things should go.How about a thumb drive that magically delivers 300,000 votes to Biden in Michigan and Wisconsin?
I normally don't engage in heated political debates while creating a product, etc, but honestly disliked the fact I was forced to vote on paper because there was no other option. What's the difference between touching a keypad to checkout at a grocery store, or standing in line at the pet store!? The answer is, none. I see the news outlets playing with numbers that don't exist in order to favor Biden, and then there's the whole talk of taking weeks or months to find out who really won and I don't think that's how things should go.
Heil Fauci!!!
“I was talking with my U.K. colleagues who are saying the U.K. is similar to where we are now, because each of our countries have that independent spirit,” he said on stage. “I can understand that, but now is the time to do what you’re told.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/12/fauci-says-us-has-independent-spirit-but-now-is-the-time-to-do-what-youre-told.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/12/fauci-says-us-has-independent-spirit-but-now-is-the-time-to-do-what-youre-told.html)
Hmm...how about HELL FUCKING NO, you dickless little prick?
And this my friends is the cultural divide. Those who kneel vs. those who stand.
Heil Fauci!!!
“I was talking with my U.K. colleagues who are saying the U.K. is similar to where we are now, because each of our countries have that independent spirit,” he said on stage. “I can understand that, but now is the time to do what you’re told.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/12/fauci-says-us-has-independent-spirit-but-now-is-the-time-to-do-what-youre-told.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/12/fauci-says-us-has-independent-spirit-but-now-is-the-time-to-do-what-youre-told.html)
Hmm...how about HELL FUCKING NO, you dickless little prick?
And this my friends is the cultural divide. Those who kneel vs. those who stand.
Greetings!
That's right, my friend! So many people want to be slaves. They feel safe and secure on their knees, begging. They enjoy being directed, and told what to do in every aspect of life. Socialism is for people that are essentially cattle. They are fat, bloated, and lazy. They do not want to work or think. They want to be taken care of by the government. Schooling, medical care, housing, food, a monthly check. They need someone else to make decisions for them. They are weak minded, and easily manipulated by emotions and controlled. Give them food, let them fuck and breed, and they are content, like cattle. Look at how hive-minded they are, and eager they embrace groupthink. They even chant the nonsense, over and over, like a spiritual mantra. These people don't want to think for themselves. They don't want to take responsibility for themselves--that's why they embrace a victim mentality, for everything in their lives, where everything terrible or pathetic in their life is someone else's fault--never the result of their own hedonism, their own selfishness and stupidity, their own lack of discipline, common sense, and respect for others, their own poor judgment and poor choices.
Deep down, they know they are weak, and they yearn to serve a master.
Just look at the 70 million or more people that voted for Biden and Kamala.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
This is probably too much of a false-information echo chamber to penetrate anyone's consciousness, but most of the points being made about the low fatality rates of Covid-19 have been clearly and repeatedly debunked as results of false positive rates on tests, fatality or serum positive test rates from studies that were too small to yield meaningful results, over estimates of asymptomatic cases because people were not followed long enough to see them get sick. Add in a healthy dose of lies and assumptions.That's a mix of misleading and false information. You base a lot of your conclusions on the case fatality rate (CFR), which is defined as the number of deaths over the number of positive tests. That's not a very useful number because it is highly dependent on the number of tests performed, their sensitivity, and who is being tested. If those factors are stable (within a fairly uniform region where the other variables don't change very much), the CFR can be used as indicator for whether the disease is trending up or down. But comparing CFRs across regions or when the number of tests or other factors are changing is pretty useless, and it says little about how dangerous the disease really is it. The reason the CFR was cited at lot at the start of the pandemic is because it's easily calculated, not because it's a good number.
The reality is that the case fatality rate (based on confirmed tests) averages close to 2 % (varying between about 1 and 5 %) at all times and places where it has been well documented in a big and well tested population. This is true in all of the heavily tested countries with basically modern health care systems in the US, Europe, east Asia, South America, etc. Obviously the true case fatality rate is lower than this because it doesn't account for people who never receive a test. But for much of the well documented period testing has been widespread, positivity rates very low, and antibody assays on big populations consistently fail to support the narrative that big chunks of the population have already had the disease without getting diagnosed. The real multiple of people who have had the disease is something like a factor of a few.
The relationship of case fatality rate to age is widely recognized, but is not nearly as dramatic as people usually like to quote in their anti-mask tirades. Yes, 90 year olds have enormously greater true case fatality rate than 10 year olds. But most of the adult population has significant risk of death. If you are 50 or so, your case fatality rate is closely similar to the overall population average (so, of order 1 %).
The rates of signifiant morbidity (really long lasting impairment) are something like 10x or more case fatality rates.
Add this all up, and it is obvious why the economy is not going to just spring back into mid 2019 form when the world overlords from the UN stop oppressing the sheeple (or however you like to present absurd conspiracy theories). People don't think a ~ 2 % chance of death and ~20 % chance of serious long term health problems is worth flying to some stupid business conference where nothing much will happen anyway. Most of the restrictions on movement , vacations, eating at restaurants, etc. are a mix of semi-enforced rules and a lot of voluntary restrictions. If you want to get everyone back in their seats at Denny's or wandering around Disney World again, you need to reduce the risks down to the levels most people find acceptable. Like has been done in Korea, New Zealand, Australia, and a number of other places.
You essentially wrote a withering 1000 word, 10 link essay to say I was exactly correct about the true fatality rate (a factor of a few less than ~2 %), recapitulating all of the logic of an argument I made (but of course in a way that made it sound like I hadn't said it).You explicitly said it has a 2% death rate in your last paragraph, which is flat-out wrong. In your first paragraph you did mention the true rate was lower, but didn't quantify it, and put emphasis on the 2% (1-5%) numbers, which was at best misleading.
Your description of the age distribution issue is also consistent with what I said, though obviously you meant to make a different rhetorical point. Nothing you presented disagrees with the statement I made - that if you are mid-to-late middle age (~50) your case fatality rate (and by extension likely also your infection fatality rate) is on the order of the average value across the population. If you are truly elderly it is 10x higher or worse and if you are under 25 or so it is effectively zero. But if you are near the age I said than it is near the value I stated.
Heil Fauci!!!
“I was talking with my U.K. colleagues who are saying the U.K. is similar to where we are now, because each of our countries have that independent spirit,” he said on stage. “I can understand that, but now is the time to do what you’re told.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/12/fauci-says-us-has-independent-spirit-but-now-is-the-time-to-do-what-youre-told.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/12/fauci-says-us-has-independent-spirit-but-now-is-the-time-to-do-what-youre-told.html)
Hmm...how about HELL FUCKING NO, you dickless little prick?
And this my friends is the cultural divide. Those who kneel vs. those who stand.
Greetings!
That's right, my friend! So many people want to be slaves. They feel safe and secure on their knees, begging. They enjoy being directed, and told what to do in every aspect of life. Socialism is for people that are essentially cattle. They are fat, bloated, and lazy. They do not want to work or think. They want to be taken care of by the government. Schooling, medical care, housing, food, a monthly check. They need someone else to make decisions for them. They are weak minded, and easily manipulated by emotions and controlled. Give them food, let them fuck and breed, and they are content, like cattle. Look at how hive-minded they are, and eager they embrace groupthink. They even chant the nonsense, over and over, like a spiritual mantra. These people don't want to think for themselves. They don't want to take responsibility for themselves--that's why they embrace a victim mentality, for everything in their lives, where everything terrible or pathetic in their life is someone else's fault--never the result of their own hedonism, their own selfishness and stupidity, their own lack of discipline, common sense, and respect for others, their own poor judgment and poor choices.
Deep down, they know they are weak, and they yearn to serve a master.
Just look at the 70 million or more people that voted for Biden and Kamala.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Agreed, with one exception.
Biden/Harris did not get 70 million or so votes. An honest audit of the election would/will show that they got 1/3 of that, at best.
Break it down: You know you can't disagree with my statement that the case fatality rate is in the low per cent range because the data are irrefutable. And you know I said that the true infection fatality rate must be a factor of several lower (it is not well enough known to pin down but clearly somewhere in the range of a few, so it isn't worth arguing over whether the right factor is 2 or 5 or 7). And of course you realize that something like 1-2 % divided by a few is indistinguishable from your preferred number of 0.3 %. So, there is nothing there we disagree about.I broke it down. You claimed the death rate was 2% in one place, which is completely and utterly wrong. Your other number is approximately correct (0.1-0.5% is typical), but it places the emphasis on a number ten times as large, so it's terribly misleading.
It is completely possible that the case fatality rate for 50-somethings is 1-2 % AND that 90 % of fatalities happen in people over 70. These are not incompatible facts.Even from a pure mathematical perspective, you'd need really extreme outliers for the average to be below the age of 90% of the cases. And that's simply not the case, given even a cursory understanding of how population groups are distributed.
Regarding the serum antibody tests, you seem to be agreeing that they have generally low results but there are various anecdotal reasons to hope that we are close to herd immunity. I don't know what countries you are looking at, but I live in one (the US) that is in the midst of a widespread exponential rise in infections that couldn't happen if we were close to herd immunity. And much of western Europe is in a similar boat (though a couple weeks further along). How do you explain the explosion of new cases and rapid rate of rise of new cases in places that have been extensively tested for months?No, none of this is based on anecdotes. It's based on scientific studies that indicate that 20-50% of the people who report anosmia do not test positive for COVID-19 antibodies. Since that's a rare symptom, and is the single strongest indicator that someone has SARS2, that strongly supports the idea that the antibody tests are catching half, or likely considerably less, the people who have already been affected. This is easily explained, because the people with mild or no symptoms neutralize the disease with muscosal (IgA) antibodies, and may not develop enough IgG antibodies to be detected by the seurological tests, or the counts may drop below that threshold in a few weeks. But since these people have still developed T-cells capable of creating those antibodies, they still have an immune system defense, despite the negative tests.
Here are three absolute truths to remember by heart.The content of this post is disputed.
Episan didn't kill himself.
Covid 19 was blown way out of in portion to what it really was.
Biden had to cheat to win.
Agreed, with one exception.Thank you, my friend! Yes, I also believe that the level of fraud in this election has been absolutely shameful! I can't imagine how someone who is ready for the retirement home and who got beat soundly in the debates could ever be considered a serious candidate. Furthermore, Biden didn't really "campaign" at all--but remained isolated in their basement--and when he did venture out to some event--he couldn't attract enough people to fill a high-school gym! Campaign enthusiasm is considered a *critical* factor for anyone to be elected, throughout our political history--and how the fuck does the campaign enthusiasm of Biden and Kamala compare to Trump? That's fucking laughable, and everyone knows it. The last time I knew a candidate that had the kind of popularity and enthusiasm that Trump has--it was President Reagan, and he won with a 49 state landslide!
Biden/Harris did not get 70 million or so votes. An honest audit of the election would/will show that they got 1/3 of that, at best.
You essentially wrote a withering 1000 word, 10 link essay to say I was exactly correct about the true fatality rate (a factor of a few less than ~2 %), recapitulating all of the logic of an argument I made (but of course in a way that made it sound like I hadn't said it).
Your description of the age distribution issue is also consistent with what I said, though obviously you meant to make a different rhetorical point. Nothing you presented disagrees with the statement I made - that if you are mid-to-late middle age (~50) your case fatality rate (and by extension likely also your infection fatality rate) is on the order of the average value across the population. If you are truly elderly it is 10x higher or worse and if you are under 25 or so it is effectively zero. But if you are near the age I said than it is near the value I stated.
Biden/Harris did not get 70 million or so votes. An honest audit of the election would/will show that they got 1/3 of that, at best.
It's important to accept that 70M-ish did vote for Harris/Biden. Why? Because they love the Nanny State and have no connection, no love, nor interest, in what made America the greatest nation in this history of the world.Don't confuse Tumblr with real life. Most of the people who voted for Biden did so because they don't like Trump, and want things to go back to normal. They just don't realize what that means when it comes to lockdowns, fracking, the green new deal, and critical race theory.
It's important to accept that 70M-ish did vote for Harris/Biden. Why? Because they love the Nanny State and have no connection, no love, nor interest, in what made America the greatest nation in this history of the world.Don't confuse Tumblr with real life. Most of the people who voted for Biden did so because they don't like Trump, and want things to go back to normal. They just don't realize what that means when it comes to lockdowns, fracking, the green new deal, and critical race theory.
If the Dems have their way, the Plebes will NEVER be allowed near another ballot. Remember when Al Gore lost the election of 2000? Remember what happened the following year? Well, it'll be worse this time around. They were never kidding about the round-ups/executions.It's important to accept that 70M-ish did vote for Harris/Biden. Why? Because they love the Nanny State and have no connection, no love, nor interest, in what made America the greatest nation in this history of the world.Don't confuse Tumblr with real life. Most of the people who voted for Biden did so because they don't like Trump, and want things to go back to normal. They just don't realize what that means when it comes to lockdowns, fracking, the green new deal, and critical race theory.
Perhaps four years of unchecked rioting will convince people to vote Trump 2024.
Don't confuse Tumblr with real life.
Most of the people who voted for Biden did so because they don't like Trump, and want things to go back to normal. They just don't realize what that means when it comes to lockdowns, fracking, the green new deal, and critical race theory.
Sorry Pat. I'm not buying the "poor confused little Democrat" story. Everybody has the internet in their pocket. This isn't some medieval age when the peasantry has to hope the town crier is telling the truth because there's no way to find out what's going on outside the village.One of the biggest voting blocs in the country is the elderly, and they still get their news from ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and newspapers. The majority of the rest listen to the mainstream media, or get their news fed to them from social media, where anything except the prevailing narrative has been suppressed, and they're warned away from hotbeds of alternathink.
Never ascribe to the culture war what can safely attributed to an insulated blanket of conformity.
The Numerberg defense doesn't apply, unless you think Trump is your master.Never ascribe to the culture war what can safely attributed to an insulated blanket of conformity.
The Nuremberg defense didn't work 75 years ago and it doesn't fly today. It especially doesn't fly today when almost anything you want to discover, question or investigate requires reaching into your own pocket.
Willful ignorance is a choice.
Republican Senate, thin margin in the House with threat of losing the House at the midterms, and moderate Democratic President who himself has never been big on the culture war (and who himself never supported the Green New Deal by the way). This is not a combination made for radical change of anything any time soon, and not a sign the electorate is supporting anything radical."Moderate"
They just wanted Trump to shut up. Otherwise, the public mostly voted for moderation.
... and moderate Democratic President who himself has never been big on the culture war (and who himself never supported the Green New Deal by the way)....https://joebiden.com/climate-plan/#
Biden believes the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face.
Well, fuck it. It looks like I'm going to get to cash in on Covid after all. Got a sweet 6-month contract to run a testing site (and possibly extended after that to juice people with a vaccine). It's short-term, but the money is good.
... and moderate Democratic President who himself has never been big on the culture war (and who himself never supported the Green New Deal by the way)....https://joebiden.com/climate-plan/#Quote from: Joe Biden's own websiteBiden believes the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face.
That's him, supporting the Green New Deal. Which is exactly what you said he didn't do.... and moderate Democratic President who himself has never been big on the culture war (and who himself never supported the Green New Deal by the way)....https://joebiden.com/climate-plan/#Quote from: Joe Biden's own websiteBiden believes the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face.
Yes which all the actual Green New Deal people have rightly called a brush-off. "framework" means "We start here and then change it to something reasonable IE more towards the center".
Pat you cannot expect honesty from Mistwell. He has the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome).Lot of people here double down when factual inaccuracies are pointed out.
Well, despite having a 'masks everywhere' mandate for over a month Ohio cases have gone up. The solution is to mask harder.I would suggest threatening them with legal action, but most folks don't have that kind of cash to burn. Might try ordering groceries online for delivery.
The governor has changed the mask mandate. It is now a state enforceable mandate because local authorities weren't enforcing it enough. A new task force is being created to help with the enforcement. There is now a group that will go around checking on places to make sure they are enforcing the mandate.
Also, all retail stores have to have signs on all public entrances saying masks must be worn and how to wear them properly (too many people not covering their nose) and a self selected enforcer of the policy at that entrance. If a business gets caught with someone inside w/o a mask they, the business, get a written warning. On a second offence the business will be shut down for up to 24 hours. No comment on offences past that. So now you not wearing a mask will get a place shut down.
Stores I've been going into mask-less for months have now denied me entry for not wearing a mask. Even when I tell them I have a medical exemption (which I do) I'm not allowed in. Glad I stocked up on food earlier because every grocery store in the area is now off limits to me.
Well, despite having a 'masks everywhere' mandate for over a month Ohio cases have gone up. The solution is to mask harder.You (and almost certainly others) were not following the masking guidelines, and yet your first complaint is that they are not working. Your second complaint is that more strict measures are being put in place. Isn't that what you should expect when people don't take the personal responsibility to follow the instructions given? Why blame the ones giving the instructions and not those that don't follow them?
The governor has changed the mask mandate. It is now a state enforceable mandate because local authorities weren't enforcing it enough. A new task force is being created to help with the enforcement. There is now a group that will go around checking on places to make sure they are enforcing the mandate.
Also, all retail stores have to have signs on all public entrances saying masks must be worn and how to wear them properly (too many people not covering their nose) and a self selected enforcer of the policy at that entrance. If a business gets caught with someone inside w/o a mask they, the business, get a written warning. On a second offence the business will be shut down for up to 24 hours. No comment on offences past that. So now you not wearing a mask will get a place shut down.
Stores I've been going into mask-less for months have now denied me entry for not wearing a mask. Even when I tell them I have a medical exemption (which I do) I'm not allowed in. Glad I stocked up on food earlier because every grocery store in the area is now off limits to me.
You (and almost certainly others) were not following the masking guidelines, and yet your first complaint is that they are not working. Your second complaint is that more strict measures are being put in place. Isn't that what you should expect when people don't take the personal responsibility to follow the instructions given? Why blame the ones giving the instructions and not those that don't follow them?That's not how it works. Measures like masks and social distancing don't require absolute compliance to be effective. In theory, they're about reducing the percentage chance of transmission within a population, not eliminating it. Widespread implementation should reduce the R0, whether or not some people ignore the mandates. If the number of cases flare up instead, it's an indicator the method isn't working.
I was already set up for most of my non-perishables to be delivered regularly via Amazon. I just need to find someplace that won't charge an arm and a leg of things like milk, meat and produce.A lot of groceries have pickup options where they bring it out to your car. You don't need a mask for that, and it tends to be more reasonably priced than delivery or third party services.
Lockdowns! Lockdowns! Lockdowns! Keep the healthy inside so they become controlled and sick!Didn't Justin Trudeau just fucking go on television to talk about this 'great reset'? Kind of hard to be a conspiracy theory when the freaking PM of Canada is talking it up...
Welcome to Alex Jones' Wet Dreams. WW3 is NOT what you think...
I think this may help generate conversation:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/the-great-reset-this-weeks-world-vs-virus-podcast
Remember: I am just a Conspiracy Troll. So this is not PROOF! (If you think it, then it MUST be true - "I think, so therefore I hate!" -Someone, Somwhere)
Didn't Justin Trudeau just fucking go on television to talk about this 'great reset'? Kind of hard to be a conspiracy theory when the freaking PM of Canada is talking it up...The Great Reset has never been a conspiracy, it's always been out in the open. Here's the origin:
Didn't Justin Trudeau just fucking go on television to talk about this 'great reset'? Kind of hard to be a conspiracy theory when the freaking PM of Canada is talking it up...
The Great Reset has never been a conspiracy, it's always been out in the open. Here's the origin:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/now-is-the-time-for-a-great-reset/
Until I hear about it from the nice folks at MSNBC or CNN, IT IS A CONSPIRACY THEORY! (especially if it's true!):The NY Times article is bizarre:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/world/the-baseless-great-reset-conspiracy-theory-rises-again.html
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/great-reset-conspiracy-theory/
The nice people on TV NEVER LIE! They all STAND! For what, I do not know.... :D
(I was joking on theory. I officially nominate it to HYPOTHESIS! But remember: The evidence, even if it exists, doesn't! It's where 4 went when you add 2+2! That dustbin, where reason now resides - so that feelings can reign supreme!)
The narrative first took root in late May, when Prince Charles and Klaus Schwab, the executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, announced plans to convene world leaders and discuss climate change and how to rebuild an economy damaged by the pandemic. The meeting was branded as a “Great Reset,” and the false rumors about the tight-knit group of elites manipulating the global economy took off.Don't they realize the first sentence literally confirms the rumors they're dismissing in the second sentence? They're not even pretending there are crazy rumors, for instance something involving Satanic rituals or aliens. The only rumor the article mentions is that economic elites are planning to use the pandemic to exert economic control. Which is exactly what they said is happening.
Someone posted photos of Gavin Newsom's party. Needless to say, not much social distancing and forget masks.Hey nothing like putting down some draconian rules about going out and socializing, then heading out for a NINE course meal that is going to set you back (with the wife and wine) about a grand, with 50-60 of your best pals, all taking 5-8 hours to eat and drink wine all night. With no masks. Maybe he can trip and fall on something sharp, in his neck, or heart, or eyes? Not likely, also has 24/7 armed security. It must be nice to be literal royalty.
You know, it really grinds my gears to see this sort of thing. People wonder why resistance to the 'restrictions' keeps ratcheting up? It's because we can see the 'noble elite' ignoring them.
The solution is to mask harder.
Are we still supposed to follow the science?Spinachcat, you disingenuous slut...
Danish study says Masks = Bullshit
https://noqreport.com/2020/11/18/the-danish-study-face-masks-showed-no-impact-protecting-wearers-against-covid-19/ (https://noqreport.com/2020/11/18/the-danish-study-face-masks-showed-no-impact-protecting-wearers-against-covid-19/)
I just about made a lady shit herself when she came around a corner and I had a respirator on (one I had tucked away, and it looks more like Bane's and is an actual respirator, not an n95). We both had a laugh, after she could talk again.Are we still supposed to follow the science?Spinachcat, you disingenuous slut...
Danish study says Masks = Bullshit
https://noqreport.com/2020/11/18/the-danish-study-face-masks-showed-no-impact-protecting-wearers-against-covid-19/ (https://noqreport.com/2020/11/18/the-danish-study-face-masks-showed-no-impact-protecting-wearers-against-covid-19/)
It's long been known that cloth and surgical/procedure masks are not intended to protect the wearer--they are there to reduce transmission from the wearer to others. The idea is that you wearing a mask protects me, and me wearing a mask protects you because the mask acts as a baffle to impede the force of exhalation and thus the range of spread. These masks do not capture/block the virus, they slow the air carrying it. Call it a face diaper if you like, because like a diaper, it's designed to catch the shit of the wearer, not to keep others' shit off of the wearer. Note that N95 and other respirators (along with eye protection) are what you need to wear to protect yourself from the virus. They may look like masks, but they work differently.
I've said all of this before, back when I though people here cared about anything beyond their own narratives, and you'll note that the article you mentioned says all of this too. But I'm sure that part got ignored in favor of the moron-friendly message of "masks don't work" devoid of all context.
As i prepare to go run a COVID testing site, one of my friends is working to get me a Cobra Commander hood with the COVID virus replacing the cobra head symbol. Then I will be COVID Commander!I just about made a lady shit herself when she came around a corner and I had a respirator on (one I had tucked away, and it looks more like Bane's and is an actual respirator, not an n95). We both had a laugh, after she could talk again.Are we still supposed to follow the science?Spinachcat, you disingenuous slut...
Danish study says Masks = Bullshit
https://noqreport.com/2020/11/18/the-danish-study-face-masks-showed-no-impact-protecting-wearers-against-covid-19/ (https://noqreport.com/2020/11/18/the-danish-study-face-masks-showed-no-impact-protecting-wearers-against-covid-19/)
It's long been known that cloth and surgical/procedure masks are not intended to protect the wearer--they are there to reduce transmission from the wearer to others. The idea is that you wearing a mask protects me, and me wearing a mask protects you because the mask acts as a baffle to impede the force of exhalation and thus the range of spread. These masks do not capture/block the virus, they slow the air carrying it. Call it a face diaper if you like, because like a diaper, it's designed to catch the shit of the wearer, not to keep others' shit off of the wearer. Note that N95 and other respirators (along with eye protection) are what you need to wear to protect yourself from the virus. They may look like masks, but they work differently.
I've said all of this before, back when I though people here cared about anything beyond their own narratives, and you'll note that the article you mentioned says all of this too. But I'm sure that part got ignored in favor of the moron-friendly message of "masks don't work" devoid of all context.
It's long been known that cloth and surgical/procedure masks are not intended to protect the wearer--they are there to reduce transmission from the wearer to others.
As i prepare to go run a COVID testing site, one of my friends is working to get me a Cobra Commander hood with the COVID virus replacing the cobra head symbol. Then I will be COVID Commander!
Bitch, please. These are from the article you quoted:It's long been known that cloth and surgical/procedure masks are not intended to protect the wearer--they are there to reduce transmission from the wearer to others.
Except...they don't work.
And that's not from me. That's according to science!
I haven't sold out anyone. There's a public health challenge whether you can comprehend it or not, and there's nothing wrong with making some money doing my part.As i prepare to go run a COVID testing site, one of my friends is working to get me a Cobra Commander hood with the COVID virus replacing the cobra head symbol. Then I will be COVID Commander!
The Cobra hood makes total sense because anyone willingly pushing this bullshit hoax that's destroying our economy and crushing lives is undoubtedly an enemy of America and all free people. Doubly so when they're selling out their country for a paycheck.
But I wouldn't expect any less from you.
Well now we know why HappyDaze lost his shit when people didn't buy into the Covid scam.Because of increasingly stupid motherfuckers (like yourself, Snowman) that can't understand the situation? No, that's not why I gave up on the fucks here. I gave up on the clowns here making conservatives and conservative talking points look radical and idiotic.
Spinachcat, you disingenuous slut...
It's long been known that cloth and surgical/procedure masks are not intended to protect the wearer--they are there to reduce transmission from the wearer to others. The idea is that you wearing a mask protects me, and me wearing a mask protects you because the mask acts as a baffle to impede the force of exhalation and thus the range of spread. These masks do not capture/block the virus, they slow the air carrying it. Call it a face diaper if you like, because like a diaper, it's designed to catch the shit of the wearer, not to keep others' shit off of the wearer. Note that N95 and other respirators (along with eye protection) are what you need to wear to protect yourself from the virus. They may look like masks, but they work differently.
I've said all of this before, back when I though people here cared about anything beyond their own narratives, and you'll note that the article you mentioned says all of this too. But I'm sure that part got ignored in favor of the moron-friendly message of "masks don't work" devoid of all context.
Increasingly stupid motherfuckers like Gavin Newsom and Lori Lightfoot, who declare draconian lockdowns and then wipe their asses with their decrees?Well now we know why HappyDaze lost his shit when people didn't buy into the Covid scam.Because of increasingly stupid motherfuckers (like yourself, Snowman) that can't understand the situation? No, that's not why I gave up on the fucks here. I gave up on the clowns here making conservatives and conservative talking points look radical and idiotic.
Increasingly stupid motherfuckers like Gavin Newsom and Lori Lightfoot, who declare draconian lockdowns and then wipe their asses with their decrees?Well now we know why HappyDaze lost his shit when people didn't buy into the Covid scam.Because of increasingly stupid motherfuckers (like yourself, Snowman) that can't understand the situation? No, that's not why I gave up on the fucks here. I gave up on the clowns here making conservatives and conservative talking points look radical and idiotic.
You just want to be ruled, don't you?
I'm not for some of the more draconian lockdown practices those idiots preach, and I'm all about leaders following their own rules (I'm not a fan of hypocrites). It's not about wanting to be ruled; it's about understanding the benefits to an organized, systematic response to a threat (much as any soldier or sailor does). Everyone doing their own thing (whether they are governors or the guy on the street) might be a statement of individuality over being ruled, but it'll get people killed whether the restrictions ignored are traffic laws or COVID responses (though the former are often much more sudden and spectacular to watch).Increasingly stupid motherfuckers like Gavin Newsom and Lori Lightfoot, who declare draconian lockdowns and then wipe their asses with their decrees?Well now we know why HappyDaze lost his shit when people didn't buy into the Covid scam.Because of increasingly stupid motherfuckers (like yourself, Snowman) that can't understand the situation? No, that's not why I gave up on the fucks here. I gave up on the clowns here making conservatives and conservative talking points look radical and idiotic.
You just want to be ruled, don't you?
HappyDaze you miserable sellout dumb fuck I put you on IGNORE. That means I cannot read your posts you idiot. Your basically talking to the wind and wasting your time at this point.Get over yourself, bitch. Even when I respond to your posts, I'm not doing it for your benefit. I don't need you to read what I post; I can be content knowing others are appreciating my mockery of you.
Masking involves both wearing a mask and developing the discipline to not keep fucking with it. As for changing the vector, what the fuck do you think all of the hand sanitizer is supposed to be for? See how each step works together? And the nasty bacteria in the mask? That's stuff you already have inside you--the mask is unlikely to be a better environment for it to grow than your own respiratory tract.Spinachcat, you disingenuous slut...
It's long been known that cloth and surgical/procedure masks are not intended to protect the wearer--they are there to reduce transmission from the wearer to others. The idea is that you wearing a mask protects me, and me wearing a mask protects you because the mask acts as a baffle to impede the force of exhalation and thus the range of spread. These masks do not capture/block the virus, they slow the air carrying it. Call it a face diaper if you like, because like a diaper, it's designed to catch the shit of the wearer, not to keep others' shit off of the wearer. Note that N95 and other respirators (along with eye protection) are what you need to wear to protect yourself from the virus. They may look like masks, but they work differently.
I've said all of this before, back when I though people here cared about anything beyond their own narratives, and you'll note that the article you mentioned says all of this too. But I'm sure that part got ignored in favor of the moron-friendly message of "masks don't work" devoid of all context.
Which is of course utter horseshit, because they end up spreading any viruses from their hands as they repeatedly touch and adjust their masks, which are rarely, if ever washed. All that happens is the vector of transmission is adjusted, they don't "protect" anyone. With the added bonus of culturing all sorts of nasty bacteria in the mask, right in front of their mouths.
But keep telling yourself you're a virtuous human being thinking about the wellbeing of others.
Is that what he posted? HappyDaze you miserable sellout dumb fuck I put you on IGNORE. That means I cannot read your posts you idiot. Your basically talking to the wind and wasting your time at this point.Yeah, I finally got fed up and added him to ignore as well.
Back to Ghost. No HappyDaze doesn't just want to be ruled. He wants to make the big bucks by profiting out of our misery. Straight up 8th circle in hell shit right here.
Bitches gotta preserve your echo chamber!Is that what he posted? HappyDaze you miserable sellout dumb fuck I put you on IGNORE. That means I cannot read your posts you idiot. Your basically talking to the wind and wasting your time at this point.Yeah, I finally got fed up and added him to ignore as well.
Back to Ghost. No HappyDaze doesn't just want to be ruled. He wants to make the big bucks by profiting out of our misery. Straight up 8th circle in hell shit right here.
Increasingly stupid motherfuckers like Gavin Newsom and Lori Lightfoot, who declare draconian lockdowns and then wipe their asses with their decrees?Well now we know why HappyDaze lost his shit when people didn't buy into the Covid scam.Because of increasingly stupid motherfuckers (like yourself, Snowman) that can't understand the situation? No, that's not why I gave up on the fucks here. I gave up on the clowns here making conservatives and conservative talking points look radical and idiotic.
You just want to be ruled, don't you?
Is that what he posted? HappyDaze you miserable sellout dumb fuck I put you on IGNORE. That means I cannot read your posts you idiot. Your basically talking to the wind and wasting your time at this point.
Back to Ghost. No HappyDaze doesn't just want to be ruled. He wants to make the big bucks by profiting out of our misery. Straight up 8th circle in hell shit right here.
Increasingly stupid motherfuckers like Gavin Newsom and Lori Lightfoot, who declare draconian lockdowns and then wipe their asses with their decrees?Well now we know why HappyDaze lost his shit when people didn't buy into the Covid scam.Because of increasingly stupid motherfuckers (like yourself, Snowman) that can't understand the situation? No, that's not why I gave up on the fucks here. I gave up on the clowns here making conservatives and conservative talking points look radical and idiotic.
You just want to be ruled, don't you?
Is that what he posted? HappyDaze you miserable sellout dumb fuck I put you on IGNORE. That means I cannot read your posts you idiot. Your basically talking to the wind and wasting your time at this point.
Back to Ghost. No HappyDaze doesn't just want to be ruled. He wants to make the big bucks by profiting out of our misery. Straight up 8th circle in hell shit right here.
HappyDaze wants to be one of the rulers. Hence his jumping on COVID as his empowerment to rule.
You are fucking delusional. Healthcare workers providing healthcare services and making money from it isn't shameful; it's a profession.Increasingly stupid motherfuckers like Gavin Newsom and Lori Lightfoot, who declare draconian lockdowns and then wipe their asses with their decrees?Well now we know why HappyDaze lost his shit when people didn't buy into the Covid scam.Because of increasingly stupid motherfuckers (like yourself, Snowman) that can't understand the situation? No, that's not why I gave up on the fucks here. I gave up on the clowns here making conservatives and conservative talking points look radical and idiotic.
You just want to be ruled, don't you?
Is that what he posted? HappyDaze you miserable sellout dumb fuck I put you on IGNORE. That means I cannot read your posts you idiot. Your basically talking to the wind and wasting your time at this point.
Back to Ghost. No HappyDaze doesn't just want to be ruled. He wants to make the big bucks by profiting out of our misery. Straight up 8th circle in hell shit right here.
HappyDaze wants to be one of the rulers. Hence his jumping on COVID as his empowerment to rule.
He ain't going to rule shit if that is the case. He is going to be stuck with us if the globist wins and forced to hide in shadows all of his life for his traitorous actions. Living each day in shame as his money withers to nothing and knowing he signed a pact with, figuratively speaking, devils.
Masking involves both wearing a mask and developing the discipline to not keep fucking with it. As for changing the vector, what the fuck do you think all of the hand sanitizer is supposed to be for? See how each step works together? And the nasty bacteria in the mask? That's stuff you already have inside you--the mask is unlikely to be a better environment for it to grow than your own respiratory tract.Except the best evidence right now is that masks don't work. They could help a little, but the effect is small enough it's hard to isolate. It's a couple pages back now, but I posted a lot of links to the research in reply #696. (https://www.therpgsite.com/the-rpgpundit-s-own-forum/covid-the-lockdowns-etc/msg1153419/#msg1153419)
That's him, supporting the Green New Deal. Which is exactly what you said he didn't do.... and moderate Democratic President who himself has never been big on the culture war (and who himself never supported the Green New Deal by the way)....https://joebiden.com/climate-plan/#Quote from: Joe Biden's own websiteBiden believes the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face.
Yes which all the actual Green New Deal people have rightly called a brush-off. "framework" means "We start here and then change it to something reasonable IE more towards the center".
Pat you cannot expect honesty from Mistwell. He has the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome).
Someone posted photos of Gavin Newsom's party. Needless to say, not much social distancing and forget masks.
You know, it really grinds my gears to see this sort of thing. People wonder why resistance to the 'restrictions' keeps ratcheting up? It's because we can see the 'noble elite' ignoring them.
As i prepare to go run a COVID testing site, one of my friends is working to get me a Cobra Commander hood with the COVID virus replacing the cobra head symbol. Then I will be COVID Commander!I just about made a lady shit herself when she came around a corner and I had a respirator on (one I had tucked away, and it looks more like Bane's and is an actual respirator, not an n95). We both had a laugh, after she could talk again.Are we still supposed to follow the science?Spinachcat, you disingenuous slut...
Danish study says Masks = Bullshit
https://noqreport.com/2020/11/18/the-danish-study-face-masks-showed-no-impact-protecting-wearers-against-covid-19/ (https://noqreport.com/2020/11/18/the-danish-study-face-masks-showed-no-impact-protecting-wearers-against-covid-19/)
It's long been known that cloth and surgical/procedure masks are not intended to protect the wearer--they are there to reduce transmission from the wearer to others. The idea is that you wearing a mask protects me, and me wearing a mask protects you because the mask acts as a baffle to impede the force of exhalation and thus the range of spread. These masks do not capture/block the virus, they slow the air carrying it. Call it a face diaper if you like, because like a diaper, it's designed to catch the shit of the wearer, not to keep others' shit off of the wearer. Note that N95 and other respirators (along with eye protection) are what you need to wear to protect yourself from the virus. They may look like masks, but they work differently.
I've said all of this before, back when I though people here cared about anything beyond their own narratives, and you'll note that the article you mentioned says all of this too. But I'm sure that part got ignored in favor of the moron-friendly message of "masks don't work" devoid of all context.
(https://i.etsystatic.com/5924954/r/il/8bb774/2461559612/il_794xN.2461559612_7gb7.jpg)
(https://phil.cdc.gov//PHIL_Images/23311/23311_lores.jpg)
That's not exactly what your sources say (I just read over all of them). They note that masks are largely ineffective as a protective measure, but may still offer some measure of source control (protecting others from what the mask wearer exhales). They also point out that cloth masks are considerably less effective for these purposes than surgical/procedural masks (no surprise there). Neither of these conflicts with what I've said.Masking involves both wearing a mask and developing the discipline to not keep fucking with it. As for changing the vector, what the fuck do you think all of the hand sanitizer is supposed to be for? See how each step works together? And the nasty bacteria in the mask? That's stuff you already have inside you--the mask is unlikely to be a better environment for it to grow than your own respiratory tract.Except the best evidence right now is that masks don't work. They could help a little, but the effect is small enough it's hard to isolate. It's a couple pages back now, but I posted a lot of links to the research in reply #696. (https://www.therpgsite.com/the-rpgpundit-s-own-forum/covid-the-lockdowns-etc/msg1153419/#msg1153419)
Except the best evidence right now is that masks don't work. They could help a little, but the effect is small enough it's hard to isolate. It's a couple pages back now, but I posted a lot of links to the research in reply #696. (https://www.therpgsite.com/the-rpgpundit-s-own-forum/covid-the-lockdowns-etc/msg1153419/#msg1153419)
A useful link that quickly summarizes and provides links re. the latest understanding of the infection fatality rate:I'd like to see what they're using for raw data. Again, there are issues with how Covid hits people with multiple comorbidities, and there have been irregularities in reporting (flagging people as Covid deaths when they died of completely unrelated issues, if they had the virus).
https://fullfact.org/health/toby-young-ifr-tweet/
My nephew tested positive for Covid and his family went lockdown. During those two weeks no one else got sick and this is a tiny household of two children, one 18 year old, and my sister. The chances of them not being sick is slim to none. So my nephew retook the test and found out he doesn't have Covid and the first test was a false positive. He just had a flu. Seriously you can't trust these tests and it had been a month with still no Covid.Yes, folks, false positives do happen. No, that doesn't mean that testing is worthless. It should be noted that false positives (and false negatives) can and do occur with every type of testing done. We don't abandon medicine just because it's not perfect.
Every year, thousands die from the normal flu. Question: Why is it only now that we are wearing masks? Wasn't the lives of millions of people over the last 100 years important? Why shouldn't we have all lived in a bubble since birth? Why stop all human norms now until those who profit from this misery tell the masses it is now okay to stop? And what about this: https://www.britannica.com/event/1968-flu-pandemicMy nephew tested positive for Covid and his family went lockdown. During those two weeks no one else got sick and this is a tiny household of two children, one 18 year old, and my sister. The chances of them not being sick is slim to none. So my nephew retook the test and found out he doesn't have Covid and the first test was a false positive. He just had a flu. Seriously you can't trust these tests and it had been a month with still no Covid.Yes, folks, false positives do happen. No, that doesn't mean that testing is worthless. It should be noted that false positives (and false negatives) can and do occur with every type of testing done. We don't abandon medicine just because it's not perfect.
If you're going to throw up sources, try reading them and understanding them first.
If you look at the details, which is what matters, you will find Biden does not support most of the objectionable portions of the Green New Deal.
No HappyDaze doesn't just want to be ruled. He wants to make the big bucks by profiting out of our misery. Straight up 8th circle in hell shit right here.
Increasingly stupid motherfuckers like Gavin Newsom and Lori Lightfoot, who declare draconian lockdowns and then wipe their asses with their decrees?
BOLD is mine.
About 4,860 participants completed the study. The researchers had hoped that masks would cut the infection rate by half among wearers. Instead, 42 people in the mask group, or 1.8 percent, got infected, compared with 53 in the unmasked group, or 2.1 percent. The difference was not statistically significant.
Masking involves both wearing a mask and developing the discipline to not keep fucking with it. As for changing the vector, what the fuck do you think all of the hand sanitizer is supposed to be for? See how each step works together? And the nasty bacteria in the mask? That's stuff you already have inside you--the mask is unlikely to be a better environment for it to grow than your own respiratory tract.
I don't think he wants to understand.BOLD is mine.
About 4,860 participants completed the study. The researchers had hoped that masks would cut the infection rate by half among wearers. Instead, 42 people in the mask group, or 1.8 percent, got infected, compared with 53 in the unmasked group, or 2.1 percent. The difference was not statistically significant.
Spinachcat - I will try to explain again. But this is looking only at the reverse of the usual direction. A surgeon wears a mask not to protect himself from infection, but to prevent the *patient* from infection. The primary effect of masks is to prevent people who are sick from coughing, sneezing, or otherwise getting infected water droplets on *other people*. Your mask doesn't do a lot to protect *you*, but it does significantly more to protect everyone *from* you if you are infected.
There are lots of studies showing the effectiveness of masks at preventing others from being infected by a masked carrier of the disease, showing it can reduce infection rates by 30%.
https://hartfordhealthcare.org/about-us/news-press/news-detail?articleid=27691&publicId=395
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8
https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/face-mask-mandates-effective-slowing-covid-19-study/63-0827084d-8e6b-4c80-92de-8f78b422de63
Wearing masks has been the norm for many years now in Korea and Japan. If anyone feels any sign of being sick, they put on a mask to avoid coughing or otherwise infecting others. And both of those countries have been doing *much* better both economically and in infection rates compared to both the U.S. and Europe. I was in South Korea in February when covid was just getting started. Within just days of the outbreak, almost everyone was wearing masks. It's not about a mandate or obedience - people there are just really self-conscious about disease and protecting others.
When HappyDaze makes sure his "testing" center produces lots of "cases", he might get promoted next to a mandatory vaccination center.Rest assured that, despite your bullshit narrative, I won't be falsifying results and my performance isn't rated on how many positive results are detected.
Of course, that promotion comes with hazard pay and extra life insurance...
Increasingly stupid motherfuckers like Gavin Newsom and Lori Lightfoot, who declare draconian lockdowns and then wipe their asses with their decrees?
They're not stupid. They just know the majority will kneel and obey. It's become a game of "our leaders" flaunting the lockdowns and then watching the sheep beg for more lockdowns. We have a nation full of people begging for their own destruction, so why not give it to them?
Look at it from the Newsom, Pelosi or Bettlejuice perspective. When you know the sheep won't stand, why let your own "rules" get in the way of having a good time?
Because of course people are washing their masks and hands regularly... Must be a wonderful dreamworld you live in, where people do all the things they are supposed to.
Your bacterial flora are under control when inside your body. Change the conditions on the outside, however, and it's a different story. The flora on your skin evolved exposed to the air, not covered by fabric. That's why some people suffer badly from body odour. You can get staph infections on your face where the mask is preventing proper ventilation, and Legionnaire's and other lovely things can breed in the fabric where you are repeatedly breathing warm, moist, bacteria-laden air into it.
Hm... I guess there's no rational, logical, nor scientific answer to my question. So, I'll answer it:Every year, thousands die from the normal flu. Question: Why is it only now that we are wearing masks? Wasn't the lives of millions of people over the last 100 years important? Why shouldn't we have all lived in a bubble since birth? Why stop all human norms now until those who profit from this misery tell the masses it is now okay to stop? And what about this: https://www.britannica.com/event/1968-flu-pandemicMy nephew tested positive for Covid and his family went lockdown. During those two weeks no one else got sick and this is a tiny household of two children, one 18 year old, and my sister. The chances of them not being sick is slim to none. So my nephew retook the test and found out he doesn't have Covid and the first test was a false positive. He just had a flu. Seriously you can't trust these tests and it had been a month with still no Covid.Yes, folks, false positives do happen. No, that doesn't mean that testing is worthless. It should be noted that false positives (and false negatives) can and do occur with every type of testing done. We don't abandon medicine just because it's not perfect.
Why was no one forced to wear anything back then?
The Answer: <Fill this blank in a rational, logical, and scientific manner discussing all relevant information please>
Spinachcat - I will try to explain again.
And both of those countries have been doing *much* better both economically and in infection rates compared to both the U.S. and Europe.
Rest assured that, despite your bullshit narrative, I won't be falsifying results and my performance isn't rated on how many positive results are detected.
Legionnaires Disease? Really? This is a piece of nonsense in that it's completely nonsensical. I believe the phrase is "bugfuck crazy". I worry about people like you spreading nonsense about some sort of pandemic of Legionnaires with absolutely no evidence. Why are you so scared of a communicable disease that you won't wear a mask?
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
"In this community-based, randomized controlled trial conducted in a setting where mask wearing was uncommon and was not among other recommended public health measures related to COVID-19, a recommendation to wear a surgical mask when outside the home among others did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, incident SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with no mask recommendation. We designed the study to detect a reduction in infection rate from 2% to 1%."
You're the one hyping up fear. You're just another flavor of anti-vaxxer.Rest assured that, despite your bullshit narrative, I won't be falsifying results and my performance isn't rated on how many positive results are detected.
The nigh-useless tests will do the falsifying for you.
Amazing how just last week Elon Musk had 4 identical tests by one nurse and magically, 2 positive and 2 negatives showed up. How many tests did he need to get the accurate result? 5? 7? 22?
So if a bazillionaire celebrity with the best healthcare at his fingertips can only get jackoff results from bullshit tests, what quality tests do you think your podunk center is using?
[cue HappyDaze "explaining" how his patients in Holy Podunkia are going to get better tests than what Elon Musk could access last week]
And your performance rating ABSOLUTELY depends on lots of CASES! CASES! CASES! because if you're not cranking out the fuel for more CoronaPanic, the funding for the "testing center" dries up.
But I have faith in you HappyDaze! You'll diligently spread baseless fear and false positives as far and wide as you can. Gotta get that primo position at the mandatory vaccine center!
I note you dodged the staphylococcus infection reference. I'm not scared of anything, thanks, I just don't make pointless gestures for the sake of making bedwetting cowards feel "safe". I'm so unimpressed by coronavirus (less deadly than the flu) that I choose not to wear a mask and potentially expose myself to it. To date: no infection whatsoever, besides the usual sniffles (which would no doubt trip the PCR test as "positive" because it's a shit test).
Published in Nature this month: asymptomatic transmission is utter bollocks. In other words, there is no case for healthy people to wear masks.
And both of those countries have been doing *much* better both economically and in infection rates compared to both the U.S. and Europe.
South Korea and Japan only exist, let alone have an economy, because the US taxpayer makes sure China doesn't turn them into snacks.
Color me unimpressed that nations full of subservient conformists are excited about wearing muzzles.
I'm so unimpressed by coronavirus (less deadly than the flu) that I choose not to wear a mask and potentially expose myself to it. To date: no infection whatsoever, besides the usual sniffles (which would no doubt trip the PCR test as "positive" because it's a shit test).
Published in Nature this month: asymptomatic transmission is utter bollocks. In other words, there is no case for healthy people to wear masks.
In a manuscript posted on medRxiv this month2, they report that the risk of an asymptomatic person passing the virus to others in their home is about one-quarter of the risk of transmission from a symptomatic person.
Although there is a lower risk of transmission from asymptomatic people, they might still present a significant public-health risk because they are more likely to be out in the community than isolated at home, says Andrew Azman, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland, who is based in Switzerland and was a co-author on the study. “The actual public-health burden of this massive pool of interacting ‘asymptomatics’ in the community probably suggests that a sizeable portion of transmission events are from asymptomatic transmissions,” he says.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
"In this community-based, randomized controlled trial conducted in a setting where mask wearing was uncommon and was not among other recommended public health measures related to COVID-19, a recommendation to wear a surgical mask when outside the home among others did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, incident SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with no mask recommendation. We designed the study to detect a reduction in infection rate from 2% to 1%."
From your source:
"Limitation:
Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others."
What I have said repeatedly is that masks are for source control.
Fair enough. You didn't say otherwise, but several here keep saying masks do nothing but focus only on protecting the wearer (which is not their purpose) rather than source control (protecting others from the mask wearer). All the while the dishonest fucks just keep saying "the science shows it doesn't work" and leaving out the meaningful context because it doesn't fit their politics.https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
"In this community-based, randomized controlled trial conducted in a setting where mask wearing was uncommon and was not among other recommended public health measures related to COVID-19, a recommendation to wear a surgical mask when outside the home among others did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, incident SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with no mask recommendation. We designed the study to detect a reduction in infection rate from 2% to 1%."
From your source:
"Limitation:
Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others."
What I have said repeatedly is that masks are for source control.
Agreed, I never said otherwise. I was just providing one of the newest studies for context, make of it what you will.
You're the one hyping up fear. You're just another flavor of anti-vaxxer.
All the while the dishonest fucks just keep saying "the science shows it doesn't work" and leaving out the meaningful context because it doesn't fit their politics.That's exactly what you're doing. You're ignoring all the studies that show masks don't work, in favor of repeating a theory that simply doesn't hold up, when we look at the evidence. At this point, there's a huge number of population studies that show an almost zero correlation between mask mandates and the number of cases, and from that standpoint whether wearing a mask protects the wearer or others is completely irrelevant. And you're ignoring the competing theory that the viral particles are aerosolized, and the studies that show how it quickly spreads though enclosed areas, almost completely bypassing all facial coverings this side of a properly fitted N95 mask.
It's OK, Pat. I know you don't (can't?) fucking read what I say. But keep trying, maybe you'll figure it out.All the while the dishonest fucks just keep saying "the science shows it doesn't work" and leaving out the meaningful context because it doesn't fit their politics.That's exactly what you're doing. You're ignoring all the studies that show masks don't work, in favor of repeating a theory that simply doesn't hold up, when we look at the evidence. At this point, there's a huge number of population studies that show an almost zero correlation between mask mandates and the number of cases, and from that standpoint whether wearing a mask protects the wearer or others is completely irrelevant. And you're ignoring the competing theory that the viral particles are aerosolized, and the studies that show how it quickly spreads though enclosed areas, almost completely bypassing all facial coverings this side of a properly fitted N95 mask.
That's a perfect example of confirmation bias. You find one narrow study that seems to support your conclusions, and ignore all the rest like the dozen or so I linked in an earlier post.It's OK, Pat. I know you don't (can't?) fucking read what I say. But keep trying, maybe you'll figure it out.All the while the dishonest fucks just keep saying "the science shows it doesn't work" and leaving out the meaningful context because it doesn't fit their politics.That's exactly what you're doing. You're ignoring all the studies that show masks don't work, in favor of repeating a theory that simply doesn't hold up, when we look at the evidence. At this point, there's a huge number of population studies that show an almost zero correlation between mask mandates and the number of cases, and from that standpoint whether wearing a mask protects the wearer or others is completely irrelevant. And you're ignoring the competing theory that the viral particles are aerosolized, and the studies that show how it quickly spreads though enclosed areas, almost completely bypassing all facial coverings this side of a properly fitted N95 mask.
But here, this is a recent one: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6947e2.htm?s_cid=mm6947e2_w (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6947e2.htm?s_cid=mm6947e2_w)
Pat, you ignorant slut, I addressed your shit back in post #735. Your old shit is old shit.That's a perfect example of confirmation bias. You find one narrow study that seems to support your conclusions, and ignore all the rest like the dozen or so I linked in an earlier post.It's OK, Pat. I know you don't (can't?) fucking read what I say. But keep trying, maybe you'll figure it out.All the while the dishonest fucks just keep saying "the science shows it doesn't work" and leaving out the meaningful context because it doesn't fit their politics.That's exactly what you're doing. You're ignoring all the studies that show masks don't work, in favor of repeating a theory that simply doesn't hold up, when we look at the evidence. At this point, there's a huge number of population studies that show an almost zero correlation between mask mandates and the number of cases, and from that standpoint whether wearing a mask protects the wearer or others is completely irrelevant. And you're ignoring the competing theory that the viral particles are aerosolized, and the studies that show how it quickly spreads though enclosed areas, almost completely bypassing all facial coverings this side of a properly fitted N95 mask.
But here, this is a recent one: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6947e2.htm?s_cid=mm6947e2_w (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6947e2.htm?s_cid=mm6947e2_w)
I could link another dozen, but let's try a visual instead:
https://twitter.com/yinonw/status/1321177359601393664
If there wasn't a line on each graph, you'd never guess when masks were mandated in each of those countries.
There are some studies that show masks are effective, but a lot more that show they aren't. And the two major studies that show the effectiveness of masks (The WHO's study in the Lancet and the PNAS study) have been criticized as critical flawed, and the latter was formally withdrawn.
Pat, you ignorant slut, I addressed your shit back in post #735. Your old shit is old shit.No, you didn't. You had one unsourced quote, and didn't address the bulk of the evidence. It's cherry picking. Again.
Can you fucking read? I didn't make a quote in #735, I made a summary after reading all of the sources. It's not cherry picking, because the "bulk of the evidence" that you want to talk about isn't relevant to the argument that I was making regarding source control. You are trying to throw so much shit about masks not providing protection to the wearer up, but it's all totally irrelevant to the point I've been making since this thread started, you dumb asshole. You keep trying to conflate them, but I do not.Pat, you ignorant slut, I addressed your shit back in post #735. Your old shit is old shit.No, you didn't. You had one unsourced quote, and didn't address the bulk of the evidence. It's cherry picking. Again.
Are you still an anti-vaxxer if you support vacines for other people?
I looked back, and it was Mistwell who had the quote, not you. So that was a simple mistake on my part. But you clearly can't read, because your summary missed the point of the studies: The bulk of evidence is that masks either don't work, or that they have a negligible effect. The distinction you're trying to make is only relevant to a few studies, like the one that assessed how many people who caught the disease were wearing masks. For the others, like the population studies that measure the spread of the disease before and after mandates, or the studies about the spread of aerosolized viral particles, it doesn't matter.Can you fucking read? I didn't make a quote in #735, I made a summary after reading all of the sources. It's not cherry picking, because the "bulk of the evidence" that you want to talk about isn't relevant to the argument that I was making regarding source control. You are trying to throw so much shit about masks not providing protection to the wearer up, but it's all totally irrelevant to the point I've been making since this thread started, you dumb asshole. You keep trying to conflate them, but I do not.Pat, you ignorant slut, I addressed your shit back in post #735. Your old shit is old shit.No, you didn't. You had one unsourced quote, and didn't address the bulk of the evidence. It's cherry picking. Again.
It appears Waffle House has had just about enough of this bullshit.
https://www.businessinsider.com/waffle-house-ceo-slams-lockdowns-keeps-dining-rooms-open-2020-11
I'm thinking I might swing by tomorrow morning before work for an All-Star breakfast. Anyone wanna tag along?
Are you still an anti-vaxxer if you support vacines for other people?
Are you still an anti-vaxxer if you support vacines for other people?
I absolutely support the sheeple getting the fast tracked, barely tested vaccine!
They can have my dose! And all Biden supporters can have a dozen doses each!
Yes, plans...Are you still an anti-vaxxer if you support vacines for other people?
I absolutely support the sheeple getting the fast tracked, barely tested vaccine!
They can have my dose! And all Biden supporters can have a dozen doses each!
You dont need 100% of people vaccinated to get to herd immunity, and there are millions of Biden supporters....
Could have the makings of a plan.
I didn't dodge staphylococcus infection, unlikely but barely possible, because it's boring compared to that exciting killer Legionnaires Disease which is coursing through our population by your account. I always thought that the cases in hospitals were due to ventilation symptoms but clearly it's all those medical professionals in masks.
As I just cited in a number of references earlier, not wearing a mask is like coughing on people without covering your mouth. That isn't being brave - it's being an asshole. The mask is primarily there to prevent the wearer from infecting others, not to protect the wearer.
As for asymptomatic transmission, I think you're referring to this article.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03141-3QuoteIn a manuscript posted on medRxiv this month2, they report that the risk of an asymptomatic person passing the virus to others in their home is about one-quarter of the risk of transmission from a symptomatic person.
Although there is a lower risk of transmission from asymptomatic people, they might still present a significant public-health risk because they are more likely to be out in the community than isolated at home, says Andrew Azman, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland, who is based in Switzerland and was a co-author on the study. “The actual public-health burden of this massive pool of interacting ‘asymptomatics’ in the community probably suggests that a sizeable portion of transmission events are from asymptomatic transmissions,” he says.
There is no disagreement that asymptomatic transmission exists. The only question is how important it is as a vector. Masks are only one piece of preventing transmission - but they're a simple and easy one. There is disagreement on how important masks are to help, but they do help.
I find it incredible how supposedly intelligent people have invested in the idea that a strain of the common cold is suddenly the plague.
Asymptomatic transmission is utter nonsense. It's unsubstantiated bullshit they trotted out earlier this year to hype up the scare factor. If you are not symptomatic, you are not ill and you are not contagious. Same as it has always been with every seasonal virus.
I find it incredible how supposedly intelligent people have invested in the idea that a strain of the common cold is suddenly the plague.
As for transmission, do you not believe in asymptomatic transmission in general? For example, do you believe that diseases like typhoid fever, HPV, or HIV can be passed by carriers who aren't showing symptoms? I think it is well established in other diseases, and I'm not clear why you wouldn't believe the evidence for it in covid-19.Kiero is obviously dumber-than-shit on a flat-Earther level here.
First of all, Covid-19 is not a strain of the common cold. Below is a comparison of the virus differences. You can read more in the source article.No, influenza is not the common cold. It's the flu. Kiero is right on that point -- some of the members of the coronavirus family are part of the complex of viruses that can induce the syndrome we call the "common cold". That's one of the reasons why they think herd immunity may not require 60% exposure, and it also may explain why kids are so resistant -- the antibodies developed by exposure to certain varieties of the common cold may provide cross-immunity to COVID-19.
First of all, Covid-19 is not a strain of the common cold. Below is a comparison of the virus differences. You can read more in the source article.No, influenza is not the common cold. It's the flu. Kiero is right on that point -- some of the members of the coronavirus family are part of the complex of viruses that can induce the syndrome we call the "common cold". That's one of the reasons why they think herd immunity may not require 60% exposure, and it also may explain why kids are so resistant -- the antibodies developed by exposure to certain varieties of the common cold may provide cross-immunity to COVID-19.
https://heavy.com/news/2020/05/people-build-immunity-coronavirus-common-cold/
https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2930610-3
Nevertheless, I still think it is wrong to claim that covid-19 is a "strain of the common cold" (and thus not dangerous), or that asymptomatic transmission of covid-19 can't happen.I never said any of that, I just corrected a blatant error.
Nevertheless, I still think it's wrong to claim that the Earth is flat (and thus the Moon landing didn't happen), or that Hillary Clinton is really a lizard person.
And again, how is anyone protecting anyone else if they're repeatedly touching their mask and spreading their germs on their hands?
Nevertheless, I still think it's wrong to claim that the Earth is flat (and thus the Moon landing didn't happen), or that Hillary Clinton is really a lizard person.
Nevertheless, I still think it's wrong to claim that the Earth is flat (and thus the Moon landing didn't happen), or that Hillary Clinton is really a lizard person.
If Biden wins, he's promised to scrap the space program
If Biden wins, he's promised to scrap the space program so we might as well teach kids the world is flat, and it's not as if knowing the world is a sphere matters when the kids have gobbled down the rest of the laughable indoctrination in school.
I hope Netflix brings it back for another season.If Biden wins, he's promised to scrap the space program so we might as well teach kids the world is flat, and it's not as if knowing the world is a sphere matters when the kids have gobbled down the rest of the laughable indoctrination in school.
Dont worry NZ has got your back!
We will keep Space Force running.
Greetings!I never said she was, I never said she wasn't. I don't cotton to that kind of polarized, extremist thinking. I take a moderate position on the question of whether Hillary Clinton's reptile brain is her whole brain.
Wait, Hillary Clinton isn't the Lizard Queen? ;D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
The lack of any space policy in his platform was loud and clear. He couldn't even be bothered to make some meaningless happy noise.
Dementia JoJo has only babbled about the climate change hoax and we saw NASA under Obama and we've heard about his economic plans so 2+2 = dead space program.
The Artemis program requires massive funding and brilliant teams, neither of which will be found under Biden's lockdown economy and diversity hires.
That's all I need from you.
In the end you're just another pathetic anti-vaxxer. Supposedly intelligent indeed.
It certainly shows that you've bought real estate in that same neighborhood of stupid upon your flat-Earth.That's all I need from you.
In the end you're just another pathetic anti-vaxxer. Supposedly intelligent indeed.
Go fuck yourself, you nippy cunt. I and my children are up to date on our childhood vaccinations, thanks. Refusing to indulge coronabollocks doesn't make me an anti-vaxxer.
Greetings!I never said she was, I never said she wasn't. I don't cotton to that kind of polarized, extremist thinking. I take a moderate position on the question of whether Hillary Clinton's reptile brain is her whole brain.
Wait, Hillary Clinton isn't the Lizard Queen? ;D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
The lack of any space policy in his platform was loud and clear. He couldn't even be bothered to make some meaningless happy noise.
Dementia JoJo has only babbled about the climate change hoax and we saw NASA under Obama and we've heard about his economic plans so 2+2 = dead space program.
The Artemis program requires massive funding and brilliant teams, neither of which will be found under Biden's lockdown economy and diversity hires.
So when you said Biden had promised to scrap the space program, were you outright lying, or were you just using hyperbole to make your own guess about the direction NASA would take under him as President? Because generally when someone says X Promise Y, they are not trying to say X didn't promise Y and never even mentioned Y but my opinion is they will drift more towards Y.
Go fuck yourself, you nippy cunt. I and my children are up to date on our childhood vaccinations, thanks. Refusing to indulge coronabollocks doesn't make me an anti-vaxxer.
You sound pretty ant-vaxxy what with your crazy ideas about the side effects of masks, loudly ignoring health advice, not caring about other pee and so on. Mibbe you've tipped over into full blown anti-vaxxer nuttiness and not noticed yet.Ah yes, the classic modern argumentative technique. Instead actually addressing what someone said or believes, you just made up shit about them and insisted it's true.
Ah yes, the classic modern argumentative technique. Instead actually addressing what someone said or believes, you just made up shit about them and insisted it's true.
No, you just made up shit.Ah yes, the classic modern argumentative technique. Instead actually addressing what someone said or believes, you just made up shit about them and insisted it's true.
Naw, I tried the first and the answers led me to conclusions. It's how it works,at some point the mental becomes so clear that you have to address it.
No, you just made up shit.Ah yes, the classic modern argumentative technique. Instead actually addressing what someone said or believes, you just made up shit about them and insisted it's true.
Naw, I tried the first and the answers led me to conclusions. It's how it works,at some point the mental becomes so clear that you have to address it.
No, you just made up shit.Ah yes, the classic modern argumentative technique. Instead actually addressing what someone said or believes, you just made up shit about them and insisted it's true.
Naw, I tried the first and the answers led me to conclusions. It's how it works,at some point the mental becomes so clear that you have to address it.
There are a few studies suggesting yes, but I haven't seen anything conclusive. I don't really have a strong opinion one way or the other. If there are any effects, it's probably small, and more likely to be tied to people who wear sealed masks over long periods, not people who wear loose cloth masks to the store.No, you just made up shit.Ah yes, the classic modern argumentative technique. Instead actually addressing what someone said or believes, you just made up shit about them and insisted it's true.
Naw, I tried the first and the answers led me to conclusions. It's how it works,at some point the mental becomes so clear that you have to address it.
Pat, do you believe masks have bad side effects?
There are a few studies suggesting yes, but I haven't seen anything conclusive. I don't really have a strong opinion one way or the other. If there are any effects, it's probably small, and more likely to be tied to people who wear sealed masks over long periods, not people who wear loose cloth masks to the store.No, you just made up shit.Ah yes, the classic modern argumentative technique. Instead actually addressing what someone said or believes, you just made up shit about them and insisted it's true.
Naw, I tried the first and the answers led me to conclusions. It's how it works,at some point the mental becomes so clear that you have to address it.
Pat, do you believe masks have bad side effects?
I occasionally point out hypocrisy or idiocy. Don't mistake that for taking sides.
No, you just made up shit.Ah yes, the classic modern argumentative technique. Instead actually addressing what someone said or believes, you just made up shit about them and insisted it's true.
Naw, I tried the first and the answers led me to conclusions. It's how it works,at some point the mental becomes so clear that you have to address it.
Pat, do you believe masks have bad side effects?
I shift my masks around with my hands. The fucking thing keeps trying to ride up into my eyes, or down off my nose.It's not like there aren't instructional videos on Youtube.
I don't know the proper way to don PPE. There were no public service anouncements or phamplets distributed.
I belive masks have bad primary effects.
Notice in pictures from China or Japan, the people wearing masks are wearing clean, surgical masks? Take a look at an American wearing a mask. They're cheap, cloth masks, usually garish colors and designs, the better to disguise the fact that it hasn't been washed in a week, if ever, and worn down under the nose, or they're shifting it around with their hands.
I shift my masks around with my hands. The fucking thing keeps trying to ride up into my eyes, or down off my nose.
I don't know the proper way to don PPE. There were no public service anouncements or phamplets distributed. People wear masks because they were told to. And I keep a couple of cheap, cloth masks in my car so I can put one one when I go to the store to keep the Karens at bay and so I can get my groceries without getting kicked out of the store. That's it. I have no illusions that the mask is actually doing anything to protect myself or others.
Hey Mistwell.
https://billwhittle.com/ediwg-invasion-anti-capitalist-nasa-group-fights-to-ban-usa-from-moon-mars-more/
Why does NASA have an 'Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Working Group', anyways?
I don't know the proper way to don PPE. There were no public service anouncements or phamplets distributed. People wear masks because they were told to. And I keep a couple of cheap, cloth masks in my car so I can put one one when I go to the store to keep the Karens at bay and so I can get my groceries without getting kicked out of the store. That's it. I have no illusions that the mask is actually doing anything to protect myself or others.I've been at conferences with J&J staff who were responsible for selling N95 masks. They'd tell stories about how J&J required them all to get certified once a year in the masks, and how everyone failed. They weren't medical professionals, but these are people whose job revolved around the mask, and they had to try again and again to get a proper seal. There's zero chance someone without training will wear one correctly, there's almost no chance someone who wears them occasionally will get it right, and even medical professionals who wear them routinely and get rigorously tested will probably make mistakes.
And of course wearing it below your nose is not good, but I think most people know that and most people don't do that.Not where I live. Mask wearing has definitely slipped in the past few months. While only a few people have started to brazenly ignore the mandates and not wear masks, a huge chunk have switched the below the nose position. Pandemic fatigue is real.
I shift my masks around with my hands. The fucking thing keeps trying to ride up into my eyes, or down off my nose.It's not like there aren't instructional videos on Youtube.
I don't know the proper way to don PPE. There were no public service anouncements or phamplets distributed.
That was the thesis of the rest of my reply. Mask wearing has become a ritual and not a preventative measure. And not even that anymore, as people get lax as the months wear on.
I belive masks have bad primary effects.
OK. What is the basis of your belief?
I went thought a bunch of masks when this first started. These are the best fitting I could find.QuoteNotice in pictures from China or Japan, the people wearing masks are wearing clean, surgical masks? Take a look at an American wearing a mask. They're cheap, cloth masks, usually garish colors and designs, the better to disguise the fact that it hasn't been washed in a week, if ever, and worn down under the nose, or they're shifting it around with their hands.
We wash our masks after every use. I have a drying line in my home with over a dozen masks on it all the time. The color of the mask is not relevant of course. As long as it's made properly (and all of ours are). I assure you, American masks are not "cheaper" than what you are seeing in China. And of course wearing it below your nose is not good, but I think most people know that and most people don't do that. You can shift your mask around with your hands, provided you're not handling the outside front of it, and provided you wash your hands before touching your mouth nose or eyes with that hand. But, none of this really has much to do with the mask.QuoteI shift my masks around with my hands. The fucking thing keeps trying to ride up into my eyes, or down off my nose.
Buy a better mask which is adjustable at the ears and which has a metal wire to close over your nose. They're not that hard to come by. It's what we have.
QuoteI don't know the proper way to don PPE. There were no public service anouncements or phamplets distributed. People wear masks because they were told to. And I keep a couple of cheap, cloth masks in my car so I can put one one when I go to the store to keep the Karens at bay and so I can get my groceries without getting kicked out of the store. That's it. I have no illusions that the mask is actually doing anything to protect myself or others.
What is your reason for thinking that, if someone has Covid-19 and is contagious, that a mask won't reduce the radius which they spread it around them?
Masks are 100% effective...at signaling your submission and fear.
You must have serious self consciousness issues if you care what strangers think of you for wearing a mask. How weak and cowardly that you're so concerned about your personal image to that degree.
You must have serious self consciousness issues if you care what strangers think of you for wearing a mask. How weak and cowardly that you're so concerned about your personal image to that degree.
Is this what counts as wit for leftists today? Seems lame even for Twatter.
I don't wear a mask so my disdain for you clowns is unconcealed. I wouldn't want you to miss an ounce of being judged for your submission.
So you can't explain it, but deflect onto Trump.Hey Mistwell.
https://billwhittle.com/ediwg-invasion-anti-capitalist-nasa-group-fights-to-ban-usa-from-moon-mars-more/
Why does NASA have an 'Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Working Group', anyways?
You mean why do they have such a group under Trump, and why does this have something to do with Biden's policies regarding NASA? Great questions. Can you answer them?
Well, why don't you just round him up and put a bullet in the back of his head, Komrade? Better yet, find out his personal information and post it where everyone can find him! That way, you can silence the dissenters and gain a +5 on your SOCIAL CREDIT SCORE! Remember: NON-CONFORMITY IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY! KILL THE UNBELIEVERS AND RAPE THEIR CHILDREN FOR THE GOOD OF THE MOTHERLAND! SHE BLEEDS FOR YOU!You must have serious self consciousness issues if you care what strangers think of you for wearing a mask. How weak and cowardly that you're so concerned about your personal image to that degree.
Is this what counts as wit for leftists today? Seems lame even for Twatter.
I don't wear a mask so my disdain for you clowns is unconcealed. I wouldn't want you to miss an ounce of being judged for your submission.
I am not a leftist by any stretch of the imagination and it's true that your comment struck me as you being deeply self conscious and insecure. If I see someone not wearing a mask, it does not communicate disdain. It just communicates someone with poor personal hygiene. It's roughly like seeing someone go to the bathroom and not wash their hands, and then picking their nose. It's like seeing someone missing teeth and with black teeth because they never bothered to brush their teeth. The image you're conveying is definitely not the one you think you're conveying. "Badass" or "nonconformist" is the last thing from other people's minds when they see you. They are more likely to wonder if you are specially abled.
I mean, some part of you had to know that how you see yourself might not be how others are seeing you, right?
So somebody says "you look like a damn fool" and you have to take it somewhere that makes you look far more foolish. Good job.Well, why don't you just round him up and put a bullet in the back of his head, Komrade? Better yet, find out his personal information and post it where everyone can find him! That way, you can silence the dissenters and gain a +5 on your SOCIAL CREDIT SCORE! Remember: NON-CONFORMITY IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY! KILL THE UNBELIEVERS AND RAPE THEIR CHILDREN FOR THE GOOD OF THE MOTHERLAND! SHE BLEEDS FOR YOU!You must have serious self consciousness issues if you care what strangers think of you for wearing a mask. How weak and cowardly that you're so concerned about your personal image to that degree.
Is this what counts as wit for leftists today? Seems lame even for Twatter.
I don't wear a mask so my disdain for you clowns is unconcealed. I wouldn't want you to miss an ounce of being judged for your submission.
I am not a leftist by any stretch of the imagination and it's true that your comment struck me as you being deeply self conscious and insecure. If I see someone not wearing a mask, it does not communicate disdain. It just communicates someone with poor personal hygiene. It's roughly like seeing someone go to the bathroom and not wash their hands, and then picking their nose. It's like seeing someone missing teeth and with black teeth because they never bothered to brush their teeth. The image you're conveying is definitely not the one you think you're conveying. "Badass" or "nonconformist" is the last thing from other people's minds when they see you. They are more likely to wonder if you are specially abled.
I mean, some part of you had to know that how you see yourself might not be how others are seeing you, right?
fucking murderous pig.
I am not a leftist by any stretch of the imagination and it's true that your comment struck me as you being deeply self conscious and insecure.
They are more likely to wonder if you are specially abled.
But what you said is quite telling though. You wear your diaper for conformity to make sure you aren't judged as disobedient and to signal to your fellow sheep that you submit as they submit so they approve of you.A lot of us wear pants in public too. Same kind of thing. But I'm sure you resist that too and show your ass at every opportunity.
One conversation topic that rang true was how “save the world” is all they have left. There’s no going back from it. Kinda like how once RPG settings (and fantasy fiction generally) got hooked on cataclysms they stared happening in-setting every few years; reboot = cataclysm.Reminds me of the recently sunset show Supernatural that progressed from monster-of-the-week to story-arc monsters, to season-long nemeses, to stopping the apocalypse. Then it just kept doubling-down season after season, and we even had the characters in-show asking "What's the apocalypse this time?"
One conversation topic that rang true was how “save the world” is all they have left. There’s no going back from it. Kinda like how once RPG settings (and fantasy fiction generally) got hooked on cataclysms they stared happening in-setting every few years; reboot = cataclysm.
Why is environmental policy X’s implementation necessary? To save the world. Why must you remake social functions from the ground up when a new virus hits with effects within historical norms? To save humanity. What happens if we make political decisions that don’t arc towards the history forecasted as our future? Then people are heinous assholes which might need some mandatory reprogramming if they won’t come along quietly.
None of that is sane. But it’s mainstream messaging. And they can’t ever come down off that world-teetering ledge; they’re all-in. There is no way to dial back to normalcy without losing credibility forever.
One conversation topic that rang true was how “save the world” is all they have left. There’s no going back from it. Kinda like how once RPG settings (and fantasy fiction generally) got hooked on cataclysms they stared happening in-setting every few years; reboot = cataclysm.Reminds me of the recently sunset show Supernatural that progressed from monster-of-the-week to story-arc monsters, to season-long nemeses, to stopping the apocalypse. Then it just kept doubling-down season after season, and we even had the characters in-show asking "What's the apocalypse this time?"
One conversation topic that rang true was how “save the world” is all they have left. There’s no going back from it. Kinda like how once RPG settings (and fantasy fiction generally) got hooked on cataclysms they stared happening in-setting every few years; reboot = cataclysm.
Why is environmental policy X’s implementation necessary? To save the world. Why must you remake social functions from the ground up when a new virus hits with effects within historical norms? To save humanity. What happens if we make political decisions that don’t arc towards the history forecasted as our future? Then people are heinous assholes which might need some mandatory reprogramming if they won’t come along quietly.
None of that is sane. But it’s mainstream messaging. And they can’t ever come down off that world-teetering ledge; they’re all-in. There is no way to dial back to normalcy without losing credibility forever.
I agree that the hyperbolic language is insane. My biggest issue on this forum is how many posters willfully engage in this sort of cataclysmic talk -- i.e. "The other side want to make us SLAVES to the CHINESE! They are going to DESTROY AMERICA unless we fight back!" I remember being called an antichrist just a few weeks ago. Yes, plenty of liberals engage in similar from their side - but at least among voices on this forum, all of the apocalyptic talk is coming from conservative posters.
It does seem difficult to dial back from such predictions. Unfortunately, I don't think that even the predictions failing will make people rethink and moderate. I expect that after four years of Biden, that extremist conservatives won't disavow their current apocalyptic predictions -- just like how extremist liberals have not disavowed their apocalyptic predictions after four years of Trump.
One conversation topic that rang true was how “save the world” is all they have left. There’s no going back from it. Kinda like how once RPG settings (and fantasy fiction generally) got hooked on cataclysms they stared happening in-setting every few years; reboot = cataclysm.
Why is environmental policy X’s implementation necessary? To save the world. Why must you remake social functions from the ground up when a new virus hits with effects within historical norms? To save humanity. What happens if we make political decisions that don’t arc towards the history forecasted as our future? Then people are heinous assholes which might need some mandatory reprogramming if they won’t come along quietly.
None of that is sane. But it’s mainstream messaging. And they can’t ever come down off that world-teetering ledge; they’re all-in. There is no way to dial back to normalcy without losing credibility forever.
I agree that the hyperbolic language is insane. My biggest issue on this forum is how many posters willfully engage in this sort of cataclysmic talk -- i.e. "The other side want to make us SLAVES to the CHINESE! They are going to DESTROY AMERICA unless we fight back!" I remember being called an antichrist just a few weeks ago. Yes, plenty of liberals engage in similar from their side - but at least among voices on this forum, all of the apocalyptic talk is coming from conservative posters.
It does seem difficult to dial back from such predictions. Unfortunately, I don't think that even the predictions failing will make people rethink and moderate. I expect that after four years of Biden, that extremist conservatives won't disavow their current apocalyptic predictions -- just like how extremist liberals have not disavowed their apocalyptic predictions after four years of Trump.
Note that even those are not global, but local.
But this is one of my beefs with you jhkim. It is not your place to say "Please don't be like the radicals of the beliefs I lean towards". It is absolutely sane, normal, and natural to put reason aside when threated by something having no reason. That's where we're at now. "Yeah but you guys are punching back and punching is bad" doesn't have the corollary attached that when someone is punching you, punching them back is OK.
Tell you what - if conservatives are still "immoderate" after the left has disarmed their rhetoric of our having to materially atone for sins of the father, let's have a conference about how to dial it back. Until then, what is most necessary is to counteract the rhetorical gaslighting - which is done...with counter-rhetoric.
But this is one of my beefs with you jhkim. It is not your place to say "Please don't be like the radicals of the beliefs I lean towards". It is absolutely sane, normal, and natural to put reason aside when threated by something having no reason. That's where we're at now. "Yeah but you guys are punching back and punching is bad" doesn't have the corollary attached that when someone is punching you, punching them back is OK.This is a messageboard about a kosher corner of a geeky niche hobby. It isn't the metaphorical pass of Thermopylae; there is no broader war that will be won by what we say or do not say here. So there is no need to scorch or salt the figurative earth with win-at-all-costs or take-no-prisoners rhetorical techniques.
Tell you what - if conservatives are still "immoderate" after the left has disarmed their rhetoric of our having to materially atone for sins of the father, let's have a conference about how to dial it back. Until then, what is most necessary is to counteract the rhetorical gaslighting - which is done...with counter-rhetoric.
And I'll continue to advocate for extending good faith instead of jumping to conclusions, and having discussions instead of shout downs.I like what you're trying to do. I tried the same before I gave up hope for most of the dumbasses in this place. It really isn't the place for serious conversations, but if it looks like it's genuinely heading in that direction, maybe I'll give it another try.
You should try it again. When you slip your trollskin, your posts are fairly reasonable. I don't agree with you very often, but I've never looked for that. Uniformity is dull.And I'll continue to advocate for extending good faith instead of jumping to conclusions, and having discussions instead of shout downs.I like what you're trying to do. I tried the same before I gave up hope for most of the dumbasses in this place. It really isn't the place for serious conversations, but if it looks like it's genuinely heading in that direction, maybe I'll give it another try.
Well, I hate to disappoint people. :PSo somebody says "you look like a damn fool" and you have to take it somewhere that makes you look far more foolish. Good job.Well, why don't you just round him up and put a bullet in the back of his head, Komrade? Better yet, find out his personal information and post it where everyone can find him! That way, you can silence the dissenters and gain a +5 on your SOCIAL CREDIT SCORE! Remember: NON-CONFORMITY IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY! KILL THE UNBELIEVERS AND RAPE THEIR CHILDREN FOR THE GOOD OF THE MOTHERLAND! SHE BLEEDS FOR YOU!You must have serious self consciousness issues if you care what strangers think of you for wearing a mask. How weak and cowardly that you're so concerned about your personal image to that degree.
Is this what counts as wit for leftists today? Seems lame even for Twatter.
I don't wear a mask so my disdain for you clowns is unconcealed. I wouldn't want you to miss an ounce of being judged for your submission.
I am not a leftist by any stretch of the imagination and it's true that your comment struck me as you being deeply self conscious and insecure. If I see someone not wearing a mask, it does not communicate disdain. It just communicates someone with poor personal hygiene. It's roughly like seeing someone go to the bathroom and not wash their hands, and then picking their nose. It's like seeing someone missing teeth and with black teeth because they never bothered to brush their teeth. The image you're conveying is definitely not the one you think you're conveying. "Badass" or "nonconformist" is the last thing from other people's minds when they see you. They are more likely to wonder if you are specially abled.
I mean, some part of you had to know that how you see yourself might not be how others are seeing you, right?
fucking murderous pig.
And I'll continue to advocate for extending good faith instead of jumping to conclusions, and having discussions instead of shout downs.I like what you're trying to do. I tried the same before I gave up hope for most of the dumbasses in this place. It really isn't the place for serious conversations, but if it looks like it's genuinely heading in that direction, maybe I'll give it another try.
But this is one of my beefs with you jhkim. It is not your place to say "Please don't be like the radicals of the beliefs I lean towards". It is absolutely sane, normal, and natural to put reason aside when threated by something having no reason. That's where we're at now. "Yeah but you guys are punching back and punching is bad" doesn't have the corollary attached that when someone is punching you, punching them back is OK.
Tell you what - if conservatives are still "immoderate" after the left has disarmed their rhetoric of our having to materially atone for sins of the father, let's have a conference about how to dial it back. Until then, what is most necessary is to counteract the rhetorical gaslighting - which is done...with counter-rhetoric.
So you can't explain it, but deflect onto Trump.Hey Mistwell.
https://billwhittle.com/ediwg-invasion-anti-capitalist-nasa-group-fights-to-ban-usa-from-moon-mars-more/
Why does NASA have an 'Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Working Group', anyways?
You mean why do they have such a group under Trump, and why does this have something to do with Biden's policies regarding NASA? Great questions. Can you answer them?
BTW, the EDIWG dates back to 2010.
But I wouldn't expect you to remember that. You are, after all, a very small, stupid person.
But what you said is quite telling though. You wear your diaper for conformity to make sure you aren't judged as disobedient and to signal to your fellow sheep that you submit as they submit so they approve of you.A lot of us wear pants in public too. Same kind of thing. But I'm sure you resist that too and show your ass at every opportunity.
The point I am making is that while I might fault Trump for not firing these idiots, I appreciate he had a number of other things inconveniencing him, like an impeachment farce that ate up three years.So you can't explain it, but deflect onto Trump.Hey Mistwell.
https://billwhittle.com/ediwg-invasion-anti-capitalist-nasa-group-fights-to-ban-usa-from-moon-mars-more/
Why does NASA have an 'Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Working Group', anyways?
You mean why do they have such a group under Trump, and why does this have something to do with Biden's policies regarding NASA? Great questions. Can you answer them?
BTW, the EDIWG dates back to 2010.
But I wouldn't expect you to remember that. You are, after all, a very small, stupid person.
Your personal attack notwithstanding, why would I know why they have such a group? YOU were making it a point about Biden but given we both know it well pre-dates Biden, WTF is your point in raising this?
The point I am making is that while I might fault Trump for not firing these idiots, I appreciate he had a number of other things inconveniencing him, like an impeachment farce that ate up three years.So you can't explain it, but deflect onto Trump.Hey Mistwell.
https://billwhittle.com/ediwg-invasion-anti-capitalist-nasa-group-fights-to-ban-usa-from-moon-mars-more/
Why does NASA have an 'Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Working Group', anyways?
You mean why do they have such a group under Trump, and why does this have something to do with Biden's policies regarding NASA? Great questions. Can you answer them?
BTW, the EDIWG dates back to 2010.
But I wouldn't expect you to remember that. You are, after all, a very small, stupid person.
Your personal attack notwithstanding, why would I know why they have such a group? YOU were making it a point about Biden but given we both know it well pre-dates Biden, WTF is your point in raising this?
And if you think Biden will set NASA on the straight and narrow, you are delusional AND stupid. How efficient.
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.Your ramblings aren't proof of anything.
Reply #806. READ IT!!
Your ramblings aren't proof of anything.
I don't like your song; try something that doesn't sound like REEEEE!Your ramblings aren't proof of anything.
Dance, monkey! Dance!
I don't like your song; try something that doesn't sound like REEEEE!Your ramblings aren't proof of anything.
Dance, monkey! Dance!
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.He doesn't care. You could present a signed letter by Sleepy Joe stating that NASA's new purpose will be to prop up climate change and to increase 'diversity' in STEM and he'd ignore it.
Reply #806. READ IT!!
Let's not forget that jeffy produced "nothing" in the way of verifiable facts. His ramblings are not proof of anything.Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.He doesn't care. You could present a signed letter by Sleepy Joe stating that NASA's new purpose will be to prop up climate change and to increase 'diversity' in STEM and he'd ignore it.
Reply #806. READ IT!!
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.
Reply #806. READ IT!!
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.He doesn't care. You could present a signed letter by Sleepy Joe stating that NASA's new purpose will be to prop up climate change and to increase 'diversity' in STEM and he'd ignore it.
Reply #806. READ IT!!
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.He doesn't care. You could present a signed letter by Sleepy Joe stating that NASA's new purpose will be to prop up climate change and to increase 'diversity' in STEM and he'd ignore it.
Reply #806. READ IT!!
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.He doesn't care. You could present a signed letter by Sleepy Joe stating that NASA's new purpose will be to prop up climate change and to increase 'diversity' in STEM and he'd ignore it.
Reply #806. READ IT!!
Ah but STEM discriminates against art professors when it comes to grant money. It is now STEAM. Get with the times bro.
Here:Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.He doesn't care. You could present a signed letter by Sleepy Joe stating that NASA's new purpose will be to prop up climate change and to increase 'diversity' in STEM and he'd ignore it.
Reply #806. READ IT!!
Ah but STEM discriminates against art professors when it comes to grant money. It is now STEAM. Get with the times bro.
Do you have evidence Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected?
Here:Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.He doesn't care. You could present a signed letter by Sleepy Joe stating that NASA's new purpose will be to prop up climate change and to increase 'diversity' in STEM and he'd ignore it.
Reply #806. READ IT!!
Ah but STEM discriminates against art professors when it comes to grant money. It is now STEAM. Get with the times bro.
Do you have evidence Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected?
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/28/biden-space-policy-climate-change-433236
https://time.com/5907796/biden-space-program/
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/10/31/1991287/-A-victory-for-Biden-won-t-just-change-everything-on-the-ground-it-could-reset-the-future-in-space
https://www.space.com/president-elect-biden-nasa-transition-team
https://news.yahoo.com/candidate-biden-said-little-space-120018562.html
https://capitalresearch.org/article/nasa/
lazy bastards...
Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?
It's a super simple thing. Find a QUOTE FROM BIDEN where he says the word PROMISE or something directly comparable to that word or a commitment along the lines of a promise, where he says he will SCRAP NASA or something directly comparable to that word.
Expressing a desire to change NASAs priorities is not a promise to scrap NASA. For example, Trump expressed a desire to change the priorities of the EPA if elected, and this was not him promising to scrap the EPA. An anti-Trump might lie and act like him wanting to change the priorities is the same as him wanting to scrap it, but that would be bullshit we'd all understood. Just like we all understand what you just tried to do was lie
Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?
It's a super simple thing. Find a QUOTE FROM BIDEN where he says the word PROMISE or something directly comparable to that word or a commitment along the lines of a promise, where he says he will SCRAP NASA or something directly comparable to that word.
Expressing a desire to change NASAs priorities is not a promise to scrap NASA. For example, Trump expressed a desire to change the priorities of the EPA if elected, and this was not him promising to scrap the EPA. An anti-Trump might lie and act like him wanting to change the priorities is the same as him wanting to scrap it, but that would be bullshit we'd all understood. Just like we all understand what you just tried to do was lie
'Change priorities'. Wow, way to undersell 'we're pivoting away from actual space exploration and going to prop up diversity hiring and the climate change grift'.
But hey, it won't be scrapped. It'll be a pathetic shell of its former self, housing the usual woke bullshit, but it won't go away!
Agreed. We can expect more of this bullshit started by Obama's former NASA chief Charlie Bolden:Number one won't happen, because engineering, math, and science require actual work, not wokeness, and at that point they'll just indulge their inner Lysenko. Number two should not even be a NASA imperative; that's State Department territory primarily; and number three is at best stupid and at worst historical revisionism (there have been questions raised as to how much Muslim nations 'contributed' to STEM in their golden ages -- whether those accomplishments were made by Muslims, or by residents living under the scimitar).
Bolden said President Barack Obama had charged him with three things upon becoming NASA administrator.
"One, he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering," Bolden said.
Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?
It's a super simple thing. Find a QUOTE FROM BIDEN where he says the word PROMISE or something directly comparable to that word or a commitment along the lines of a promise, where he says he will SCRAP NASA or something directly comparable to that word.
Expressing a desire to change NASAs priorities is not a promise to scrap NASA. For example, Trump expressed a desire to change the priorities of the EPA if elected, and this was not him promising to scrap the EPA. An anti-Trump might lie and act like him wanting to change the priorities is the same as him wanting to scrap it, but that would be bullshit we'd all understood. Just like we all understand what you just tried to do was lie
'Change priorities'. Wow, way to undersell 'we're pivoting away from actual space exploration and going to prop up diversity hiring and the climate change grift'.
But hey, it won't be scrapped. It'll be a pathetic shell of its former self, housing the usual woke bullshit, but it won't go away!
Let's not forget that jeffy produced "nothing" in the way of verifiable facts. His ramblings are not proof of anything.
No, but you seem to be. You're arguing semantics when both Spinach and I are pointing out how NASA has been hollowed out and might as well be dead.Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?
It's a super simple thing. Find a QUOTE FROM BIDEN where he says the word PROMISE or something directly comparable to that word or a commitment along the lines of a promise, where he says he will SCRAP NASA or something directly comparable to that word.
Expressing a desire to change NASAs priorities is not a promise to scrap NASA. For example, Trump expressed a desire to change the priorities of the EPA if elected, and this was not him promising to scrap the EPA. An anti-Trump might lie and act like him wanting to change the priorities is the same as him wanting to scrap it, but that would be bullshit we'd all understood. Just like we all understand what you just tried to do was lie
'Change priorities'. Wow, way to undersell 'we're pivoting away from actual space exploration and going to prop up diversity hiring and the climate change grift'.
But hey, it won't be scrapped. It'll be a pathetic shell of its former self, housing the usual woke bullshit, but it won't go away!
Are you fucking high?
ONE goalpost was set by Spinachcat. He said Biden promised to sack NASA if he won. That's it. That's the one single goal post. NOTHING in your links shows he promised to sack NASA if he won. YOU are trying to move the goal post away from what he set. SHOW ME THE PROMISE.
You can't. Because he lied. And now you're lying. Why though? Why compound his lie with your own?
But this is one of my beefs with you jhkim. It is not your place to say "Please don't be like the radicals of the beliefs I lean towards". It is absolutely sane, normal, and natural to put reason aside when threated by something having no reason. That's where we're at now. "Yeah but you guys are punching back and punching is bad" doesn't have the corollary attached that when someone is punching you, punching them back is OK.
Tell you what - if conservatives are still "immoderate" after the left has disarmed their rhetoric of our having to materially atone for sins of the father, let's have a conference about how to dial it back. Until then, what is most necessary is to counteract the rhetorical gaslighting - which is done...with counter-rhetoric.
If I have an insane person ranting at me in my face, I do think it's natural to get mad and scream back at them -- also acting irrational. However, I also don't think that it's productive. When professionals have to deal with insane people -- like psychiatrists and orderlies -- they do so by being calm and rational. When force is necessary, it's applied in measured amounts.
Even if it's a violent confrontation, I think rationality and order is useful. A crazed mob is dangerous, but they are no match for an organized military force. If I was in a group faced with an insanely violent mob, I'd urge everyone to keep calm and use their heads. By tactically applying our force, we can systematically take the mob apart. Going crazy and attacking them irrationally is just going to get more of us killed.
The rhetoric battle, not kinetic ones.
What if I'm descended from lowlife scumbags?
Tell me, does it ever cross your tiny pea-brain to ask why SpaceX keeps launching (and occasionally failing, but that's rocket science for you) while NASA doesn't do shit?I'm generally happy to have a go at identity politics, but NASA was becoming useless long before that nonsense popped up. It's simply that as any organisation grows and ages, it becomes subject to Pournelle's Iron Law (https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html). He actually came up with it by noting how NASA changed from Apollo - from having the goal of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth, to the goal of being able to keep 175,000 people employed. Thus the clusterfuck that was the Shuttle.
I doubt it. You probably cheer on NASA's lurch into idpol idiocy.
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people:
First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.
Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.
The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.
Tell me, does it ever cross your tiny pea-brain to ask why SpaceX keeps launching (and occasionally failing, but that's rocket science for you) while NASA doesn't do shit?I'm generally happy to have a go at identity politics, but NASA was becoming useless long before that nonsense popped up. It's simply that as any organisation grows and ages, it becomes subject to Pournelle's Iron Law (https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html). He actually came up with it by noting how NASA changed from Apollo - from having the goal of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth, to the goal of being able to keep 175,000 people employed. Thus the clusterfuck that was the Shuttle.
I doubt it. You probably cheer on NASA's lurch into idpol idiocy.QuotePournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people:
First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.
Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.
The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.
Identity politics at NASA are, I believe, a symptom of bureaucratic dysfunction, not a cause of it - because bureaucratic dysfunction existed at NASA long before this stuff came along.
There is more than one problem in the world, and more than one cause of clusterfucks.
Not that I disagree with you, but... unless someone goes in and cleans out the infection, that's not gonna happen.Tell me, does it ever cross your tiny pea-brain to ask why SpaceX keeps launching (and occasionally failing, but that's rocket science for you) while NASA doesn't do shit?I'm generally happy to have a go at identity politics, but NASA was becoming useless long before that nonsense popped up. It's simply that as any organisation grows and ages, it becomes subject to Pournelle's Iron Law (https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html). He actually came up with it by noting how NASA changed from Apollo - from having the goal of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth, to the goal of being able to keep 175,000 people employed. Thus the clusterfuck that was the Shuttle.
I doubt it. You probably cheer on NASA's lurch into idpol idiocy.QuotePournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people:
First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.
Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.
The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.
Identity politics at NASA are, I believe, a symptom of bureaucratic dysfunction, not a cause of it - because bureaucratic dysfunction existed at NASA long before this stuff came along.
There is more than one problem in the world, and more than one cause of clusterfucks.
I'm hoping that NASA evolves into an administration for the governance of civilian space programs in the same way that the FAA governs civilian aviation. If for no other reason, the sheer cost effectiveness of civilian space versus government bureacracy space.
If for no other reason, the sheer cost effectiveness of civilian space versus government bureacracy space.Private enterprise is not inherently more efficient than public. When an organisation is old enough, it becomes bloated, bureaucratic and inefficient. We see this with many large companies, it takes a huge effort by leaders to avoid this fate.
Private enterprise is not inherently more efficient than public. When an organisation is old enough, it becomes bloated, bureaucratic and inefficient. We see this with many large companies, it takes a huge effort by leaders to avoid this fate.The best solution might be to establish a private certification board, something like Underwriters' Laboratories, for spacecraft and spaceflight.
The only difference is that in private enterprise, incompetent bureaucratic organisations can simply collapse under the weight of their own inefficiency - or the corruption people engage in to get around it. Enron and so on are good examples of this. Some of course will be deemed Too Big To Fail, which is why Lockheed-Martin and their ilk plod along uselessly decades after they should have die. But in principle all, and in practise at least some bloated bureaucratic companies can and do simply collapse, and their members and assets can go on to more productive uses.
But government departments are never allowed to die. They're like a terminal cancer patient who's brain dead and whose family will never, ever pull the plug. All you can do is trim the tumours from time to time like hedges.
If NASA becomes an FAA, then in 20 years SpaceX will be just as slow, overpriced and useless as most US defence companies are today. That steady flow of government money will cause them to expand from the top and put in diversity managers and all that nonsense.
Trying to get mistwell to engage in intellectual honesty is like trying to nail jello to a wall. He will keep moving goalposts and telling bold faced lies until your common sense tells you to give up and then he will declare victory.
No, but you seem to be. You're arguing semantics when both Spinach and I are pointing out how NASA has been hollowed out and might as well be dead.Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?
It's a super simple thing. Find a QUOTE FROM BIDEN where he says the word PROMISE or something directly comparable to that word or a commitment along the lines of a promise, where he says he will SCRAP NASA or something directly comparable to that word.
Expressing a desire to change NASAs priorities is not a promise to scrap NASA. For example, Trump expressed a desire to change the priorities of the EPA if elected, and this was not him promising to scrap the EPA. An anti-Trump might lie and act like him wanting to change the priorities is the same as him wanting to scrap it, but that would be bullshit we'd all understood. Just like we all understand what you just tried to do was lie
'Change priorities'. Wow, way to undersell 'we're pivoting away from actual space exploration and going to prop up diversity hiring and the climate change grift'.
But hey, it won't be scrapped. It'll be a pathetic shell of its former self, housing the usual woke bullshit, but it won't go away!
Are you fucking high?
ONE goalpost was set by Spinachcat. He said Biden promised to sack NASA if he won. That's it. That's the one single goal post. NOTHING in your links shows he promised to sack NASA if he won. YOU are trying to move the goal post away from what he set. SHOW ME THE PROMISE.
You can't. Because he lied. And now you're lying. Why though? Why compound his lie with your own?
Iowahawk's axiom still holds true about leftards:
1) Identify a respected institution.
2) Kill it.
3) Gut it.
4) Wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect.
Tell me, does it ever cross your tiny pea-brain to ask why SpaceX keeps launching (and occasionally failing, but that's rocket science for you) while NASA doesn't do shit?
I doubt it. You probably cheer on NASA's lurch into idpol idiocy.
I bet your hands were shaking in tiny tard rage as you wrote this, Misty. Boy, it must be hard when people point out your flaws.No, but you seem to be. You're arguing semantics when both Spinach and I are pointing out how NASA has been hollowed out and might as well be dead.Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?
It's a super simple thing. Find a QUOTE FROM BIDEN where he says the word PROMISE or something directly comparable to that word or a commitment along the lines of a promise, where he says he will SCRAP NASA or something directly comparable to that word.
Expressing a desire to change NASAs priorities is not a promise to scrap NASA. For example, Trump expressed a desire to change the priorities of the EPA if elected, and this was not him promising to scrap the EPA. An anti-Trump might lie and act like him wanting to change the priorities is the same as him wanting to scrap it, but that would be bullshit we'd all understood. Just like we all understand what you just tried to do was lie
'Change priorities'. Wow, way to undersell 'we're pivoting away from actual space exploration and going to prop up diversity hiring and the climate change grift'.
But hey, it won't be scrapped. It'll be a pathetic shell of its former self, housing the usual woke bullshit, but it won't go away!
Are you fucking high?
ONE goalpost was set by Spinachcat. He said Biden promised to sack NASA if he won. That's it. That's the one single goal post. NOTHING in your links shows he promised to sack NASA if he won. YOU are trying to move the goal post away from what he set. SHOW ME THE PROMISE.
You can't. Because he lied. And now you're lying. Why though? Why compound his lie with your own?
Iowahawk's axiom still holds true about leftards:
1) Identify a respected institution.
2) Kill it.
3) Gut it.
4) Wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect.
Tell me, does it ever cross your tiny pea-brain to ask why SpaceX keeps launching (and occasionally failing, but that's rocket science for you) while NASA doesn't do shit?
I doubt it. You probably cheer on NASA's lurch into idpol idiocy.
It's not semantics you fucking liar because we all know what the words promise and scrap mean and there is no dispute about the finer nuances of what it means to make a promise or to scrap something. There was no promise about NASA to begin with, and he never threatened to scrap NASA no matter how you spin the word "scrap".
If he didn't promise to scrap it, then why did douchenozzle make the claim? If he meant "Biden won't support NASA as much as Trump did" then why did he say he made a promise (which he didn't) to scrap it (which he didn't)?
The rest of your bullshit about SpaceX is a total distraction which has nothing to do with Biden or his promise to scrap anything. You're trying to shift the topic to 'What does NASA do now' so we don't talk about the FACT that Biden did not promise to scrap NASA if elected.
Face it. He lied and hoped nobody would call him on it. You guys are circling the wagons like some SJW circle jerk because a member of your tribe was caught lying and God forbid he be held accountable for it. Can't have personal responsibility if they're a member of your tribe, right? Personal responsibility for the bullshit you say online is only for people outside the tribe, right?
Private enterprise is not inherently more efficient than public.
The only difference is that in private enterprise, incompetent bureaucratic organisations can simply collapse under the weight of their own inefficiency - or the corruption people engage in to get around it. Enron and so on are good examples of this. Some of course will be deemed Too Big To Fail, which is why Lockheed-Martin and their ilk plod along uselessly decades after they should have die. But in principle all, and in practise at least some bloated bureaucratic companies can and do simply collapse, and their members and assets can go on to more productive uses.
But government departments are never allowed to die.
Yeah, I have NO idea where he was going with that. The whole 'too big to fail' problem is rightfully flagged as an aberration of the free market and a result of interference, not a feature.
Private enterprise is not inherently more efficient than public.
That is an interesting thesis statement you have there. I wonder how you are planning to back that up?QuoteThe only difference is that in private enterprise, incompetent bureaucratic organisations can simply collapse under the weight of their own inefficiency - or the corruption people engage in to get around it. Enron and so on are good examples of this. Some of course will be deemed Too Big To Fail, which is why Lockheed-Martin and their ilk plod along uselessly decades after they should have die. But in principle all, and in practise at least some bloated bureaucratic companies can and do simply collapse, and their members and assets can go on to more productive uses.
I see. You intend to DISPROVE your own thesis statement. Bold Move, Cotton.QuoteBut government departments are never allowed to die.
So. In summary, Private Enterprise is not more efficient than Government, because both Private Enterprise and Government can become bloated, beaurocratic messes unable to find their own asses with the help of six billion dollar ass-finding tools, except that bloated, inefficient beaurocratic private enterprises can and do die off and are replaced with efficient, cost effective and competent new businesses, while Government just trundles on forever?
With a side corollary that sometimes Government keeps the bloated inefficient incompetent private enterprises on well past their funerals, thus... what? Private Enterprise Bad, Government Good?
I raised my eyebrows at that intro as well, but Kyle Aaron builds logically from that introductory statement to the rest of the post, which you both correctly interpreted, and support. So I don't see why you have a problem with the lede, because in situ it's clearly just emphasizing the primary difference between a public organization and a private company is creative destruction. I.e. it's not the structure or nature of companies that leads to better outcomes, but their environment. Specifically, it's the competitive pressures, and a method to winnow out the failures.
Private enterprise is not inherently more efficient than public.That is an interesting thesis statement you have there. I wonder how you are planning to back that up?Yeah, I have NO idea where he was going with that. The whole 'too big to fail' problem is rightfully flagged as an aberration of the free market and a result of interference, not a feature.
I raised my eyebrows at that intro as well, but Kyle Aaron builds logically from that introductory statement to the rest of the post, which you both correctly interpreted, and support. So I don't see why you have a problem with the lede, because in situ it's clearly just emphasizing the primary difference between a public organization and a private company is creative destruction. I.e. it's not the structure or nature of companies that leads to better outcomes, but their environment. Specifically, it's the competitive pressures, and a method to winnow out the failures.
Private enterprise is not inherently more efficient than public.That is an interesting thesis statement you have there. I wonder how you are planning to back that up?Yeah, I have NO idea where he was going with that. The whole 'too big to fail' problem is rightfully flagged as an aberration of the free market and a result of interference, not a feature.
I do still have one objection to the statement, but it's relatively minor: A private company also has an advantage in calculation and thus prediction. A market provides costs, and those can be used to calculate cost-benefit ratios and otherwise determine the most efficient use of resources. A government organization is insulated from this by political demands and public funding, which often leads to quixotic choices like hiring standards designed to favor certain interest groups, and perverse incentives, most particularly the tendency for failure to lead to an increase in funding. But that is a corollary point.
This is where crony capitalism has bypassed these consequences in some industries (auto manufacturing and banking being prime examples) and made such outcomes similar to governmental outcomes, almost all of which stems from governmental regulations and bailouts.Not some industries. All. We live in a heavily regulated world, and regulatory agencies and boards are always captured by the industries they represent. There's a difference in degree, yes, but it's a truism across all industries that regulations tend to favor the large, established companies and create barriers to new entrants. And that's not even considering the implicit bias when regulators look forward to a cushy job as a lobbyist or advisor in one of the companies they regulated, upon retirement. Or the bias inherent in special interests -- the companies in an industry have a vested interest in the things that affect their industry, so they'll spend money and work for years and decades to influence things in their direction. By contrast, legislators, regulators in general, and the public at large tend to focus on a few proud nails or egregious examples, and thus lose the long game of influence via incremental changes.
it's not the structure or nature of companies that leads to better outcomes, but their environment. Specifically, it's the competitive pressures, and a method to winnow out the failures.Well-paraphrased, thankyou.
A private company also has an advantage in calculation and thus prediction. A market provides costs, and those can be used to calculate cost-benefit ratios and otherwise determine the most efficient use of resources. A government organization is insulated from this by political demands and public funding, which often leads to quixotic choices like hiring standards designed to favor certain interest groups, and perverse incentives, most particularly the tendency for failure to lead to an increase in funding. But that is a corollary point.It's a fair point. In principle government organisations can adopt similar ideas, in practice they tend not to, or it's some bizarre perversion of it mostly designed just to sack people some manager dislikes.
In particular, you have hit on why government has worse outcomes that private sector efforts. It's not an "inherent" difference in efficiency, it's a lack of negative consequences in governmental institutions for failure.Yes. And this has applications for child-rearing, education - and roleplaying games. If you never allow people to fail, they can't get better. So in roleplaying games, you must ask whether you want a passive experience like watching a movie, or an active participatory experience like playing a game of tennis, where you expect to be challenged (not overwhelmed, but challenged) and gradually strive to improve your play.
This is where crony capitalism has bypassed these consequences in some industries (auto manufacturing and banking being prime examples) and made such outcomes similar to governmental outcomes, almost all of which stems from governmental regulations and bailouts.Not some industries. All. We live in a heavily regulated world, and regulatory agencies and boards are always captured by the industries they represent. There's a difference in degree, yes, but it's a truism across all industries that regulations tend to favor the large, established companies and create barriers to new entrants. And that's not even considering the implicit bias when regulators look forward to a cushy job as a lobbyist or advisor in one of the companies they regulated, upon retirement. Or the bias inherent in special interests -- the companies in an industry have a vested interest in the things that affect their industry, so they'll spend money and work for years and decades to influence things in their direction. By contrast, legislators, regulators in general, and the public at large tend to focus on a few proud nails or egregious examples, and thus lose the long game of influence via incremental changes.
Crony capitalism is an inevitable result of heavy, obscure, and ever-changing laws and regulations, where the regulators, legislators and judges have a great deal of discretion when making the rules and rulings. The best way to minimize it is to reduce the number of rules, but even more importantly to make the rules transparent, stable, and have them consistently enforced. If the rules are clearly understood, the consequences are reliably enforced, and government officials can't make decisions that subtly favor one side or the other, then regulatory capture becomes much less of a competitive advantage, and companies will tend to focus on competing with each other instead of lobbying for favors.
it's not the structure or nature of companies that leads to better outcomes, but their environment. Specifically, it's the competitive pressures, and a method to winnow out the failures.Well-paraphrased, thankyou.QuoteA private company also has an advantage in calculation and thus prediction. A market provides costs, and those can be used to calculate cost-benefit ratios and otherwise determine the most efficient use of resources. A government organization is insulated from this by political demands and public funding, which often leads to quixotic choices like hiring standards designed to favor certain interest groups, and perverse incentives, most particularly the tendency for failure to lead to an increase in funding. But that is a corollary point.It's a fair point. In principle government organisations can adopt similar ideas, in practice they tend not to, or it's some bizarre perversion of it mostly designed just to sack people some manager dislikes.
But in general, large groups of people who work together every day will adopt similar behaviours, and certin behaviours will appear given enough time and organisational size, thus the observations in Parkinson's Laws (https://www.amazon.com.au/Parkinsons-Law-Other-Studies-Administration-ebook/dp/B07JP676Q8/), such as work expanding to fill the available time (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law), and the law of triviality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality) which states that the less important a decision, the more time and argument will be spent over it, and so on.Quote from: shuddemellIn particular, you have hit on why government has worse outcomes that private sector efforts. It's not an "inherent" difference in efficiency, it's a lack of negative consequences in governmental institutions for failure.Yes. And this has applications for child-rearing, education - and roleplaying games. If you never allow people to fail, they can't get better. So in roleplaying games, you must ask whether you want a passive experience like watching a movie, or an active participatory experience like playing a game of tennis, where you expect to be challenged (not overwhelmed, but challenged) and gradually strive to improve your play.
Dear God, yes. It's like we've raised an entire generation of kids with the psychological equivalent of immunodeficiency disorder. They've got no capacity to shrug things off, no ability to forgive (show me how well leftists do that. I'll wait. I won't hold my breath), and a belief that 'intentions' and 'lived experiences' somehow trump hard data and results.
Absolutely, I would even submit, lack of consequences from helicopter parenting and the notion that everyone gets a trophy is a particularly toxic manifestation of this problem, and it is woefully obvious in a large portion of those subjected to such nonsense. Growth almost always stems from adversity, not the avoidance of it.
That's the basic thesis of The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt. It's an expansion of this article:Dear God, yes. It's like we've raised an entire generation of kids with the psychological equivalent of immunodeficiency disorder. They've got no capacity to shrug things off, no ability to forgive (show me how well leftists do that. I'll wait. I won't hold my breath), and a belief that 'intentions' and 'lived experiences' somehow trump hard data and results.
Absolutely, I would even submit, lack of consequences from helicopter parenting and the notion that everyone gets a trophy is a particularly toxic manifestation of this problem, and it is woefully obvious in a large portion of those subjected to such nonsense. Growth almost always stems from adversity, not the avoidance of it.
OK, not ALL of them. But enough that it's a serious problem.
That's the basic thesis of The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt. It's an expansion of this article:Dear God, yes. It's like we've raised an entire generation of kids with the psychological equivalent of immunodeficiency disorder. They've got no capacity to shrug things off, no ability to forgive (show me how well leftists do that. I'll wait. I won't hold my breath), and a belief that 'intentions' and 'lived experiences' somehow trump hard data and results.
Absolutely, I would even submit, lack of consequences from helicopter parenting and the notion that everyone gets a trophy is a particularly toxic manifestation of this problem, and it is woefully obvious in a large portion of those subjected to such nonsense. Growth almost always stems from adversity, not the avoidance of it.
OK, not ALL of them. But enough that it's a serious problem.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/
The left's truly bizarre reactions to Dr. Peterson are absolutely fascinating. The man is no conservative by any stretch, and yet his blunt advice (which harkens back to old Dale Carnegie self-help books) drives them bonkers.
I have read that article, albeit a while ago, and have hoped to get a chance to read more in the book. Haidt is prescient about a lot of things going on in society and particularly in higher education. He does a long form interview with Dr. Jordan Peterson about this issue:
https://youtu.be/4IBegL_V6AA
Another book that addresses this phenomenon pretty well is "The Vanishing American Adult" by Ben Sasse. The fragility they have all noticed in incoming students is simply the tip of a bigger cancer eating away Western society, that the level of prosperity we enjoy has also made our younger generations neither appreciative nor resilient. It always puts me in mind of the old saw "Hard men bring about easy times, easy times bring about soft men, and soft men bring about hard times."
The left's truly bizarre reactions to Dr. Peterson are absolutely fascinating. The man is no conservative by any stretch, and yet his blunt advice (which harkens back to old Dale Carnegie self-help books) drives them bonkers.
I have read that article, albeit a while ago, and have hoped to get a chance to read more in the book. Haidt is prescient about a lot of things going on in society and particularly in higher education. He does a long form interview with Dr. Jordan Peterson about this issue:
https://youtu.be/4IBegL_V6AA
Another book that addresses this phenomenon pretty well is "The Vanishing American Adult" by Ben Sasse. The fragility they have all noticed in incoming students is simply the tip of a bigger cancer eating away Western society, that the level of prosperity we enjoy has also made our younger generations neither appreciative nor resilient. It always puts me in mind of the old saw "Hard men bring about easy times, easy times bring about soft men, and soft men bring about hard times."
The really funny thing is he repeatedly stated that if someone prefers to use certain pronouns they should just tell him and he'll gladly do so. His objection was purely to the government compelling the action.
Yup.The really funny thing is he repeatedly stated that if someone prefers to use certain pronouns they should just tell him and he'll gladly do so. His objection was purely to the government compelling the action.
Exactly, though it really does highlight just how adverse to dissent the "tolerant" party really is. At one time liberals defended free speech.... though that time seems long gone now.
Yup.The really funny thing is he repeatedly stated that if someone prefers to use certain pronouns they should just tell him and he'll gladly do so. His objection was purely to the government compelling the action.
Exactly, though it really does highlight just how adverse to dissent the "tolerant" party really is. At one time liberals defended free speech.... though that time seems long gone now.
The 'marketplace of ideas' has suddenly become infested with officious little bastards demanding everything be sanitized to the nth degree and insisting that 'some ideas' are 'too dangerous'.
Quote from: shuddemellIn particular, you have hit on why government has worse outcomes that private sector efforts. It's not an "inherent" difference in efficiency, it's a lack of negative consequences in governmental institutions for failure.
Yes. And this has applications for child-rearing, education - and roleplaying games. If you never allow people to fail, they can't get better. So in roleplaying games, you must ask whether you want a passive experience like watching a movie, or an active participatory experience like playing a game of tennis, where you expect to be challenged (not overwhelmed, but challenged) and gradually strive to improve your play.
Absolutely, I would even submit, lack of consequences from helicopter parenting and the notion that everyone gets a trophy is a particularly toxic manifestation of this problem, and it is woefully obvious in a large portion of those subjected to such nonsense. Growth almost always stems from adversity, not the avoidance of it.
That largely goes to show just how far extreme leftist views have infiltrated our educational system. For there, even private schools are affected. Generations of that nonsense have created helicopter parenting and the "no one" fails attitude. It's largely generational because too many generations have been subjected to that nonsense.
Well, I did day one at running my testing site (still inactive) and I quit on the spot. The ineptitude in the administration was astounding, and the lack of training and equipment being offered was terrible. While I saw nothing in the testing that would indicate it would give false readings, there was a market push to get the clinics placed near wealthier neighborhoods and "get the word out" to them...and. while the tests are not particularly expensive, they are not free.Are they just rushing the process, and if so why? And what was bad about the equipment?
Everything is rushed. No training standards and no dedicated preceptors/educators allotted to assist in training (at least none that didn't also say "fuck this, I'm out" like I did). Supply chain is non-existent (but I was assured it was "under development") and supplies were drawn from various sources without standardization. Why is it rushed? Because we gotta get people tested so they can have a Merry Christmas together... That's my cynical guess.Well, I did day one at running my testing site (still inactive) and I quit on the spot. The ineptitude in the administration was astounding, and the lack of training and equipment being offered was terrible. While I saw nothing in the testing that would indicate it would give false readings, there was a market push to get the clinics placed near wealthier neighborhoods and "get the word out" to them...and. while the tests are not particularly expensive, they are not free.Are they just rushing the process, and if so why? And what was bad about the equipment?
The public officials didn't get that shutting down non-essential businesses crippled the supply chains. That caused all kinds of problems for the labs doing the research at the start of this whole thing, and I guess they haven't learned. Not to mention all the businesses shuttering their doors for good. The testing requirements for travel were a joke over the Thanksgiving holiday. Some states were requiring a test within 3 days before arriving, but many of the tests were supposed to take 2 to 7 days before the results came back, and they often failed to meet their own standards, or slipped when it came to basics like notifying people.Everything is rushed. No training standards and no dedicated preceptors/educators allotted to assist in training (at least none that didn't also say "fuck this, I'm out" like I did). Supply chain is non-existent (but I was assured it was "under development") and supplies were drawn from various sources without standardization. Why is it rushed? Because we gotta get people tested so they can have a Merry Christmas together... That's my cynical guess.Well, I did day one at running my testing site (still inactive) and I quit on the spot. The ineptitude in the administration was astounding, and the lack of training and equipment being offered was terrible. While I saw nothing in the testing that would indicate it would give false readings, there was a market push to get the clinics placed near wealthier neighborhoods and "get the word out" to them...and. while the tests are not particularly expensive, they are not free.Are they just rushing the process, and if so why? And what was bad about the equipment?
No argument from me. Halfway though the day, the refrain of Kenny Roger's Gambler was echoing through my head. It was a tough call between walk away and run.The public officials didn't get that shutting down non-essential businesses crippled the supply chains. That caused all kinds of problems for the labs doing the research at the start of this whole thing, and I guess they haven't learned. Not to mention all the businesses shuttering their doors for good. The testing requirements for travel were a joke over the Thanksgiving holiday. Some states were requiring a test within 3 days before arriving, but many of the tests were supposed to take 2 to 7 days before the results came back, and they often failed to meet their own standards, or slipped when it came to basics like notifying people.Everything is rushed. No training standards and no dedicated preceptors/educators allotted to assist in training (at least none that didn't also say "fuck this, I'm out" like I did). Supply chain is non-existent (but I was assured it was "under development") and supplies were drawn from various sources without standardization. Why is it rushed? Because we gotta get people tested so they can have a Merry Christmas together... That's my cynical guess.Well, I did day one at running my testing site (still inactive) and I quit on the spot. The ineptitude in the administration was astounding, and the lack of training and equipment being offered was terrible. While I saw nothing in the testing that would indicate it would give false readings, there was a market push to get the clinics placed near wealthier neighborhoods and "get the word out" to them...and. while the tests are not particularly expensive, they are not free.Are they just rushing the process, and if so why? And what was bad about the equipment?
Central planners at work.
But this isn't about public vs. private. I know from experience that private schools are *full* of helicopter parents and sheltered little snowflakes. While private schools have higher test results, that is entirely from the kids being richer and having the best money can buy for them. When the same kids are put in public and private, their test scores are basically equal.In Australia: no. It's demographics. Peers.
A modest proposal here: https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/sensible-compassionate-anti-covid-strategy/No, it won't kill us all. Overall, it makes good sense. There are some minor points in the proposed plan (which is really just a very rough draft/overview) that could use some adjustments, but it's not a bad basis to start from.
I await people screaming about how this will kill us all.
But this isn't about public vs. private. I know from experience that private schools are *full* of helicopter parents and sheltered little snowflakes. While private schools have higher test results, that is entirely from the kids being richer and having the best money can buy for them. When the same kids are put in public and private, their test scores are basically equal.In Australia: no. It's demographics. Peers.
ICSEA distribution. That's the index of community and socioeconomic advantage, which is a measure of how well-off and well-educated the kids' parents are. They give a raw number to it which nobody understands, but also quartiles. The mythical perfectly-representative school would be 25-25-25-25, equal proportions from each quartile. A school in a poor area might be 65-20-10-5, a school in a well-off area 5-10-20-65. Let's just consider the top and bottom quartiles since the others tend to be in proportion.
When you look over enough schools, you find that the spending makes not much difference to the outcomes - but ICSEA is huge. Consider:
Kew Primary (https://myschool.edu.au/school/44192) has 2% bottom quartile and 63% top. It gets $10,610 per student. As for results, grammar in year 5 is 505, and numeracy 518.
Broadmeadows Primary (https://myschool.edu.au/school/44883), on the other hand, has ICSEA 58/5, spending $14,533 per student, and year 5 grammar is 474 and numeracy 472. More money than Kew, but worse results. Why? Peers.
There is no reason for NASA to be involved in 'Muslim outreach'. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. The only reason to implement such imbecilic 'duhversity' systems is to infect and cannibalize the organization until it is nothing more than a shell of its former self.
Bitching about how 'oh well that's not scrapping' is pointless semantics, and you know it, because I can't imagine a reason otherwise for you to plant your flag on this hill. If this status quo persists, NASA will no longer exist as a force for space exploration and development. It'll limp along for a while, continuing its mission of 'duhversity' until some bean counter with more sense than you puts it out of its misery.
So why don't you just get back to slobbering Biden's knob like a good little bitch? It's all you're good at.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
There is no reason for NASA to be involved in 'Muslim outreach'. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. The only reason to implement such imbecilic 'duhversity' systems is to infect and cannibalize the organization until it is nothing more than a shell of its former self.
Non sequitur. You're not even referring to anything Biden said. That Muslim Outreach thing was not even this year for fuck's sake! We're talking about the claim that Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to President. This Muslim Outreach bullshit has nothing to do with that.QuoteBitching about how 'oh well that's not scrapping' is pointless semantics, and you know it, because I can't imagine a reason otherwise for you to plant your flag on this hill. If this status quo persists, NASA will no longer exist as a force for space exploration and development. It'll limp along for a while, continuing its mission of 'duhversity' until some bean counter with more sense than you puts it out of its misery.
So why don't you just get back to slobbering Biden's knob like a good little bitch? It's all you're good at.
Show me where Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to the Presidency. Stop spinning bullshit and show me where Biden made a promise to scrap NASA if elected. This should be super simple. It should be a sentence you can find to quote Biden where he says something along the lines of "If elected, I will end NASA." Or even something vaguely similar to that. Not "I will change some of it's priorities" show me a PROMISE to SCRAP NASA in the FUTURE (as in "If elected").
He's flailing and desperately trying to narrow the scope down so he can declare victory.https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
There is no reason for NASA to be involved in 'Muslim outreach'. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. The only reason to implement such imbecilic 'duhversity' systems is to infect and cannibalize the organization until it is nothing more than a shell of its former self.
Non sequitur. You're not even referring to anything Biden said. That Muslim Outreach thing was not even this year for fuck's sake! We're talking about the claim that Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to President. This Muslim Outreach bullshit has nothing to do with that.QuoteBitching about how 'oh well that's not scrapping' is pointless semantics, and you know it, because I can't imagine a reason otherwise for you to plant your flag on this hill. If this status quo persists, NASA will no longer exist as a force for space exploration and development. It'll limp along for a while, continuing its mission of 'duhversity' until some bean counter with more sense than you puts it out of its misery.
So why don't you just get back to slobbering Biden's knob like a good little bitch? It's all you're good at.
Show me where Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to the Presidency. Stop spinning bullshit and show me where Biden made a promise to scrap NASA if elected. This should be super simple. It should be a sentence you can find to quote Biden where he says something along the lines of "If elected, I will end NASA." Or even something vaguely similar to that. Not "I will change some of it's priorities" show me a PROMISE to SCRAP NASA in the FUTURE (as in "If elected").
links to: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/nov/18/joe-biden-pressured-scrap-space-force/
Just in case you forgot what a link is...
I've also read somewhere that the same people want NASA scrapped as well. So... resume with your incoherent rant please. It makes me laugh! (And heavens knows we all need a good laugh!)
If you're going to go that way, what are current results of Biden's impending presidency on NASA? Not what you think he might do--just the verifiable results.He's flailing and desperately trying to narrow the scope down so he can declare victory.https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
There is no reason for NASA to be involved in 'Muslim outreach'. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. The only reason to implement such imbecilic 'duhversity' systems is to infect and cannibalize the organization until it is nothing more than a shell of its former self.
Non sequitur. You're not even referring to anything Biden said. That Muslim Outreach thing was not even this year for fuck's sake! We're talking about the claim that Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to President. This Muslim Outreach bullshit has nothing to do with that.QuoteBitching about how 'oh well that's not scrapping' is pointless semantics, and you know it, because I can't imagine a reason otherwise for you to plant your flag on this hill. If this status quo persists, NASA will no longer exist as a force for space exploration and development. It'll limp along for a while, continuing its mission of 'duhversity' until some bean counter with more sense than you puts it out of its misery.
So why don't you just get back to slobbering Biden's knob like a good little bitch? It's all you're good at.
Show me where Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to the Presidency. Stop spinning bullshit and show me where Biden made a promise to scrap NASA if elected. This should be super simple. It should be a sentence you can find to quote Biden where he says something along the lines of "If elected, I will end NASA." Or even something vaguely similar to that. Not "I will change some of it's priorities" show me a PROMISE to SCRAP NASA in the FUTURE (as in "If elected").
links to: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/nov/18/joe-biden-pressured-scrap-space-force/
Just in case you forgot what a link is...
I've also read somewhere that the same people want NASA scrapped as well. So... resume with your incoherent rant please. It makes me laugh! (And heavens knows we all need a good laugh!)
I wonder if it's dawned on him that it's the results I give a shit about, not the declarations or intentions.
I wonder if it's dawned on him that it's the results I give a shit about, not the declarations or intentions.If you're going to go that way, what are current results of Biden's impending presidency on NASA? Not what you think he might do--just the verifiable results.
There's a lot of -plans-, and budgetary fun. But how many launches? How many new footprints, how many new satellites and probes?I wonder if it's dawned on him that it's the results I give a shit about, not the declarations or intentions.If you're going to go that way, what are current results of Biden's impending presidency on NASA? Not what you think he might do--just the verifiable results.
I'd think the best measure would be the verifiable results of what happened to NASA under the Obama-Biden administration. Not select quotes of what some Obama official said, but the actual results. I wasn't actually sure about this, so I looked up some out of curiosity.
https://www.space.com/35394-president-obama-spaceflight-exploration-legacy.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_policy_of_the_Barack_Obama_administration
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA
Looks like there's some criticism of scrapping plans of more Moon missions, but there was also development of the HLV and accelerated plans to get to asteroids and Mars. The NASA budget rose in 2010, but did shrink from 2012 to 2014, and then grew again in the last two years. The budget did grow under Trump, so I'll buy that Trump was better for NASA in that sense -- but that is not at all the same as saying Biden would scrap the whole thing.
I remember old Drumpf had asked NASA, when he started, if they could do a manned lunar flyby by late 2018. They said no. That was two years he gave them. Of course, it's been another two years since. Four years in all. By contrast, consider what the US achieved from JFK's speech in May 1961 to May 1965. Let's not speak of 1965-69. Ahem.Well, thats because those 200 dollar kinetic impact wood fastener drivers the government buys from their bestest friend contractors need long projects so that you can buy more than one of them.
Fifty years on, the US is unable to do what it did fifty years ago. It's like the contrast between Afghanistan and Vietnam - it takes you longer and costs you more money to lose a war than it used to.
It's sad, really.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
There is no reason for NASA to be involved in 'Muslim outreach'. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. The only reason to implement such imbecilic 'duhversity' systems is to infect and cannibalize the organization until it is nothing more than a shell of its former self.
Non sequitur. You're not even referring to anything Biden said. That Muslim Outreach thing was not even this year for fuck's sake! We're talking about the claim that Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to President. This Muslim Outreach bullshit has nothing to do with that.QuoteBitching about how 'oh well that's not scrapping' is pointless semantics, and you know it, because I can't imagine a reason otherwise for you to plant your flag on this hill. If this status quo persists, NASA will no longer exist as a force for space exploration and development. It'll limp along for a while, continuing its mission of 'duhversity' until some bean counter with more sense than you puts it out of its misery.
So why don't you just get back to slobbering Biden's knob like a good little bitch? It's all you're good at.
Show me where Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to the Presidency. Stop spinning bullshit and show me where Biden made a promise to scrap NASA if elected. This should be super simple. It should be a sentence you can find to quote Biden where he says something along the lines of "If elected, I will end NASA." Or even something vaguely similar to that. Not "I will change some of it's priorities" show me a PROMISE to SCRAP NASA in the FUTURE (as in "If elected").
links to: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/nov/18/joe-biden-pressured-scrap-space-force/
Just in case you forgot what a link is...
I've also read somewhere that the same people want NASA scrapped as well. So... resume with your incoherent rant please. It makes me laugh! (And heavens knows we all need a good laugh!)
He's flailing and desperately trying to narrow the scope down so he can declare victory.https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
There is no reason for NASA to be involved in 'Muslim outreach'. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. The only reason to implement such imbecilic 'duhversity' systems is to infect and cannibalize the organization until it is nothing more than a shell of its former self.
Non sequitur. You're not even referring to anything Biden said. That Muslim Outreach thing was not even this year for fuck's sake! We're talking about the claim that Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to President. This Muslim Outreach bullshit has nothing to do with that.QuoteBitching about how 'oh well that's not scrapping' is pointless semantics, and you know it, because I can't imagine a reason otherwise for you to plant your flag on this hill. If this status quo persists, NASA will no longer exist as a force for space exploration and development. It'll limp along for a while, continuing its mission of 'duhversity' until some bean counter with more sense than you puts it out of its misery.
So why don't you just get back to slobbering Biden's knob like a good little bitch? It's all you're good at.
Show me where Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected to the Presidency. Stop spinning bullshit and show me where Biden made a promise to scrap NASA if elected. This should be super simple. It should be a sentence you can find to quote Biden where he says something along the lines of "If elected, I will end NASA." Or even something vaguely similar to that. Not "I will change some of it's priorities" show me a PROMISE to SCRAP NASA in the FUTURE (as in "If elected").
links to: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/nov/18/joe-biden-pressured-scrap-space-force/
Just in case you forgot what a link is...
I've also read somewhere that the same people want NASA scrapped as well. So... resume with your incoherent rant please. It makes me laugh! (And heavens knows we all need a good laugh!)
I wonder if it's dawned on him that it's the results I give a shit about, not the declarations or intentions.
Every year, thousands die from the normal flu. Question: Why is it only now that we are wearing masks? Wasn't the lives of millions of people over the last 100 years important?I was in the hospital 18 months ago for 10 days. The only time I saw anyone wear a mask was in an operating room.
SHOW ME WHERE BIDEN PROMISED TO SCRAP NASA IF ELECTED.You're technically correct. Biden doesn't appear to ever explicitly said he'd scrap NASA. Or even implied it, for that matter.
My point has been that Mistwell fixates on exact words while being completely unwilling to admit that there might be some truth to the complaints.SHOW ME WHERE BIDEN PROMISED TO SCRAP NASA IF ELECTED.You're technically correct. Biden doesn't appear to ever explicitly said he'd scrap NASA. Or even implied it, for that matter.
The other posters like Ghostmaker and consolcwby are correct in the more general sense that there are a lot of things Biden has said or implied that don't seem promising for the future of space development under a Biden administration, including NASA but also extending to other areas like the Space Force.
You're all wrong because you're all refusing to acknowledge what the other side has said, and pretending there's this great dispute when you're not even contradicting each other.
My point has been that Mistwell fixates on exact words while being completely unwilling to admit that there might be some truth to the complaints.It's very typical of everyone. Mistwell said one thing, you're pretending he said other things. That basically stalls a conversation. The best approach is to admit that Mistwell is correct on that point, and then expand the discussion to the other related points. That closes off that one point, and allows the conversation to move to broader topics. But if you don't do that, then it'll keep coming back to that one point.
Which is very typical for leftists.
I'd think the best measure would be the verifiable results of what happened to NASA under the Obama-Biden administration. Not select quotes of what some Obama official said, but the actual results. I wasn't actually sure about this, so I looked up some out of curiosity.There's a lot of -plans-, and budgetary fun. But how many launches? How many new footprints, how many new satellites and probes?
https://www.space.com/35394-president-obama-spaceflight-exploration-legacy.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_policy_of_the_Barack_Obama_administration
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA
Looks like there's some criticism of scrapping plans of more Moon missions, but there was also development of the HLV and accelerated plans to get to asteroids and Mars. The NASA budget rose in 2010, but did shrink from 2012 to 2014, and then grew again in the last two years. The budget did grow under Trump, so I'll buy that Trump was better for NASA in that sense -- but that is not at all the same as saying Biden would scrap the whole thing.
The budget in general isn't a good metric to judge by. If they pour the money into stupid shit, it doesn't make any difference.
Current U.S. Space Policy represents a pragmatic and cost-effective approach to meeting our deep-space exploration needs. Continued development of the SLS allows NASA the capability to focus on a variety of missions needed to explore space, advance our knowledge of our solar system, learn more about the history of our own planet, and inspire future generations.Source: https://www.al.com/opinion/2015/06/former_top_nasa_administrators.html
As we reflect upon, and celebrate, both the first human lunar landing 46 years ago and the more recent successful Orion flight test, it is important to focus on the path forward for human space exploration. That path is best followed by developing the fully capable version of the SLS.
Not true. My point has been that Mistwell is not honest enough to admit that the left (through its sockpuppet, Sleepy Joe) is not going to do space exploration any favors. The whining about 'shutting down/not shutting down NASA' is a smokescreen.My point has been that Mistwell fixates on exact words while being completely unwilling to admit that there might be some truth to the complaints.It's very typical of everyone. Mistwell said one thing, you're pretending he said other things. That basically stalls a conversation. The best approach is to admit that Mistwell is correct on that point, and then expand the discussion to the other related points. That closes off that one point, and allows the conversation to move to broader topics. But if you don't do that, then it'll keep coming back to that one point.
Which is very typical for leftists.
Not true. My point has been that Mistwell is not honest enough to admit that the left (through its sockpuppet, Sleepy Joe) is not going to do space exploration any favors. The whining about 'shutting down/not shutting down NASA' is a smokescreen.By that standard, you're the one in the wrong, because you're not being honest enough to admit that Mistwell is correct that Biden never said he'd scrap NASA. Instead, you've changed the topic to how Biden would be bad for space exploration in general. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with moving the discussion to broader issues. But you can't legitimately say someone is wrong when you haven't addressed what they actually said.
Meanwhile, Mistwell is completely unwilling to admit that yes, the left is chasing identity politics to appease focus groups while forgetting what NASA's actual job is supposed to be.
But then, you're right about inability to reach common ground. Constrained versus unconstrained vision.
Really? So because I point out an inconvenient truth, this is me being 'dishonest'?Not true. My point has been that Mistwell is not honest enough to admit that the left (through its sockpuppet, Sleepy Joe) is not going to do space exploration any favors. The whining about 'shutting down/not shutting down NASA' is a smokescreen.By that standard, you're the one in the wrong, because you're not being honest enough to admit that Mistwell is correct that Biden never said he'd scrap NASA. Instead, you've changed the topic to how Biden would be bad for space exploration in general. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with moving the discussion to broader issues. But you can't legitimately say someone is wrong when you haven't addressed what they actually said.
Meanwhile, Mistwell is completely unwilling to admit that yes, the left is chasing identity politics to appease focus groups while forgetting what NASA's actual job is supposed to be.
But then, you're right about inability to reach common ground. Constrained versus unconstrained vision.
To state it in more general terms, if somebody says A, and you reply that that they're wrong, but only refute B, the conversation is always going to end up in an endless loop because they'll keep insisting (correctly) that you haven't refuted A, while you keep providing examples that refute B. It's a lot more useful to say they're right about A, but that you think B is a more important issue, and you want to talk about that. That doesn't create an endless loop, so you might get a useful reply.
Damn, you sure do like to call others dishonest while being completely blind to your own dishonesty. Face it Ghosty, you"re a sad lying liar that lies so much that you can't even tell what's the truth anymore.Really? So because I point out an inconvenient truth, this is me being 'dishonest'?Not true. My point has been that Mistwell is not honest enough to admit that the left (through its sockpuppet, Sleepy Joe) is not going to do space exploration any favors. The whining about 'shutting down/not shutting down NASA' is a smokescreen.By that standard, you're the one in the wrong, because you're not being honest enough to admit that Mistwell is correct that Biden never said he'd scrap NASA. Instead, you've changed the topic to how Biden would be bad for space exploration in general. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with moving the discussion to broader issues. But you can't legitimately say someone is wrong when you haven't addressed what they actually said.
Meanwhile, Mistwell is completely unwilling to admit that yes, the left is chasing identity politics to appease focus groups while forgetting what NASA's actual job is supposed to be.
But then, you're right about inability to reach common ground. Constrained versus unconstrained vision.
To state it in more general terms, if somebody says A, and you reply that that they're wrong, but only refute B, the conversation is always going to end up in an endless loop because they'll keep insisting (correctly) that you haven't refuted A, while you keep providing examples that refute B. It's a lot more useful to say they're right about A, but that you think B is a more important issue, and you want to talk about that. That doesn't create an endless loop, so you might get a useful reply.
My point has been that the whole argument over 'Biden's going to shut down NASA' is pointless because NASA is already infested with leftist idpol idiocy. And that the damage is already done. Biden won't need to shut it down because it's not going to be doing space exploration.
I can't tell if you're just moving things around because you genuinely think this kind of semantics is important, or you're just as dishonest.
Maybe you'll be happier when the U.S. is a shithole. You're certainly doing your part for that.
Damn, you sure do like to call others dishonest while being completely blind to your own dishonesty. Face it Ghosty, you"re a sad lying liar that lies so much that you can't even tell what's the truth anymore.
I guess Happy hasn't noticed yet that I put his sorry ass on ignore.Damn, you sure do like to call others dishonest while being completely blind to your own dishonesty. Face it Ghosty, you"re a sad lying liar that lies so much that you can't even tell what's the truth anymore.
Come on, it is not Ghostmakers fault. It was Martin Luther!
Makes no difference to me.I guess Happy hasn't noticed yet that I put his sorry ass on ignore.Damn, you sure do like to call others dishonest while being completely blind to your own dishonesty. Face it Ghosty, you"re a sad lying liar that lies so much that you can't even tell what's the truth anymore.
Come on, it is not Ghostmakers fault. It was Martin Luther!
Makes no difference to me.I guess Happy hasn't noticed yet that I put his sorry ass on ignore.Damn, you sure do like to call others dishonest while being completely blind to your own dishonesty. Face it Ghosty, you"re a sad lying liar that lies so much that you can't even tell what's the truth anymore.
Come on, it is not Ghostmakers fault. It was Martin Luther!
Makes no difference to me.I guess Happy hasn't noticed yet that I put his sorry ass on ignore.Damn, you sure do like to call others dishonest while being completely blind to your own dishonesty. Face it Ghosty, you"re a sad lying liar that lies so much that you can't even tell what's the truth anymore.
Come on, it is not Ghostmakers fault. It was Martin Luther!
Joke's on YOU Ghostmaker, HappyDaze was only pretending to be retarded. ;)
Oh hey, look at that (https://www.forbes.com/sites/pedrodacosta/2020/08/10/the-covid-19-crisis-has-wiped-out-nearly-half-of-black-small-businesses/?sh=3108700a4310).
It's like lockdowns are causing massive damage to the economy.
Sweden’s government has acknowledged that the latest Covid-19 flare-up means the economy will be weaker over the coming months than previously thought.Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-18/sweden-says-covid-resurgence-will-hurt-economy-in-months-ahead
Finance Minister Magdalena Andersson said the pandemic is now “just as serious” in Sweden as it was back in March and April. “The transmission we have seen recently, and the measures taken here and in other countries, are expected to dampen the economic recovery,” she said at a press briefing on Wednesday.
Sweden has so far faced a milder recession than many other European nations, after leaving much of its economy open throughout the pandemic. But with new cases soaring and hospitals filling up as Europe enters winter, the outlook is now much bleaker.
Maybe you'll be happier when the U.S. is a shithole. You're certainly doing your part for that.Would like to escalate it further? Maybe bring up Nazis?
The implication here is that if only we just ignored the virus, the economy would be humming along fine. But that's not what we see in the data. The countries whose economies are doing the best are in East Asia, where they quickly implemented strong social distancing, mask wearing, and tracing - while avoiding lockdowns. Meanwhile, the U.S. and Europe have both been hit hard. Sweden is famous for not having lockdowns, but they've still been seeing a major economic recession.No, that's not the implication. Nobody's saying the coronavirus would have no effect, that's a pure strawman. What people are saying is the economy would be doing better. That's what economics is about, and what politics should be about: Looking at the trade offs between what's seen (what happened) and the unseen (what could have happened, if we made different choices).
Greetings!BE QUIET!
Fuck the goddamned masks. Most of society has been wearing the fucking masks and isolating, and "social distancing" for six months and more now.
And it hasn't done a fucking thing.
Beyond that, who gives a shit? The China virus isn't likely to kill anyone under 60. So, everyone that is over 60, fat, and with other such problems, THEY can wear masks, isolate themselves, and "wait for a vaccine"--while the rest of the population gets back to work, and gets on with living.
If you get the fucking China virus, so what? You are not likely to die, and preventative measures seem to be bullshit, and there's no cure, so what the fuck? You get it, you get it. Otherwise, we need to move the fuck on.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Greetings!BE QUIET!
Fuck the goddamned masks. Most of society has been wearing the fucking masks and isolating, and "social distancing" for six months and more now.
And it hasn't done a fucking thing.
Beyond that, who gives a shit? The China virus isn't likely to kill anyone under 60. So, everyone that is over 60, fat, and with other such problems, THEY can wear masks, isolate themselves, and "wait for a vaccine"--while the rest of the population gets back to work, and gets on with living.
If you get the fucking China virus, so what? You are not likely to die, and preventative measures seem to be bullshit, and there's no cure, so what the fuck? You get it, you get it. Otherwise, we need to move the fuck on.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Don't you understand? They WANT to be enslaved, starved, and watch as their families are torn ASUNDER! As long as they can play 5E without DICE, their happy as a little bitch waiting their turn at the knacker's yard!
And, whatever you do, do NOT show them this: https://twitter.com/rising_serpent/status/1335779124527452160
Let them have their government decide if they and theirs is worthy of LIFE. Fuck liberty or pursuit of any happiness!!! As long as they're protected from the sniffles, WHO CARES RIGHT?!
Watch them ban HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGE and give out FREE FORCED ABORTIONS! I, myself, cannot wait to see the gleam of happiness in their eyes!
8)
I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.Maybe you'll be happier when the U.S. is a shithole. You're certainly doing your part for that.Would like to escalate it further? Maybe bring up Nazis?
The extremists on both sides call everyone they perceive to not be on their side (which very often includes the moderates on their own side) names that might accurately apply to only a very small number of their opponents. It's rather pathetic.I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.Maybe you'll be happier when the U.S. is a shithole. You're certainly doing your part for that.Would like to escalate it further? Maybe bring up Nazis?
It's easy to say don't bother doing anything if you catch the virus you catch it. If you get sick and die well it's your own fault for being 60 and over and unhealthy. Sorry I can' take that kind of cold calculating attitude of a sociopath in my daily life. My fiance grandparents are in their 90s. Both our moms are on their 60s. As much as I want to be a socially retarded asshole like many here. I can't I would find myself out on the street and single. Not to mention everyone is the tough guy socially retarded asshole when they and none of their family, friends and loved ones are sick. In my neck of the woods they give out fines of 1000$+. Good luck trying to refuse to pay it.shitstain, you ignorant bastard...
Now I agree the media and TV shows in general are getting annoying with constantly bringing up Cov-19. The Canadian Health Minister has such an annoying English accent in her voice it's like nails on chalkboard. I don't feel sorry for many businesses in my area. No social distancing at all with packed houses. People filming them and putting it on Facebook. It's one thing to complain about being closed when they followed proper procedures. Many of them gave a big finger to them and now they want to complain about being closed. Even then the government in my neck of the woods is strange. Restaurants that sell food are to remain closed yet tattoo parlors and sun tanning are booths are essential
The extremists on both sides call everyone they perceive to not be on their side (which very often includes the moderates on their own side) names that might accurately apply to only a very small number of their opponents. It's rather pathetic.I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.Maybe you'll be happier when the U.S. is a shithole. You're certainly doing your part for that.Would like to escalate it further? Maybe bring up Nazis?
It's easy to say don't bother doing anything if you catch the virus you catch it. If you get sick and die well it's your own fault for being 60 and over and unhealthy. Sorry I can' take that kind of cold calculating attitude of a sociopath in my daily life. My fiance grandparents are in their 90s. Both our moms are on their 60s. As much as I want to be a socially retarded asshole like many here. I can't I would find myself out on the street and single. Not to mention everyone is the tough guy socially retarded asshole when they and none of their family, friends and loved ones are sick. In my neck of the woods they give out fines of 1000$+. Good luck trying to refuse to pay it.
Now I agree the media and TV shows in general are getting annoying with constantly bringing up Cov-19. The Canadian Health Minister has such an annoying English accent in her voice it's like nails on chalkboard. I don't feel sorry for many businesses in my area. No social distancing at all with packed houses. People filming them and putting it on Facebook. It's one thing to complain about being closed when they followed proper procedures. Many of them gave a big finger to them and now they want to complain about being closed. Even then the government in my neck of the woods is strange. Restaurants that sell food are to remain closed yet tattoo parlors and sun tanning are booths are essential
It's easy to say don't bother doing anything if you catch the virus you catch it. If you get sick and die well it's your own fault for being 60 and over and unhealthy. Sorry I can' take that kind of cold calculating attitude of a sociopath in my daily life. My fiance grandparents are in their 90s. Both our moms are on their 60s. As much as I want to be a socially retarded asshole like many here. I can't I would find myself out on the street and single. Not to mention everyone is the tough guy socially retarded asshole when they and none of their family, friends and loved ones are sick. In my neck of the woods they give out fines of 1000$+. Good luck trying to refuse to pay it.
Now I agree the media and TV shows in general are getting annoying with constantly bringing up Cov-19. The Canadian Health Minister has such an annoying English accent in her voice it's like nails on chalkboard. I don't feel sorry for many businesses in my area. No social distancing at all with packed houses. People filming them and putting it on Facebook. It's one thing to complain about being closed when they followed proper procedures. Many of them gave a big finger to them and now they want to complain about being closed. Even then the government in my neck of the woods is strange. Restaurants that sell food are to remain closed yet tattoo parlors and sun tanning are booths are essential
I would say shark is not exactly a poet with how he describes his point of view, but words like sociopath are strong, especially considering all the things we see going around about how to protect a lot of the older people, seem to not be coming from those same older people.SHARK isn't likely a sociopath IRL, but his persona here is bombastic and relentlessly aggressive to stupid levels because he wants to play the monster (and many people here seem to love it). Note that most of his posts on the gaming forum are much more thoughtful and balanced and probably better represent how SHARK would interact IRL.
The extremists on both sides call everyone they perceive to not be on their side (which very often includes the moderates on their own side) names that might accurately apply to only a very small number of their opponents. It's rather pathetic.I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.Maybe you'll be happier when the U.S. is a shithole. You're certainly doing your part for that.Would like to escalate it further? Maybe bring up Nazis?
Yeah but, I think using Nazi as an epithet has a cultural connotation that Right name-calling just doesn't approach. Commie? Eeeehhhh. While I think communist should be a term that evokes the same revulsion as Nazi, communism unfortunatley doesn't bring up images of gulags and kulaks for most people.
The extremists on both sides call everyone they perceive to not be on their side (which very often includes the moderates on their own side) names that might accurately apply to only a very small number of their opponents. It's rather pathetic.I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.Maybe you'll be happier when the U.S. is a shithole. You're certainly doing your part for that.Would like to escalate it further? Maybe bring up Nazis?
Yeah but, I think using Nazi as an epithet has a cultural connotation that Right name-calling just doesn't approach. Commie? Eeeehhhh. While I think communist should be a term that evokes the same revulsion as Nazi, communism unfortunatley doesn't bring up images of gulags and kulaks for most people.
Pretty much, plus it's one thing to call someone a "Commie" or a "Nazi", or whatever, during a heated discussion between social media randos. But it's another thing entirely when the ENTIRE mainstream media apparatus has been working over night for years to associate all bad conduct and everything that is evil with the so-called "Right Wing", and now just arbitrarily declares whole swaths of people "Far Right" Alt-Right, White Supremacists, Nazis, etc., regardless of what their actual believes or political leanings are. Now ANYONE can be a "Far Right" Nazi just because the media declares it so, therefore it must be so.
I'm "Right-Wing" cuz I reject Intersectionality and was involved with GamerGate, even though I used to be a socialist, and still hardly agree with any actual "right-wing" policy positions other than 2nd amendment, which used to be a life-wing position (Marx was pro-gun) before Neo-Liberals started promoting gun control.
Where's the equivalent of that against the so-called "Left"? Faux News calling Obama a Socialist decades ago? ONE network in ages past using a term most people hardly associate with evil and some actually associate with good.
The term "Right-Wing" has come to mean "Evil". I've seen countless discussions with people who speak strictly on terms of "Left-Wing Good & Everything Righteous/Right-Wing Bad, Evil, Bigoted & Deplorable", and anyone who disagrees with them is "Right Wing". It's actually come to the point where Left/Right is viewed as a real life alignment system where Left=Good and Right=Evil. And why would any decent person align with "Right"?
Oh, it looks like we can agree on some things after all. Carry on then. ;)
Well I am tired of how posters here causal talk about endangering peoples lives as if it's nothing.You endanger your kids by driving them to karate practice, instead of keeping them at home. You endanger the elderly in the nursing home by visiting your elderly relatives during a regular flu season. But are you going to keep your kids locked in a box, or ban people from visiting their elderly relatives? We make these kind of risk assessments all the time, and we always decide some level of risk is acceptable. Living life is more important than the illusion of safety.
I was supposed to get married a few months ago it's not happening and I am not going to do the dumb thing of having a weeding with cardboard cutouts in place of real people or TVs or monitors like they do say in Wrestling. I am not happy yet made of sterner stuff. I barely go out unless I have to do or do some exercise as my job requires me to sit down until the end of my shift. I am not saying become a hermit. Covid-19 or not they are fucking partying and nothing changes. Well don't whine and complain when the numbers do not go down in terms of cases.
Oh, it looks like we can agree on some things after all. Carry on then. ;)
Well I am tired of how posters here causal talk about endangering peoples lives as if it's nothing.
Maybe your all willing to take that risk I am not. I sure as hell am not going to run the risk of losing my finance simply because I refuse to wear a mask and follow at least minimum quarantine protocol.
Maybe you all live in areas where the cases are not high. We reached 2000 new cases in one day and that number is not decreasing it keeps increasing. It's one thing to worry when the cases of Covid are down and each day less and less are reported. It's the opposite in my area. I will not live in fear neither will I live assume I am immune because I have not caught it.
So because some of you either don't believe in Covid or want to downplay how dangerous it can be for the elderly I am supposed to stop following proper quarantine procedures around my mother and mother in law who are both in their 60s and my fiance Grandparents who are in their 90s because of your reasons and feels and carefully constructed personal narratives. Fuck that no.Couple things, restaurants or bars that are never crowded go out of business, or are 'hobby ventures' that do not make money. The margins are razor thin. You are concerned for your parents, So am I, you do not have kids, so you personally experience one, not all of the issues these restrictions bring. You can lecture me as to what is important, but the fact is I have different stakes, more stakes, in this game than you do. I have a much more complicated decision to make than you do. You can call me cold, sociopath, or whatever you like. Because you do not have the same decisions to make that I do, or even the owner of a restaurant does. What do you think it would do to a restaurant owner in his 50's to have to go out of business because of restrictions? I can tell you, it is likely to kill him if he has invested most of his adult life into that business. Should he #learntocode? I think you doing for the people close to you is smart, and what is best. To assume when I want what is best for me and the people close to me is sociopathic, you signal you are finished discussing it and ready to draw a line on the ground that we have to toe and face one another.
I don't know if some of you realize it or even care your becoming as bad as the SJWs with the same narratives. Coming off as cold uncaring social retarded members of the hobby. I don' expect better from sJws I suppose I should expect the same from some here. You guys come off as nutcases. If it's not one poster stocking ammo to kill Leftists it's another who wants to hang them from trees. Maybe it's all bark and not bite and simply trying to be a social retarded edgelord. Still some of you are really starting to scare me some of you are not all there in the head.
I was going to invite some members of my gaming group to come and register here and two did lurk and they want nothing to do with this place. And it's because they are easily scared special snowflakes either. When members of the board come across as not giving a shit about others while wanting to murder those who oppose them ideologically it's not a very welcoming atmosphere. It's like that friend who is at the dinner table asked how his last date went and the response at the table is " I fucked her hard and threw her ass to the curb".
Before anyone says it I leave this board when I am damn good and ready so anyone who thinks of telling me to leave well don't waste your time. Maybe I need a break from this area of the boards as emotions post elects seem to be running high on both sides and with posters in general.
Damn, you sound like you've come around to my position. Remember when I said I was here throwing shit back at the assholes that seek to escalate violence, dehumanize the "other side" to justify it, and follow hard-right narratives beyond any reasonable limits as a dark mirror of the SJWs that they claim to hate? That's also when I said most of the posters here are not 'real' but rather are (hopefully) just a bunch of trolls. Well, welcome to my world. Can I still call you shitstain?
I don't know if some of you realize it or even care your becoming as bad as the SJWs with the same narratives. Coming off as cold uncaring social retarded members of the hobby. I don' expect better from sJws I suppose I should expect the same from some here. You guys come off as nutcases. If it's not one poster stocking ammo to kill Leftists it's another who wants to hang them from trees. Maybe it's all bark and not bite and simply trying to be a social retarded edgelord. Still some of you are really starting to scare me some of you are not all there in the head.
Sureshot, are you sure that you want to join the side that calls you shitstain?Maybe he's up for taking it back and making the word his own?
I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?I always wondered if magical effects in D&D that cure disease (like the spell of the same name or paladin's lay on hands ability) can be used to counteract obesity or, that most widespread of human diseases, tooth decay. The idea of a paladin going around groping the fat off of people or slapping them on the mouth to fix their smiles amuses me.
Obesity is a scientifically proven risk factor for many diseases and death so should be the logical next step.
Unfortunately there is no current vaccine for reducing fat but luckily if the party of science recommends a very tight fitting mask then we can reduce both the China Wuhan virus and obesity at the same time.
I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?I always wondered if magical effects in D&D that cure disease (like the spell of the same name or paladin's lay on hands ability) can be used to counteract obesity or, that most widespread of human diseases, tooth decay. The idea of a paladin going around groping the fat off of people or slapping them on the mouth to fix their smiles amuses me.
Obesity is a scientifically proven risk factor for many diseases and death so should be the logical next step.
Unfortunately there is no current vaccine for reducing fat but luckily if the party of science recommends a very tight fitting mask then we can reduce both the China Wuhan virus and obesity at the same time.
There is almost nothing in D&D settings that is accurate to the real world middle ages. You'll find plenty of obese people in Forgotten Realms, Eberron, and elsewhere.I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?I always wondered if magical effects in D&D that cure disease (like the spell of the same name or paladin's lay on hands ability) can be used to counteract obesity or, that most widespread of human diseases, tooth decay. The idea of a paladin going around groping the fat off of people or slapping them on the mouth to fix their smiles amuses me.
Obesity is a scientifically proven risk factor for many diseases and death so should be the logical next step.
Unfortunately there is no current vaccine for reducing fat but luckily if the party of science recommends a very tight fitting mask then we can reduce both the China Wuhan virus and obesity at the same time.
I do not think being fat was a huge issue in middle ages settings. That is a first world malady.
I always wondered if magical effects in D&D that cure disease (like the spell of the same name or paladin's lay on hands ability) can be used to counteract obesity or, that most widespread of human diseases, tooth decay. The idea of a paladin going around groping the fat off of people or slapping them on the mouth to fix their smiles amuses me.
You realize your retort eliminates tooth decay right? TThere is almost nothing in D&D settings that is accurate to the real world middle ages. You'll find plenty of obese people in Forgotten Realms, Eberron, and elsewhere.I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?I always wondered if magical effects in D&D that cure disease (like the spell of the same name or paladin's lay on hands ability) can be used to counteract obesity or, that most widespread of human diseases, tooth decay. The idea of a paladin going around groping the fat off of people or slapping them on the mouth to fix their smiles amuses me.
Obesity is a scientifically proven risk factor for many diseases and death so should be the logical next step.
Unfortunately there is no current vaccine for reducing fat but luckily if the party of science recommends a very tight fitting mask then we can reduce both the China Wuhan virus and obesity at the same time.
I do not think being fat was a huge issue in middle ages settings. That is a first world malady.
Fair enough. It does seem like every D&D character (PC & NPC) has either absolutely perfect teeth, or is an evil bastard with a mouthful of rotten pegs. I can't say as I've ever seen them portray a non-evil character not of advanced age that was obviously missing teeth or had visibly broken teeth.You realize your retort eliminates tooth decay right? TThere is almost nothing in D&D settings that is accurate to the real world middle ages. You'll find plenty of obese people in Forgotten Realms, Eberron, and elsewhere.I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?I always wondered if magical effects in D&D that cure disease (like the spell of the same name or paladin's lay on hands ability) can be used to counteract obesity or, that most widespread of human diseases, tooth decay. The idea of a paladin going around groping the fat off of people or slapping them on the mouth to fix their smiles amuses me.
Obesity is a scientifically proven risk factor for many diseases and death so should be the logical next step.
Unfortunately there is no current vaccine for reducing fat but luckily if the party of science recommends a very tight fitting mask then we can reduce both the China Wuhan virus and obesity at the same time.
I do not think being fat was a huge issue in middle ages settings. That is a first world malady.
I wonder how many of you here are going to go out this Christmas and LARP yourselves into killing the dreaded...What do you expect from people stupider than my dog. That article mentions Biden winning Georgia and then unironically calls Newt Gingrich a racist in the very next sentence.
PLAGUE RATS
???
https://theslot.jezebel.com/look-whos-a-modern-day-plague-rat-1845827404
It seems the PARTY OF PEACE AND PROGRESS is equating PEOPLE to RATS again, like they did in one of those WORLD WARS...
Which way are the DEATH CAMPS, again? Oh, right - WALFART!
I wonder how many of you here are going to go out this Christmas and LARP yourselves into killing the dreaded...I'll just quote Doc Holliday in Tombstone: "I'm your huckleberry."
PLAGUE RATS
???
https://theslot.jezebel.com/look-whos-a-modern-day-plague-rat-1845827404
It seems the PARTY OF PEACE AND PROGRESS is equating PEOPLE to RATS again, like they did in one of those WORLD WARS...
Which way are the DEATH CAMPS, again? Oh, right - WALFART!
HappyDaze I ca't say we will agree on everything just call me whatever you want.No, sureshot, we won't always agree, but it sounds like you're hurting right now. While I might fling some shit at what I perceive to be asshole posters (based on their online personas, which I sincerely hope do not accurately reflect the way they act IRL), I'm not 100% a dick. I hope things get better for you and your fiance. Be well.
I am sympathetic to restaurant owners life would have been different I could have owned one. Except many perhaps too many did not follow any quarantine protocols. Packed crowds, no enforcing of wearing a mask for the patrons that is not going to make the numbers go down. Many did push their luck the numbers went up and unfortunately they are not considered an essential service. Maybe it's because I have not eaten as much junk food like before or maybe less good quality yet the last time I ordered from Wendys and from a local restaurant the food did not make me sick it just tasted yet sat in stomach like a lump. Even in terms my finances it shows that I have more money too. Too many restaurant owners wanted to play with fire so to speak and expected not to get burnt. Certain actions have consequences and if you don't give a fuck about what happens don't come crying to me or anyone else if something bad happens because of it. At most I might hire an orchestra of the world smallest violins to play for you.Your entire post is one big wall of ignorance and fear.
It's so bad in my area I received and Amber alert on my phone. Where I live I can't even so my fiance anymore. The fines can now go as high as 6000$. Sure one try and claim the fine is unconstitutional yet not sure how strong or valid that kind of defense can be when people have been told about the fines for the better part of year or more. It's annoying that I cannot do Christmas and New Years with my fiance and her family an maybe my own. It is what it is. It's easy to say "your being a slave and afraid " when your lucky that the governments in charge don't fine people. In my area they broke up a bunch of house parties and events with 50+ people in attendance. That's people who are so weak who can't spend some time not partying or mentally ill imo. I was not going to run the risk of catching the previous fine of 1000% over a couple of stupid beers and food. Unlike many other places they can and do enforce the giving of fines.
The problem is governments in North america should have been more strict once the virus raged out of control in Europe. Instead relying on people to do the "right " thing. That worked out so well. Person returning from Europe or an infected area mandatory 14 day quarantine no exceptions. Instead we get to see the negative aspects of Democracy where even before push comes to shove most people won't do the right thing and we have the situation we are in. People want to be entitled, fuck consequences and screw everyone else then bitch and whine that restrictions are unfair well you can't have it both ways. Maybe in the carefully constructed imaginary narrative filled worlds that many live in sure. Reality is something else.
It is about privilege. Your privilege.These words always start conversations off on the right track.
It is about privilege. Your privilege.These words always start conversations off on the right track.
But even if people keep their distance, it would just slow the spread, not stop it. COVID-19 is very infectious, and the lengthy pre-symptomatic but infectious period, the high proportion of asymptomatic carriers, and the way its symptoms almost entirely overlap with other more routine and familiar diseases, mean once it starts spreading in the community there's really no way to stop it. Contact tracing is a sad joke, and there was no point when a severe lockdown of the borders of the US and the EU would have worked, because the latest studies show that the disease was widespread in the US in and Italy in December, before it was even recognized as a threat.
They're the victims, not the monsters you seem to think they are. They're not the ones out of touch, or lacking in compassion, or mentally ill, or weak. It's the government, who are imposing blanket mandates because bureaucrats and politicians are almost never punished for excessive caution, even when the cost of those measures if far higher than doing nothing. And it's the people like you who show no sympathy for the misery it causes, mock them, insult them, and call them names.
Nobody's quite sure why Asia is doing better than the West, but it's not mask wearing. One theory is subtle cultural differences, like Japanese on tightly packed trains who don't talk to each other, in comparison to all the people constantly talking on their cell phones (and thus spreading droplets) in supermarkets in the US. The other major theory is that Asia has experienced multiple waves of coronavirus before, from sars1 20 years ago, to others that probably weren't even noticed, so more of the population already has some degree of cross-immunity. There are even a few daring to say it might have a genetic component, arguing that immunity has evolved over the past 25,000 years in response to prehistorical pandemics. We may have a clear answer in a few months, because they're starting to do research like measuring the prevalence of antibodies that are partially reactive to sars2 in East Asian populations.
And the evidence completely supports the idea that countries without massive lockdowns are doing better, economically. Look at Europe, with strong lockdowns nearly everywhere and dismal economic projections for the next quarter. The projections for East Asia are much better, and the same is true for the US. In Europe, Sweden is an economic bright spot. Or look at Latin America, India, or Africa.
The simple truth is that saying no to covid measures requires no argumentation nor justification. It requires nothing more than people saying “I’d rather take my chances.”
Entertaining the premise that an argument most be considered credible, statistically, by people amiable to emergency measures is to lose before you say one word.
We never should have allowed seat belt laws on the basis of mortality reduction. That was a significant validation of this entire flawed premise. It should have been nipped right there instead of being allowed to take root and grow
You're citing seat belt laws, but fire codes, drug laws, speed limits and similar laws go back much earlier than that. There's a long history of laws based on mortality reduction.
I would say that if a person is risking only their *own* life, then I favor being more lenient. I don't favor total drug deregulation, but I favor more relaxed laws around morality.
However, if a person is endangering the public by their behavior, then I think it is less clear. If someone is shooting off fireworks in their own apartment, then they should be stopped - because the fire could spread to other apartments and even other buildings if it goes up. Likewise, if someone is driving recklessly, they endanger not only themselves, but other people on the roads. It's the same with infectious disease - whether that's covid or HIV or whatever. An infectious disease isn't just a risk to the person - it's a risk to everyone around them.
Here you're saying the virus will spread no matter what, and thus arguing against wearing masks, contact tracing, and lockdowns.You're flipping cause and effect.
But we *do* observe that there are countries which are doing better both economically and in deaths. Successfully fighting off the virus makes for a stronger economy -- and yes, there are countries that have done much better in dealing with the virus. The main case for your point used to be Sweden -- which didn't do lockdowns -- but the data continues to be marginal, not showing a clear win. Its economy is better than many EU countries, but so did Norway's. And Sweden has had vastly more deaths than Norway, which are now spiking to the point that they are going ahead with lockdowns. That doesn't seem like a win to me.Yes, some countries are doing better than others. But the point is, we're not sure why. Taiwan? The low rate makes little sense. They're right next to China, with a direct link. Yet the number of cases was absurdly low. They did lock down their borders, but not quickly enough. There should be far more cases. It's the same mystery with Japan and South Korea. As I mentioned before, it might be related to specific cultural factors (not mask wearing), cross-immunity because of exposure to earlier coronaviruses, or even genes. This is also the situation that contract tracing was designed for: A low number of cases, and tight border controls to make it easy to trace back every case, and to limit exoinfections. Countries like New Zealand were also able to pull it off, but that's because they were infected relatively late, and it's a lot easier to restrict travel to an island.
Sweden's approach wasn't crazy, but it's not the shining star that many are making it out to be. The clearest winners in the economy are South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, and Australia -- which have had fewer deaths and a stronger economy. Below, you can see there's a wide range of covid death rate and gdp hit this year among countries -- and the countries doing the best also have a low death rate.
Your endorsed strategy is to let the virus spread freely among the young and healthy, and isolate only the vulnerable population. You claim that it's obvious to do so. If it's so clear, why is there no country in the world that has successfully used this approach? As far as I can tell, the answer is that it just doesn't work on a large scale to isolate the vulnerable from the healthy.I never endorsed that strategy. It's inevitable, to some degree, because unless we get lucky with the vaccines, the disease will spread to its natural extent in the areas where there's widespread community transmission. We can't stop that.
The simple truth is that saying no to covid measures requires no argumentation nor justification. It requires nothing more than people saying “I’d rather take my chances.”
Entertaining the premise that an argument most be considered credible, statistically, by people amiable to emergency measures is to lose before you say one word.
We never should have allowed seat belt laws on the basis of mortality reduction. That was a significant validation of this entire flawed premise. It should have been nipped right there instead of being allowed to take root and grow
You're citing seat belt laws, but fire codes, drug laws, speed limits and similar laws go back much earlier than that. There's a long history of laws based on mortality reduction.
I would say that if a person is risking only their *own* life, then I favor being more lenient. I don't favor total drug deregulation, but I favor more relaxed laws around morality.
However, if a person is endangering the public by their behavior, then I think it is less clear. If someone is shooting off fireworks in their own apartment, then they should be stopped - because the fire could spread to other apartments and even other buildings if it goes up. Likewise, if someone is driving recklessly, they endanger not only themselves, but other people on the roads. It's the same with infectious disease - whether that's covid or HIV or whatever. An infectious disease isn't just a risk to the person - it's a risk to everyone around them.
HIV seems to defeat your argument entirely, as if we were to treat HIV similarly, there would be a lockdown on the most risky, non-reproductive forms of sex.There's an epidemiologist who makes that very comparison, basically: lockdowns are the abstinence approach, ineffective, miserable, and doomed to failure.
The simple truth is that saying no to covid measures requires no argumentation nor justification. It requires nothing more than people saying “I’d rather take my chances.”
Entertaining the premise that an argument most be considered credible, statistically, by people amiable to emergency measures is to lose before you say one word.
We never should have allowed seat belt laws on the basis of mortality reduction. That was a significant validation of this entire flawed premise. It should have been nipped right there instead of being allowed to take root and grow
You're citing seat belt laws, but fire codes, drug laws, speed limits and similar laws go back much earlier than that. There's a long history of laws based on mortality reduction.
I would say that if a person is risking only their *own* life, then I favor being more lenient. I don't favor total drug deregulation, but I favor more relaxed laws around morality.
However, if a person is endangering the public by their behavior, then I think it is less clear. If someone is shooting off fireworks in their own apartment, then they should be stopped - because the fire could spread to other apartments and even other buildings if it goes up. Likewise, if someone is driving recklessly, they endanger not only themselves, but other people on the roads. It's the same with infectious disease - whether that's covid or HIV or whatever. An infectious disease isn't just a risk to the person - it's a risk to everyone around them.
The simple truth is that saying no to covid measures requires no argumentation nor justification. It requires nothing more than people saying “I’d rather take my chances.”
Entertaining the premise that an argument most be considered credible, statistically, by people amiable to emergency measures is to lose before you say one word.
We never should have allowed seat belt laws on the basis of mortality reduction. That was a significant validation of this entire flawed premise. It should have been nipped right there instead of being allowed to take root and grow
You're citing seat belt laws, but fire codes, drug laws, speed limits and similar laws go back much earlier than that. There's a long history of laws based on mortality reduction.
I would say that if a person is risking only their *own* life, then I favor being more lenient. I don't favor total drug deregulation, but I favor more relaxed laws around morality.
However, if a person is endangering the public by their behavior, then I think it is less clear. If someone is shooting off fireworks in their own apartment, then they should be stopped - because the fire could spread to other apartments and even other buildings if it goes up. Likewise, if someone is driving recklessly, they endanger not only themselves, but other people on the roads. It's the same with infectious disease - whether that's covid or HIV or whatever. An infectious disease isn't just a risk to the person - it's a risk to everyone around them.
HIV? then is it not odd nanny state Cali has some pretty lax laws regarding knowingly spreading HIV and some iron fisted ones regardin COVID?
HIV? then is it not odd nanny state Cali has some pretty lax laws regarding knowingly spreading HIV and some iron fisted ones regardin COVID?
HIV was/is the gay disease. That earns them big oppression points to counter the concerns about public health hazards.
On the thread topic, I wonder how his statistical analysis of all the Covid-19 numbers/research aligns with his analysis of climate change research. He's a scientist. Surely he wouldn't justify or accept faulty or corrupted data simply because it fit his political narrative, would he??Jhkim's always struck me as honest. Remember, when it comes to COVID-19, the need for immediate answers has led to a lot of studies being rushed out the door that are based on often absurdly limited and/or highly unrepresentative data sets, and otherwise fall very low on the tiers of evidence based medicine. The conclusions, at best, are very shaky. At worst they're just wrong, because the rush has led to significant errors. There have been major retractions from The Lancet and The NEJM, and other studies that haven't but should be withdrawn. One of which is immediately relevant, because it's the WHO-funded meta study on masks in The Lancet that's been used as justification for a lot of the mask mandates. It concludes that masks are highly effective when used by the public, but the problem is it does things like transpose numbers, misclassify the studies under review, and the vast majority of the studies it considers don't address the central point of whether mask use is effective in the community (it ends up with two relevant studies, one showing no benefit and one showing a benefit, but the one that shows the benefit is itself highly flawed). Conversely, at least one study that's critical of masks, the so-called Danish study, has had a hard time getting published, apparently due to political reasons (it finally appeared last month in the Annals of Internal Medicine). As a result, it can be very hard to assess the data. And most people don't even try, and just accept whatever their echo chamber tells them.
---snipped for brevity--- bolded by me for emphasis
The conclusions, at best, are very shaky. At worst they're just wrong, because the rush has led to significant errors. There have been major retractions from The Lancet and The NEJM, and other studies that haven't but should be withdrawn. One of which is immediately relevant, because it's the WHO-funded meta study on masks in The Lancet that's been used as justification for a lot of the mask mandates. It concludes that masks are highly effective when used by the public, but the problem is it does things like transpose numbers, misclassify the studies under review, and the vast majority of the studies it considers don't address the central point of whether mask use is effective in the community (it ends up with two relevant studies, one showing no benefit and one showing a benefit, but the one that shows the benefit is itself highly flawed). Conversely, at least one study that's critical of masks, the so-called Danish study, has had a hard time getting published, apparently due to political reasons (it finally appeared last month in the Annals of Internal Medicine). As a result, it can be very hard to assess the data. And most people don't even try, and just accept whatever their echo chamber tells them.
Retraction https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/two-elite-medical-journals-retract-coronavirus-papers-over-data-integrity-questions
Retraction https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/lancet-retracts-surgispheres-study-on-hydroxychloroquine-67613
WHO meta study https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
Critique of the WHO study http://www.economicsfaq.com/retract-the-lancets-and-who-funded-published-study-on-mask-wearing-criticism-of-physical-distancing-face-masks-and-eye-protection-to-prevent-person-to-person-transmissi/
Danish study https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
No, the bolded part is referring to the scientific papers, which had serious limitations, but they weren't really political. The spin happened downstream, in the information presented to the public by the press and public health. Though the failure to retract the WHO study and the suppression of the Danish study may be political.The conclusions, at best, are very shaky. At worst they're just wrong, because the rush has led to significant errors.
No Pat. At worst the data was intentionally misused for political reasons...
Mistakes are one thing, intentional misuse is an entirely different kettle of fish...
On the thread topic, I wonder how his statistical analysis of all the Covid-19 numbers/research aligns with his analysis of climate change research. He's a scientist. Surely he wouldn't justify or accept faulty or corrupted data simply because it fit his political narrative, would he??Jhkim's always struck me as honest. Remember, when it comes to COVID-19, the need for immediate answers has led to a lot of studies being rushed out the door that are based on often absurdly limited and/or highly unrepresentative data sets, and otherwise fall very low on the tiers of evidence based medicine. The conclusions, at best, are very shaky.
[In the show, it came from WUHAN CHINA! Am I right? What did I win??
Those possibilities came from actual CDC research...there was an episode of the Dead Zone from back in the early 2000s that even used it as a plot based on the data from the CDC.
(Bonus points if you can guess where the disease came from. :) )
No, the bolded part is referring to the scientific papers, which had serious limitations, but they weren't really political. The spin happened downstream, in the information presented to the public by the press and public health. Though the failure to retract the WHO study and the suppression of the Danish study may be political.The conclusions, at best, are very shaky. At worst they're just wrong, because the rush has led to significant errors.
No Pat. At worst the data was intentionally misused for political reasons...
Mistakes are one thing, intentional misuse is an entirely different kettle of fish...
Curse the scientists! None of them have anything to contribute here — they never seem to tell us any useful information about how to suppress spread of the disease; they haven't quickly invented a series of tests, treatments and immunizations; none of them are doing anything to systematically study modes of transmission or the progression of the disease.
Curse the scientists! None of them have anything to contribute here — they never seem to tell us any useful information about how to suppress spread of the disease; they haven't quickly invented a series of tests, treatments and immunizations; none of them are doing anything to systematically study modes of transmission or the progression of the disease.
If only they could be as SMART and INFORMED as we! Why, I'll bet they've not reviewed even HALF of the meticulous data vomited forth by the EXPERTS of Twitter! For shame, America, for shame...
Curse the scientists! None of them have anything to contribute here — they never seem to tell us any useful information about how to suppress spread of the disease; they haven't quickly invented a series of tests, treatments and immunizations; none of them are doing anything to systematically study modes of transmission or the progression of the disease.
If only they could be as SMART and INFORMED as we! Why, I'll bet they've not reviewed even HALF of the meticulous data vomited forth by the EXPERTS of Twitter! For shame, America, for shame...
So this is what we have come too:Here's a much more interesting one:
--snipp--
Harald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter, ” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”
The paper that won the Pultizer for covering up one of the greatest genocides of the 20th century (https://visiontimes.com/2017/06/25/the-new-york-times-journalist-who-covered-up-genocide.html) published an article arguing that we should use the vaccine rollout as an opportunity to cull old people, because of their race.Quote from: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/05/health/covid-vaccine-first.htmlHarald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter, ” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”
Yes, these is a quote from "experts" and not direct statements by the paper. But this isn't an opinion piece, it's an article. Which is worse, because they're presenting it as facts, without any serious caveats or opposition. The general thesis is supported by other "experts" (emphasize the "scare" in "scare quotes") in the article.
Why hasn’t the Governor rented that naval hospital ship yet? You should recall him, it’s not as if they couldn’t have done that weeks ago.
Greetings!
Well, I certainly have lots of problems with how the media has engaged in hysteria with the China virus, and many elements of the government have certainly exploited the China virus to push their own political power and agenda--as well as creating opportunities for trainloads of BS and fraud in our 2020 election.
Then, there is the shrieking cries and hysteria of all the Leftist goodies and Karens which want everyone to bow the fuck down and suck on their fucking ass.
Fuck all of them. Whaa! Whaa! Whaa! Let them choke on their fucking Communist jello.
Having said that, on a legitimate level, as an actual virus, the China virus is certainly a danger to people over 60, and or who have various co-morbidity ailments such as lung problems, diabetes, being fat, and more. Some people get the China virus, and within a week or two are dead.
Then though, you have people under 60 getting the China virus, and experiencing almost entirely different realities in regards to the virus. Some have the sniffles for a week or so, and are fine. Some even barely register a fever, and they recover swiftly--not much different than any other kind of cold or perhaps a weak flu.
Then, however, you have people that are laid the fuck out for two, three, four weeks, loss of smell and taste, fever, coughing, severe fatigue, and feeling like they have been run over by rhinoceroses. There are also some people that claim that there is ongoing, residual damage to their kidneys, lungs, or heart, as a result from having the China virus.
I personally know several people that have fallen precisely along this weird spectrum--from being severely ill for weeks at a time, and suffering the effects of a severe pneumonia-like illness--to those that were fine in a week.
So, while the China virus seems to have a spectrum of effects on different people, it remains true that it is not fatal to the vast majority of people, especially those under the age of 60.
The China virus is just yet another virus that people have to get through and survive, and move the fuck on. The government should not be exercising tyranny though, shutting down society and crippling the economy. There are also many social and political aspects of how the government is handling the China virus as to be deeply suspicious. Can't have small businesses, gyms, or Churches open, but Target, Costco, Walmart, gambling casinos, sex shops and gay bathhouses are just fine in being open.
Lots of BS and problems with that for damned sure.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
This takes us back to the early pages of this thread (or maybe the thread that was the precursor to this one). Those insisting that this is just "the sniffles" don't want to look at the ripple effects on the capabilities of the healthcare system even though they want everyone to look at the ripple effects of the lockdowns on the economy. Both are important, and while any sane person should be looking at both, every person's situation (location, demographics, occupation, etc.) are going to make value calls. That's not entirely bad. What is bad is the assholes trying to ignore the other side and dismiss their concerns. Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.Greetings!
Well, I certainly have lots of problems with how the media has engaged in hysteria with the China virus, and many elements of the government have certainly exploited the China virus to push their own political power and agenda--as well as creating opportunities for trainloads of BS and fraud in our 2020 election.
Then, there is the shrieking cries and hysteria of all the Leftist goodies and Karens which want everyone to bow the fuck down and suck on their fucking ass.
Fuck all of them. Whaa! Whaa! Whaa! Let them choke on their fucking Communist jello.
Having said that, on a legitimate level, as an actual virus, the China virus is certainly a danger to people over 60, and or who have various co-morbidity ailments such as lung problems, diabetes, being fat, and more. Some people get the China virus, and within a week or two are dead.
Then though, you have people under 60 getting the China virus, and experiencing almost entirely different realities in regards to the virus. Some have the sniffles for a week or so, and are fine. Some even barely register a fever, and they recover swiftly--not much different than any other kind of cold or perhaps a weak flu.
Then, however, you have people that are laid the fuck out for two, three, four weeks, loss of smell and taste, fever, coughing, severe fatigue, and feeling like they have been run over by rhinoceroses. There are also some people that claim that there is ongoing, residual damage to their kidneys, lungs, or heart, as a result from having the China virus.
I personally know several people that have fallen precisely along this weird spectrum--from being severely ill for weeks at a time, and suffering the effects of a severe pneumonia-like illness--to those that were fine in a week.
So, while the China virus seems to have a spectrum of effects on different people, it remains true that it is not fatal to the vast majority of people, especially those under the age of 60.
The China virus is just yet another virus that people have to get through and survive, and move the fuck on. The government should not be exercising tyranny though, shutting down society and crippling the economy. There are also many social and political aspects of how the government is handling the China virus as to be deeply suspicious. Can't have small businesses, gyms, or Churches open, but Target, Costco, Walmart, gambling casinos, sex shops and gay bathhouses are just fine in being open.
Lots of BS and problems with that for damned sure.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Even with lockdowns, all ICUs are full in Los Angeles. Though the risk to end up in the ICU if you are under 60 and have no co-morbitities is LOW, it's not ZERO. And we have a population of over 10 million people in our county.
Think for a moment what that means. Every car accident, every person who falls from a tree, whatever injury you can imagine, there is no ICU bed left.
Do you seriously think, if you don't reduce the number of people getting Covid-19 to numbers we can manage, that people under 60 without co-morbitities will be fine in this city if they just go about their daily lives? We have hundreds and hundreds of people who end up in the ICU for normal every day accidents and other non-Covid related incidents every day. THERE IS NO ICU FOR THEM TO GO TO.
Man, it's just not as pat and simple as you seem to think it is. You cannot just worry about the over-60 and co-morbidity crowd. A smaller but meaningful percentage outside that group also ends up in the ICU and we do not have a hospital system in the U.S. that can handle these kinds of numbers.
This takes us back to the early pages of this thread (or maybe the thread that was the precursor to this one). Those insisting that this is just "the sniffles" don't want to look at the ripple effects on the capabilities of the healthcare system even though they want everyone to look at the ripple effects of the lockdowns on the economy. Both are important, and while any sane person should be looking at both, every person's situation (location, demographics, occupation, etc.) are going to make value calls. That's not entirely bad. What is bad is the assholes trying to ignore the other side and dismiss their concerns. Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
BTW, it can't help that California is having some strikes among their nurses. I've seen offers for 2-week stints paying $1500/day for scabs.
Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
Like you said, raging through the world. There are only so many resources--including healthcare workers--to go around. Supply chains have been stepped up, and while that's good news for keeping current operations running, it doesn't directly increase the number of beds available and staffed. The last nine months have not really been focused on erecting new hospitals and training a new crop of workers. While it might be possible to set up field hospitals and staff them with un(der)trained personnel, that's not a solution that's generally acceptable in first world nations until everyone agrees the situation is dire...and there are still a lot of people that don't accept that for various--usually political--reasons.This takes us back to the early pages of this thread (or maybe the thread that was the precursor to this one). Those insisting that this is just "the sniffles" don't want to look at the ripple effects on the capabilities of the healthcare system even though they want everyone to look at the ripple effects of the lockdowns on the economy. Both are important, and while any sane person should be looking at both, every person's situation (location, demographics, occupation, etc.) are going to make value calls. That's not entirely bad. What is bad is the assholes trying to ignore the other side and dismiss their concerns. Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
BTW, it can't help that California is having some strikes among their nurses. I've seen offers for 2-week stints paying $1500/day for scabs.
I would believe the "strain on the healthcare" line 9 months ago.
If you have strain on your healthcare now then what the fuck was your state doing for the last 9 months while there was a pandemic raging through the world?
Like I said folks, fools here be in denial, like the whiny bitch VisionStorm here shows.Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
And in the real world, from the people in actual power with decision making capabilities (as opposed to whiny bitches in an RPG forum), we have the complete polar opposite. Along with many places were hospitals are NOT overflowing and overcapacity, and no concrete evidence that the lockdowns do in fact work. It's all a faith-based initiative.
This takes us back to the early pages of this thread (or maybe the thread that was the precursor to this one). Those insisting that this is just "the sniffles" don't want to look at the ripple effects on the capabilities of the healthcare system even though they want everyone to look at the ripple effects of the lockdowns on the economy. Both are important, and while any sane person should be looking at both, every person's situation (location, demographics, occupation, etc.) are going to make value calls. That's not entirely bad. What is bad is the assholes trying to ignore the other side and dismiss their concerns. Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
BTW, it can't help that California is having some strikes among their nurses. I've seen offers for 2-week stints paying $1500/day for scabs.
I would believe the "strain on the healthcare" line 9 months ago.
If you have strain on your healthcare now then what the fuck was your state doing for the last 9 months while there was a pandemic raging through the world?
Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
And in the real world, from the people in actual power with decision making capabilities (as opposed to whiny bitches in an RPG forum), we have the complete polar opposite. Along with many places were hospitals are NOT overflowing and overcapacity, and no concrete evidence that the lockdowns do in fact work. It's all a faith-based initiative.
In some cases, it is a matter of physical beds. In one hospital I've been working with, private (single) rooms are being turned into semi-private (double) rooms and rooms usually holding two beds are being arranged to hold a third. However, even as this is going on, you are right that it's becoming very hard to get the staffing to cover all of the added bed space. Additionally, some supporting elements--like kitchens, laundry, housekeeping/environmental, and others--can't necessarily expand facilities to accommodate the surge as easily even if they can find new minimally skilled staff.This takes us back to the early pages of this thread (or maybe the thread that was the precursor to this one). Those insisting that this is just "the sniffles" don't want to look at the ripple effects on the capabilities of the healthcare system even though they want everyone to look at the ripple effects of the lockdowns on the economy. Both are important, and while any sane person should be looking at both, every person's situation (location, demographics, occupation, etc.) are going to make value calls. That's not entirely bad. What is bad is the assholes trying to ignore the other side and dismiss their concerns. Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
BTW, it can't help that California is having some strikes among their nurses. I've seen offers for 2-week stints paying $1500/day for scabs.
I would believe the "strain on the healthcare" line 9 months ago.
If you have strain on your healthcare now then what the fuck was your state doing for the last 9 months while there was a pandemic raging through the world?
It was reasonably assumed the lockdowns would in fact keep the levels well below the ICU bed numbers we have. And it did. For 9 months. And then massive spike on top of massive spike. Which was not predicted. By anyone.
Did you imagine we would what, import more ICU-level emergency doctors just in case? Where would we get them? It's not a matter of physical beds, it's a matter of the people able to deal with an ICU-level situation.
And remember this is WITH LOCKDOWNS. SHARK is advocating no lock-downs So the number of needed ICU beds would be even more than the number needed now.
Like you said, raging through the world. There are only so many resources--including healthcare workers--to go around. Supply chains have been stepped up, and while that's good news for keeping current operations running, it doesn't directly increase the number of beds available and staffed. The last nine months have not really been focused on erecting new hospitals and training a new crop of workers. While it might be possible to set up field hospitals and staff them with un(der)trained personnel, that's not a solution that's generally acceptable in first world nations until everyone agrees the situation is dire...and there are still a lot of people that don't accept that for various--usually political--reasons.This takes us back to the early pages of this thread (or maybe the thread that was the precursor to this one). Those insisting that this is just "the sniffles" don't want to look at the ripple effects on the capabilities of the healthcare system even though they want everyone to look at the ripple effects of the lockdowns on the economy. Both are important, and while any sane person should be looking at both, every person's situation (location, demographics, occupation, etc.) are going to make value calls. That's not entirely bad. What is bad is the assholes trying to ignore the other side and dismiss their concerns. Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
BTW, it can't help that California is having some strikes among their nurses. I've seen offers for 2-week stints paying $1500/day for scabs.
I would believe the "strain on the healthcare" line 9 months ago.
If you have strain on your healthcare now then what the fuck was your state doing for the last 9 months while there was a pandemic raging through the world?
Out of curiosity, what did you expect the CA healthcare system to have done over the last 9 months to be able to take care of the COVID-19 admission rate it currently faces?
Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
And in the real world, from the people in actual power with decision making capabilities (as opposed to whiny bitches in an RPG forum), we have the complete polar opposite. Along with many places were hospitals are NOT overflowing and overcapacity, and no concrete evidence that the lockdowns do in fact work. It's all a faith-based initiative.
In the real world Los Angeles is out of ICU beds. So, what do you recommend we do, and how does "no lockdowns" result in less usage of ICU beds?
It was reasonably assumed the lockdowns would in fact keep the levels well below the ICU bed numbers we have. And it did. For 9 months. And then massive spike on top of massive spike. Which was not predicted. By anyone.
So your answer is a non-answer. Moving to Texas would probably not be all that helpful in any event:Like you said, raging through the world. There are only so many resources--including healthcare workers--to go around. Supply chains have been stepped up, and while that's good news for keeping current operations running, it doesn't directly increase the number of beds available and staffed. The last nine months have not really been focused on erecting new hospitals and training a new crop of workers. While it might be possible to set up field hospitals and staff them with un(der)trained personnel, that's not a solution that's generally acceptable in first world nations until everyone agrees the situation is dire...and there are still a lot of people that don't accept that for various--usually political--reasons.This takes us back to the early pages of this thread (or maybe the thread that was the precursor to this one). Those insisting that this is just "the sniffles" don't want to look at the ripple effects on the capabilities of the healthcare system even though they want everyone to look at the ripple effects of the lockdowns on the economy. Both are important, and while any sane person should be looking at both, every person's situation (location, demographics, occupation, etc.) are going to make value calls. That's not entirely bad. What is bad is the assholes trying to ignore the other side and dismiss their concerns. Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
BTW, it can't help that California is having some strikes among their nurses. I've seen offers for 2-week stints paying $1500/day for scabs.
I would believe the "strain on the healthcare" line 9 months ago.
If you have strain on your healthcare now then what the fuck was your state doing for the last 9 months while there was a pandemic raging through the world?
Out of curiosity, what did you expect the CA healthcare system to have done over the last 9 months to be able to take care of the COVID-19 admission rate it currently faces?
Does not directly increase the number of beds available? Then what the fuck has your local government been doing? Everyone knew that there would be a second wave coming.
As for CA, I would suggest considering moving to Texas.
So your answer is a non-answer. Moving to Texas would probably not be all that helpful in any event:
At least 50 Texas hospitals are at more than 98% capacity, including 27 hospitals with completely full ICUs, according to new data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/12/13/hospital-icus-across-texas-capacity/3813649001/ (https://www.statesman.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/12/13/hospital-icus-across-texas-capacity/3813649001/)
You're showing yourself to be a fool. ICUs are not intended to be run at a sustained 100% capacity. But you think it's OK to just move to where the beds are, and that (if possible) creates all sorts of additional stresses to the system. Besides, it's a pandemic...that means that all of those capacities are going to be strained (not that 98% capacity is a normal load--it may not even leave a dedicated code bed in some cases). But, by all means, keep going on about shit you don't understand.So your answer is a non-answer. Moving to Texas would probably not be all that helpful in any event:
From your link:QuoteAt least 50 Texas hospitals are at more than 98% capacity, including 27 hospitals with completely full ICUs, according to new data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The way that I read that is that everyone who needs to be in ICU in Texas is in ICU with an additional 2% capacity for any lucky Californian who can make it across the border to safety.Quotehttps://www.statesman.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/12/13/hospital-icus-across-texas-capacity/3813649001/ (https://www.statesman.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/12/13/hospital-icus-across-texas-capacity/3813649001/)
(https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/5eb71c4f250000dc15eb129e.jpeg?ops=1200_630)
You're showing yourself to be a fool. ICUs are not intended to be run at a sustained 100% capacity. But you think it's OK to just move to where the beds are, and that (if possible) creates all sorts of additional stresses to the system. Besides, it's a pandemic...that means that all of those capacities are going to be strained (not that 98% capacity is a normal load--it may not even leave a dedicated code bed in some cases). But, by all means, keep going on about shit you don't understand.
The way that I read that is that everyone who needs to be in ICU in Texas is in ICU with an additional 2% capacity for any lucky Californian who can make it across the border to safety.
If I may ask:
What is the number of homeless people, you know - people who live out on the street - who have died of COVID? Because, wouldn't they be the most susceptible to it's effects? Why aren't we seeing them pulling the dead out from the shanties?
It's a fair question at this point.
Half the world predicted it. The news has been full of dire warnings for months. They've been talking about a second fall surge, wondering whether the disease is seasonal, discussing lockdown fatigue, and expressing concern about people moving inside with poor ventilation and dry air due to the cold weather. We know seroprevalance was low in many areas that are being hit hard.This takes us back to the early pages of this thread (or maybe the thread that was the precursor to this one). Those insisting that this is just "the sniffles" don't want to look at the ripple effects on the capabilities of the healthcare system even though they want everyone to look at the ripple effects of the lockdowns on the economy. Both are important, and while any sane person should be looking at both, every person's situation (location, demographics, occupation, etc.) are going to make value calls. That's not entirely bad. What is bad is the assholes trying to ignore the other side and dismiss their concerns. Here we have a lot more people wanting to point out the economic risks while brushing off the strain to the healthcare system than we do the reverse.
BTW, it can't help that California is having some strikes among their nurses. I've seen offers for 2-week stints paying $1500/day for scabs.
I would believe the "strain on the healthcare" line 9 months ago.
If you have strain on your healthcare now then what the fuck was your state doing for the last 9 months while there was a pandemic raging through the world?
It was reasonably assumed the lockdowns would in fact keep the levels well below the ICU bed numbers we have, or at least below the level we've been ramping up for all along (and we have added ICU slots all along). And it did. For 9 months. And then massive spike on top of massive spike. Which was not predicted. By anyone.
Did you imagine we would what, import more ICU-level emergency doctors just in case? Where would we get them? It's not a matter of physical beds, it's a matter of the people able to deal with an ICU-level situation.
And remember this is WITH LOCKDOWNS. SHARK is advocating no lock-downs So the number of needed ICU beds would be even more than the number needed now.
I already answered your question. They are not intended to be run at a sustained 100% capacity. When you do that, you don't leave any flex room for OR cases that go bad, ED traumas (they have to go somewhere post-stabilization or else they block up your trauma bay), adverse outcomes in cath labs, etc. Many of these services have a small but significant chance of going bad and you need somewhere for those patients to go immediately in such situations. That place is the ICU, so most ICUs typically run at well below 100% so that the other necessary services can continue with the required safety net in place. Without it, interventions for trauma, cardiac events, and cerebrovascular events, as well as many non-elective surgeries get slowed down. This is also why (along with cost issues) there is such a push to downgrade patients and get them out of the ICU. With COVID-19, there are a great many such patients taking up progressive care/stepdown and medical/surgical beds for > 1 week, leading to a lot of throughput issues.You're showing yourself to be a fool. ICUs are not intended to be run at a sustained 100% capacity. But you think it's OK to just move to where the beds are, and that (if possible) creates all sorts of additional stresses to the system. Besides, it's a pandemic...that means that all of those capacities are going to be strained (not that 98% capacity is a normal load--it may not even leave a dedicated code bed in some cases). But, by all means, keep going on about shit you don't understand.
ICUs are not designed to run at 100% of capacity?
:o
It was reasonably assumed the lockdowns would in fact keep the levels well below the ICU bed numbers we have. And it did. For 9 months. And then massive spike on top of massive spike. Which was not predicted. By anyone.
It was predicted by everyone because that is what happens with infectious disease.
See for example the Spanish Flu and or any season of the normal Flu virus.
If I may ask:
What is the number of homeless people, you know - people who live out on the street - who have died of COVID? Because, wouldn't they be the most susceptible to it's effects? Why aren't we seeing them pulling the dead out from the shanties?
It's a fair question at this point.
Half the world predicted it.
And lockdowns have not kept it down. We have plenty of examples around the world of places without a lockdown, and few cases; and places with severe lockdowns, where they're overwhelmed by cases.
Let's look at the data:Half the world predicted it.
No really, they did not. I get it, you're a fucking expert on all topics and an off-the-cuff answer which sounds good is the best answer? But really, what is happening this week in Los Angeles was not predicted under the models. A spike in cases is predicted. What just happened with a double spike (which may be two different mutations converging) was not. This is not just a surge. There is a normal second surge happening on many parts of the U.S. right now, but it's not like this particular thing happening here.
I didn't mention Sweden. You're just strawmanning.QuoteAnd lockdowns have not kept it down. We have plenty of examples around the world of places without a lockdown, and few cases; and places with severe lockdowns, where they're overwhelmed by cases.Yeah Sweden just surrendered the "no lockdown" theory. It didn't work.
Regardless, it's pretty much the only tool we have to not overwhelm ICU beds when it gets like this. "No lockdown" is guaranteed to make it worse once you get to these levels. All the rest is just bullshit ideology-driven chest thumping. When you get to this point where Los Angeles is at, and you don't have the humans able to treat the number of people in the hospitals, you have to do something more than throw up your hands and claim lockdowns don't help. Because we're now at the point where bad kidney stones can kill you. We're at the point where a gall bladder that goes bad can kill you. When you cannot admit people to emergency surgery anymore because too many people are in the ICU, "no lockdowns" is not a humane answer ether. And I say that as a small business owner who hates lockdowns.
I didn't mention Sweden. You're just strawmanning.
And no, it's literally not the only tool. Start with identifying where it's happening. Talk to the contact tracers, see where most of the infections are happening. Then target those behaviors and locations.
But let's say it is. Let's say a complete lockdown was the only tool in the bag. We still have to determine whether it's worth the trade off. You're making an emotional argument right now, basically a variation on "someone do something!" That's bad policy, because doing something that doesn't help but causes immense damage is not a good idea. Even if it helps a bit, we still have to look at the trade offs.
Overwhelming hospitals is a bad thing, but it's not a justification for widespread, total lockdowns forever everywhere.
The other posters are correct, the time in between the spring and fall surges should have been spent building excess capacity. They threw up temporary hospitals in Wuhan and NYC, so it should be possible to do so in LA.
You quoted me, didn't address what I said, and only talked about Sweden. The only strawmanning is in your part. Even if you were trying to make a general point (you didn't; you just talked about Sweden), Sweden is an ambiguous case, and you're ignoring most of Asia, South America, and Africa.I didn't mention Sweden. You're just strawmanning.
I didn't say you mentioned Sweden (you strawmanned me, by claiming I strawmanned you - nice one!). Sweden is an example of a nation which used the "no lockdowns" method, and it failed. It's a counter-example.
If you're going to start screaming that the sky is falling, you should at least provide a citation. DNA studies show most of the strains spreading in the US can still be attributed to a divergence in January, not a new strain from the UK. Most West Coast cases can be attributed to a case from Wuhan and another from Europe, who both came in thru Washington. The East Coast includes strains from Washington, as well as others directly from China and Europe. Most new infections now are the result of local transmission, or from long distance travel within the country (inter-state travel is less restricted than international travel). The variants with the D614G substitution, which appears to make them more infectious but also more susceptible to antibodies, have been present in the US since before the pandemic was recognized, and are the majority of cases.QuoteAnd no, it's literally not the only tool. Start with identifying where it's happening. Talk to the contact tracers, see where most of the infections are happening. Then target those behaviors and locations.
Oh my God, holy shit. You seriously have no idea what's going on out here.
You know where it's happening? Everywhere. EVERYWHERE. It has saturated every aspect of society. An overwhelming number of responses to "where did you get it" are now "no idea, I didn't gather with a group at all." The UK has identified a new strain which is 70% more contagious than the prior one. It's probably that. We've likely gone from "you cannot get it from touching an Amazon box delivered to your front porch" to "oh shit now you can get it from that."
Well no, of course not. Thanks for your next strawman. I was arguing a LOCALIZED lockdown for a SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. But we cannot achieve even that when guys like yourself are arguing "But freedom and it's all a fraud anyway!"Then why you were raging at my post? Because I never said localized lockdowns were a bad idea. In fact, I explicitly supported them. You flipped out over something I never said, and now you're claiming I'm the one making strawmen?
Which I addressed. That was literally the entire point of my paragraph. You just edited out everything except the first two sentences to make it look like I was saying something you could oppose. (The parts I added back in are in italics.)The other posters are correct, the time in between the spring and fall surges should have been spent building excess capacity. They threw up temporary hospitals in Wuhan and NYC, so it should be possible to do so in LA. You're also right that staffing is more challenging than just bringing in stuff and repurposing space. But again, that should be solvable. The one thing that should be obvious to anyone who lived through the previous surge is that, even during the peak, hospital bed usage actually goes down, when considered at the state or national level. The fear of covid-19 drives people away from hospitals, so elective and preventative visits drop precipitously. More hospitals were struggling to pay their bills because they were empty than were running at 90% capacity. The trick is to repurpose that staff. We already have things like the Medical Reserve Corp, designed to help in situations like this, but we should have expanded it.
It was. We did. It's not physical capacity, it's personnel.
I was arguing a LOCALIZED lockdown for a SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.In Victoria we have a joke: "just two more weeks!" We were always promised a short lockdown, just temporary measures for the duration until we... um... hey we reached that goal, let's move those goalposts now... just two more weeks!
I already answered your question. They are not intended to be run at a sustained 100% capacity. When you do that, you don't leave any flex room for OR cases that go bad, ED traumas (they have to go somewhere post-stabilization or else they block up your trauma bay), adverse outcomes in cath labs, etc. Many of these services have a small but significant chance of going bad and you need somewhere for those patients to go immediately in such situations. That place is the ICU, so most ICUs typically run at well below 100% so that the other necessary services can continue with the required safety net in place. Without it, interventions for trauma, cardiac events, and cerebrovascular events, as well as many non-elective surgeries get slowed down. This is also why (along with cost issues) there is such a push to downgrade patients and get them out of the ICU. With COVID-19, there are a great many such patients taking up progressive care/stepdown and medical/surgical beds for > 1 week, leading to a lot of throughput issues.You're showing yourself to be a fool. ICUs are not intended to be run at a sustained 100% capacity. But you think it's OK to just move to where the beds are, and that (if possible) creates all sorts of additional stresses to the system. Besides, it's a pandemic...that means that all of those capacities are going to be strained (not that 98% capacity is a normal load--it may not even leave a dedicated code bed in some cases). But, by all means, keep going on about shit you don't understand.
ICUs are not designed to run at 100% of capacity?
:o
I am telling you how it actually works in the USA (which where most of the examples, such as that of CA, are based), from firsthand experience within the field. I don't know, nor do I really care, how it is done in NZ. More likely than not, what they are telling you is their utilization compared to standard capacity, not maximum capacity (the latter of which cannot exceed 100%). I haven't given you any hysterics, but you have given me some true ignorance.I already answered your question. They are not intended to be run at a sustained 100% capacity. When you do that, you don't leave any flex room for OR cases that go bad, ED traumas (they have to go somewhere post-stabilization or else they block up your trauma bay), adverse outcomes in cath labs, etc. Many of these services have a small but significant chance of going bad and you need somewhere for those patients to go immediately in such situations. That place is the ICU, so most ICUs typically run at well below 100% so that the other necessary services can continue with the required safety net in place. Without it, interventions for trauma, cardiac events, and cerebrovascular events, as well as many non-elective surgeries get slowed down. This is also why (along with cost issues) there is such a push to downgrade patients and get them out of the ICU. With COVID-19, there are a great many such patients taking up progressive care/stepdown and medical/surgical beds for > 1 week, leading to a lot of throughput issues.You're showing yourself to be a fool. ICUs are not intended to be run at a sustained 100% capacity. But you think it's OK to just move to where the beds are, and that (if possible) creates all sorts of additional stresses to the system. Besides, it's a pandemic...that means that all of those capacities are going to be strained (not that 98% capacity is a normal load--it may not even leave a dedicated code bed in some cases). But, by all means, keep going on about shit you don't understand.
ICUs are not designed to run at 100% of capacity?
:o
Yeah right. In NZ with our wonderful socialist healthcare, during a normal flu season our Hospitals can and do go over 100% capacity. So please spare me your hysterics about some theoretically incompetent ICU that can not operate at 100% capacity.
Call me back when you have Italy levels of patients piling up in the corridors but I wont be holding my breath.
I am telling you how it actually works in the USA (which where most of the examples, such as that of CA, are based), from firsthand experience within the field. I don't know, nor do I really care, how it is done in NZ. More likely than not, what they are telling you is their utilization compared to standard capacity, not maximum capacity (the latter of which cannot exceed 100%). I haven't given you any hysterics, but you have given me some true ignorance.
You don't seem to be seeking to understand, and you keep moving goalposts. A hospital may be able to exceed it's total bed capacity (standard capacity, often limited by licensing before physical beds run out) in emergencies, but we are talking about ICU bed capacities, and that's quite different ("hallway beds" seen in Code Black ED situations are not capable of supporting ICU-level needs, nor are typical nurses ICU-trained).I am telling you how it actually works in the USA (which where most of the examples, such as that of CA, are based), from firsthand experience within the field. I don't know, nor do I really care, how it is done in NZ. More likely than not, what they are telling you is their utilization compared to standard capacity, not maximum capacity (the latter of which cannot exceed 100%). I haven't given you any hysterics, but you have given me some true ignorance.
So you think that a Hospital can not have more Patients in it then it has beds for those patients?
Yeah please tell me how things "work"
Interesting study for those interested in how habits changed during the pandemic, from the first reaction to eventual fatigue:
https://www.cleaninginstitute.org/newsroom/releases/2020/american-cleaning-institute-survey-finds-decline-handwashing-practices
14% drop in frequent handwashing between March and September.
As long as you are sanitizing your hands fairly often before bringing them near your face (especially eyes & mouth), you can skip on sanitizing the surfaces of your own car/computer/etc. (however, cleaning shared work stations and the like when following after another user is good practice). I don't remember when wearing gloves for normal day-to-day activities was ever seriously suggested (gloves are a barrier to prevent skin contact, and COVID doesn't infect through the skin). The trick to maintaining vigilance is to know what steps are the important/effective ones, and there is a lot of (mis)information out there that unnecessarily adds to the burden.Interesting study for those interested in how habits changed during the pandemic, from the first reaction to eventual fatigue:
https://www.cleaninginstitute.org/newsroom/releases/2020/american-cleaning-institute-survey-finds-decline-handwashing-practices
14% drop in frequent handwashing between March and September.
In march when the lockdowns were fresh, I used to wear mask and gloves when going out and interacting with the world. Sanitize my wheel/handles/etc in the car with cleaning wipes after coming home, fresh masks and disposable gloves every trip, etc.
As the weeks went on, I slowly stopped. Now I just keep a few masks in my car to wear into the store because they're "required".
Constant vigiliance is just not practical for everyday living.
As long as you are sanitizing your hands fairly often before bringing them near your face (especially eyes & mouth), you can skip on sanitizing the surfaces of your own car/computer/etc. (however, cleaning shared work stations and the like when following after another user is good practice). I don't remember when wearing gloves for normal day-to-day activities was ever seriously suggested (gloves are a barrier to prevent skin contact, and COVID doesn't infect through the skin). The trick to maintaining vigilance is to know what steps are the important/effective ones, and there is a lot of (mis)information out there that unnecessarily adds to the burden.The thinking behind the gloves was to prevent people from transmitting the virus from a surface to the face. That's why some people put on disposable gloves before opening the door in a store or using a gas pump, which made sense because those were high contact areas. It was very early on, and I don't remember if it was ever officially recommended.
Interesting study for those interested in how habits changed during the pandemic, from the first reaction to eventual fatigue:In march when the lockdowns were fresh, I used to wear mask and gloves when going out and interacting with the world. Sanitize my wheel/handles/etc in the car with cleaning wipes after coming home, fresh masks and disposable gloves every trip, etc.
https://www.cleaninginstitute.org/newsroom/releases/2020/american-cleaning-institute-survey-finds-decline-handwashing-practices
14% drop in frequent handwashing between March and September.
As the weeks went on, I slowly stopped. Now I just keep a few masks in my car to wear into the store because they're "required".
Constant vigiliance is just not practical for everyday living.
That's only going to be useful if they are changing the gloves regularly--which didn't really happen--and still sanitize after removing the gloves. Instead, I saw several wear the same pair of gloves for an extended period of time, during which they didn't bother to wash/sanitize hands (obviously), and they touched multiple surfaces in stores. This is worse for secondary contact than bare hands with washing/sanitizing would be.As long as you are sanitizing your hands fairly often before bringing them near your face (especially eyes & mouth), you can skip on sanitizing the surfaces of your own car/computer/etc. (however, cleaning shared work stations and the like when following after another user is good practice). I don't remember when wearing gloves for normal day-to-day activities was ever seriously suggested (gloves are a barrier to prevent skin contact, and COVID doesn't infect through the skin). The trick to maintaining vigilance is to know what steps are the important/effective ones, and there is a lot of (mis)information out there that unnecessarily adds to the burden.That's only going.to be useful if they are changing the gloves regularly--which didn't really happen. Instead they more thr same pair of gloves for an extended period of time, during which they didn't bother to wash/sanitize hands. This is worse for secondary contact than bare hands with washing/sanitizing would be.
The thinking behind the gloves was to prevent people from transmitting the virus from a surface to the face. That's why some people put on disposable gloves before opening the door in a store or using a gas pump, which made sense because those were high contact areas. It was very early on, and I don't remember if it was ever officially recommended.
Interesting discussions and replies. So, I'll play THE DEVIL IN THE DETAILS for this posting:
MY NEW HYPOTHESIS: The shutdown and the mask mandates have been based on a virus they cannot even prove exists!
--------------------------------
The same group that established the Federal Reserve Bank in the US also financed the Bolshevik Revolution and Hitler and the CCP and promoted the offshoring of US wealth to China. They are the same group behind the World Bank, the IMF, the World Economic Forum and the UN and its numerous agencies, like the WHO.
I was arguing a LOCALIZED lockdown for a SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.In Victoria we have a joke: "just two more weeks!" We were always promised a short lockdown, just temporary measures for the duration until we... um... hey we reached that goal, let's move those goalposts now... just two more weeks!
Now, wherever you are may need it, I don't know. My point is simply: it always takes longer and costs more than planned. That's government.
Interesting discussions and replies. So, I'll play THE DEVIL IN THE DETAILS for this posting:
MY NEW HYPOTHESIS: The shutdown and the mask mandates have been based on a virus they cannot even prove exists!
--------------------------------
The same group that established the Federal Reserve Bank in the US also financed the Bolshevik Revolution and Hitler and the CCP and promoted the offshoring of US wealth to China. They are the same group behind the World Bank, the IMF, the World Economic Forum and the UN and its numerous agencies, like the WHO.
The Illuminati?
Also, that site you linked to claims there literally is no virus.
That's only going to be useful if they are changing the gloves regularly--which didn't really happen--and still sanitize after removing the gloves. Instead, I saw several wear the same pair of gloves for an extended period of time, during which they didn't bother to wash/sanitize hands (obviously), and they touched multiple surfaces in stores. This is worse for secondary contact than bare hands with washing/sanitizing would be.They're latex and nitrile gloves, or occasionally food service gloves. Nobody wears those for long periods. The people who did so in response to the coronavirus tended to be the most cautious people, so they were pretty religious about breaking out a new pair every time they visited a store, or disinfected mail or packages.
I am telling you how it actually works in the USA (which where most of the examples, such as that of CA, are based), from firsthand experience within the field. I don't know, nor do I really care, how it is done in NZ. More likely than not, what they are telling you is their utilization compared to standard capacity, not maximum capacity (the latter of which cannot exceed 100%). I haven't given you any hysterics, but you have given me some true ignorance.
So you think that a Hospital can not have more Patients in it then it has beds for those patients?
Yeah please tell me how things "work"
New Zealand has pretty good socialised healthcare, I might have lost my sons and wife without it, but without a government that locked the country down and protected it there could have been a lot of deaths. Here in the UK we have pretty good socialised healthcare that due to cuts is normally barely able to get through winter. The US does not have decent healthcare for all.
New Zealand has pretty good socialised healthcare, I might have lost my sons and wife without it, but without a government that locked the country down and protected it there could have been a lot of deaths. Here in the UK we have pretty good socialised healthcare that due to cuts is normally barely able to get through winter. The US does not have decent healthcare for all.
You sound like you know what you are talking about.
New Zealand has pretty good socialised healthcare, I might have lost my sons and wife without it, but without a government that locked the country down and protected it there could have been a lot of deaths. Here in the UK we have pretty good socialised healthcare that due to cuts is normally barely able to get through winter. The US does not have decent healthcare for all.
You sound like you know what you are talking about.
Nah, I'm just making it up as I go along.
Illuminati, from Latin, meaning ENLIGHTENED ONES. Nope. I have seen more enlightened ones in abandoned buildings than I'll ever see in banking! ;D My butcher is quite enlightened. He gets his meats and cheeses from Canada ~ kosher too!Interesting discussions and replies. So, I'll play THE DEVIL IN THE DETAILS for this posting:
MY NEW HYPOTHESIS: The shutdown and the mask mandates have been based on a virus they cannot even prove exists!
--------------------------------
The same group that established the Federal Reserve Bank in the US also financed the Bolshevik Revolution and Hitler and the CCP and promoted the offshoring of US wealth to China. They are the same group behind the World Bank, the IMF, the World Economic Forum and the UN and its numerous agencies, like the WHO.
The Illuminati?
Also, that site you linked to claims there literally is no virus.
New Zealand has pretty good socialised healthcare, I might have lost my sons and wife without it, but without a government that locked the country down and protected it there could have been a lot of deaths. Here in the UK we have pretty good socialised healthcare that due to cuts is normally barely able to get through winter. The US does not have decent healthcare for all.
You sound like you know what you are talking about.
Nah, I'm just making it up as I go along.
Oh, you are the "Otahuhu is a hellhole" guy. Enough said.
New Zealand has pretty good socialised healthcare, I might have lost my sons and wife without it, but without a government that locked the country down and protected it there could have been a lot of deaths. Here in the UK we have pretty good socialised healthcare that due to cuts is normally barely able to get through winter. The US does not have decent healthcare for all.
You sound like you know what you are talking about.
Nah, I'm just making it up as I go along.
Oh, you are the "Otahuhu is a hellhole" guy. Enough said.
The "New Zealand is a socialist hellhole" guy thank you very much. Try and get something right.
*transparent shilling*
New Zealand has pretty good socialised healthcare, I might have lost my sons and wife without it, but without a government that locked the country down and protected it there could have been a lot of deaths. Here in the UK we have pretty good socialised healthcare that due to cuts is normally barely able to get through winter. The US does not have decent healthcare for all.
You sound like you know what you are talking about.
Nah, I'm just making it up as I go along.
Oh, you are the "Otahuhu is a hellhole" guy. Enough said.
The "New Zealand is a socialist hellhole" guy thank you very much. Try and get something right.
Hey, chap, at least it's a step up from the Qanon guy and the three... (four?) *outright* white supremacists running around here unchecked. (Yes, yes, very funny, hu-white fuckoffnow).
So sales tax isn't a tax... because..?
Just a reminder.
$900 billion stimulus bill
/ 150 million taxpayers
= $6,000
That's how much your $600 stimulus costs you. (At least a 1:10 return is a better deal than the CARES Act was.)
Is that the right degree of discourse?
Do MASK MANDATES WORK?
Hey, chap, at least it's a step up from the Qanon guy and the three... (four?) *outright* white supremacists running around here unchecked. (Yes, yes, very funny, hu-white fuckoffnow).
New Zealand has pretty good socialised healthcare, I might have lost my sons and wife without it, but without a government that locked the country down and protected it there could have been a lot of deaths. Here in the UK we have pretty good socialised healthcare that due to cuts is normally barely able to get through winter. The US does not have decent healthcare for all.
Do MASK MANDATES WORK?
According to this, apparently not: https://twitter.com/justin_hart/status/1340725086278434821
Unless murdering innocent people is the goal?
Dunno what to think!
Just a reminder.
$900 billion stimulus bill
/ 150 million taxpayers
= $6,000
That's how much your $600 stimulus costs you. (At least a 1:10 return is a better deal than the CARES Act was.)
Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?Just a reminder.
$900 billion stimulus bill
/ 150 million taxpayers
= $6,000
That's how much your $600 stimulus costs you. (At least a 1:10 return is a better deal than the CARES Act was.)
It's a typical dishonest ploy for Republicans to pass tax cuts for rich people, driving up the national debt and then attribute that debt equally to every American. I don't see any problem with the benefit of coronavirus relief going to those who were more negatively affected, and those who were not paying for it; that's how society should work. The push for stimulus checks to everyone instead of increased unemployment benefits for people who are mostly out of work through no fault of their own is a bad thing, but it's probably all that the politics allows. (Labeling something that is disaster relief as stimulus is a failing at both ends of the political spectrum.)
Do MASK MANDATES WORK?
According to this, apparently not: https://twitter.com/justin_hart/status/1340725086278434821
Unless murdering innocent people is the goal?
Dunno what to think!
You might notice that mask mandates are only put in place when there are a lot of cases, and sometimes not even then. So it stands to reason that there would be more coronavirus cases where there are mask mandates, because there were already more cases which led to the mask mandate.
Kansas, as it once did with tax policy, provided a natural experiment to test mask effectiveness, and a CDC study found that counties with mask mandates did better (https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/23/937173060/mask-mandates-work-to-slow-spread-of-coronavirus-kansas-study-finds). The article links to the CDC study.Just a reminder.
$900 billion stimulus bill
/ 150 million taxpayers
= $6,000
That's how much your $600 stimulus costs you. (At least a 1:10 return is a better deal than the CARES Act was.)
It's a typical dishonest ploy for Republicans to pass tax cuts for rich people, driving up the national debt and then attribute that debt equally to every American. I don't see any problem with the benefit of coronavirus relief going to those who were more negatively affected, and those who were not paying for it; that's how society should work. The push for stimulus checks to everyone instead of increased unemployment benefits for people who are mostly out of work through no fault of their own is a bad thing, but it's probably all that the politics allows. (Labeling something that is disaster relief as stimulus is a failing at both ends of the political spectrum.)
Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?Just a reminder.
$900 billion stimulus bill
/ 150 million taxpayers
= $6,000
That's how much your $600 stimulus costs you. (At least a 1:10 return is a better deal than the CARES Act was.)
It's a typical dishonest ploy for Republicans to pass tax cuts for rich people, driving up the national debt and then attribute that debt equally to every American. I don't see any problem with the benefit of coronavirus relief going to those who were more negatively affected, and those who were not paying for it; that's how society should work. The push for stimulus checks to everyone instead of increased unemployment benefits for people who are mostly out of work through no fault of their own is a bad thing, but it's probably all that the politics allows. (Labeling something that is disaster relief as stimulus is a failing at both ends of the political spectrum.)
Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.
The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?The foreign aid is part of the omnibus spending bill, not the coronavirus relief package.
Congress appropriated funds for foreign aid and for American arts centers, and Americans are free to disagree that taxpayer money is allotted in this way. But it’s wrong to suggest that such funding is in the COVID-19 relief bill.And some more debunking: https://www.masslive.com/politics/2020/12/no-the-covid-stimulus-isnt-sending-85m-to-cambodia-complaints-over-alleged-omnibus-pork-muddle-stimulus-deal.html
What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected?The $900 billion price tag includes:
$325 billion | Aid to Small Businesses | |
$166 billion | $600 checks per person | |
$120 billion | Unemployement Benefits | |
$82 billion | Education | |
$56 billion | Health Care | |
$45 billion | Transportation | |
$83 billion | Other Spending | |
$40 billion | Other Tax Cuts |
You're completely dishonest. I talk about the things that interest me and which I know something about, and don't talk about the things that I don't. You can't randomly throw add a new topic, and then immediately claim victory because you were ignored. Not talking about something is not a statement of support. That's idiotic.Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?Just a reminder.
$900 billion stimulus bill
/ 150 million taxpayers
= $6,000
That's how much your $600 stimulus costs you. (At least a 1:10 return is a better deal than the CARES Act was.)
It's a typical dishonest ploy for Republicans to pass tax cuts for rich people, driving up the national debt and then attribute that debt equally to every American. I don't see any problem with the benefit of coronavirus relief going to those who were more negatively affected, and those who were not paying for it; that's how society should work. The push for stimulus checks to everyone instead of increased unemployment benefits for people who are mostly out of work through no fault of their own is a bad thing, but it's probably all that the politics allows. (Labeling something that is disaster relief as stimulus is a failing at both ends of the political spectrum.)
Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.
Since you are silent on the inappropriateness of distributing increases in national debt equally among all American taxpayers (and of course you misrepresent the Americans who don't pay federal income tax as not being taxpayers), I conclude you are unable to defend that point. Victory lap taken!
Instead you deflect by misrepresenting the contents of the coronavirus relief package. Taking your points in reverse order:
It's one bill. There is no omnibus spending bill, and a separate sars2 relief bill. There is only one bill, which includes both omnibus and coronavirus spending.The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?The foreign aid is part of the omnibus spending bill, not the coronavirus relief package.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/22/facebook-posts/facebook-posts-wrongly-say-covid-19-bill-includes-/Quote from: PolitifactCongress appropriated funds for foreign aid and for American arts centers, and Americans are free to disagree that taxpayer money is allotted in this way. But it’s wrong to suggest that such funding is in the COVID-19 relief bill.And some more debunking: https://www.masslive.com/politics/2020/12/no-the-covid-stimulus-isnt-sending-85m-to-cambodia-complaints-over-alleged-omnibus-pork-muddle-stimulus-deal.html
Pat, if you don't want to be thought a right-winger, maybe you should spend time making your economic posts accurate rather than regurgitating right-wing talking points, and less time worrying about the correctness of the term "President elect".That's only you. The other half a dozen people on this board who insisted on applying a partisan label to me called me a leftwinger.
I thought you are neutral Pat.Believing that everyone here is an idiot is the neutral position.
You're completely dishonest. I talk about the things that interest me and which I know something about, and don't talk about the things that I don't. You can't randomly throw add a new topic, and then immediately claim victory because you were ignored. Not talking about something is not a statement of support. That's idiotic.Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?Just a reminder.
$900 billion stimulus bill
/ 150 million taxpayers
= $6,000
That's how much your $600 stimulus costs you. (At least a 1:10 return is a better deal than the CARES Act was.)
It's a typical dishonest ploy for Republicans to pass tax cuts for rich people, driving up the national debt and then attribute that debt equally to every American. I don't see any problem with the benefit of coronavirus relief going to those who were more negatively affected, and those who were not paying for it; that's how society should work. The push for stimulus checks to everyone instead of increased unemployment benefits for people who are mostly out of work through no fault of their own is a bad thing, but it's probably all that the politics allows. (Labeling something that is disaster relief as stimulus is a failing at both ends of the political spectrum.)
Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.
Since you are silent on the inappropriateness of distributing increases in national debt equally among all American taxpayers (and of course you misrepresent the Americans who don't pay federal income tax as not being taxpayers), I conclude you are unable to defend that point. Victory lap taken!
Instead you deflect by misrepresenting the contents of the coronavirus relief package. Taking your points in reverse order:
Plus, much of the rest of your post was illegible garbage. There wasn't much to respond to, because many of your points were unclear.
Distributing the debt equally is a perfect example. What does that mean? Taking $25 trillion, and dividing it by 330 million? That's insane. It's not how it works it's not how it ever worked, it's not how anyone ever proposed it works, it has no bearing on the bill being discussed, and it's not even an interesting or illuminating exercise. It's just random claim with no relation to anything, because you failed to communicate the concept you're really trying to convey.
And of course people who don't pay income tax pay other taxes, the government is very good at gouging money from people. Even if you somehow manage to avoid paying sales tax for instance, they'll get you via inflation. But we're talking about the Trumpbux, which are predicated on paying income tax. So taxpayer, in that context, clearly means someone who pays income tax. Your failure to understand context and correctly interpret their trivial implications would be moronic if that was the limit of your intellectual capabilities. But I prefer to believe you at least qualify as a dimbulb, and thus knew exactly what I was saying. You just choose to deliberately misinterpret it, in a feeble attempt to claim a false victory. Which is dishonest.
It's one bill. There is no omnibus spending bill, and a separate sars2 relief bill. There is only one bill, which includes both omnibus and coronavirus spending.The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?The foreign aid is part of the omnibus spending bill, not the coronavirus relief package.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/22/facebook-posts/facebook-posts-wrongly-say-covid-19-bill-includes-/Quote from: PolitifactCongress appropriated funds for foreign aid and for American arts centers, and Americans are free to disagree that taxpayer money is allotted in this way. But it’s wrong to suggest that such funding is in the COVID-19 relief bill.And some more debunking: https://www.masslive.com/politics/2020/12/no-the-covid-stimulus-isnt-sending-85m-to-cambodia-complaints-over-alleged-omnibus-pork-muddle-stimulus-deal.html
This is civics 101.
You could make an argument that some parts of the bill are intended for different things, i.e. part of it is for relief, and other parts are for other stuff. But then you could also argue that the spending for the Sudan is a separate thing, unrelated to anything else in the bill. You can atomize it any way you like, but that doesn't change the fact: It's all part of the same bill.
That's how they pass all this crap. They find something that people want, or think they want, and then jam attach every last piece of random crap they think of to it, so they can (falsely) claim that opposing the bill means opposing the tiny bit of stuff that polls well. Rand Paul is right to call them on it, and it's astonishing Trump is doing the same, because he's hardly been a voice of fiscal restraint or cutting crap.
So that's another case where you've displayed a combination of blissful ignorance and dishonesty, flavored by your nutso variety of irrational partisanship.
Your analysis of the $900 billion spending seems moderately reasonable if we ignore your need to make false digs against certain members of the uniparty. I would add some points about much of that spending is really wasted, too late, or are patches to fixes problems the government itself caused, but what's the point? You don't engage in honest discussions.
Pat, if you don't want to be thought a right-winger, maybe you should spend time making your economic posts accurate rather than regurgitating right-wing talking points, and less time worrying about the correctness of the term "President elect".That's only you. The other half a dozen people on this board who insisted on applying a partisan label to me called me a leftwinger.
It should be obvious at this point, but just to reiterate, you're all idiots.
I think I understand what you're saying now.You're completely dishonest. I talk about the things that interest me and which I know something about, and don't talk about the things that I don't. You can't randomly throw add a new topic, and then immediately claim victory because you were ignored. Not talking about something is not a statement of support. That's idiotic.Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?Just a reminder.
$900 billion stimulus bill
/ 150 million taxpayers
= $6,000
That's how much your $600 stimulus costs you. (At least a 1:10 return is a better deal than the CARES Act was.)
It's a typical dishonest ploy for Republicans to pass tax cuts for rich people, driving up the national debt and then attribute that debt equally to every American. I don't see any problem with the benefit of coronavirus relief going to those who were more negatively affected, and those who were not paying for it; that's how society should work. The push for stimulus checks to everyone instead of increased unemployment benefits for people who are mostly out of work through no fault of their own is a bad thing, but it's probably all that the politics allows. (Labeling something that is disaster relief as stimulus is a failing at both ends of the political spectrum.)
Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.
Since you are silent on the inappropriateness of distributing increases in national debt equally among all American taxpayers (and of course you misrepresent the Americans who don't pay federal income tax as not being taxpayers), I conclude you are unable to defend that point. Victory lap taken!
Instead you deflect by misrepresenting the contents of the coronavirus relief package. Taking your points in reverse order:
I criticized your foolish statement and you chose not to defend it. Apparently, things you just said are among the things you don't know about. Not surprising for a right-winger.
There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You concede that there are other forms of tax revenue, even though you have to engage in a huge number of insults to get there. A more telling point is that the debt incurred may never be paid off; the US owed more than its GDP at the end of WWII and the federal debt has never gone below half of that debt - it just became less significant through economic growth.I stated what I believe, what I've always believed, and spelled out how you deliberately and dishonestly misinterpreted what I said. That's not a concession, that's calling you out as a liar.
[It's really not hard; stop making right-wing arguments if you're not right-wing.You really see the world that way, don't you? That people are divided into two groups, with comprehensive and mutually incompatible beliefs. So all you have to do is learn one thing that someone believes, and you know everything there is to know about them.
I think I understand what you're saying now.
You believe an illustration of how much a bill costs, by showing how much it costs from the perspective of each taxpayer, is somehow an argument for taxing everyone equally?
You're a fucking moron.
There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You concede that there are other forms of tax revenue, even though you have to engage in a huge number of insults to get there. A more telling point is that the debt incurred may never be paid off; the US owed more than its GDP at the end of WWII and the federal debt has never gone below half of that debt - it just became less significant through economic growth.I stated what I believe, what I've always believed, and spelled out how you deliberately and dishonestly misinterpreted what I said. That's not a concession, that's calling you out as a liar.
[It's really not hard; stop making right-wing arguments if you're not right-wing.You really see the world that way, don't you? That people are divided into two groups, with comprehensive and mutually incompatible beliefs. So all you have to do is learn one thing that someone believes, and you know everything there is to know about them.
That's sad. You're like a child who was raised in a box, and has never seen the range of wonders in the wider world.
You really see the world that way, don't you? That people are divided into two groups, with comprehensive and mutually incompatible beliefs. So all you have to do is learn one thing that someone believes, and you know everything there is to know about them.
That's sad. You're like a child who was raised in a box, and has never seen the range of wonders in the wider world.
You really see the world that way, don't you? That people are divided into two groups, with comprehensive and mutually incompatible beliefs. So all you have to do is learn one thing that someone believes, and you know everything there is to know about them.
That's sad. You're like a child who was raised in a box, and has never seen the range of wonders in the wider world.
I bet you can predict what rawma thinks on any particular topic just by knowing that he is left wing.
He's a contrarian. When Trump wanted an aid package MONTHS AGO, he stated they weren't necessary. NOW suddenly, he complains about Trump stating it's not enough! He's also an economic expert, a political expert, a law expert, a medical expert, and an obvious anti-semite. The fact is, he has trouble thinking, sleeping, and other less savory problems. Also, his back hurt today something fierce! So go easy on him will ya??You really see the world that way, don't you? That people are divided into two groups, with comprehensive and mutually incompatible beliefs. So all you have to do is learn one thing that someone believes, and you know everything there is to know about them.
That's sad. You're like a child who was raised in a box, and has never seen the range of wonders in the wider world.
I bet you can predict what rawma thinks on any particular topic just by knowing that he is left wing.
He's a contrarian. When Trump wanted an aid package MONTHS AGO, he stated they weren't necessary. NOW suddenly, he complains about Trump stating it's not enough! He's also an economic expert, a political expert, a law expert, a medical expert, and an obvious anti-semite. The fact is, he has trouble thinking, sleeping, and other less savory problems. Also, his back hurt today something fierce! So go easy on him will ya??You really see the world that way, don't you? That people are divided into two groups, with comprehensive and mutually incompatible beliefs. So all you have to do is learn one thing that someone believes, and you know everything there is to know about them.
That's sad. You're like a child who was raised in a box, and has never seen the range of wonders in the wider world.
I bet you can predict what rawma thinks on any particular topic just by knowing that he is left wing.
fnord.
Well, you'd know him better than me! If you're friend is a mindless NPC, then more power to him! If it was me, I'd be in TOTAL DESPAIR! (At least he's not reading the Atlantic or such silly trash!)He's a contrarian. When Trump wanted an aid package MONTHS AGO, he stated they weren't necessary. NOW suddenly, he complains about Trump stating it's not enough! He's also an economic expert, a political expert, a law expert, a medical expert, and an obvious anti-semite. The fact is, he has trouble thinking, sleeping, and other less savory problems. Also, his back hurt today something fierce! So go easy on him will ya??You really see the world that way, don't you? That people are divided into two groups, with comprehensive and mutually incompatible beliefs. So all you have to do is learn one thing that someone believes, and you know everything there is to know about them.
That's sad. You're like a child who was raised in a box, and has never seen the range of wonders in the wider world.
I bet you can predict what rawma thinks on any particular topic just by knowing that he is left wing.
fnord.
Its not being a contrarian at all. I would put people like Mistwell in that particular category.
rawma is the type of person who gets his talking points from places like CNN and NY Times which frees him from the need to be consistant. Therefore he is happy to complain about Trump wanting an aid package one second before the narrative changes to the opposite.
You and I may experience some kind of cognitive dissonance but for him it is just another Tuesday.
I pretended no such thing. I just pointed out that the $600 that everyone talks about has a huge hidden cost. And the 2017 bill isn't even vaguely equivalent.I think I understand what you're saying now.
You believe an illustration of how much a bill costs, by showing how much it costs from the perspective of each taxpayer, is somehow an argument for taxing everyone equally?
You tried to compare $600 payments to the "cost" to taxpayers, and pretended that $600 was the only benefit to each; it's a typical right-wing deception. Recasting it as general opposition to any large government expenditure would hardly escape from the universe of right-wing discourse. (Do you have a link to your equivalent criticism about the $2+ trillion dollar tax cut from 2017, a stimulus effort that produced so little actual stimulus?)
No, you're just a moron who unsurprisingly offers no defense of your dishonest claim that there were two bills. (I notice you switched to calling it a "package" instead of a "bill".)You're a fucking moron.
You're awfully defensive about being right-wing but unsurprisingly you offer no defense of your dishonest claims that the foreign aid amounts were part of the $900 billion coronavirus relief package.
I never backed off from that even in the slightest. There's no way a reasonable person could interpret anything I said as backing off from it, but you're not a reasonable person, are you?There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You concede that there are other forms of tax revenue, even though you have to engage in a huge number of insults to get there. A more telling point is that the debt incurred may never be paid off; the US owed more than its GDP at the end of WWII and the federal debt has never gone below half of that debt - it just became less significant through economic growth.I stated what I believe, what I've always believed, and spelled out how you deliberately and dishonestly misinterpreted what I said. That's not a concession, that's calling you out as a liar.
You wanted to divide by federal income taxpayers, and you backed off from that. Cheers for your tiny little step away from being a right-winger. You should notice that many federal-income-taxpayers won't get the $600 and many non-federal-income-taxpayers will get it.
I'm not neutral. Snowman said that, not me.[It's really not hard; stop making right-wing arguments if you're not right-wing.You really see the world that way, don't you? That people are divided into two groups, with comprehensive and mutually incompatible beliefs. So all you have to do is learn one thing that someone believes, and you know everything there is to know about them.
That's sad. You're like a child who was raised in a box, and has never seen the range of wonders in the wider world.
You make arguments straight out of Republican talking points memos and pretend that you're some sort of neutral arbiter of the truth. You laud Rand Paul and find fault with every Democrat. You denied the clear Biden election victory. But you want to be seen as not a right-winger? LOL.
Its not being a contrarian at all. I would put people like Mistwell in that particular category.Rawma isn't someone who just repeats talking points, there's some thought under there. It's just it's buried under the Culture War mentality, the idea that there's this grand fight between two diametrically opposed sides. This does tend to blind people to the faults of their own side, while turning the enemy as a cartoonish caricature, but even more consequential is the belief that every argument must be won at any cost, even if they have to resort to dirty tactics. Plenty of people on both sides display it, though it is more common among the left because they're the driving force in the Culture War, while the right is more reactive.
rawma is the type of person who gets his talking points from places like CNN and NY Times which frees him from the need to be consistant. Therefore he is happy to complain about Trump wanting an aid package one second before the narrative changes to the opposite.
You and I may experience some kind of cognitive dissonance but for him it is just another Tuesday.
rawma is the type of person who gets his talking points from places like CNN and NY Times which frees him from the need to be consistant. Therefore he is happy to complain about Trump wanting an aid package one second before the narrative changes to the opposite.
I just pointed out that the $600 that everyone talks about has a huge hidden cost. And the 2017 bill isn't even vaguely equivalent.
If you come across a green wall, and the green wall doesn't immediately denounce something you claim is a characteristic of white walls, say doing division in a certain way, do you tell the green wall it's really white?
You're awfully defensive about being right-wing but unsurprisingly you offer no defense of your dishonest claims that the foreign aid amounts were part of the $900 billion coronavirus relief package.No, you're just a moron who unsurprisingly offers no defense of your dishonest claim that there were two bills. (I notice you switched to calling it a "package" instead of a "bill".)
The foreign aid is part of the omnibus spending bill, not the coronavirus relief package.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/22/facebook-posts/facebook-posts-wrongly-say-covid-19-bill-includes-/Quote from: PolitifactCongress appropriated funds for foreign aid and for American arts centers, and Americans are free to disagree that taxpayer money is allotted in this way. But it’s wrong to suggest that such funding is in the COVID-19 relief bill.And some more debunking: https://www.masslive.com/politics/2020/12/no-the-covid-stimulus-isnt-sending-85m-to-cambodia-complaints-over-alleged-omnibus-pork-muddle-stimulus-deal.html
I never backed off from that even in the slightest. There's no way a reasonable person could interpret anything I said as backing off from it, but you're not a reasonable person, are you?
In fact, I'll reiterate it: I took the amount of the coronavirus part of the gigantic abusive spending package, and divided by the number of people who pay federal income tax. I did that because, while some of those taxpayers won't qualify because they make too much and there are some complications re SSNs, it still serves as a reasonable proxy for the number of people who will receive a $600 "stimulus". In other words, it's the total hidden cost of that $600 check or deposit.
I'm not neutral. Snowman said that, not me.[It's really not hard; stop making right-wing arguments if you're not right-wing.You really see the world that way, don't you? That people are divided into two groups, with comprehensive and mutually incompatible beliefs. So all you have to do is learn one thing that someone believes, and you know everything there is to know about them.
That's sad. You're like a child who was raised in a box, and has never seen the range of wonders in the wider world.
You make arguments straight out of Republican talking points memos and pretend that you're some sort of neutral arbiter of the truth. You laud Rand Paul and find fault with every Democrat. You denied the clear Biden election victory. But you want to be seen as not a right-winger? LOL.
I find fault with every Republican, too. In fact, it was only about a month ago on this very board that I got dogpiled for attacking Rand Paul. So that's just ironic.
And I never said anything about who won the election.
0/3 so far. And I don't care whether people think I'm right-wing or not, either. It's just a symptom of the deeper problem: Your inability to listen to what I say. You'll notice we haven't talked about anything interesting or substantive, and that's because you keep replying as if I said things I never said, I correct you, you get indignant and double down, and it repeats ad nauseum.
In fact, I was always rather amused that people on the left usually labeled me as right wing, while people on the right usually labeled me as left wing. That's a just how people work. When you talk with another person, disagreements take on a greater import than areas of concordance. So when someone starts with a left/right axis bias, they're likely to label someone who doesn't fall on that axis as being on the opposite end. Humans are quick to label people as Other.
But there was a time when I could simply explain that I didn't fit neatly in that box, and people would accept that. That was fun, because it allowed us to move on with the discussion, and talk about real differences and areas of agreement, instead of being stuck at the gate, as it were. The loss of that is the worst part of today's political zeitgest, because saying "no that's not what I believe" in an endless, recursive cycle is pretty damn dull.
Rawma isn't someone who just repeats talking points, there's some thought under there. It's just it's buried under the Culture War mentality, the idea that there's this grand fight between two diametrically opposed sides. This does tend to blind people to the faults of their own side, while turning the enemy as a cartoonish caricature, but even more consequential is the belief that every argument must be won at any cost, even if they have to resort to dirty tactics. Plenty of people on both sides display it, though it is more common among the left because they're the driving force in the Culture War, while the right is more reactive.
Pat I said I thought you were neutral. I didn't state you were neutral. Give me some credibility that I don't shove my foot in my mouth.Noted. I was really just pointing out that among the things I never said was one with a clear source. I was paying more attention to the phrase itself than the contexts in which it was used.
Though in honesty why haven't put Rawma on ignore? What are you exactly getting out of him? From my view point your just rewarding him with unwarranted attention that he so desperately seeks. Seriously stop feeding this disingenuous troll.
Rawma isn't someone who just repeats talking points, there's some thought under there. It's just it's buried under the Culture War mentality, the idea that there's this grand fight between two diametrically opposed sides. This does tend to blind people to the faults of their own side, while turning the enemy as a cartoonish caricature, but even more consequential is the belief that every argument must be won at any cost, even if they have to resort to dirty tactics. Plenty of people on both sides display it, though it is more common among the left because they're the driving force in the Culture War, while the right is more reactive.
I think the idea that there are two diametrically opposed sides is more characteristic of the right wing; the belief that left-wing forces are trying to destroy western civilization (and that RPGs are a significant battlefield for this) is an underlying premise of so much of the posting on this entire site. The two-party system of the United States is an objective manifestation of a duality, but there was a time when the two parties worked together on at least some issues and could compromise on others. The Republican party has become ever more radical throughout my lifetime; MItch McConnell's entire agenda when a Democrat is President is to obstruct everything in the hopes of making that President unpopular. And in the post-election phase, too many Republicans have abandoned any regard for the Constitution or the country to embrace dishonest fantasies about the election outcome, such as the impossibility that Trump could lose. The result is that my politics, without moving much from where they were when I first voted, now strike you as being some sort of Manichean heresy.
I suspect the right is more prone to Us vs. Them thinking, because of what we know about the psychological underpinnings that incline people toward being liberal or conservative. But they're also more inclined to be reactive, and the left has clearly been driving the discussion, while frequently arguing that the things they support are obvious and good, with the implication that anyone who disagrees doesn't just have different values, but lacks any morals at all.Rawma isn't someone who just repeats talking points, there's some thought under there. It's just it's buried under the Culture War mentality, the idea that there's this grand fight between two diametrically opposed sides. This does tend to blind people to the faults of their own side, while turning the enemy as a cartoonish caricature, but even more consequential is the belief that every argument must be won at any cost, even if they have to resort to dirty tactics. Plenty of people on both sides display it, though it is more common among the left because they're the driving force in the Culture War, while the right is more reactive.
I think the idea that there are two diametrically opposed sides is more characteristic of the right wing; the belief that left-wing forces are trying to destroy western civilization (and that RPGs are a significant battlefield for this) is an underlying premise of so much of the posting on this entire site. The two-party system of the United States is an objective manifestation of a duality, but there was a time when the two parties worked together on at least some issues and could compromise on others. The Republican party has become ever more radical throughout my lifetime; MItch McConnell's entire agenda when a Democrat is President is to obstruct everything in the hopes of making that President unpopular. And in the post-election phase, too many Republicans have abandoned any regard for the Constitution or the country to embrace dishonest fantasies about the election outcome, such as the impossibility that Trump could lose. The result is that my politics, without moving much from where they were when I first voted, now strike you as being some sort of Manichean heresy.
The rest of the bill. You know this, it's what we've been talking about. This is deliberate obfuscation on your part.I just pointed out that the $600 that everyone talks about has a huge hidden cost. And the 2017 bill isn't even vaguely equivalent.
What hidden cost?
Mirror, meet wall.QuoteIf you come across a green wall, and the green wall doesn't immediately denounce something you claim is a characteristic of white walls, say doing division in a certain way, do you tell the green wall it's really white?
While arguing with you does bear resemblance to arguing with a wall, the answer is no.
You can't debunk a fact. All you can do is cite people who make casual, uninformed statements.Quote from: PolitifactCongress appropriated funds for foreign aid and for American arts centers, and Americans are free to disagree that taxpayer money is allotted in this way. But it’s wrong to suggest that such funding is in the COVID-19 relief bill.And some more debunking: https://www.masslive.com/politics/2020/12/no-the-covid-stimulus-isnt-sending-85m-to-cambodia-complaints-over-alleged-omnibus-pork-muddle-stimulus-deal.html
You conceded that there were other sources of federal revenue, thus retreating from your initial attempt to score a point with the longtime right-wing talking point about any expenditure right-wingers don't like."Concession" involves giving ground. I'm standing exactly where I've always stood. You can't simply proclaim someone has retreated,
But you're still talking about the whole cost of the coronavirus relief bill as a hidden cost of the $600 check; you might as well say the $1.4 trillion spending, or the rest of the entire federal budget, is the hidden cost of the $600 check.That's exactly what I'm saying. You're just playing word games trying to claim otherwise.
We had a long exchange about whether Joe Biden could be called President elect; being President elect means he won the election but is not yet President. You claimed that media not using your definition were deliberately lying. That was pretty much the tipping point for realizing you are right-wing; that's not a normal reaction for a non-right-winger on a title you pretend doesn't really matter.I knew exactly what you were referring to, but believing we should use the correct term is not equivalent to saying who won or didn't win an election.
I keep relying on things you said, which you keep claiming meant something else, or running away from completely.No, you keep reading things into what I said that aren't there.
To the extent that there's a left-to-right political spectrum, everyone gets projected onto it, like it or not. You are clearly to the right. Many of the posters here have a completely distorted view of where the center is; don't use that to claim you aren't right-wing.Is Neptune closer to Milwaukee or Duluth? Are sponges more closely related to cows or wolves?
I think the idea that there are two diametrically opposed sides is more characteristic of the right wing; the belief that left-wing forces are trying to destroy western civilization (and that RPGs are a significant battlefield for this) is an underlying premise of so much of the posting on this entire site. The two-party system of the United States is an objective manifestation of a duality, but there was a time when the two parties worked together on at least some issues and could compromise on others. The Republican party has become ever more radical throughout my lifetime; MItch McConnell's entire agenda when a Democrat is President is to obstruct everything in the hopes of making that President unpopular. And in the post-election phase, too many Republicans have abandoned any regard for the Constitution or the country to embrace dishonest fantasies about the election outcome, such as the impossibility that Trump could lose. The result is that my politics, without moving much from where they were when I first voted, now strike you as being some sort of Manichean heresy.
The right wing became more radical? You mean not moving left fast enough I think. Unless you are 21, you are suffering from serious bias if your point of view republicans resisting a dude who in his own book made sure to mention every friend and mentor he ever had was a communist (as well as his father, grandfather, and step father) is somehow a radical step to the right. LOL. Not sure if serious.
The rest of the bill. You know this, it's what we've been talking about. This is deliberate obfuscation on your part.I just pointed out that the $600 that everyone talks about has a huge hidden cost. And the 2017 bill isn't even vaguely equivalent.
What hidden cost?
You can't debunk a fact. All you can do is cite people who make casual, uninformed statements.Quote from: PolitifactCongress appropriated funds for foreign aid and for American arts centers, and Americans are free to disagree that taxpayer money is allotted in this way. But it’s wrong to suggest that such funding is in the COVID-19 relief bill.And some more debunking: https://www.masslive.com/politics/2020/12/no-the-covid-stimulus-isnt-sending-85m-to-cambodia-complaints-over-alleged-omnibus-pork-muddle-stimulus-deal.html
It's one bill. See for yourself:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/133
(Don't let the name fool you, H.R. 133 is the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021. The amendments amend nearly everything, even the name. It's how this shit works.)
You conceded that there were other sources of federal revenue, thus retreating from your initial attempt to score a point with the longtime right-wing talking point about any expenditure right-wingers don't like."Concession" involves giving ground. I'm standing exactly where I've always stood. You can't simply proclaim someone has retreated,
But you're still talking about the whole cost of the coronavirus relief bill as a hidden cost of the $600 check; you might as well say the $1.4 trillion spending, or the rest of the entire federal budget, is the hidden cost of the $600 check.That's exactly what I'm saying. You're just playing word games trying to claim otherwise.
I knew exactly what you were referring to, but believing we should use the correct term is not equivalent to saying who won or didn't win an election.
And I hope you realize you just invalidated your own argument. The election isn't won until the electors vote, and they hadn't at that point. So even by your definition, Biden wasn't president-elect.
I keep relying on things you said, which you keep claiming meant something else, or running away from completely.No, you keep reading things into what I said that aren't there.
To the extent that there's a left-to-right political spectrum, everyone gets projected onto it, like it or not. You are clearly to the right. Many of the posters here have a completely distorted view of where the center is; don't use that to claim you aren't right-wing.Is Neptune closer to Milwaukee or Duluth? Are sponges more closely related to cows or wolves?
Trying to jam everyone on a simplistic spectrum leads to nonsense results.
I've rebutted this with links; rebutted your claim that I switched to saying package instead of bill when I said that at the very beginning, and I do not deny that the two bills were passed together and that Trump will sign or veto them together. That doesn't make them the same thing, any more than the cost of sending $600 checks includes the cost of something else. And you admitted this from the start when you talked about a $900 billion cost versus the entire cost of the combined bill.It's not two bills passed together, it's just one bill. And that does make them the same bill. It needs just one signature, not two. And my source is the source used by all your sources, which makes it more authoritative. Consider all your rebuttals debutted.
The proposed bill still costs $2.3 trillion, and the American taxpayers can't just choose to pay for the $600 and skip the rest. That's the point I made, which you're pretending to miss.
Back at you; that's not a cost of the $600 check, that's the cost of the other things that the bill also does. As I said in the part that you removed.
And of course you were wrong about the foreign aid being part of the $900 billion for coronavirus relief.
And you were wrong when you said that the foreign aid was part of the $900 billion coronavirus relief.
And of course you were wrong about the foreign aid being part of the $900 billion for coronavirus relief; are you still standing with that? Or just pretending you said something else?
You are wrong, just like you were wrong on the foreign aid being part of the $900 billion for coronavirus relief.
Nope. You said that the the foreign aid was part of the $900 billion for coronavirus relief, and you were wrong and have dishonestly continued to pretend you were not.
That's just insane garbage from someone who incorrectly stated that the foreign aid was part of the $900 billion for coronavirus relief.This is hilarious.
Your first post attributed the entire cost to "taxpayers"; from the number cited, you obviously meant payers of federal income tax. And then you said "And of course people who don't pay income tax pay other taxes". That's a concession; let's include them in the denominator. That you do not understand the meaning of the words you write is not any fault of mine; you misrepresenting them later is definitely your fault.According to the US Debt Clock, the debt per taxpayers is currently $220,130. Does that mean a $220,130 bill is being sent to each taxpayer?
What, we couldn't have $600 checks without the other $2+ trillion dollars spent on unrelated matters? If you go to a store and buy a gallon of milk, a dozen eggs and a loaf of bread, the price of the eggs and the loaf of bread is not a "hidden cost" of the milk.Is an ad deceptive if it advertises something for one price, and when you show up at the store they'll only sell it to you at that price if you buy a bunch of shit you don't want?
You just defeated your own argument again. If it's about how the phrase is defined in federal law, then the president-elect isn't determined until the GSA administrator certifies them. You were the one who brought this up, in the other discussion.QuoteI knew exactly what you were referring to, but believing we should use the correct term is not equivalent to saying who won or didn't win an election.
And I hope you realize you just invalidated your own argument. The election isn't won until the electors vote, and they hadn't at that point. So even by your definition, Biden wasn't president-elect.
Oh, caring about words so passionately that you suspect the results of this election but don't care about how the words are defined in federal law. Care more about your nonsensical hidden costs that are actually paying for something else.
The election is won in the voting on election day. No consequential change has ever happened after election day (in 2000, Florida might have changed but didn't). By your argument, every President elect has been prematurely mislabeled, and according to you, it is deliberate lying by the media.
Neptune isn't somewhere between Milwaukee and Duluth, Rawma. If I believed I was a centrist, I would have analogized myself to Eu Claire.QuoteTo the extent that there's a left-to-right political spectrum, everyone gets projected onto it, like it or not. You are clearly to the right. Many of the posters here have a completely distorted view of where the center is; don't use that to claim you aren't right-wing.Is Neptune closer to Milwaukee or Duluth? Are sponges more closely related to cows or wolves?
Trying to jam everyone on a simplistic spectrum leads to nonsense results.
I don't have to judge who is more or less right-wing or left-wing by infinitesimal amounts; only where they sit relative to the center. I expect you believe that the center sits right under you, just as you believe your definitions and opinions are more authoritative than anything I cite.
New Zealand has pretty good socialised healthcare, I might have lost my sons and wife without it, but without a government that locked the country down and protected it there could have been a lot of deaths. Here in the UK we have pretty good socialised healthcare that due to cuts is normally barely able to get through winter. The US does not have decent healthcare for all.
We actually have decent healthcare for all. You've just heard too much media whining.
We'd have sci-fi level amazing healthcare for all if we let other nations fend for themselves. If NZ had to shoulder the burden of its own defense, then we'll see what kind of healthcare you'd get.
Considering the uselessness of America's "allies" and all the asshole noise we have to hear from their citizens, I'd FAR rather we keep the money at home and let you people get a crash course in Chinese.
It's not two bills passed together, it's just one bill. And that does make them the same bill. It needs just one signature, not two. And my source is the source used by all your sources, which makes it more authoritative. Consider all your rebuttals debutted.
Not to mention this is Civics 101. They used to teach this in Saturday morning commercials.
It's an easy mistake, given the weight of tradition, so it's no surprise people were initially confused, and it took a while to work out the details. But at this point, the news media have had plenty of time to look it over, correct themselves, and put a qualifier in front President-elect. Since they've chosen not to, that means they're deliberately lying.
Neptune isn't somewhere between Milwaukee and Duluth, Rawma. If I believed I was a centrist, I would have analogized myself to Eu Claire.
But let's get to the important question: Is it one bill, or two?It's not two bills passed together, it's just one bill. And that does make them the same bill. It needs just one signature, not two. And my source is the source used by all your sources, which makes it more authoritative. Consider all your rebuttals debutted.
Not to mention this is Civics 101. They used to teach this in Saturday morning commercials.
You presented the $900 billion for coronavirus relief as a separate thing, and then incorrectly stated that the $900 billion included foreign aid that was part of the $1.4 trillion dollars. That the two pieces of legislation were merged is not relevant. I have pointed out your mistake repeatedly and how you have misrepresented my comments repeatedly, and you continue to do so. Per Pat, this now proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that you are deliberately lying.
It's an easy mistake, given the weight of tradition, so it's no surprise people were initially confused, and it took a while to work out the details. But at this point, Pat has had plenty of time to look it over, correct themselves, and admit their error and deception. Since they've chosen not to, that means they're deliberately lying.They learned the correct answer, and decided to go with the false one. That's lying.
Yes, that's about right.
If you'll deliberately lie about something like that, nobody can trust your own characterization of your political stance; the appropriate rule is to trust what people reveal through their actions over what they claim about themselves. And you show right-wing a lot. I don't blame you from wanting to dissociate yourself from the idiot right-wingers on this site; I don't blame you for fantasizing that your politics are more respectable than that of the political allies you despise even when you agree with them, but I do blame you for lying about me.
But let's get to the important question:It's not two bills passed together, it's just one bill. And that does make them the same bill. It needs just one signature, not two. And my source is the source used by all your sources, which makes it more authoritative. Consider all your rebuttals debutted.
Not to mention this is Civics 101. They used to teach this in Saturday morning commercials.
You presented the $900 billion for coronavirus relief as a separate thing, and then incorrectly stated that the $900 billion included foreign aid that was part of the $1.4 trillion dollars. That the two pieces of legislation were merged is not relevant. I have pointed out your mistake repeatedly and how you have misrepresented my comments repeatedly, and you continue to do so. Per Pat, this now proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that you are deliberately lying.
It's an easy mistake, given the weight of tradition, so it's no surprise people were initially confused, and it took a while to work out the details. But at this point, Pat has had plenty of time to look it over, correct themselves, and admit their error and deception. Since they've chosen not to, that means they're deliberately lying.They learned the correct answer, and decided to go with the false one. That's lying.
Yes, that's about right.
If you'll deliberately lie about something like that, nobody can trust your own characterization of your political stance; the appropriate rule is to trust what people reveal through their actions over what they claim about themselves. And you show right-wing a lot. I don't blame you from wanting to dissociate yourself from the idiot right-wingers on this site; I don't blame you for fantasizing that your politics are more respectable than that of the political allies you despise even when you agree with them, but I do blame you for lying about me.
One bill or two?
They went with their own criteria which disagreed with Pat's. More likely that Pat was wrong, or that media ranging from mainstream (AP, networks, major newspapers) to right-wing (like Fox News and OANN) were all uniformly wrong? In any case, being wrong is not lying.If someone points out a third party lied, "no you're the liar!" isn't a very mature response. If you think the evidence suggests otherwise, you should make your case. You tried to do that once, and I wasn't convinced.
But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.
Obvious reply: It's not one bill under certain circumstances. It's one bill, period. Under all circumstances.QuoteOne bill or two?
I have repeatedly said that it is one bill for purposes of the President's signing or vetoing it. That Congress merged two pieces of legislation is not particularly relevant; it is relevant that Pat said that the foreign aid was part of coronavirus relief (specifically, that it was part of the $900 billion) and thus treated that as a separate bill. Nothing I said depended on the two being separate bills.
They went with their own criteria which disagreed with Pat's. More likely that Pat was wrong, or that media ranging from mainstream (AP, networks, major newspapers) to right-wing (like Fox News and OANN) were all uniformly wrong? In any case, being wrong is not lying.If someone points out a third party lied, "no you're the liar!" isn't a very mature response. If you think the evidence suggests otherwise, you should make your case. You tried to do that once, and I wasn't convinced.
But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.Obvious reply: It's not one bill under certain circumstances. It's one bill, period. Under all circumstances.QuoteOne bill or two?
I have repeatedly said that it is one bill for purposes of the President's signing or vetoing it. That Congress merged two pieces of legislation is not particularly relevant; it is relevant that Pat said that the foreign aid was part of coronavirus relief (specifically, that it was part of the $900 billion) and thus treated that as a separate bill. Nothing I said depended on the two being separate bills.
See what you're doing? You made a false statement. You haven't really conceded, and you're still trying to weasel out of that mistake. Making a mistake isn't really a big deal, but by replying like this, you're only augmenting the mistake, because you're just asking for the other person to correct you again (example in italics), which drags it out even further.
One thing you could have done is drop it. I'm perfectly fine with that. Most people don't like publicly admitting their mistakes, and demanding they do so tends to make them double down, which is a conversation killer. That creates bad will and leads to an endless cycle of "no you"s (like you're doing right now), and all for what? An ego trip? No thanks.
You've made some other mistakes in the thread, I've corrected them, and then dropped it. That's how I normally operate. I'm not going to badger someone just to stroke my own ego. So if it's exactly what I just said I don't normally do, why did I keep harping on the one bill? I was hoping you'd notice I was mimicking you. I was throwing your own rhetorical techniques back at you in an attempt to point out you were doing exactly the same thing, without explicitly calling you out. That didn't work, so I'm coming out and stating it.
Let's start here: The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources).
I don't have any problem admitting my mistakes, which seems to make me a bit of an oddball. And I was going to come out and say I was wrong in a post, but you weren't just being petty about it, you had also made the same kind of mistake. So I tried to show you what you were doing by mirroring your behavior.
You're right that the one/two bill thing isn't terribly vital, but it is a useful correction. The same is true about whether the foreign aid spending is part of the coronavirus package or not. My point is and always has been that they're using an emergency and a high publicity items ($600!) as cover to throw all their pet projects into the bill. Whether it's part of the $900 billion or part of the greater $2+ trillion isn't terribly important.
Are people buying the "mutant strain" bullshit, that coincidentally allows the UK government to prolong the utterly unnecessary restrictions?
South Africa.Are people buying the "mutant strain" bullshit, that coincidentally allows the UK government to prolong the utterly unnecessary restrictions?
I heard they found another strain in either South America, or South Africa. All it proves is that the vaccines will be useless. The silverlining is that these strains are weaker.
It is one bill. One bill so full of pork and with barely any time to read that even AOC bitched about it in twitter and yet still voted yes for it. Tulsi was the only one that I know among the democrats that voted against the bill out of basic decency. You don't vote yes on bills if you don't know what is in it. Bills are like the devil contracts, but everyone suffers instead of the politicians that sign it.
They went with their own criteria which disagreed with Pat's. More likely that Pat was wrong, or that media ranging from mainstream (AP, networks, major newspapers) to right-wing (like Fox News and OANN) were all uniformly wrong? In any case, being wrong is not lying.If someone points out a third party lied, "no you're the liar!" isn't a very mature response. If you think the evidence suggests otherwise, you should make your case. You tried to do that once, and I wasn't convinced.
But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.
Obvious reply: It's not one bill under certain circumstances. It's one bill, period. Under all circumstances.QuoteOne bill or two?
I have repeatedly said that it is one bill for purposes of the President's signing or vetoing it. That Congress merged two pieces of legislation is not particularly relevant; it is relevant that Pat said that the foreign aid was part of coronavirus relief (specifically, that it was part of the $900 billion) and thus treated that as a separate bill. Nothing I said depended on the two being separate bills.
See what you're doing? You made a false statement. You haven't really conceded, and you're still trying to weasel out of that mistake. Making a mistake isn't really a big deal, but by replying like this, you're only augmenting the mistake, because you're just asking for the other person to correct you again (example in italics), which drags it out even further.
I was hoping you'd notice I was mimicking you. I was throwing your own rhetorical techniques back at you in an attempt to point out you were doing exactly the same thing, without explicitly calling you out.
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?
Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.
You're right that the one/two bill thing isn't terribly vital, but it is a useful correction. The same is true about whether the foreign aid spending is part of the coronavirus package or not. My point is and always has been that they're using an emergency and a high publicity items ($600!) as cover to throw all their pet projects into the bill. Whether it's part of the $900 billion or part of the greater $2+ trillion isn't terribly important.
It is one bill. One bill so full of pork and with barely any time to read that even AOC bitched about it in twitter and yet still voted yes for it. Tulsi was the only one that I know among the democrats that voted against the bill out of basic decency. You don't vote yes on bills if you don't know what is in it. Bills are like the devil contracts, but everyone suffers instead of the politicians that sign it.
I heard they found another strain in either South America, or South Africa. All it proves is that the vaccines will be useless. The silverlining is that these strains are weaker.
The news organizations aren't you, and aren't me, therefore they're third parties. That's the literal definition of the phrase. And I explained, in detail, why calling Biden the president-elect, without using a qualifier like "presumptive", was incorrect until the states were certified or the electors cast their votes. Since there was no reasonable argument supporting their position, and the nature of the election meant the electoral process was covered in great detail, they had to actively choose to keep using the incorrect term, after they learned better. That makes them liars. Your attempt to claim I'm really the liar, without even explaining how it applies to me, is just an irrational "no you" response.They went with their own criteria which disagreed with Pat's. More likely that Pat was wrong, or that media ranging from mainstream (AP, networks, major newspapers) to right-wing (like Fox News and OANN) were all uniformly wrong? In any case, being wrong is not lying.If someone points out a third party lied, "no you're the liar!" isn't a very mature response. If you think the evidence suggests otherwise, you should make your case. You tried to do that once, and I wasn't convinced.
But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.
You didn't point out a third party lied; you claimed that all the media who disagreed with your definition must therefore be lying. If someone says "Everyone else is a liar!" then you should look closely at that person. I was simply applying your standard (knows better but doesn't correct and therefore deliberate lying) to you, and I've even explained that to you repeatedly.
I did not make a false statement, although the sources I linked described the two as separate but still had correct information; my statement did not hinge on them being separate, as you had separated them out by only considering the cost of one part of the bill. You incorrectly attributed the foreign aid to the $900 billion coronavirus relief; pointing out that there was foreign aid (pretty much as requested by the President's budget) in an omnibus spending bill would have been not even a "dog bites man" story but more like "dog wags tail".You claimed it was one bill. That was a false statement.
I understand that you were trying to drop it without admitting your mistake, but as long as you keep attacking me for something I didn't do, you're not really dropping it and, unlike you, I don't have the luxury here of someone else like SHARK posting in support of me, so I will defend myself.Then you fail at reading comprehension, because I quite literally said I was going to post a correction, like I almost always do. I was offering you the chance to bow out without admitting your mistake.
It would have worked better if you had found a mistake that completely undercut any entire post of mine, as I did with yours. It just looked like you were quibbling over an irrelevant point to avoid an admission of error that was the entire basis of your reply.Nonsense. My thesis is they were using the coronavirus to slide in all the crap they couldn't get passed when there isn't an emergency. That they were attaching crap like funding for the Sudan supports my thesis.
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.That quite literally supports my position.I will in turn concede that I did not consider whether the two parts of the bill were passed together; they were widely reported as separate entities and had very different paths of negotiation, and it was not important except to change the possible issues from a presidential veto. But you incorrectly attributing foreign aid to stimulus/relief completely demolishes your point in this post:Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?
Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.
You pointed out one error, I pointed out many of yours. And I literally referred to items from the omnibus. You have no case.QuoteYou're right that the one/two bill thing isn't terribly vital, but it is a useful correction. The same is true about whether the foreign aid spending is part of the coronavirus package or not. My point is and always has been that they're using an emergency and a high publicity items ($600!) as cover to throw all their pet projects into the bill. Whether it's part of the $900 billion or part of the greater $2+ trillion isn't terribly important.
Again, you say after many, many posts that this was what you did all along, but you never mentioned the omnibus spending bill. This is an ongoing issue in conversation with you; you either hold back your real intent or invent it later, and pretend you were explicitly saying it all along. I corrected the obvious and immediate errors in your early post and you slowly slid into claiming you always said something you didn't and which would have undercut your point entirely if you had.
I'm willing to let it go now, assuming you don't jump back in. Our discussion of aerosolization in the mask mandate thread is a much better model for future interaction.I was trying to give you a graceful out. Acting condescending and making demands is not an appropriate response.
The news organizations aren't you, and aren't me, therefore they're third parties. That's the literal definition of the phrase. And I explained, in detail, why calling Biden the president-elect, without using a qualifier like "presumptive", was incorrect until the states were certified or the electors cast their votes. Since there was no reasonable argument supporting their position, and the nature of the election meant the electoral process was covered in great detail, they had to actively choose to keep using the incorrect term, after they learned better. That makes them liars. Your attempt to claim I'm really the liar, without even explaining how it applies to me, is just an irrational "no you" response.They went with their own criteria which disagreed with Pat's. More likely that Pat was wrong, or that media ranging from mainstream (AP, networks, major newspapers) to right-wing (like Fox News and OANN) were all uniformly wrong? In any case, being wrong is not lying.If someone points out a third party lied, "no you're the liar!" isn't a very mature response. If you think the evidence suggests otherwise, you should make your case. You tried to do that once, and I wasn't convinced.
But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.
You didn't point out a third party lied; you claimed that all the media who disagreed with your definition must therefore be lying. If someone says "Everyone else is a liar!" then you should look closely at that person. I was simply applying your standard (knows better but doesn't correct and therefore deliberate lying) to you, and I've even explained that to you repeatedly.
You're trying to be pedantic, but you're not very good at it.
I did not make a false statement, although the sources I linked described the two as separate but still had correct information; my statement did not hinge on them being separate, as you had separated them out by only considering the cost of one part of the bill. You incorrectly attributed the foreign aid to the $900 billion coronavirus relief; pointing out that there was foreign aid (pretty much as requested by the President's budget) in an omnibus spending bill would have been not even a "dog bites man" story but more like "dog wags tail".You claimed it was one bill. That was a false statement.
I understand that you were trying to drop it without admitting your mistake, but as long as you keep attacking me for something I didn't do, you're not really dropping it and, unlike you, I don't have the luxury here of someone else like SHARK posting in support of me, so I will defend myself.Then you fail at reading comprehension, because I quite literally said I was going to post a correction, like I almost always do. I was offering you the chance to bow out without admitting your mistake.
And SHARK didn't support either of us in this stupid little dispute. He just supported a general statement about the bill's nature, and he's attacked me in the past.
It would have worked better if you had found a mistake that completely undercut any entire post of mine, as I did with yours. It just looked like you were quibbling over an irrelevant point to avoid an admission of error that was the entire basis of your reply.Nonsense. My thesis is they were using the coronavirus to slide in all the crap they couldn't get passed when there isn't an emergency. That they were attaching crap like funding for the Sudan supports my thesis.
QuoteThe part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
I will in turn concede that I did not consider whether the two parts of the bill were passed together; they were widely reported as separate entities and had very different paths of negotiation, and it was not important except to change the possible issues from a presidential veto. But you incorrectly attributing foreign aid to stimulus/relief completely demolishes your point in this post:That quite literally supports my position.Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?
Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.
You pointed out one error, I pointed out many of yours. And I literally referred to items from the omnibus. You have no case.QuoteYou're right that the one/two bill thing isn't terribly vital, but it is a useful correction. The same is true about whether the foreign aid spending is part of the coronavirus package or not. My point is and always has been that they're using an emergency and a high publicity items ($600!) as cover to throw all their pet projects into the bill. Whether it's part of the $900 billion or part of the greater $2+ trillion isn't terribly important.
Again, you say after many, many posts that this was what you did all along, but you never mentioned the omnibus spending bill. This is an ongoing issue in conversation with you; you either hold back your real intent or invent it later, and pretend you were explicitly saying it all along. I corrected the obvious and immediate errors in your early post and you slowly slid into claiming you always said something you didn't and which would have undercut your point entirely if you had.
I'm willing to let it go now, assuming you don't jump back in. Our discussion of aerosolization in the mask mandate thread is a much better model for future interaction.I was trying to give you a graceful out. Acting condescending and making demands is not an appropriate response.
The discussion of aerosolization is more positive because you behaved better. I never start fights.
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
You can look back through the thread for Shasarak and consolcwby who were critical of me and not of you.
It does not, in any way, prove the vaccines will be useless. They are fairly broad spectrum vaccines due to the nature of this type of vaccine.
But make sure to wear your face diapers!!!
Oh wait, that's proven to be laughable bullshit too?
https://redstate.com/brandon_morse/2020/12/28/graph-shows-lockdowns-of-california-causing-covid-to-thrive-while-free-florida-is-far-better-off-n300807 (https://redstate.com/brandon_morse/2020/12/28/graph-shows-lockdowns-of-california-causing-covid-to-thrive-while-free-florida-is-far-better-off-n300807)
What amazing surprises!
So California is experiencing a major surge right now, and I think it's fair enough to attribute it to fatigue with the restrictions in place - particularly over Thanksgiving and Christmas. However, California's overall track record for deaths is still much better than Florida or Texas. Below is the trend of death rates over time for CA (purple), FL (green), and TX (blue).
CDC says the entire USA had 27 flu cases last week.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm)
But make sure to wear your face diapers!!!
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
Let people be free, and deal with the fucking virus how they want to deal with it. As individual citizens, and as individual communities.Here is a line of pure, distilled stupidity. Individual efforts are not effective in dealing with a public health crisis/concern (even most of those that try to disbelieve that Covid-19 is a "crisis" will still grudgingly acknowledge it as a "concern").
I'm taking the "no comorbidities" from the article. "Dr. G.E. Ghali, of LSU Health Shreveport, told The Advocate that Letlow didn't have any underlying health conditions that would have placed him at greater risk to COVID-19."Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
Yes, because exceptions make the rule. And you wonder why nobody's swayed by your weak ass fallacious arguments. Also...
>no comorbidities
>guy has a fatter chin than mine
Rrrright.
Let people be free, and deal with the fucking virus how they want to deal with it. As individual citizens, and as individual communities.Here is a line of pure, distilled stupidity. Individual efforts are not effective in dealing with a public health crisis/concern (even most of those that try to disbelieve that Covid-19 is a "crisis" will still grudgingly acknowledge it as a "concern").
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
Outlier.
And he's overweight, so who knows what hidden co-morbidities simply hadn't been discovered yet.
I get it - if it can take down a healthy middle aged person, it can take you down too and that's scary so you go into denial. And you can call it an outlier all you want, but you have no way to know if that's you.
He was not particularly overweight. This is him:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/jgglML-70Mg/maxresdefault.jpg)
And the 46 year old on my friend's block is the fittest woman you will ever see, perfect health, jogged literally every single day, and she's in her home on oxygen right now and has been for a week. Only reason she is home with it and not in a hospital is because with the lack of beds they let her stay home.
The virus hits different people different ways and they don't know why. I get it - if it can take down a healthy middle aged person, it can take you down too and that's scary so you go into denial. And you can call it an outlier all you want, but you have no way to know if that's you.
What is the point of living if you cannot even fucking live? Fuck mass starvation from the collapse economy and the lynchings that will come afterwards towards the health professionals that back up the lock downs will kill more people than the virus.
What is the point of living if you cannot even fucking live? Fuck mass starvation from the collapse economy and the lynchings that will come afterwards towards the health professionals that back up the lock downs will kill more people than the virus.
If it were just "wear a mask, wash your hands", I don't think anyone would be complaining.
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
If it were just "wear a mask, wash your hands", I don't think anyone would be complaining.
My wife, who has hours of training in hygiene and sanitation, can't run her own business; but any one of us could walk into a Home Depot (where there's ALWAYS somebody not wearing a mask, or wearing one UNDER their nose). Decisions on "Who is essential?" seem overwhelmingly arbitrary (and based upon favorable nepotism in California).
The question becomes "When does the cure, become worse than the disease?"
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
I eagerly await the car lockdowns. Seriously, more than 38 THOUSAND deaths a year in the US? That's almost as bad as the kung flu, and it's been going on for DECADES! Don't even wanna look at fourtrax and motorcycle statistics. We need to lock down all motor transportation, STAT!
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
I eagerly await the car lockdowns. Seriously, more than 38 THOUSAND deaths a year in the US? That's almost as bad as the kung flu, and it's been going on for DECADES! Don't even wanna look at fourtrax and motorcycle statistics. We need to lock down all motor transportation, STAT!
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
It's not sand, it's kitty litter. Used kitty litter.Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
No, I am not talking about California only, though it's the most populous state. Well in excess of the norm is not "full" but fucking yes, in all states, hospitals on average are WELL IN EXCESS OF THE NORM right now, except I think Hawaii. Name the state you're in, and I am betting your hospitals are well in excess of the norm right now.
Jesus Christ it's like this board is full of ostrich burying their heads in the sand.
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
No, fucktard, that's not what happens. I know that you're just being a sarcastic dick that doesn't want to really understand, but for the others...Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
The thing that really amuses me is the "fake news" that anyone actually ever had to go to hospital and or died in any of the years prior to 2020.
I mean, look at Happydaze who was worried about the Hospital ICUs running at over 98% capacity before Christmas. I assume that now there are many stories about the Hospitals that utterly failed and collapsed under the weight of all of the China Wuhan infection cases
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
The thing that really amuses me is the "fake news" that anyone actually ever had to go to hospital and or died in any of the years prior to 2020.
I mean, look at Happydaze who was worried about the Hospital ICUs running at over 98% capacity before Christmas. I assume that now there are many stories about the Hospitals that utterly failed and collapsed under the weight of all of the China Wuhan infection cases
No, fucktard, that's not what happens. I know that you're just being a sarcastic dick that doesn't want to really understand, but for the others...Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
The thing that really amuses me is the "fake news" that anyone actually ever had to go to hospital and or died in any of the years prior to 2020.
I mean, look at Happydaze who was worried about the Hospital ICUs running at over 98% capacity before Christmas. I assume that now there are many stories about the Hospitals that utterly failed and collapsed under the weight of all of the China Wuhan infection cases
What does happen is that important but non-critical procedures get bumped back. This makes a huge difference to the person that had need of those procedures. As but one example, consider the person scheduled to have a knee replacement d/t severe OA and is in terrible pain every day. This procedure is medically necessary for relief of pain, restoration of function, and improving the overall quality of life of the patient. However, it is in limbo right now and it may have to wait weeks or months longer before the hospital can fit them into the OR d/t concerns of ICU capacity (as previously explained). There's also the worry that any of the insurance approvals for the surgery may expire before the procedure can be done, and then the patient has to go through the approval process again leading to further delays.
You didn't read what I posted. There are very real backups r/t the increased patient load as I mentioned. Mistwell is saying he's seen a situation where non-treatment areas are being converted to patient-care areas. That's not normal and is a sign of severe overload.No, fucktard, that's not what happens. I know that you're just being a sarcastic dick that doesn't want to really understand, but for the others...Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
The thing that really amuses me is the "fake news" that anyone actually ever had to go to hospital and or died in any of the years prior to 2020.
I mean, look at Happydaze who was worried about the Hospital ICUs running at over 98% capacity before Christmas. I assume that now there are many stories about the Hospitals that utterly failed and collapsed under the weight of all of the China Wuhan infection cases
What does happen is that important but non-critical procedures get bumped back. This makes a huge difference to the person that had need of those procedures. As but one example, consider the person scheduled to have a knee replacement d/t severe OA and is in terrible pain every day. This procedure is medically necessary for relief of pain, restoration of function, and improving the overall quality of life of the patient. However, it is in limbo right now and it may have to wait weeks or months longer before the hospital can fit them into the OR d/t concerns of ICU capacity (as previously explained). There's also the worry that any of the insurance approvals for the surgery may expire before the procedure can be done, and then the patient has to go through the approval process again leading to further delays.
If there is no over load this week then it has to be next week for sure.
Or some new excuse. Honestly these wanabe health experts around here. Cant turn around without falling over a Dr (non MD).
We're talking about a mask, not cessation of all life.
I wear Green Lanter and GI Joe Cobra and Transformers masks. I wear Night Before Christmas and Los Angeles Clippers masks. I am about to make a d20 mask. WTF is the whining about masks. They're not that big a deal and sometimes I get nice compliments like, "nice to see you, Cobra Commander" (got that one from a newly elected judge).
Y'all are so weak sometimes.
No, fucktard, that's not what happens. I know that you're just being a sarcastic dick that doesn't want to really understand, but for the others...
What does happen is that important but non-critical procedures get bumped back. This makes a huge difference to the person that had need of those procedures. As but one example, consider the person scheduled to have a knee replacement d/t severe OA and is in terrible pain every day. This procedure is medically necessary for relief of pain, restoration of function, and improving the overall quality of life of the patient. However, it is in limbo right now and it may have to wait weeks or months longer before the hospital can fit them into the OR d/t concerns of ICU capacity (as previously explained). There's also the worry that any of the insurance approvals for the surgery may expire before the procedure can be done, and then the patient has to go through the approval process again leading to further delays.
I eagerly await the car lockdowns. Seriously, more than 38 THOUSAND deaths a year in the US? That's almost as bad as the kung flu, and it's been going on for DECADES! Don't even wanna look at fourtrax and motorcycle statistics. We need to lock down all motor transportation, STAT!
In reality land, 340 is not considered close to 38.
My question is: if 340 thousand dead Americans isn't enough to be considered serious, what number dead would be considered serious? A million? Two million? In terms of history, this level of pandemic happens once or twice a century.
I have some sympathy for arguments that some of the measures don't have a positive effect. That's an argument over statistical measures, and we can debate over what approaches are best.
But saying "Oh, who cares if 340 thousand people die"?!? I don't get it.
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
No, I am not talking about California only, though it's the most populous state. Well in excess of the norm is not "full" but fucking yes, in all states, hospitals on average are WELL IN EXCESS OF THE NORM right now, except I think Hawaii. Name the state you're in, and I am betting your hospitals are well in excess of the norm right now.
Jesus Christ it's like this board is full of ostrich burying their heads in the sand.
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
The thing that really amuses me is the "fake news" that anyone actually ever had to go to hospital and or died in any of the years prior to 2020.
There is more than one way to skin a virus. The average age of someone dying from sars2 is about 80 years, while the average lifespan in the US is a bit over 78 years. Compare that to car crashes, where most fatalities are among the relatively young. Even without knowing exact numbers, it's safe to say that far more years of life were lost to car crashes this year than to the pandemic.I eagerly await the car lockdowns. Seriously, more than 38 THOUSAND deaths a year in the US? That's almost as bad as the kung flu, and it's been going on for DECADES! Don't even wanna look at fourtrax and motorcycle statistics. We need to lock down all motor transportation, STAT!
In reality land, 340 is not considered close to 38.
You are the only one who doesn't find the provisions of the Presidential Transition Act to be a reasonable argument; the term "president elect" is defined in federal law, and anyone claiming the benefits attached to that designation without being the president elect would be violating the law; are you asserting that Joe Biden and the head of the GSA (who authorized that funding) are violating federal law?I'm not the only one, that's a ridiculous claim. But you do like your appeals to non-existent general authorities.
When I said you did not name a third party, the intended emphasis was on "a" and would have been better represented as "did not name a third party"; sorry for not emphasizing it but it seemed obvious. Instead you named a whole bunch of third parties, and when one person who has no real basis for his opinion, just his own pedantry, names an enormous number of competing third parties with very different agendas as uniformly, deliberately lying because they disagree with him, then there is more reason to doubt the person making that claim, rather than the third parties.
And in the current situation I applied your standard to you. I demonstrated that you were wrong (you later conceded the error, so my demonstration was correct) and you continued to say the same thing, which must mean, by your standard, that you were deliberately lying.
My statement was about what you were previously doing, in the past, not what you said you were going to do. It seems that dropping it would be better achieved by making the correction and not by posting additional criticism. Since you seem to want to continue to attack me, I will continue to point out your error and dishonesty. Given that you have already conceded your error, are you now backtracking from that concession?That doesn't even make sense. You are making a statement about my intent, not my past.
As you note later, "making demands is not an appropriate response" and yet you apparently were demanding that I not respond, despite the continued misrepresentations you have made.I've never made that demand. Of anyone. You're lying again.
He agreed that your statement was correct; that is support that I rarely get. You can look back through the thread for Shasarak and consolcwby who were critical of me and not of you.There are multiple people supporting your various positions in the thread. And picking Shasarak as a defender of me is risible.
Your thesis at the time was that the bill was for "helping those were more negatively affected" [sic] and that "Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. . It's pork, with a minor bribe attached". This suggests you did not understand the full scope of the bill, which was not just the coronavirus relief. As usual, you want to pretend that the point you pivoted to much later was what you claimed all along.Bullshit again. Saying the bill was full of pork highlights I understood the overarching nature of the bill perfectly. The bill is using the coronavirus to pass a shitton of pork. That is literally the argument I made in the quote you just mangled. Your failure to understand such a simple concept after multiple rephrasings is mind-boggling.
The total amount you listed adds up to $920 billion: that's not the cost of the entire bill that includes the foreign aid provisions you listed as being part of that cost; those provisions were part of the $1.4 trillion omnibus spending bill. If anything, it just looks more and more like you were confused over one versus two bills.A lot of people were. Re-read the news articles. You'll find numerous ones supporting both your and my assertions, which turned out to be incorrect.
You have not pointed out any error of mine that affected my post. I have repeatedly pointed out the one error that you conceded after so many posts, and apparently now want to contest again, which made your post nonsense.You have not pointed out any error that affected my post. I have pointed out errors you've made in almost every post, but unlike you I have to grace to drop them. The only error of yours that I repeated was your one/two bill mistake, and that was to show how miserably you were behaving.
No, it literally supports my position. That even more spending had shit and nothing to do with a coronvirus stimulus only strengthens my argument.The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
That pretty much says it all. The correction invalidates the post where you made this error.
The novel coronavirus' mortality profile is almost identical to the natural mortality profile. It kills people almost perfectly in proportion to their chances to die from natural causes.
Hmmm... Covid kills Luke Letlow, a Republican congressman-elect in LA. He was fairly young (41) and had no comorbidities. Sniffles my ass.
https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php (https://www.westport-news.com/news/article/Louisiana-congressman-Luke-Letlow-dead-from-15835132.php)
In other news, somewhere in a country of 330 million someone dies.
So all the people in all the hospitals right now which are well in excess of the norm is just all fake news?
Which "all the hospitals"? California is not the center of the Universe. The VAST majority of "all the hospitals" are not "well in excess of the norm". I don't give a fuck about California. The entire landmass can break from the rest of the continent and sink into the Pacific for all I care.
The thing that really amuses me is the "fake news" that anyone actually ever had to go to hospital and or died in any of the years prior to 2020.
I mean, look at Happydaze who was worried about the Hospital ICUs running at over 98% capacity before Christmas. I assume that now there are many stories about the Hospitals that utterly failed and collapsed under the weight of all of the China Wuhan infection cases
A hospital close to me has patients in the gift shop.
The novel coronavirus' mortality profile is almost identical to the natural mortality profile. It kills people almost perfectly in proportion to their chances to die from natural causes.
The novel coronavirus' mortality profile is almost identical to the natural mortality profile. It kills people almost perfectly in proportion to their chances to die from natural causes.
Almost like it is exacerbating deaths from co-morbidities rather than being an actual 'super-killer' on its own.
imagine that...
It's massively reducing life expectancy. It's killing people much earlier than natural causes would normally kill them. From January 26, 2020, through October 3, 2020, an estimated 299,028 more persons than expected have died in the United States.No, it's slightly reducing life expectancy. And you flipped back to the number of deaths, rather than lost years of life in the last sentence. That doesn't bolster your argument, it makes a different one.
I find it sad that on a ROLE PLAYING GAME forum that y'all think co-morbitities is something only old people at the end of their lives already might have. Hello, we're gamers. Many of us have co-morbitities of some kind. And by "us" I don't mean the population of this message board I mean the general population of RPG players as a whole. We tend to be overweight. We tend to have a higher incidence of high blood pressure, diabetes, and related conditions. This attitude that somehow it's OK if people die with those because "co-morbitites so it's natural" is obvious bullshit which I think none of you actually believe when it comes to the people you know in your lives. It's just more Internet fake badassery.
It's massively reducing life expectancy. It's killing people much earlier than natural causes would normally kill them. From January 26, 2020, through October 3, 2020, an estimated 299,028 more persons than expected have died in the United States.No, it's slightly reducing life expectancy. And you flipped back to the number of deaths, rather than lost years of life in the last sentence. That doesn't bolster your argument, it makes a different one.
Stephen Elledge, a Harvard professor of genetics, looked at the death profile of the novel coronavirus back when roughly 200,000 people had died, and estimated the pandemic cost the US 2.5 million years of life. That's a loss of 12.5 years of life for each death, which is high compared to other estimates.
Scott Atlas, a Stanford physician, and some business professors from places like the University and Chicago and Duke did an analysis of the years of life lost due to the economic shutdowns. They came up an estimate of 1.5 million lost years of life from the roughly 2 months of lockdown that had taken place by late May, using very conservative estimations (the real number is bound to be much higher).
We could extrapolate the numbers directly (340K becomes 4.3 million years of life, 9 months becomes 6.4 million years), but that's not really a fair comparison because there might have been changes in the demographic profiles, and we'd need to look at the specific components of the lockdowns. It would be good to have more up to date numbers. But one thing should be very clear: This isn't about saving lives. It's about trading some lives for other lives. We need to be looking at the real costs and trade offs, and avoiding the simplistic "it's just a flu!" or only counting covid-19 deaths.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/10/20/covid-america-2-5-million-life-years-harvard-stephen-elledge/5994363002/
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/499394-the-covid-19-shutdown-will-cost-americans-millions-of-years-of-life
I'm not the only one, that's a ridiculous claim. But you do like your appeals to non-existent general authorities.
Also, who cares about the GSA? You certainly don't. Your argument is that Biden was the president-elect on November 5. The GSA administrator didn't certify Biden until weeks later, so that doesn't support your position in the slightest.
Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?
Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
Fortunately, I'm not relying on an opinion. I made an argument, which should be judged based on its merits, not your opinion on whether someone else has an opinion.I'm not the only one, that's a ridiculous claim. But you do like your appeals to non-existent general authorities.
Federal law on this exists and is a fairly specific authority. "Pat's opinion" is too weak an authority for anything but the corner bar.
That's false on multiple levels. The sad part is, I don't think you even realize what you're doing.QuoteAlso, who cares about the GSA? You certainly don't. Your argument is that Biden was the president-elect on November 5. The GSA administrator didn't certify Biden until weeks later, so that doesn't support your position in the slightest.
My first statement of congratulations came on November 7th, after every media that traditionally calls presidential contests had called it for Biden. The thread in which you argued this was in December, well after the GSA determination. You could have made points earlier after my first post; but after the November 23rd recognition by the GSA, all tradition and law was against you on that matter.
That you accused a huge number of media, both neutral and across the political spectrum, left and right and center, of deliberately lying is the stuff of idiotic conspiracy theories. Which does mean you're posting in the right place, just not credibly.
For the rest, I will just repeat the evidence. Anyone interested in details can track the thread back.Thanks for supporting my argument.Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?
Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
While I agree lockdowns also cost lives, that isn't the claim I was disputing. Covid-19 is not "kill[ing] people almost perfectly in proportion to their chances to die from natural causes." It is in fact reducing life expectancy by a meaningful amount, no matter how you choose to spin the data.You were talking about a couple different things, the overall death toll and the number of years of life lost. I was pointing out they're very different measures. My discussion of the lockdowns was to illustrate the number of years of life lost, not a specific rebuttal to anything you said.
I was mostly just messing around, piggybacking Shasarak's sarcasm
Damn Vision. I hope your brother gets well and fully recover from that if he can.
You didn't read what I posted. There are very real backups r/t the increased patient load as I mentioned. Mistwell is saying he's seen a situation where non-treatment areas are being converted to patient-care areas. That's not normal and is a sign of severe overload.
I also never claimed to be a Dr. (MD or otherwise), but I am professionally familiar with healthcare administration and patient care processes relevant to these issues.
Why I don't buy the covid death estimates: "Congressman-elect Luke Letlow suffered a heart attack following operation"
Link: https://nypost.com/2020/12/30/congressman-elect-luke-letlow-suffered-a-heart-attack-during-operation/
But I'm sure that most people who've died from the virus actually died from the virus.
Exactly how is surgery used to treat a viral respiratory infection?
Exactly how is surgery used to treat a viral respiratory infection?
Exactly how is surgery used to treat a viral respiratory infection?Well, before the infection can spread and get worse, you can always KILL the patient!
Federal law on this exists and is a fairly specific authority. "Pat's opinion" is too weak an authority for anything but the corner bar.Fortunately, I'm not relying on an opinion. I made an argument, which should be judged based on its merits, not your opinion on whether someone else has an opinion.
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
While I'm pretty sure youre just talking shit, whiich "predictions" have I made that you question? Please, be specific.You didn't read what I posted. There are very real backups r/t the increased patient load as I mentioned. Mistwell is saying he's seen a situation where non-treatment areas are being converted to patient-care areas. That's not normal and is a sign of severe overload.
I also never claimed to be a Dr. (MD or otherwise), but I am professionally familiar with healthcare administration and patient care processes relevant to these issues.
If you had experience then some of your predictions would actually happen.
That Pathfinder 2e was going to be awesome?...While I'm pretty sure youre just talking shit, whiich "predictions" have I made that you question? Please, be specific.You didn't read what I posted. There are very real backups r/t the increased patient load as I mentioned. Mistwell is saying he's seen a situation where non-treatment areas are being converted to patient-care areas. That's not normal and is a sign of severe overload.
I also never claimed to be a Dr. (MD or otherwise), but I am professionally familiar with healthcare administration and patient care processes relevant to these issues.
If you had experience then some of your predictions would actually happen.
I've made arguments, while you've degenerated to nothing but personal attacks.Federal law on this exists and is a fairly specific authority. "Pat's opinion" is too weak an authority for anything but the corner bar.Fortunately, I'm not relying on an opinion. I made an argument, which should be judged based on its merits, not your opinion on whether someone else has an opinion.
You have nothing but your opinion.
Yes, which was supported by numerous news articles that also got it wrong. The same as your mistake about whether it was one or two bills. Would you like to go over all the other times you've been wrong? We could start with the easy ones, where you were telling me what I think.The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
Except being wrong.
I've made arguments, while you've degenerated to nothing but personal attacks.
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.But now you want to blame other people.
From our local channel 7 news today:
Cathy Chidester, director of the county Emergency Medical Services agency...said there are reports of hospitals being so overwhelmed that ambulances are waiting seven or eight hours in emergency bays, forcing patients to be treated in the ambulance. But more importantly, the delay is keeping the ambulances out of service, leaving them unable to respond to additional emergency medical calls, she said. The crisis at hospitals have some facilities reassigning nurses from outpatient clinics to emergency and COVID units, reducing patient access across the board.
County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said that 86% of people who died from COVID in 2020 had underlying conditions. This figure is down from more than 90% in the early days of the pandemic. "This indicates, that in fact, that more people than ever are not only passing away, but passing away without any underlying health conditions," Ferrer said.
I've made arguments, while you've degenerated to nothing but personal attacks.
Wrong again; I made an argument which you accepted:The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
But now you want to blame other people.Oh look, another personal attack.
The crisis at hospitals have some facilities reassigning nurses from outpatient clinics to emergency and COVID units, reducing patient access across the board.This also compounds the issue by having patients self-redirect themselves to the ED for things that really don't need that kind of treatment. Even if their problem is relatively minor, it still takes time to work them through the system, and the ED gets backed-up even further.
We gave them six months to prepare. Maybe they should have been getting ready instead of making dance videos for TikTok.What steps would you have suggested?
From our local channel 7 news today:
Cathy Chidester, director of the county Emergency Medical Services agency...said there are reports of hospitals being so overwhelmed that ambulances are waiting seven or eight hours in emergency bays, forcing patients to be treated in the ambulance. But more importantly, the delay is keeping the ambulances out of service, leaving them unable to respond to additional emergency medical calls, she said. The crisis at hospitals have some facilities reassigning nurses from outpatient clinics to emergency and COVID units, reducing patient access across the board.
County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said that 86% of people who died from COVID in 2020 had underlying conditions. This figure is down from more than 90% in the early days of the pandemic. "This indicates, that in fact, that more people than ever are not only passing away, but passing away without any underlying health conditions," Ferrer said.
We gave them six months to prepare. Maybe they should have been getting ready instead of making dance videos for TikTok.What steps would you have suggested?
Where did that happen? NYC? I know it didn't happen in Central Florida.We gave them six months to prepare. Maybe they should have been getting ready instead of making dance videos for TikTok.What steps would you have suggested?
I remember in March when the Navy hospital ship and the national guard were setting up emergency facilities that went unused. What happened to that stuff?
We gave them six months to prepare. Maybe they should have been getting ready instead of making dance videos for TikTok.What steps would you have suggested?
I remember in March when the Navy hospital ship and the national guard were setting up emergency facilities that went unused. What happened to that stuff?
Where did that happen? NYC? I know it didn't happen in Central Florida.
While I'm pretty sure youre just talking shit, whiich "predictions" have I made that you question? Please, be specific.You didn't read what I posted. There are very real backups r/t the increased patient load as I mentioned. Mistwell is saying he's seen a situation where non-treatment areas are being converted to patient-care areas. That's not normal and is a sign of severe overload.
I also never claimed to be a Dr. (MD or otherwise), but I am professionally familiar with healthcare administration and patient care processes relevant to these issues.
If you had experience then some of your predictions would actually happen.
The crisis at hospitals have some facilities reassigning nurses from outpatient clinics to emergency and COVID units, reducing patient access across the board.This also compounds the issue by having patients self-redirect themselves to the ED for things that really don't need that kind of treatment. Even if their problem is relatively minor, it still takes time to work them through the system, and the ED gets backed-up even further.
What predictions did I make? I told you about how ICU capacity was having an effect on OR procedures local to me. That wasn't prediction, it was reporting.While I'm pretty sure youre just talking shit, whiich "predictions" have I made that you question? Please, be specific.You didn't read what I posted. There are very real backups r/t the increased patient load as I mentioned. Mistwell is saying he's seen a situation where non-treatment areas are being converted to patient-care areas. That's not normal and is a sign of severe overload.
I also never claimed to be a Dr. (MD or otherwise), but I am professionally familiar with healthcare administration and patient care processes relevant to these issues.
If you had experience then some of your predictions would actually happen.
All your talk about ICus was what? Pearl clutching? Oh no, 98% capacity!
I find it sad that on a ROLE PLAYING GAME forum that y'all think co-morbitities is something only old people at the end of their lives already might have. Hello, we're gamers. Many of us have co-morbitities of some kind. And by "us" I don't mean the population of this message board I mean the general population of RPG players as a whole. We tend to be overweight. We tend to have a higher incidence of high blood pressure, diabetes, and related conditions. This attitude that somehow it's OK if people die with those because "co-morbitites so it's natural" is obvious bullshit which I think none of you actually believe when it comes to the people you know in your lives. It's just more Internet fake badassery.
Look beyond yourself. It's something humans do.I find it sad that on a ROLE PLAYING GAME forum that y'all think co-morbitities is something only old people at the end of their lives already might have. Hello, we're gamers. Many of us have co-morbitities of some kind. And by "us" I don't mean the population of this message board I mean the general population of RPG players as a whole. We tend to be overweight. We tend to have a higher incidence of high blood pressure, diabetes, and related conditions. This attitude that somehow it's OK if people die with those because "co-morbitites so it's natural" is obvious bullshit which I think none of you actually believe when it comes to the people you know in your lives. It's just more Internet fake badassery.
I'm over 40, I don't have any. Because I actually look after my health and fitness (I'm fitter now than I was a decade ago).
Look beyond yourself. It's something humans do.
Ah, but to leftists, it's inverted. You MUST care for other people above even your own needs.Look beyond yourself. It's something humans do.
No, you start by taking responsibility for yourself. Then your family. Then your community.
But if you let your health go to shit, you can't do any of those things properly.
From our local channel 7 news today:
Cathy Chidester, director of the county Emergency Medical Services agency...said there are reports of hospitals being so overwhelmed that ambulances are waiting seven or eight hours in emergency bays, forcing patients to be treated in the ambulance. But more importantly, the delay is keeping the ambulances out of service, leaving them unable to respond to additional emergency medical calls, she said. The crisis at hospitals have some facilities reassigning nurses from outpatient clinics to emergency and COVID units, reducing patient access across the board.
County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said that 86% of people who died from COVID in 2020 had underlying conditions. This figure is down from more than 90% in the early days of the pandemic. "This indicates, that in fact, that more people than ever are not only passing away, but passing away without any underlying health conditions," Ferrer said.
So the ambulances and EMTs are waiting in a bay for 7 to 8 hours insteading of going to a different hospital...I know the traffic in LA is bad, but damn.
As for the second quote, the statistical data has been garbage since this began and they were counting deaths 'with Covid present' as deaths 'from Covid'.
Ah, but to leftists, it's inverted. You MUST care for other people above even your own needs.Look beyond yourself. It's something humans do.
No, you start by taking responsibility for yourself. Then your family. Then your community.
But if you let your health go to shit, you can't do any of those things properly.
I find it sad that on a ROLE PLAYING GAME forum that y'all think co-morbitities is something only old people at the end of their lives already might have. Hello, we're gamers. Many of us have co-morbitities of some kind. And by "us" I don't mean the population of this message board I mean the general population of RPG players as a whole. We tend to be overweight. We tend to have a higher incidence of high blood pressure, diabetes, and related conditions. This attitude that somehow it's OK if people die with those because "co-morbitites so it's natural" is obvious bullshit which I think none of you actually believe when it comes to the people you know in your lives. It's just more Internet fake badassery.
I'm over 40, I don't have any. Because I actually look after my health and fitness (I'm fitter now than I was a decade ago).
You know so little that if you had any self awareness you'd be embarrassed.Ah, but to leftists, it's inverted. You MUST care for other people above even your own needs.Look beyond yourself. It's something humans do.
No, you start by taking responsibility for yourself. Then your family. Then your community.
But if you let your health go to shit, you can't do any of those things properly.
The minor inconvenience of a mask is in fact more important than the major inconvenience of people dying before their time, yeah. This is not "leftism" it's simply "being a decent human being and not a piece of utter psychotic trash".
I quite agree that looking at yourself is a good start. I was encouraging you to take the next step rather than putting your head in the sand and ignoring others.Look beyond yourself. It's something humans do.
No, you start by taking responsibility for yourself. Then your family. Then your community.
But if you let your health go to shit, you can't do any of those things properly.
Ah, but to leftists, it's inverted. You MUST care for other people above even your own needs.Look beyond yourself. It's something humans do.
No, you start by taking responsibility for yourself. Then your family. Then your community.
But if you let your health go to shit, you can't do any of those things properly.
The minor inconvenience of a mask is in fact more important than the major inconvenience of people dying before their time, yeah. This is not "leftism" it's simply "being a decent human being and not a piece of utter psychotic trash".
Upon determining by clear and convincing evidence that the health of others is or may be endangered by a case, contact or carrier, or suspected case, contact or carrier of a contagious disease… the governor or his or her delegee, including, but not limited to the commissioner or the heads of local health departments, may order the removal and/or detention of such a person or of a group of such persons by issuing a single order.
Such person or group of persons shall be detained in a medical facility or other appropriate facility or premises designated by the governor or his or her delegee…
A person or group removed or detained by order of the governor or his or her delegee pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall be detained for such period and in such manner as the department may direct in accordance with this section.
There's a difference between looking out for others voluntarily and having the state demand that and determine the manner in which you will do so.Do you oppose mandatory gun safety classes?
Let's talk about 'safety codes' in light of this.Due process exists for any crimes they may be charged with. This is not about charging someone for a crime. Apples and hubcaps.
https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A00416&term=&Summary=Y&Text=Y
Take a good hard look.
Money shots:QuoteUpon determining by clear and convincing evidence that the health of others is or may be endangered by a case, contact or carrier, or suspected case, contact or carrier of a contagious disease… the governor or his or her delegee, including, but not limited to the commissioner or the heads of local health departments, may order the removal and/or detention of such a person or of a group of such persons by issuing a single order.QuoteSuch person or group of persons shall be detained in a medical facility or other appropriate facility or premises designated by the governor or his or her delegee…QuoteA person or group removed or detained by order of the governor or his or her delegee pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall be detained for such period and in such manner as the department may direct in accordance with this section.
(emphasis added by me)
Due process? Fuck your due process. Get in the box.
This should be grounds to drag whatever-his-name-is Perry out of the NY capitol building and have him tarred and feathered.
There's a difference between looking out for others voluntarily and having the state demand that and determine the manner in which you will do so.Do you oppose mandatory gun safety classes?
Speech codes are not related to safety codes. Conservatives, as a generalization, do support safety codes. The best gun safety courses tend to be taught by conservatives, for example. The idea that looking after the safety of others is somehow a leftist ideal is an excuse for you to be a lazy shit. Utah, one of the most conservative states, is also full of people looking after others as an ideal. It has nothing to do with shit like speech codes. It just has to do with loving your community and being a mature adult.
From our local channel 7 news today:
Cathy Chidester, director of the county Emergency Medical Services agency...said there are reports of hospitals being so overwhelmed that ambulances are waiting seven or eight hours in emergency bays, forcing patients to be treated in the ambulance. But more importantly, the delay is keeping the ambulances out of service, leaving them unable to respond to additional emergency medical calls, she said. The crisis at hospitals have some facilities reassigning nurses from outpatient clinics to emergency and COVID units, reducing patient access across the board.
County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said that 86% of people who died from COVID in 2020 had underlying conditions. This figure is down from more than 90% in the early days of the pandemic. "This indicates, that in fact, that more people than ever are not only passing away, but passing away without any underlying health conditions," Ferrer said.
So the ambulances and EMTs are waiting in a bay for 7 to 8 hours insteading of going to a different hospital...I know the traffic in LA is bad, but damn.
As for the second quote, the statistical data has been garbage since this began and they were counting deaths 'with Covid present' as deaths 'from Covid'.
You live in a fact free world. Anything which runs contrary to your belief about how the world works you dismiss. Which is going to be really fucking shitty if it ever hits your family members and you find you're not able to get treated at the hospital because of what you thought was fiction. This shit is real. Whatever minor spin you can toss on the edges of the information doesn't change the basic premise - the hospitals are in fact filling up, and it is in fact killing more people over time who had no underlying conditions. It's not lining up in the nice safe way you thought it would anymore and cannot be simply dismissed as "like the flu" anymore. Not if you're being honest.
LOL my high blood pressure is inherited. I am in good shape otherwise. It's just the way I was born. Which is how it is for a lot of people. Diabetes is also inherited for some. None of this is leftism. Indeed, it' USED TO BE the right cared about community more than the left, and looking after the weak in society used to be a right wing value. WTF is this self-centered bullshit? It sure isn't conservatism.I find it sad that on a ROLE PLAYING GAME forum that y'all think co-morbitities is something only old people at the end of their lives already might have. Hello, we're gamers. Many of us have co-morbitities of some kind. And by "us" I don't mean the population of this message board I mean the general population of RPG players as a whole. We tend to be overweight. We tend to have a higher incidence of high blood pressure, diabetes, and related conditions. This attitude that somehow it's OK if people die with those because "co-morbitites so it's natural" is obvious bullshit which I think none of you actually believe when it comes to the people you know in your lives. It's just more Internet fake badassery.
I'm over 40, I don't have any. Because I actually look after my health and fitness (I'm fitter now than I was a decade ago).
Speech codes are not related to safety codes. Conservatives, as a generalization, do support safety codes. The best gun safety courses tend to be taught by conservatives, for example. The idea that looking after the safety of others is somehow a leftist ideal is an excuse for you to be a lazy shit. Utah, one of the most conservative states, is also full of people looking after others as an ideal. It has nothing to do with shit like speech codes. It just has to do with loving your community and being a mature adult.
No Evidence Of FRAUD, say those who want to create a new AUSCHWITZ IN AMERICA!
Nope nope nope. Line crossed. You do not get to use the history of my families pain and death in your stupid political ranting bullshit. I mean you have the free speech right but you don't have the right to be consequence free from that fucking bullshit antic.
No, there are no concentration camps. No, nothing going on in America is comparable to Auschwitz, and nothing anyone wants to "create" is either. Yes, you're a complete fucking creepy asshole for claiming there is or plans to be. No, there is no defense other than 'I am sorry you're right I went to far on that one' for that comment.
There's a difference between looking out for others voluntarily and having the state demand that and determine the manner in which you will do so.Do you oppose mandatory gun safety classes?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!That helps to offset the costs of caring for COVID patients and the corresponding loss of income from canceled elective or delayed necessary-but-not-urgent procedures. A lot of that gets eaten by premium labor (like travel/contract RNs), and nothing directly helps the patients that want/need those necessary but delayed procedures.
!!!!NEWS FLASH!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's all about the Benjamins baby...
---
More than 1,000 hospitals in high-impact areas will get a share of $10 billion in new federal assistance. The new payments will be $50,000 per COVID-19 admission, less than the $77,000 in an earlier round. Hospitals with large Medicaid populations have until Aug. 3 to apply for a separate pool of funds. Hospitals that recently have submitted information on large COVID-19 caseloads could start to receive a share of $10 billion in new federal assistance this week.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced it would begin sending payments July 20 to more than 1,000 hospitals in “high-impact” areas of the pandemic, based on the case count data they submitted in recent weeks. That would add to the $10 billion HHS sent in May to hospitals that had more than 100 COVID-19 patients by April 10. Hospitals will qualify for payments based on whether admissions between Jan. 1 and June 10 meet one of the following criteria:
More than 161 COVID-19 admissions
At least one COVID-19 admission per day
Higher than the national average ratio of COVID-19 admissions per bed
Amount of assistance reduced
The new round will pay $50,000 per COVID-19 admission, compared with $77,000 in the earlier high-impact round. A senior HHS official said on a media call that the reduced funding is due to the number of such admissions surging from about 50,000 in the first round to more than 400,000 by the time of the second round. The first-round payments went to 325 hospitals. The new round of payments will be “net from their payments — what they had already received” will be subtracted from their allocated total, the official said.
from: https://www.hfma.org/topics/news/2020/07/the-new-round-will-pay--50-000-per-covid-19-admission--compared-.html
And NOW: https://www.hfma.org/topics/news/2020/12/appeals-court-rejects-hospitals--objections-to-new-price-transpa.html
things that make you go hmmm...
---
The 2021 agenda and its tie in with the 2030 agenda. Klaus, President of the World Economic Forum stated recently, ” The MASSES” will own nothing. no house, no land, no car, nothing, not even the clothes on their backs. The masses will learn to grow and eat weeds and they will be happy." Part of these agendas is to heard the masses into cities, eliminate small towns and population control. This is coming. It will not matter if you are a Republican, Democrat, Independent or what ever you may be. This plan is already in every town and city in the U.S. WWG1WGA!
PS: i luv u all!
I understand that. But please, understand this ~ isn't it a bit shady to receive public funds and then hide actual costs from said public? This is about WHERE the money goes not what it is needed for. If you think everything is on the up and up... well, at least WONDERLAND is nice this time of year, I hear....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!That helps to offset the costs of caring for COVID patients and the corresponding loss of income from canceled elective or delayed necessary-but-not-urgent procedures. A lot of that gets eaten by premium labor (like travel/contract RNs), and nothing directly helps the patients that want/need those necessary but delayed procedures.
!!!!NEWS FLASH!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's all about the Benjamins baby...
---
More than 1,000 hospitals in high-impact areas will get a share of $10 billion in new federal assistance. The new payments will be $50,000 per COVID-19 admission, less than the $77,000 in an earlier round. Hospitals with large Medicaid populations have until Aug. 3 to apply for a separate pool of funds. Hospitals that recently have submitted information on large COVID-19 caseloads could start to receive a share of $10 billion in new federal assistance this week.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced it would begin sending payments July 20 to more than 1,000 hospitals in “high-impact” areas of the pandemic, based on the case count data they submitted in recent weeks. That would add to the $10 billion HHS sent in May to hospitals that had more than 100 COVID-19 patients by April 10. Hospitals will qualify for payments based on whether admissions between Jan. 1 and June 10 meet one of the following criteria:
More than 161 COVID-19 admissions
At least one COVID-19 admission per day
Higher than the national average ratio of COVID-19 admissions per bed
Amount of assistance reduced
The new round will pay $50,000 per COVID-19 admission, compared with $77,000 in the earlier high-impact round. A senior HHS official said on a media call that the reduced funding is due to the number of such admissions surging from about 50,000 in the first round to more than 400,000 by the time of the second round. The first-round payments went to 325 hospitals. The new round of payments will be “net from their payments — what they had already received” will be subtracted from their allocated total, the official said.
from: https://www.hfma.org/topics/news/2020/07/the-new-round-will-pay--50-000-per-covid-19-admission--compared-.html
And NOW: https://www.hfma.org/topics/news/2020/12/appeals-court-rejects-hospitals--objections-to-new-price-transpa.html
things that make you go hmmm...
---
The 2021 agenda and its tie in with the 2030 agenda. Klaus, President of the World Economic Forum stated recently, ” The MASSES” will own nothing. no house, no land, no car, nothing, not even the clothes on their backs. The masses will learn to grow and eat weeds and they will be happy." Part of these agendas is to heard the masses into cities, eliminate small towns and population control. This is coming. It will not matter if you are a Republican, Democrat, Independent or what ever you may be. This plan is already in every town and city in the U.S. WWG1WGA!
PS: i luv u all!
There's a difference between looking out for others voluntarily and having the state demand that and determine the manner in which you will do so.
You know you're kind of funny when you get so bent out of shape that you can't even make an attempt at countering the statements I made with anything short of "you're lying"...I'm pretty sure an educated person like yourself should be able to throw up some links/pictures of the ambulances backed up for 7 hours and no hospitals within that range to run transfers to...I have some friends who are EMTs who are really interested since it doesn't seem to have made much national news. They are trying to figure out how screwed up the system is out there and would appreciate any information.https://ktla.com/news/local-news/in-l-a-county-patients-in-ambulances-waiting-as-long-as-8-hours-before-entering-ers/
That's worse, you know. With a crime, you have to be charged and taken to court, where you have a chance to defend yourself before your rights are removed. You're arguing that if they just don't call it a crime, they can take away your rights without due process.Let's talk about 'safety codes' in light of this.Due process exists for any crimes they may be charged with. This is not about charging someone for a crime. Apples and hubcaps.
https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A00416&term=&Summary=Y&Text=Y
Take a good hard look.
Money shots:QuoteUpon determining by clear and convincing evidence that the health of others is or may be endangered by a case, contact or carrier, or suspected case, contact or carrier of a contagious disease… the governor or his or her delegee, including, but not limited to the commissioner or the heads of local health departments, may order the removal and/or detention of such a person or of a group of such persons by issuing a single order.QuoteSuch person or group of persons shall be detained in a medical facility or other appropriate facility or premises designated by the governor or his or her delegee…QuoteA person or group removed or detained by order of the governor or his or her delegee pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall be detained for such period and in such manner as the department may direct in accordance with this section.
(emphasis added by me)
Due process? Fuck your due process. Get in the box.
This should be grounds to drag whatever-his-name-is Perry out of the NY capitol building and have him tarred and feathered.
Ohio State study: 30% of student athletes have heart damage linked to COVID-19 (https://www.q13fox.com/news/ohio-state-study-30-of-student-athletes-have-heart-damage-linked-to-covid-19?fbclid=IwAR1Nz13GkeiJi92Gi2EwVdU28EGrf6uFHse1F2ktv6SKYCpvFc3_dABOjTA)Interesting link. We've known for a while that covid-19 isn't just a respiratory disease, it's also a cardiovascular disease. And that myocarditis is a common side effect.
But it's just like the flu, right?
How detailed do you expect those cost reports to the public to be? If they just broke it down into %-age by categories like payroll (perhaps with OT and premium labor %-ages laid out), supply chain, current staff retraining, new staff training, insurance (yes, some of those that had procedures cancelled or delayed may sue), etc. would that satisfy you, or do you expect every cent to be documented for the public? I think it might be nice to see general %-ages by category (and I have for one organization), but that's typically only released internally. If you don't like that, well, that's the way healthcare works in the USA.I understand that. But please, understand this ~ isn't it a bit shady to receive public funds and then hide actual costs from said public? This is about WHERE the money goes not what it is needed for. If you think everything is on the up and up... well, at least WONDERLAND is nice this time of year, I hear....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!That helps to offset the costs of caring for COVID patients and the corresponding loss of income from canceled elective or delayed necessary-but-not-urgent procedures. A lot of that gets eaten by premium labor (like travel/contract RNs), and nothing directly helps the patients that want/need those necessary but delayed procedures.
!!!!NEWS FLASH!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's all about the Benjamins baby...
---
More than 1,000 hospitals in high-impact areas will get a share of $10 billion in new federal assistance. The new payments will be $50,000 per COVID-19 admission, less than the $77,000 in an earlier round. Hospitals with large Medicaid populations have until Aug. 3 to apply for a separate pool of funds. Hospitals that recently have submitted information on large COVID-19 caseloads could start to receive a share of $10 billion in new federal assistance this week.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced it would begin sending payments July 20 to more than 1,000 hospitals in “high-impact” areas of the pandemic, based on the case count data they submitted in recent weeks. That would add to the $10 billion HHS sent in May to hospitals that had more than 100 COVID-19 patients by April 10. Hospitals will qualify for payments based on whether admissions between Jan. 1 and June 10 meet one of the following criteria:
More than 161 COVID-19 admissions
At least one COVID-19 admission per day
Higher than the national average ratio of COVID-19 admissions per bed
Amount of assistance reduced
The new round will pay $50,000 per COVID-19 admission, compared with $77,000 in the earlier high-impact round. A senior HHS official said on a media call that the reduced funding is due to the number of such admissions surging from about 50,000 in the first round to more than 400,000 by the time of the second round. The first-round payments went to 325 hospitals. The new round of payments will be “net from their payments — what they had already received” will be subtracted from their allocated total, the official said.
from: https://www.hfma.org/topics/news/2020/07/the-new-round-will-pay--50-000-per-covid-19-admission--compared-.html
And NOW: https://www.hfma.org/topics/news/2020/12/appeals-court-rejects-hospitals--objections-to-new-price-transpa.html
things that make you go hmmm...
---
The 2021 agenda and its tie in with the 2030 agenda. Klaus, President of the World Economic Forum stated recently, ” The MASSES” will own nothing. no house, no land, no car, nothing, not even the clothes on their backs. The masses will learn to grow and eat weeds and they will be happy." Part of these agendas is to heard the masses into cities, eliminate small towns and population control. This is coming. It will not matter if you are a Republican, Democrat, Independent or what ever you may be. This plan is already in every town and city in the U.S. WWG1WGA!
PS: i luv u all!
There is a process, and it is subject to review. And, as with anything, if the people feel strongly enough, there are legal ways to challenge it and get it changed.That's worse, you know. With a crime, you have to be charged and taken to court, where you have a chance to defend yourself before your rights are removed. You're arguing that if they just don't call it a crime, they can take away your rights without due process.Let's talk about 'safety codes' in light of this.Due process exists for any crimes they may be charged with. This is not about charging someone for a crime. Apples and hubcaps.
https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A00416&term=&Summary=Y&Text=Y
Take a good hard look.
Money shots:QuoteUpon determining by clear and convincing evidence that the health of others is or may be endangered by a case, contact or carrier, or suspected case, contact or carrier of a contagious disease… the governor or his or her delegee, including, but not limited to the commissioner or the heads of local health departments, may order the removal and/or detention of such a person or of a group of such persons by issuing a single order.QuoteSuch person or group of persons shall be detained in a medical facility or other appropriate facility or premises designated by the governor or his or her delegee…QuoteA person or group removed or detained by order of the governor or his or her delegee pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall be detained for such period and in such manner as the department may direct in accordance with this section.
(emphasis added by me)
Due process? Fuck your due process. Get in the box.
This should be grounds to drag whatever-his-name-is Perry out of the NY capitol building and have him tarred and feathered.
Ohio State study: 30% of student athletes have heart damage linked to COVID-19 (https://www.q13fox.com/news/ohio-state-study-30-of-student-athletes-have-heart-damage-linked-to-covid-19?fbclid=IwAR1Nz13GkeiJi92Gi2EwVdU28EGrf6uFHse1F2ktv6SKYCpvFc3_dABOjTA)Interesting link. We've known for a while that covid-19 isn't just a respiratory disease, it's also a cardiovascular disease. And that myocarditis is a common side effect.
But it's just like the flu, right?
https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/27/covid19-concerns-about-lasting-heart-damage/
But compare that 30% to a UK study that is larger, more rigorous, and has a more representative sample of the population (average age 44, for instance), and discovered only an 11% incidence:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.14.20212555v1
And an autopsy study found zero evidence of myocarditis:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768914
So the frequency may be lower. But that may be related to the other question: Whether the effects were temporary or permanent. If you read down further in your own link, you'll see some promising signs -- the infant and the other 4 referenced in the JACC study recovered fully.
This all fits with a Swiss study, which found inflammatory changes in the heart in 78/100 patients (high), but 3 months later found zero evidence of heart problems.
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.20min.ch/story/mit-blick-auf-die-vielen-symptomlos-infizierten-macht-mir-das-angst-338649943422
Evidence suggests there are heart issues while you have the disease, but it regenerates after. That does explain the report heart attacks and the like, and doesn't mean there will be no long term problems, but like the even earlier scares about lung function, it's probably overblown.
Greetings!
Hmmm. I'm not even sure anymore what HappyDaze and Mistwell are arguing. It is crystal clear that "Lockdowns" and closing businesses doesn't work. Oh, and Costco, Walmart, and Target can all be open, as well as casinos, sports stadiums for multi-billion dollar professional sports teams, sex shops, and gay bars and gay bathhouses...but hair salons, bars, restaurants--and churches--and many more establishments must be closed down. That is bullshit. "But the China virus will spread!" Yeah? And? That doesn't seem to be a concern for the mayor of Austin, Texas, Governor Newsome of California, Congresswoman Nancy Polosi, and many other political elites, government bureaucrats, as well as executives of medical corporations--all of which have attende private parties, cozy, special restaurants--without social distancing or wearing masks--not to mention the approval of *thousands* of BLM and ANTIFA thugs rioting en masse in cities all over the country. So, let the fucking China Virus spread. So what? We already know 99% or more of the population is not in danger of dying from the fucking virus. The whole profile of this virus is a danger to primarily the old and sick--which is concerning, and tragic, to be certain--but none of that in any way justifies the economic shutdown and crippling of our economy--and the devastation of millions of peoples lives and families. And fuck the "Government Stimulus Checks". Those things are a pittance, and aren't going to save anyone from being homeless. How about the devastation of businesses that people have devoted their life savings to, and worked and built for *years*--none of those people matter, right? Their employees that depend on their jobs so they can buy food, pay bills, and keep a roof over their heads--they can just get fucked, right? How about the families and children of the small business owners? I guess their fucked too, and can hope they can survive on fucking welfare, is that right?
I quite agree that looking at yourself is a good start. I was encouraging you to take the next step rather than putting your head in the sand and ignoring others.
Ohio State study: 30% of student athletes have heart damage linked to COVID-19 (https://www.q13fox.com/news/ohio-state-study-30-of-student-athletes-have-heart-damage-linked-to-covid-19?fbclid=IwAR1Nz13GkeiJi92Gi2EwVdU28EGrf6uFHse1F2ktv6SKYCpvFc3_dABOjTA)
But it's just like the flu, right?
No, dumbass, that's not how society works. Everyone in society has some levels of responsibility to others. A pandemic just makes some of them more prominent. It also makes the sociopaths that are just parasitically living off of the benefits of society without contributing--like yourself--more obvious.I quite agree that looking at yourself is a good start. I was encouraging you to take the next step rather than putting your head in the sand and ignoring others.
Fuck off, I have no responsibility whatsoever for other adults. They are responsible for themselves. My responsibility is to my children and my family.
No, dumbass, that's not how society works. Everyone in society has some levels of responsibility to others. A pandemic just makes some of them more prominent. It also makes the sociopaths that are just parasitically living off of the benefits of society without contributing--like yourself--more obvious.
You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.No, dumbass, that's not how society works. Everyone in society has some levels of responsibility to others. A pandemic just makes some of them more prominent. It also makes the sociopaths that are just parasitically living off of the benefits of society without contributing--like yourself--more obvious.
No dumbass, I have no responsibility for you or anyone else.
As for contribution, I'm a Higher Rate taxpayer, I actually fund the state. There my obligation ends.
This is a reply to the discussion we were having about
Oh look, another personal attack.
You're irrational and insane.Purely in response to my observation that you and your right-wing talking points were wrong.
(I don't blame other people.)
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.Which you blamed on your sources.
No, by bringing in something completely unrelated, you were the one who was trying to pivot. I just pointed out what you did.This is a reply to the discussion we were having about
The Pat Pivot, as usual. ::)
Oh look, another false pivot on your part. My comment that you were irrational and insane was a reference to stuff like "But I encourage you or Trump to sue Fox News over this."QuoteOh look, another personal attack.
If you really wanted to talk about the earlier discussion and personal attacks, you would notice this:You're irrational and insane.Purely in response to my observation that you and your right-wing talking points were wrong.
I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later, when I brought it up to help you save face from one of your own errors, by pointing out that both our errors were because we relied on sources that made the same errors. Note that is in no way "blaming" anyone for a mistake. It's just explaining how it happened. I'll also point out that when you made an error, I corrected it, and you dropped it, I never harangued you over it. The only exception is your one/two bill error, which I brought up several times to highlight that that's exactly what you were doing. Feel free to keep on doing it, though. I don't mind. I'm not that insecure.Quote(I don't blame other people.)
Endlessly repeating your delusions doesn't make them reality.
Here's a piece of reality:The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.Which you blamed on your sources.
You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.No, dumbass, that's not how society works. Everyone in society has some levels of responsibility to others. A pandemic just makes some of them more prominent. It also makes the sociopaths that are just parasitically living off of the benefits of society without contributing--like yourself--more obvious.
No dumbass, I have no responsibility for you or anyone else.
As for contribution, I'm a Higher Rate taxpayer, I actually fund the state. There my obligation ends.
But keep milking those false equivalencies. That's all you got. :P
There are many things that the government can legally do during times of emergency/crisis. While you may.consider them unconstitutional, that doesn't make them so (even if they are authoritarian).You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.No, dumbass, that's not how society works. Everyone in society has some levels of responsibility to others. A pandemic just makes some of them more prominent. It also makes the sociopaths that are just parasitically living off of the benefits of society without contributing--like yourself--more obvious.
No dumbass, I have no responsibility for you or anyone else.
As for contribution, I'm a Higher Rate taxpayer, I actually fund the state. There my obligation ends.
There are no laws dictating that people have to wear masks or refrain from leaving their homes. And no, politicians making unconstitutional authoritarian decrees aren't "laws". People also don't have a legal, moral or ethical obligation of protecting others from natural disasters or so-called "acts of god" (such as pandemics), and the expectation that they somehow do is just insane.
But keep milking those false equivalencies. That's all you got. :P
And what does the Right have? Collective delusions that their self-destructive behaviors are going to lead to a new golden (or orange) age after addition-by-subtraction strengthens & purifies them?But keep milking those false equivalencies. That's all you got. :P
That's all that the "Left" has got these days. Most of their intelligent folks have either left or been suppressed due to the religious dogma that's arisen.
Absolutely shocking how far things have swung since the 80's/90's.
But keep milking those false equivalencies. That's all you got. :P
That's all that the "Left" has got these days. Most of their intelligent folks have either left or been suppressed due to the religious dogma that's arisen.
Absolutely shocking how far things have swung since the 80's/90's.
And what does the Right have? Collective delusions that their self-destructive behaviors are going to lead to a new golden (or orange) age after addition-by-subtraction strengthens & purifies them?But keep milking those false equivalencies. That's all you got. :P
That's all that the "Left" has got these days. Most of their intelligent folks have either left or been suppressed due to the religious dogma that's arisen.
Absolutely shocking how far things have swung since the 80's/90's.
You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.No, dumbass, that's not how society works. Everyone in society has some levels of responsibility to others. A pandemic just makes some of them more prominent. It also makes the sociopaths that are just parasitically living off of the benefits of society without contributing--like yourself--more obvious.
No dumbass, I have no responsibility for you or anyone else.
As for contribution, I'm a Higher Rate taxpayer, I actually fund the state. There my obligation ends.
There are no laws dictating that people have to wear masks or refrain from leaving their homes. And no, politicians making unconstitutional authoritarian decrees aren't "laws". People also don't have a legal, moral or ethical obligation of protecting others from natural disasters or so-called "acts of god" (such as pandemics), and the expectation that they somehow do is just insane.
But keep milking those false equivalencies. That's all you got. :P
Someone pointed out that the justifications used to confine Covid sufferers could apply to other people as well.It's called Common Core, and the same methodology was also used to count votes!
People with AIDS, for example.
I wonder how some of you smooth-brained quarter-wits would've reacted if the Reagan Administration had decided to handle the AIDS outbreaks by requiring all people who tested HIV positive to be confined, regardless of their wishes.
But then, this isn't about sickness. This is about control.
Also, it seems California is counting every Covid patient as if they are 1.5 patients. For reasons, I guess.
This is a reply to the discussion we were having about
The Pat Pivot, as usual. ::)
Accusing people of things you just did is becoming a favorite tactic of yours.
Oh look, another false pivot on your part. My comment that you were irrational and insane was a reference to stuff like "But I encourage you or Trump to sue Fox News over this."QuoteOh look, another personal attack.
If you really wanted to talk about the earlier discussion and personal attacks, you would notice this:You're irrational and insane.Purely in response to my observation that you and your right-wing talking points were wrong.
You weren't "observing" that I was wrong. You were randomly assigning me a set of politics and making ridiculous suggestions. Which is a bugfuck insane response.
I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts laterQuote(I don't blame other people.)
Endlessly repeating your delusions doesn't make them reality.
Here's a piece of reality:The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.Which you blamed on your sources.
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources).(I'll add, because you're apparently not able to follow more than the immediate post, that my post did not depend at all on whether the bill was one or two when I was correcting your error.)
But are you a 4 year old? Because you're acting like one.
If you don't like being called a 4 year old, stop acting like one. All you've done is tell other people what they think and then have the gall tell them they're wrong about what they think when they correct you, do something stupid then accuse other people of doing the same thing in some feeble attempt at deflection, refuse to take any responsibility for your own actions, lie, and make personal attacks.QuoteBut are you a 4 year old? Because you're acting like one.
Ending on the Pat Projection! LOL.
If you don't like being called a 4 year old, stop acting like one. All you've done is tell other people what they think and then have the gall tell them they're wrong about what they think when they correct you, do something stupid then accuse other people of doing the same thing in some feeble attempt at deflection, refuse to take any responsibility for your own actions, lie, and make personal attacks.QuoteBut are you a 4 year old? Because you're acting like one.
Ending on the Pat Projection! LOL.
Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.
Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.If you don't like being called a 4 year old, stop acting like one. All you've done is tell other people what they think and then have the gall tell them they're wrong about what they think when they correct you, do something stupid then accuse other people of doing the same thing in some feeble attempt at deflection, refuse to take any responsibility for your own actions, lie, and make personal attacks.QuoteBut are you a 4 year old? Because you're acting like one.
Ending on the Pat Projection! LOL.
I'm laughing at you. But, oh! Pat is annoyed! Reading his posts and making inferences is apparently completely against the rules at his daycare center. How dare anyone express disagreement with Pat's unsupported opinions!
Get over yourself already.
You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.
There are many things that the government can legally do during times of emergency/crisis. While you may.consider them unconstitutional, that doesn't make them so (even if they are authoritarian).
The only "crisis" is the one governments have manufactured in order to give themselves unprecedented powers as they trample on all the norms of basic freedom.
The only "crisis" is the one governments have manufactured in order to give themselves unprecedented powers as they trample on all the norms of basic freedom.
So how long have you believed an an international conspiracy of governments to take your basic freedoms? It isn't headed by lizard people is it cos you're right into David Icke territory with that one.
the nut job conspiracy theory side of things.That's the side that many of the posters here appear to embrace. Many of them seem smart but deranged & deluded, or perhaps just trolling the others that are deranged & deluded. I find it best to imagine that they are just embracing their online personas and "doing what their characters would do" to make a show here in their safe space. And this board really is a safe space for such foolishness, especially for the right wing extremists here (easy to spot because they see "Marxists" everywhere) that are an embarrassment to any reasonable conservatives.
Greetings!Did Santa bring you some new tinfoil hats for Christmas this year?
For many years now, since the early 20th century, there has been a growing class of Glabalists, non-elected magnates which have a goal of creating a globalist, one world government, a globalist, one world economy--all of which is fine-tuned to benefit the elite few at the expense of everyone else. The realization of such a globalist government and economy can only proceed successfully through the gathering and concentration of power and immense wealth and control into the hands of the few, and such control must be exercised at the expense of liberty and freedom to the masses, so that a predictable, constantly operating global economy can be maintained. Such wealth, power, and control cannot be facilitated through the ever-shifting and unpredictable changes in a democracy, hence their efforts at creating a private, non-elected body of controllers, and the continued processes of making democracy an illusion, so as to keep the masses compliant and unaware of what is the reality.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
the nut job conspiracy theory side of things.That's the side that many of the posters here appear to embrace. Many of them seem smart but deranged & deluded, or perhaps just trolling the others that are deranged & deluded. I find it best to imagine that they are just embracing their online personas and "doing what their characters would do" to make a show here in their safe space. And this board really is a safe space for such foolishness, especially for the right wing extremists here (easy to spot because they see "Marxists" everywhere) that are an embarrassment to any reasonable conservatives.
But that's right. I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about.Every so often, SHARK glimpses the truth.
Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.
Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.
Get over yourself already.
You on the other hand haven't stopped lying, and continue to behave like a spoiled child.
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources).
.
I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later
I've backed up every one of my positions, which you haven't. I've admitted my mistakes, which you haven't, even when presented with incontrovertible evidence you were wrong.Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.
Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.
Get over yourself already.
You on the other hand haven't stopped lying, and continue to behave like a spoiled child.
You lied only a few posts ago; you have not supported your positions. To the contrary, you've admitted at least one error and lied about when you brought up your sources:The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources)..
I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later
Pat Projection is on stronger steroids than manic Donald Trump with coronavirus in October: throwing yet another tantrum about being observed to be right-wing, and spewing lies to cover up his earlier lies.
Climb off the WAAAAAHmbulance and grow up, Pat.
I've backed up every one of my positions, which you haven't. I've admitted my mistakes, which you haven't, even when presented with incontrovertible evidence you were wrong.Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.
Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.
Get over yourself already.
You on the other hand haven't stopped lying, and continue to behave like a spoiled child.
You lied only a few posts ago; you have not supported your positions. To the contrary, you've admitted at least one error and lied about when you brought up your sources:The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources)..
I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later
Pat Projection is on stronger steroids than manic Donald Trump with coronavirus in October: throwing yet another tantrum about being observed to be right-wing, and spewing lies to cover up his earlier lies.
Climb off the WAAAAAHmbulance and grow up, Pat.
I've accused you of lying, but only reluctantly, after a great deal of evidence, because I understand a lie isn't a simple difference of opinion, or even a mistake. It requires deliberately telling a falsehood when you know better. Which you've done, repeatedly. And I have not.
You're still behaving like a child, BTW.
I have ignored your "evidence", but that's because you've repeatedly made baseless attacks with false claims, and there's no interesting content or discussion to make it worth the bother. That doesn't make me a liar. If someone hasn't read Great Expectations, you can't call them a liar because they haven't read Great Expectations (though you're more a dick than a Dickens).I've backed up every one of my positions, which you haven't. I've admitted my mistakes, which you haven't, even when presented with incontrovertible evidence you were wrong.Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.
Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.
Get over yourself already.
You on the other hand haven't stopped lying, and continue to behave like a spoiled child.
You lied only a few posts ago; you have not supported your positions. To the contrary, you've admitted at least one error and lied about when you brought up your sources:The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources)..
I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later
Pat Projection is on stronger steroids than manic Donald Trump with coronavirus in October: throwing yet another tantrum about being observed to be right-wing, and spewing lies to cover up his earlier lies.
Climb off the WAAAAAHmbulance and grow up, Pat.
I've accused you of lying, but only reluctantly, after a great deal of evidence, because I understand a lie isn't a simple difference of opinion, or even a mistake. It requires deliberately telling a falsehood when you know better. Which you've done, repeatedly. And I have not.
You ignore the evidence of your lies in the very post you reply to. You accused all the media using "President elect Biden" of lying based on a difference of opinion; you have no reluctance to go without basis to accusations of lying. You know better because you've seen the proof, you've admitted to it and still you persist in your denial, lies and personal attacks.QuoteYou're still behaving like a child, BTW.
LOL. You're too small to pull off a Big Lie by yourself, Pat (short for Pathetic) the Right-Winger.
I have ignored your "evidence", but that's because you've repeatedly made baseless attacks with false claims, and there's no interesting content or discussion to make it worth the bother. That doesn't make me a liar. If someone hasn't read Great Expectations, you can't call them a liar because they haven't read Great Expectations (though you're more a dick than a Dickens).I've backed up every one of my positions, which you haven't. I've admitted my mistakes, which you haven't, even when presented with incontrovertible evidence you were wrong.Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.
Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.
Get over yourself already.
You on the other hand haven't stopped lying, and continue to behave like a spoiled child.
You lied only a few posts ago; you have not supported your positions. To the contrary, you've admitted at least one error and lied about when you brought up your sources:The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources)..
I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later
Pat Projection is on stronger steroids than manic Donald Trump with coronavirus in October: throwing yet another tantrum about being observed to be right-wing, and spewing lies to cover up his earlier lies.
Climb off the WAAAAAHmbulance and grow up, Pat.
I've accused you of lying, but only reluctantly, after a great deal of evidence, because I understand a lie isn't a simple difference of opinion, or even a mistake. It requires deliberately telling a falsehood when you know better. Which you've done, repeatedly. And I have not.
You ignore the evidence of your lies in the very post you reply to. You accused all the media using "President elect Biden" of lying based on a difference of opinion; you have no reluctance to go without basis to accusations of lying. You know better because you've seen the proof, you've admitted to it and still you persist in your denial, lies and personal attacks.QuoteYou're still behaving like a child, BTW.
LOL. You're too small to pull off a Big Lie by yourself, Pat (short for Pathetic) the Right-Winger.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.I have ignored your "evidence", but that's because you've repeatedly made baseless attacks with false claims, and there's no interesting content or discussion to make it worth the bother. That doesn't make me a liar. If someone hasn't read Great Expectations, you can't call them a liar because they haven't read Great Expectations (though you're more a dick than a Dickens).I've backed up every one of my positions, which you haven't. I've admitted my mistakes, which you haven't, even when presented with incontrovertible evidence you were wrong.Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.
Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.
Get over yourself already.
You on the other hand haven't stopped lying, and continue to behave like a spoiled child.
You lied only a few posts ago; you have not supported your positions. To the contrary, you've admitted at least one error and lied about when you brought up your sources:The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources)..
I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later
Pat Projection is on stronger steroids than manic Donald Trump with coronavirus in October: throwing yet another tantrum about being observed to be right-wing, and spewing lies to cover up his earlier lies.
Climb off the WAAAAAHmbulance and grow up, Pat.
I've accused you of lying, but only reluctantly, after a great deal of evidence, because I understand a lie isn't a simple difference of opinion, or even a mistake. It requires deliberately telling a falsehood when you know better. Which you've done, repeatedly. And I have not.
You ignore the evidence of your lies in the very post you reply to. You accused all the media using "President elect Biden" of lying based on a difference of opinion; you have no reluctance to go without basis to accusations of lying. You know better because you've seen the proof, you've admitted to it and still you persist in your denial, lies and personal attacks.QuoteYou're still behaving like a child, BTW.
LOL. You're too small to pull off a Big Lie by yourself, Pat (short for Pathetic) the Right-Winger.
That Pat lied earlier makes all of his subsequent posts worthless ("no interesting content or discussion"), per Pat the Pathetic Right-Winger's standard.
But apparently while Pat can't be bothered to post anything truthful, he is bothered enough to keep posting forever. Pat is still fun to mock and laugh at, even though nothing he says is interesting content or discussion.
Get over yourself, Pat.
Reviewing that, I don't think it's fair to characterize Pat as lying during that exchange. And I am not typically on Pat's "side" in this so I don't think you could accuse me of being biased.Thanks. We've definitely clashed in a major way, but our last exchange was pretty reasonable.
But apparently while Pat can't be bothered to post anything truthful, he is bothered enough to keep posting forever. Pat is still fun to mock and laugh at, even though nothing he says is interesting content or discussion.Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Get over yourself, Pat.
Reviewing that, I don't think it's fair to characterize Pat as lying during that exchange. And I am not typically on Pat's "side" in this so I don't think you could accuse me of being biased.
Since he insists I'm lying, maybe you should make a judgement on that.
And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.Nobody on these boards is worth any serious investment of time.
I'm investing a small amount of time mocking and laughing at you.That's the spirit!
And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.Nobody on these boards is worth any serious investment of time.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
You know, the last couple of breathless 'oh shit it's all terrible' posts from Misty have involved California.
Here's a thought. Maybe the problem there isn't Covid.
Maybe California is just very, very, badly run.
No, I didn't.But apparently while Pat can't be bothered to post anything truthful, he is bothered enough to keep posting forever. Pat is still fun to mock and laugh at, even though nothing he says is interesting content or discussion.Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Get over yourself, Pat.
You did lie; proof given in previous posts. You are investing a lot of time in denying it and digging a deeper hole for yourself; I'm investing a small amount of time mocking and laughing at you.
Not just California, specific areas in California. Mistwell's right that there are areas where the hospital capacity is overwhelmed. This second surge is significantly bigger than the first. But the implication that it's a universal problem is wrong. Like before, it's highly selective. A far more widespread problem during the last surge than exceeding capacity was running so far below capacity (because people were avoiding precautionary and elective visits) that hospitals were struggling with their budgets, staff were being furloughed, and some went out of business. The same is true this time, though bed use is higher across the country, so there are more problems at the high end than the low. Which is a significant problem; as HappyDaze noted, you can't just scale up ICU slots by adding beds. It's about equipment, the building's environment (reverse pressure, etc.), and especially staff.You know, the last couple of breathless 'oh shit it's all terrible' posts from Misty have involved California.
Here's a thought. Maybe the problem there isn't Covid.
Maybe California is just very, very, badly run.
Exactly. I mean, that place is such as nasty dump it had a resurgence of Medieval era diseases, for crying out loud! Of course more people are dying of sickness there than anywhere else in the US!
Keiro is actually somebody I'm worried about. High earning, you know he pays the top rate of tax, and physically healthy he's neglected his mental health and gone into a weird psychosis where all the governments are out to get him. He's also totally not an anti-vaxxer but says the flu vaccine doesn't work. He's a total mental.
Since he insists I'm lying, maybe you should make a judgement on that.
I like to apply the rawma principle on these occasions: Did rawma say something? Then yes he was lying.
The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.
So yeah Flu vaccine works.
Reasonable people disagree.The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.
So yeah Flu vaccine works.
40% when they guess the right strain(s). Even then it doesn't make you immune, it might just shorten your symptoms, in other words a complete waste of time.
Reasonable people disagree.The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.
So yeah Flu vaccine works.
Reducing hospitalisation and death is seen as a good thing by many.
40% when they guess the right strain(s). Even then it doesn't make you immune, it might just shorten your symptoms, in other words a complete waste of time.
No, I didn't.But apparently while Pat can't be bothered to post anything truthful, he is bothered enough to keep posting forever. Pat is still fun to mock and laugh at, even though nothing he says is interesting content or discussion.Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Get over yourself, Pat.
You did lie; proof given in previous posts. You are investing a lot of time in denying it and digging a deeper hole for yourself; I'm investing a small amount of time mocking and laughing at you.
I appreciate that you can laugh while the world is laughing at you.
Let's start here: The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources).
I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later, when I brought it up to help you save face from one of your own errors, by pointing out that both our errors were because we relied on sources that made the same errors. Note that is in no way "blaming" anyone for a mistake. It's just explaining how it happened. I'll also point out that when you made an error, I corrected it, and you dropped it, I never harangued you over it. The only exception is your one/two bill error, which I brought up several times to highlight that that's exactly what you were doing. Feel free to keep on doing it, though. I don't mind. I'm not that insecure.
Yes, I admitted my error. I almost always do. That you've brought it up -- is it dozens of times, now? -- without admitting to even one of your own blatant errors says a lot about your insecurities.No, I didn't.But apparently while Pat can't be bothered to post anything truthful, he is bothered enough to keep posting forever. Pat is still fun to mock and laugh at, even though nothing he says is interesting content or discussion.Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Get over yourself, Pat.
You did lie; proof given in previous posts. You are investing a lot of time in denying it and digging a deeper hole for yourself; I'm investing a small amount of time mocking and laughing at you.
I appreciate that you can laugh while the world is laughing at you.
SMH. The things that trigger Pat and that Pat imagines are devastating putdowns are a roadmap of Pat's insecurities.
Pat first concedes his error and deflects to his sources:Let's start here: The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong. I could link the sources I used, which said the same thing I said, but they're wrong too. Just like the sources you used that talk about the coronavirus package being a separate bill. They're both easy mistakes, and ones that have also been made by people who are supposed to be experts (as evidenced by our sources).
And then Pat denies what anyone can see right there; emphasis added:I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later, when I brought it up to help you save face from one of your own errors, by pointing out that both our errors were because we relied on sources that made the same errors. Note that is in no way "blaming" anyone for a mistake. It's just explaining how it happened. I'll also point out that when you made an error, I corrected it, and you dropped it, I never harangued you over it. The only exception is your one/two bill error, which I brought up several times to highlight that that's exactly what you were doing. Feel free to keep on doing it, though. I don't mind. I'm not that insecure.
You know, the last couple of breathless 'oh shit it's all terrible' posts from Misty have involved California.
Here's a thought. Maybe the problem there isn't Covid.
Maybe California is just very, very, badly run.
The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.
So yeah Flu vaccine works.
40% when they guess the right strain(s). Even then it doesn't make you immune, it might just shorten your symptoms, in other words a complete waste of time.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Dude, I figured that out weeks ago, and I didn't even spend that much time in this forum section till after the election. This guy makes interacting with HappyDaze and Mistwell seem enjoyable. I don't even hate them that much, specially when actually discussing RPGs.You know, the last couple of breathless 'oh shit it's all terrible' posts from Misty have involved California.
Here's a thought. Maybe the problem there isn't Covid.
Maybe California is just very, very, badly run.
Exactly. I mean, that place is such as nasty dump it had a resurgence of Medieval era diseases, for crying out loud! Of course more people are dying of sickness there than anywhere else in the US!
And since many here won't give a shit about those benefits, here's another: Less time hospitalized, especially in ICU, means lower bills. IOW, the vaccine will potentially save you $$$ for a nominal cost and expenditure of time.The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.
So yeah Flu vaccine works.
40% when they guess the right strain(s). Even then it doesn't make you immune, it might just shorten your symptoms, in other words a complete waste of time.
There are TWO direct benefits to you from the flu vaccine:
1. It reduces your chances of getting the flu by 40-60%
CDC: "flu vaccination reduces the risk of flu illness by between 40% and 60% among the overall population during seasons when most circulating flu viruses are well-matched to the flu vaccine."
2. It reduces your chances of ending up hospitalized or in the ICU or dead from the flu, if you do get it:
"In recent years, flu vaccines have reduced the risk of flu-associated hospitalizations among older adults on average by about 40%. Flu vaccination among adults reduced the risk of being admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with flu by 82 percent. flu vaccination reduced deaths, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, ICU length of stay, and overall duration of hospitalization among hospitalized flu patients. A 2018 study showed that among adults hospitalized with flu, vaccinated patients were 59 percent less likely to be admitted to the ICU than those who had not been vaccinated. Among adults in the ICU with flu, vaccinated patients on average spent 4 fewer days in the hospital than those who were not vaccinated."
And then it has a primary indirect benefit, which is reducing the spread of the Flu in the population at large which reduces your chances of being exposed to the Flu virus in the first place. It further reduces the chances someone else who is a child or old or immune compromised of getting it and dying from it as well.
There are TWO direct benefits to you from the flu vaccine:
1. It reduces your chances of getting the flu by 40-60%
CDC: "flu vaccination reduces the risk of flu illness by between 40% and 60% among the overall population during seasons when most circulating flu viruses are well-matched to the flu vaccine."
2. It reduces your chances of ending up hospitalized or in the ICU or dead from the flu, if you do get it:
"In recent years, flu vaccines have reduced the risk of flu-associated hospitalizations among older adults on average by about 40%. Flu vaccination among adults reduced the risk of being admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with flu by 82 percent. flu vaccination reduced deaths, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, ICU length of stay, and overall duration of hospitalization among hospitalized flu patients. A 2018 study showed that among adults hospitalized with flu, vaccinated patients were 59 percent less likely to be admitted to the ICU than those who had not been vaccinated. Among adults in the ICU with flu, vaccinated patients on average spent 4 fewer days in the hospital than those who were not vaccinated."
And then it has a primary indirect benefit, which is reducing the spread of the Flu in the population at large which reduces your chances of being exposed to the Flu virus in the first place. It further reduces the chances someone else who is a child or old or immune compromised of getting it and dying from it as well.
And since many here won't give a shit about those benefits, here's another: Less time hospitalized, especially in ICU, means lower bills. IOW, the vaccine will potentially save you $$$ for a nominal cost and expenditure of time.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Dude, I figured that out weeks ago, and I didn't even spend that much time in this forum section till after the election. This guy makes interacting with HappyDaze and Mistwell seem enjoyable. I don't even hate them that much, specially when actually discussing RPGs.You know, the last couple of breathless 'oh shit it's all terrible' posts from Misty have involved California.
Here's a thought. Maybe the problem there isn't Covid.
Maybe California is just very, very, badly run.
Exactly. I mean, that place is such as nasty dump it had a resurgence of Medieval era diseases, for crying out loud! Of course more people are dying of sickness there than anywhere else in the US!
I don't hate anyone here, though the guy who called me a Zionist Scum is pushing it. I've been here for over a decade, and I knew some of the folks here online (like SHARK) well before they were posting here. My love of RPGs and people who play them is far more important to me than any of this bullshit.
Reasonable people disagree.The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.
So yeah Flu vaccine works.
40% when they guess the right strain(s). Even then it doesn't make you immune, it might just shorten your symptoms, in other words a complete waste of time.
If you have to ask, then you spend too much of your time here.Reasonable people disagree.The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.
So yeah Flu vaccine works.
40% when they guess the right strain(s). Even then it doesn't make you immune, it might just shorten your symptoms, in other words a complete waste of time.
How do you know what reasonable people do?
If you have to ask, then you spend too much of your time here.Reasonable people disagree.The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.
So yeah Flu vaccine works.
40% when they guess the right strain(s). Even then it doesn't make you immune, it might just shorten your symptoms, in other words a complete waste of time.
How do you know what reasonable people do?
Good one. That made me laugh.If you have to ask, then you spend too much of your time here.Reasonable people disagree.The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.
So yeah Flu vaccine works.
40% when they guess the right strain(s). Even then it doesn't make you immune, it might just shorten your symptoms, in other words a complete waste of time.
How do you know what reasonable people do?
I mean that seriously.
hardly anyone is dyingAre you speaking qualitatively or quantitatively? I just like to know what kind of monster I'm hunting.
Not mutually exclusive positions. California can be badly run (and it definitely is badly run) and also this can be what's about to happen and is already happening in other states which are better run (California STILL has a lower rate of death per 100,000 people from Covid-19 than a majority of states even with this shitty government). But, no matter how poorly run, California cannot "make" Covid-19 worse than the flu. Covid-19 is worse than the flu regardless of how poor or well a government is run. Because the flu has never, EVER done this to California. Our hospitals have never been overrun from the flu. Mass death on this scale has never happened here from the flu. But the government was just as shitty out here with the flu. So it's not the government which is the changed factor here that's made things so bad with the hospitals, it's Covid-19.
Are you speaking qualitatively or quantitatively? I just like to know what kind of monster I'm hunting.
Glad to see we have a totally reciprocal relationship! It makes communicating so much easier when we both know there's absolutely no point to it. Now if everyone here could just be so honest.Are you speaking qualitatively or quantitatively? I just like to know what kind of monster I'm hunting.
Sorry, why would you think I could give a flying fuck what your opinion on the matter is?
It's interesting how many here complained about the Leftist bias in the media both before, during and after the 2020 US election. Yet somehow don't question the media when it pushes their narrative. So is the media biased or only biased when it suits you all.This is the way.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Dude, I figured that out weeks ago, and I didn't even spend that much time in this forum section till after the election. This guy makes interacting with HappyDaze and Mistwell seem enjoyable. I don't even hate them that much, specially when actually discussing RPGs.You know, the last couple of breathless 'oh shit it's all terrible' posts from Misty have involved California.
Here's a thought. Maybe the problem there isn't Covid.
Maybe California is just very, very, badly run.
Exactly. I mean, that place is such as nasty dump it had a resurgence of Medieval era diseases, for crying out loud! Of course more people are dying of sickness there than anywhere else in the US!
I don't hate anyone here, though the guy who called me a Zionist Scum is pushing it. I've been here for over a decade, and I knew some of the folks here online (like SHARK) well before they were posting here. My love of RPGs and people who play them is far more important to me than any of this bullshit.
Greetings!
*Laughing* Mistwell, do you realize you have known me since Eric Noah was running EN World? That was before Morrus was even there. Was that 2000? Geesus. Where has the time gone? ;D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Link (https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2021/01/us-covid-19-death-toll/617544/)
ON AVERAGE, EACH PERSON IN THE U.S. WHO HAS DIED FROM COVID-19 WAS DEPRIVED OF ABOUT 13 YEARS OF LIFE.
Link (https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2021/01/us-covid-19-death-toll/617544/)
ON AVERAGE, EACH PERSON IN THE U.S. WHO HAS DIED FROM COVID-19 WAS DEPRIVED OF ABOUT 13 YEARS OF LIFE.
FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE WORLD WAR II, U.S. LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH COULD DROP BY A FULL YEAR.
ROUGHLY 3.1 MILLION AMERICANS HAVE LOST A CLOSE RELATIVE TO COVID-19.
Glad to see we have a totally reciprocal relationship! It makes communicating so much easier when we both know there's absolutely no point to it. Now if everyone here could just be so honest.Are you speaking qualitatively or quantitatively? I just like to know what kind of monster I'm hunting.
Sorry, why would you think I could give a flying fuck what your opinion on the matter is?
It's not the Atlantic. I've linked to the guy they're citing before. He's a professor of genetics at Harvard. Here's his analysis:Link (https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2021/01/us-covid-19-death-toll/617544/)
ON AVERAGE, EACH PERSON IN THE U.S. WHO HAS DIED FROM COVID-19 WAS DEPRIVED OF ABOUT 13 YEARS OF LIFE.
Uh, no...
At which point do we consider the Atlantic to no longer be 'massaging' their data and actually 'raping' it instead?
Link (https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2021/01/us-covid-19-death-toll/617544/)
ON AVERAGE, EACH PERSON IN THE U.S. WHO HAS DIED FROM COVID-19 WAS DEPRIVED OF ABOUT 13 YEARS OF LIFE.
Uh, no...
At which point do we consider the Atlantic to no longer be 'massaging' their data and actually 'raping' it instead?
Link (https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2021/01/us-covid-19-death-toll/617544/)
ON AVERAGE, EACH PERSON IN THE U.S. WHO HAS DIED FROM COVID-19 WAS DEPRIVED OF ABOUT 13 YEARS OF LIFE.
FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE WORLD WAR II, U.S. LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH COULD DROP BY A FULL YEAR.
ROUGHLY 3.1 MILLION AMERICANS HAVE LOST A CLOSE RELATIVE TO COVID-19.
The average age of death "with" covid in the UK is 82.4. That's almost exactly the average age of death from all causes. That doesn't imply lost years at all.
377 people under the age of 60 and without any co-morbidities have died. In other words, if you're young and healthy, your risk is negligible, though you are much more likely to commit suicide or suffer from mental health issues than you were before lockdowns.
To be fair you can't be too hard on Kiero. He avowes to not care for anybody beyond his absolutely immediate family, is a latent anti-vaxxer who believes that governments across the world have a concerted plan to use a virus with no ill effects to take his liberty and states he owes others not the slightest effort to prevent them dying. As a complete mental he needs compassion.
Eats you up that we pity you, doesn't it? Oh well, maybe you'll get better at being human.To be fair you can't be too hard on Kiero. He avowes to not care for anybody beyond his absolutely immediate family, is a latent anti-vaxxer who believes that governments across the world have a concerted plan to use a virus with no ill effects to take his liberty and states he owes others not the slightest effort to prevent them dying. As a complete mental he needs compassion.
Spare your faux-sincerity act for someone who actually believes you, you smug cunt.
Oh well, maybe you'll get better at being human.
To be fair you can't be too hard on Kiero. He avowes to not care for anybody beyond his absolutely immediate family, is a latent anti-vaxxer who believes that governments across the world have a concerted plan to use a virus with no ill effects to take his liberty and states he owes others not the slightest effort to prevent them dying. As a complete mental he needs compassion.
Spare your faux-sincerity act for someone who actually believes you, you smug cunt.
Your use of sarcastic black tells me you agree. 8)Oh well, maybe you'll get better at being human.
There is no reasonable person that would say this.
Your use of sarcastic black tells me you agree. 8)Oh well, maybe you'll get better at being human.
There is no reasonable person that would say this.
Hm... FOR THOSE OF YOU PLAYING AT HOME, THE SECRET PASSWORD FOR TODAY IS ~To be fair you can't be too hard on Kiero. He avowes to not care for anybody beyond his absolutely immediate family, is a latent anti-vaxxer who believes that governments across the world have a concerted plan to use a virus with no ill effects to take his liberty and states he owes others not the slightest effort to prevent them dying. As a complete mental he needs compassion.
Spare your faux-sincerity act for someone who actually believes you, you smug cunt.
Calm down you gadje I wasn't even talking to you and I can confirm that I was being completely sincere when I called you a mental.
Yes, I admitted my error. I almost always do.
That you've brought it up -- is it dozens of times, now? -- without admitting to even one of your own blatant errors says a lot about your insecurities.
As I've explained -- what, a half a dozen times now? -- I was planning on doing so right away, but I saw an opportunity show you your own hypocrisy by mirroring your behavior, without explicitly calling you out on it. I was trying to be nice. But when they clearly didn't work, I had no problem pointing out my own error. I do this regularly. It doesn't bother me.Yes, I admitted my error. I almost always do.
It took you six replies before admitting your error; you can go back and look at the thread. I doubt you would have admitted it if I had not pointed it out repeatedly.QuoteThat you've brought it up -- is it dozens of times, now? -- without admitting to even one of your own blatant errors says a lot about your insecurities.
You could try listing just one error of mine instead of name calling. No, the "one bill or two" thing you kept bringing up doesn't qualify; it did not affect the correctness of my post, unlike your errors. Nor are my opinions of your honesty and politics an error; I stand by my opinion of what you post. So, what have you got? I'll judge the evidence fairly, as I do when evidence is provided.
As I've explained -- what, a half a dozen times now? -- I was planning on doing so right away, but I saw an opportunity show you your own hypocrisy by mirroring your behavior, without explicitly calling you out on it. I was trying to be nice.Yes, I admitted my error. I almost always do.
It took you six replies before admitting your error; you can go back and look at the thread. I doubt you would have admitted it if I had not pointed it out repeatedly.QuoteThat you've brought it up -- is it dozens of times, now? -- without admitting to even one of your own blatant errors says a lot about your insecurities.
You could try listing just one error of mine instead of name calling. No, the "one bill or two" thing you kept bringing up doesn't qualify; it did not affect the correctness of my post, unlike your errors. Nor are my opinions of your honesty and politics an error; I stand by my opinion of what you post. So, what have you got? I'll judge the evidence fairly, as I do when evidence is provided.
You're completely dishonest.
...
Plus, much of the rest of your post was illegible garbage.
...
But I prefer to believe you at least qualify as a dimbulb
...
So that's another case where you've displayed a combination of blissful ignorance and dishonesty, flavored by your nutso variety of irrational partisanship.
You're a fucking moron.
...
You're like a child who was raised in a box, and has never seen the range of wonders in the wider world.
No, you're just a moron
And I don't care whether people think I'm right-wing or not, either.
But when they clearly didn't work, I had no problem pointing out my own error. I do this regularly. It doesn't bother me.
And I've pointed out your errors in almost every single post. Yes, like the one/two bill.
But you wouldn't or couldn't let it go.The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.
I will in turn concede that I did not consider whether the two parts of the bill were passed together; they were widely reported as separate entities and had very different paths of negotiation, and it was not important except to change the possible issues from a presidential veto.
Acting condescendingApparently you could not bear not to have the last word.
Or how about all the attempts at internet telepathy, where you decided you know better than I do what I think?
Your claim that I haven't is another lie, because you literally just admitted that I've been bringing it up your mistake about the nature of the bill.
And as I've pointed out endlessly, my error actually strengthens the point I was making.
You lie and lie and lie. You're the most dishonest poster I've had the misfortune to run across on this board.
Why do you keep replying to such a dishonest person but then concede that he is correct in pointing out your error?So you're baffled that I told the truth, even to a liar?
And once more, you're lying. We already did this a couple times. For instance, a couple replies back you claimed that I called you insane without any provocation, and that you just made a nice innocent little point. And then I went back, quoted the actual post, and what do you know? Your point not only was completely baseless, but you mixed it in with crazy claims that you had selectively edited out.
Kool-aid overdose (sour grape flavor). They've looked it over and stuck with it because it's true. Media mostly prefer the fifth definition you list, because it flatters them with the most importance. But I encourage you or Trump to sue Fox News over this. Be aware that they've defended lawsuits by claiming they're entertainment rather than news, and Sean Hannity recently admitted that he doesn't vet the information on his show.You're making up fantasies about me.
Note that many media are also referring to Biden as the 46th President; that's one thing Trump could prevent, by resigning and making Biden 47th (or beyond). Add that demand to your lawsuit, please, for the entertainment value.
You're irrational and insane.
Addressing your less bugfuck crazy shit: The President-elect is not defined by the press, the GSA has no authority over who becomes president, Trump's tweet was ambiguous and he clarified it was not a concession, and just because something is almost certain to happen doesn't mean that it's already happened. Using President-elect to refer to Biden without a caveat like "presumptive" is simply incorrect. It may be acceptable in casual situations, as a shortcut, as long as everyone knows the presumptive is implied. But in professional works where precision is important, like the news, it's just wrong.
No, by bringing in something completely unrelated, you were the one who was trying to pivot. I just pointed out what you did.This is a reply to the discussion we were having about
The Pat Pivot, as usual. ::)
Accusing people of things you just did is becoming a favorite tactic of yours.Oh look, another false pivot on your part. My comment that you were irrational and insane was a reference to stuff like "But I encourage you or Trump to sue Fox News over this."QuoteOh look, another personal attack.
If you really wanted to talk about the earlier discussion and personal attacks, you would notice this:You're irrational and insane.Purely in response to my observation that you and your right-wing talking points were wrong.
You weren't "observing" that I was wrong. You were randomly assigning me a set of politics and making ridiculous suggestions. Which is a bugfuck insane response.I took explicit responsibility for my error, which you've never done for any of the errors you made. I never even mentioned my sources until several posts later, when I brought it up to help you save face from one of your own errors, by pointing out that both our errors were because we relied on sources that made the same errors. Note that is in no way "blaming" anyone for a mistake. It's just explaining how it happened. I'll also point out that when you made an error, I corrected it, and you dropped it, I never harangued you over it. The only exception is your one/two bill error, which I brought up several times to highlight that that's exactly what you were doing. Feel free to keep on doing it, though. I don't mind. I'm not that insecure.Quote(I don't blame other people.)
Endlessly repeating your delusions doesn't make them reality.
Here's a piece of reality:The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.Which you blamed on your sources.
But are you a 4 year old? Because you're acting like one.
Also, I can give as good as I get, but I never start fights. I generally respond in kind, and then drop it if there's no further provocations. You were the one who started with the insults, and have made them relentlessly. You can't claim I'm the aggressor. Well, I suppose you can. But that's because you're a liar.
You're a despicable liar, Rawma. And incredibly insecure.Why do you keep replying to such a dishonest person but then concede that he is correct in pointing out your error?So you're baffled that I told the truth, even to a liar?
The level of dishonesty behind your reasoning is staggering.
It's not the Atlantic. I've linked to the guy they're citing before. He's a professor of genetics at Harvard. Here's his analysis:Link (https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2021/01/us-covid-19-death-toll/617544/)
ON AVERAGE, EACH PERSON IN THE U.S. WHO HAS DIED FROM COVID-19 WAS DEPRIVED OF ABOUT 13 YEARS OF LIFE.
Uh, no...
At which point do we consider the Atlantic to no longer be 'massaging' their data and actually 'raping' it instead?
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.18.20214783v1.full.pdf
Note it's based on a pretty simple calculations, and hasn't been peer reviewed, though he's supposedly shopping it around to journals. Also, it's high compared to other estimates. And it doesn't look at the alternative costs. He's estimating that 2.5 million life years have been lost due to the pandemic, through early October. Another analysis, also not peer reviewed but also by qualified academics (Stanford physician, various professors of business, etc.), is estimating the lockdowns are costing 700,000 life years per month, far more than COVID-19 itself.
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/499394-the-covid-19-shutdown-will-cost-americans-millions-of-years-of-life
While the numbers sound scary, that's an irrational response because I don't have a good feel for what a million life years mean, when compared to other causes of death. But a few back of the envelope calculations suggests it's in the ballpark of other threats. For instance, if there are 40K car crash deaths, and the average age of death is 39 (half the US life expectancy), that's more than 1.5 million life years lost. In particular, I'd be curious to see a comparison to the seasonal flu. We know the number of deaths due to sar2 is higher, but the the flu is more deadly for people under 49, which would dramatically increase the average number of life years lost.
Since you won't bring the evidence, I guess I will. No editing, since Pat will insist it's lying.Nope. Unlike you, I only accuse people of lying when they lie. I'm not the one with truth issues, remember?
I guess this is Pat continuing to be nice. And not a liar. Your post is not aging well, Mistwell.Nope.
Since you won't bring the evidence, I guess I will. No editing, since Pat will insist it's lying.Nope. Unlike you, I only accuse people of lying when they lie. I'm not the one with truth issues, remember?
And once again, you demolished your own argument with a quote. You literally listed 3 different crazy things in that post you pretended was innocent.
You apparently think that's normal.
I guess this is Pat continuing to be nice. And not a liar. Your post is not aging well, Mistwell.Nope.
I mostly kept a civil tone, while you were making endless personal attacks, and making up stuff about me. I always presented arguments, even when I also responded in kind to your insults. I repeatedly de-escalated, and gave you multiple graceful ways out.
You never accepted any of those olive branches, and in fact you doubled down, and dropped even the pretense of making an argument for a while.
I'm not a relentlessly miserable excuse for a human being like you, but I'm done with extending those olive branches.
Though you're right about the second part, I'm not a liar. That's you, remember?
Hm... FOR THOSE OF YOU PLAYING AT HOME, THE SECRET PASSWORD FOR TODAY IS ~To be fair you can't be too hard on Kiero. He avowes to not care for anybody beyond his absolutely immediate family, is a latent anti-vaxxer who believes that governments across the world have a concerted plan to use a virus with no ill effects to take his liberty and states he owes others not the slightest effort to prevent them dying. As a complete mental he needs compassion.
Spare your faux-sincerity act for someone who actually believes you, you smug cunt.
Calm down you gadje I wasn't even talking to you and I can confirm that I was being completely sincere when I called you a mental.
GADJE:
Borrowed from Romani gadje. Doublet of gadgie and gorger.
Noun
gadje (plural gadjes or gadje)
A non-Roma; a non-Romani person.
from: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gadje
----
Is Gary a Gypsy? :o
----
Now back to our regularly scheduled programme, already in progress.
Good thing too, as I'm not particularly fond of travelers.Hm... FOR THOSE OF YOU PLAYING AT HOME, THE SECRET PASSWORD FOR TODAY IS ~To be fair you can't be too hard on Kiero. He avowes to not care for anybody beyond his absolutely immediate family, is a latent anti-vaxxer who believes that governments across the world have a concerted plan to use a virus with no ill effects to take his liberty and states he owes others not the slightest effort to prevent them dying. As a complete mental he needs compassion.
Spare your faux-sincerity act for someone who actually believes you, you smug cunt.
Calm down you gadje I wasn't even talking to you and I can confirm that I was being completely sincere when I called you a mental.
GADJE:
Borrowed from Romani gadje. Doublet of gadgie and gorger.
Noun
gadje (plural gadjes or gadje)
A non-Roma; a non-Romani person.
from: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gadje
----
Is Gary a Gypsy? :o
----
Now back to our regularly scheduled programme, already in progress.
Garry isn't a gypsy but that's not bad. Dig deeper.
You claimed you posted a perfectly innocent post, and I called you crazy. You then quoted your "innocent" post, except you edited out the 3 or 4 parts where you made crazy claims.Since you won't bring the evidence, I guess I will. No editing, since Pat will insist it's lying.Nope. Unlike you, I only accuse people of lying when they lie. I'm not the one with truth issues, remember?
Why would I remember something that's just one of your lies? The last time I quoted one of those posts without the whole thing, you accused me of dishonestly editing it. No reason to believe you wouldn't have done that again.
Those are jokes, and even if interpreted as insults, they're pretty mild for this forum. There is something wrong with you if you can't recognize them as either. The only craziness was your belief that, if they have defied Pat's opinion, all media are deliberately lying. And the first thing you did? Called me irrational and insane. ???You said crazy things about me, and I called you crazy in return. And I'm the one out of line?
I accepted your olive branch of admitting one mistake (after so many posts) but you only think I rejected it because I posted again. Your olive branches all came with a demand, apparently, that I stop posting. There was nothing left to argue about; your irrationality and hostility squeezed out all other topics. And lately, in response to Mistwell, giving you a chance to support your claims just proves that you have nothing.That wasn't the olive branch, asshole. I admitted I was wrong because I was wrong, not because of a miserable piece of shit like you. The olive branch I extended was showing you how you were wrong, by responding exactly like you were doing. I.e. showing you by example, without having to explicitly call you out on it. For anyone with a hint of self-awareness, that should have been a wake up call. But even though you've tacitly admitted your own mistake in the various contortions you've been making while trying to evade any responsibility, you refused to actually come out and say you're wrong because you have the maturity of a 4 year old.
You claimed you posted a perfectly innocent post, and I called you crazy. You then quoted your "innocent" post, except you edited out the 3 or 4 parts where you made crazy claims.
Good thing too, as I'm not particularly fond of travelers.Hm... FOR THOSE OF YOU PLAYING AT HOME, THE SECRET PASSWORD FOR TODAY IS ~To be fair you can't be too hard on Kiero. He avowes to not care for anybody beyond his absolutely immediate family, is a latent anti-vaxxer who believes that governments across the world have a concerted plan to use a virus with no ill effects to take his liberty and states he owes others not the slightest effort to prevent them dying. As a complete mental he needs compassion.
Spare your faux-sincerity act for someone who actually believes you, you smug cunt.
Calm down you gadje I wasn't even talking to you and I can confirm that I was being completely sincere when I called you a mental.
GADJE:
Borrowed from Romani gadje. Doublet of gadgie and gorger.
Noun
gadje (plural gadjes or gadje)
A non-Roma; a non-Romani person.
from: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gadje
----
Is Gary a Gypsy? :o
----
Now back to our regularly scheduled programme, already in progress.
Garry isn't a gypsy but that's not bad. Dig deeper.
Pat hate to sound like a broken record, but again a brick wall is going to constructive than rawma will ever be. Swallow your pride and just put him on ignore. This is beyond principle at this point.
That's your weird bigotry. I'm just pointing out a fact like I should have done about his spelling of Garry.Hint: it's not weird if you see shit like this: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-lancashire-44288992
Pat hate to sound like a broken record, but again a brick wall is going to constructive than rawma will ever be. Swallow your pride and just put him on ignore. This is beyond principle at this point.
To be fair I'm not even sure what the argument is about anymore.
You did nothing but misrepresent that post, many many others. It's one of the many things that makes you a liar.You claimed you posted a perfectly innocent post, and I called you crazy. You then quoted your "innocent" post, except you edited out the 3 or 4 parts where you made crazy claims.
I have not misrepresented what I wrote; humor, hyperbole, rhetoric, opinion, and mild by the standards of this forum. You reacted with outraged and humorless shrieks, and have subsequently misrepresented your posts significantly. I've invited you to make your case and you can't or won't.
It hasn't been about anything in a long time. Pat is upset because I implied that he was right-wing on a forum where almost everybody is right-wing and where he posts lots of right-wing saws, and he immediately lost it; I got annoyed because he won't accept even a well-documented rebuttal except after a large number of posts.Nah, it's simpler than that. You lie and act like a 4 year old.
You did nothing but misrepresent that post, many many others. It's one of the many things that makes you a liar.You claimed you posted a perfectly innocent post, and I called you crazy. You then quoted your "innocent" post, except you edited out the 3 or 4 parts where you made crazy claims.
I have not misrepresented what I wrote; humor, hyperbole, rhetoric, opinion, and mild by the standards of this forum. You reacted with outraged and humorless shrieks, and have subsequently misrepresented your posts significantly. I've invited you to make your case and you can't or won't.
And the funny one, of course. How could we forget that?
It hasn't been about anything in a long time. Pat is upset because I implied that he was right-wing on a forum where almost everybody is right-wing and where he posts lots of right-wing saws, and he immediately lost it; I got annoyed because he won't accept even a well-documented rebuttal except after a large number of posts.Nah, it's simpler than that. You lie and act like a 4 year old.
Pat hate to sound like a broken record, but again a brick wall is going to constructive than rawma will ever be. Swallow your pride and just put him on ignore. This is beyond principle at this point.Doesn't cost me anything. I don't spend any time these replies anymore. Which is a first for me, because I've always gone to the effort of giving everyone the basic human respect of a rational, considered reply even when they're attacking me, or when they have a weak case. But Rawma is just a broken record of lies and personal attacks, repeating the same lies and accusing everyone else of doing what he's doing, in some pathetic attempt to deflect blame.
Pat hate to sound like a broken record, but again a brick wall is going to constructive than rawma will ever be. Swallow your pride and just put him on ignore. This is beyond principle at this point.Doesn't cost me anything. I don't spend any time these replies anymore. Which is a first for me, because I've always gone to the effort of giving everyone the basic human respect of a rational, considered reply even when they're attacking me, or when they have a weak case. But Rawma is just a broken record of lies and personal attacks, repeating the same lies and accusing everyone else of doing what he's doing, in some pathetic attempt to deflect blame.
Nothing new and nothing true, I see.I say something, you lie about it, I correct you, you repeat the same lies. There's nothing new under the Rawma sun, just the endless beating heat of indistinguishable lies.
Pat hate to sound like a broken record, but again a brick wall is going to constructive than rawma will ever be. Swallow your pride and just put him on ignore. This is beyond principle at this point.Doesn't cost me anything. I don't spend any time these replies anymore. Which is a first for me, because I've always gone to the effort of giving everyone the basic human respect of a rational, considered reply even when they're attacking me, or when they have a weak case. But Rawma is just a broken record of lies and personal attacks, repeating the same lies and accusing everyone else of doing what he's doing, in some pathetic attempt to deflect blame.
Nothing new and nothing true, I see.I say something, you lie about it, I correct you, you repeat the same lies. There's nothing new under the Rawma sun, just the endless beating heat of indistinguishable lies.
I bet you can predict what rawma thinks on any particular topic just by knowing that he is left wing.
Its not being a contrarian at all. I would put people like Mistwell in that particular category.
rawma is the type of person who gets his talking points from places like CNN and NY Times which frees him from the need to be consistant. Therefore he is happy to complain about Trump wanting an aid package one second before the narrative changes to the opposite.
You and I may experience some kind of cognitive dissonance but for him it is just another Tuesday.
(f) REGIONAL PROGRAMS.—Funds appropriated by this Act shall be made available for assistance for Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other countries in South and Central Asia to significantly increase the recruitment, training, and retention of women in the judiciary, police, and other security forces, and to train judicial and security personnel in such countries to prevent and address gender-based violence, human trafficking, and other practices that disproportionately harm women and girls.And "climate change in Tibet" is presumably from "POLICY REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER RESOURCES ON THE TIBETAN PLATEAU" which seems at least as concerned with Chinese policies as climate change; it's also much shorter than "STATEMENT OF POLICY REGARDING THE SUCCESSION OR REINCARNATION OF THE DALAI LAMA".
I've backed up my claims; Pat just makes stuff up that he can't support. It is sad that Pat is trapped in an endless cycle of projection of his own dishonesty and thin skin.I've backed up all my claims. This is you, dishonestly projecting.
I've backed up my claims; Pat just makes stuff up that he can't support. It is sad that Pat is trapped in an endless cycle of projection of his own dishonesty and thin skin.I've backed up all my claims. This is you, dishonestly projecting.
Other way around. You've been preemptively accusing me of doing what you're doing, for dozens of posts, in an apparent attempt to deflect the blame for your own actions. That's not funny, it's sad.I've backed up my claims; Pat just makes stuff up that he can't support. It is sad that Pat is trapped in an endless cycle of projection of his own dishonesty and thin skin.I've backed up all my claims. This is you, dishonestly projecting.
You could not have demonstrated my observation any more thoroughly. LOL.
Other way around. You've been preemptively accusing me of doing what you're doing, for dozens of posts, in an apparent attempt to deflect the blame for your own actions. That's not funny, it's sad.I've backed up my claims; Pat just makes stuff up that he can't support. It is sad that Pat is trapped in an endless cycle of projection of his own dishonesty and thin skin.I've backed up all my claims. This is you, dishonestly projecting.
You could not have demonstrated my observation any more thoroughly. LOL.
This "nuh uh, you're the poopyhead not me!" back and forth is very productive. I feel informed and persuaded.
Pat is welcome to make his case, as I did. He apparently can't or won't. (My attempt to introduce another topic was widely ignored.)I have made my case, repeatedly. You haven't. At this stage, you're just resorting to bald-faced lies and false characterizations.
Pat is welcome to make his case, as I did. He apparently can't or won't. (My attempt to introduce another topic was widely ignored.)I have made my case, repeatedly. You haven't. At this stage, you're just resorting to bald-faced lies and false characterizations.
Anyone who's interested can go back and read all the previous posts, it's very clear. (I imagine nobody cares.)
I've called out your errors as you made them, and as you just noted, I've even repeated several later, when you asked. But every time I point out an error, you demand I point out another. That's absurd. You can troll the past history of the thread, if you want more example of your foolishness and perfidy. Your lies are nobody's responsibility except your own.Pat is welcome to make his case, as I did. He apparently can't or won't. (My attempt to introduce another topic was widely ignored.)I have made my case, repeatedly. You haven't. At this stage, you're just resorting to bald-faced lies and false characterizations.
Anyone who's interested can go back and read all the previous posts, it's very clear. (I imagine nobody cares.)
I asked you to list errors, excluding your claims about my opinions and the one or two bill nonsense, and you had nothing. Since you care enough to post forever, you could actually make one post where you list just one such error and expend less effort than posting forever
I've called out your errors as you made them, and as you just noted, I've even repeated several later, when you asked. But every time I point out an error, you demand I point out another. That's absurd. You can troll the past history of the thread, if you want more example of your foolishness and perfidy. Your lies are nobody's responsibility except your own.
No, you've claimed multiple errors but are never able to list them.One/two ring a bell?
No, you've claimed multiple errors but are never able to list them.One/two ring a bell?
One/two ring a bell?
You tacitly admitted you were wrong. Shame you don't have the integrity to come out and admit it.No, you've claimed multiple errors but are never able to list them.One/two ring a bell?
Does my repeated response ring a bell? And you have nothing else? LOL.
(https://i2.wp.com/semi-rad.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/xkcd-someone-is-wrong-on-the-internet.png?fit=500%2C550&ssl=1)Low investment makes it easy to continue forever.
Low investment makes it easy to continue forever.
You of all posters know that.
.
You tacitly admitted you were wrong. Shame you don't have the integrity to come out and admit it.No, you've claimed multiple errors but are never able to list them.One/two ring a bell?
Does my repeated response ring a bell? And you have nothing else? LOL.
As I said, I conceded that I did not consider the question, but since the question was not relevant to my post, that is hardly surprising and not an error; I didn't consider a lot of other irrelevant questions. If we're moving to tacit admissions, I'll take this post as your concession that you have nothing; qui tacet consentit.Then I'll take your post as a tacit admission that you were completely wrong about everything and for atonement you agree to wear a fursuit for 10 years and only speak in barks.
If it was at least amusing you may have a very very small point.It's really tedious. That's almost like amusing, right?
As I said, I conceded that I did not consider the question, but since the question was not relevant to my post, that is hardly surprising and not an error; I didn't consider a lot of other irrelevant questions. If we're moving to tacit admissions, I'll take this post as your concession that you have nothing; qui tacet consentit.Then I'll take your post as a tacit admission that you were completely wrong about everything and for atonement you agree to wear a fursuit for 10 years and only speak in barks.
bark bark BARK BARK bark bark barkYou implicitly admitted it. Get in the damn fursuit.
No, I deny your nonsensical assertion. If you made the assertion that I was wrong and I evaded discussing it, you might have a case. Still waiting for you to show the errors you assert; burden of proof is on you.You implicitly admitted it. Get in the damn fursuit.
ARF ARF ARF I'M WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING ARF ARF ARF ARF ARFCould you repeat that in pekinense?
Pat and rawma -- I can't even tell what you two are arguing about at this point, but I think it's probably better for both of your blood pressures to just take a break and go do something else you enjoy. I get worked up over stuff on this forum from time to time, and I find it helps a lot to take a break and have a beer or something.Seems like Cabin-Fever got them! Their turning into FURRIES before our very eyes!
A county-by-county breakdown outlining the presence of COVID-19 in all of Ohio's 88 counties can be found on the Ohio Public Health Advisory System's website. All 88 counties have a level of spread that is at least three times more than what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) considers high incidence.
Governor DeWine also discussed key measurements regarding incidence cases per 100,000 residents over two weeks, as well as regional COVID-19 ICU utilization.
"We saw new cases per capita at the statewide level increase since last week, which indicates that COVID-19 continues to spread in both urban and rural communities throughout Ohio," said Governor DeWine.
I know people like numbers so here are some from Ohio. We've had a complete mask mandate, where businesses are threated with shutdown by the state if they allow people w/o masks inside, for several months now. No lockdowns recently but we are under curfew from 10pm to 5am. According to the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation (who report the governor's press releases) update I got last Thursday:Does it match these numbers?QuoteA county-by-county breakdown outlining the presence of COVID-19 in all of Ohio's 88 counties can be found on the Ohio Public Health Advisory System's website. All 88 counties have a level of spread that is at least three times more than what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) considers high incidence.
Governor DeWine also discussed key measurements regarding incidence cases per 100,000 residents over two weeks, as well as regional COVID-19 ICU utilization.
"We saw new cases per capita at the statewide level increase since last week, which indicates that COVID-19 continues to spread in both urban and rural communities throughout Ohio," said Governor DeWine.
There is a pretty little info-graphic with one map showing the incidence rate and the other the ICU utilization. The numbers show average incidence up over the previous week from 656.6 to 739.8 while ICU utilization dropped from 28.8% to 26.8%.
It looks like the highest ICU utilization is somewhere around 35-40%. It is hard to tell because it's just one of those different shades of blue sliding scales. It is definitely under the 50% mark though.
I know people like numbers so here are some from Ohio. We've had a complete mask mandate, where businesses are threated with shutdown by the state if they allow people w/o masks inside, for several months now. No lockdowns recently but we are under curfew from 10pm to 5am. According to the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation (who report the governor's press releases) update I got last Thursday:Does it match these numbers?QuoteA county-by-county breakdown outlining the presence of COVID-19 in all of Ohio's 88 counties can be found on the Ohio Public Health Advisory System's website. All 88 counties have a level of spread that is at least three times more than what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) considers high incidence.
Governor DeWine also discussed key measurements regarding incidence cases per 100,000 residents over two weeks, as well as regional COVID-19 ICU utilization.
"We saw new cases per capita at the statewide level increase since last week, which indicates that COVID-19 continues to spread in both urban and rural communities throughout Ohio," said Governor DeWine.
There is a pretty little info-graphic with one map showing the incidence rate and the other the ICU utilization. The numbers show average incidence up over the previous week from 656.6 to 739.8 while ICU utilization dropped from 28.8% to 26.8%.
It looks like the highest ICU utilization is somewhere around 35-40%. It is hard to tell because it's just one of those different shades of blue sliding scales. It is definitely under the 50% mark though.
https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/covid-19/dashboards/key-metrics/hospitalizations
Overall covid patient counts have been steadily but slowly dropping since the start of the year. Covid patients in the ICU and on ventilators seem fairly stable. Overall ICU utilization has been hovering around 75%, but covid patients only make up about 20%. Only about a 1/4 of ventilators are in use.
I am a health care professional, and i agree that it is a good thing. There are a lot of other factors to consider too, but as far as ICU utilization goes, those are pretty good.I know people like numbers so here are some from Ohio. We've had a complete mask mandate, where businesses are threated with shutdown by the state if they allow people w/o masks inside, for several months now. No lockdowns recently but we are under curfew from 10pm to 5am. According to the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation (who report the governor's press releases) update I got last Thursday:Does it match these numbers?QuoteA county-by-county breakdown outlining the presence of COVID-19 in all of Ohio's 88 counties can be found on the Ohio Public Health Advisory System's website. All 88 counties have a level of spread that is at least three times more than what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) considers high incidence.
Governor DeWine also discussed key measurements regarding incidence cases per 100,000 residents over two weeks, as well as regional COVID-19 ICU utilization.
"We saw new cases per capita at the statewide level increase since last week, which indicates that COVID-19 continues to spread in both urban and rural communities throughout Ohio," said Governor DeWine.
There is a pretty little info-graphic with one map showing the incidence rate and the other the ICU utilization. The numbers show average incidence up over the previous week from 656.6 to 739.8 while ICU utilization dropped from 28.8% to 26.8%.
It looks like the highest ICU utilization is somewhere around 35-40%. It is hard to tell because it's just one of those different shades of blue sliding scales. It is definitely under the 50% mark though.
https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/covid-19/dashboards/key-metrics/hospitalizations
Overall covid patient counts have been steadily but slowly dropping since the start of the year. Covid patients in the ICU and on ventilators seem fairly stable. Overall ICU utilization has been hovering around 75%, but covid patients only make up about 20%. Only about a 1/4 of ventilators are in use.
Yes, my impression (and it is only an impression, I am not a health care professional) is that if you can keep the Covid ICU utilization under 30% then you are at least below the "highly-stressed" level. That should be a good thing.
Pat and rawma -- I can't even tell what you two are arguing about at this point, but I think it's probably better for both of your blood pressures to just take a break and go do something else you enjoy. I get worked up over stuff on this forum from time to time, and I find it helps a lot to take a break and have a beer or something.
I am a health care professional, and i agree that it is a good thing. There are a lot of other factors to consider too, but as far as ICU utilization goes, those are pretty good.I know people like numbers so here are some from Ohio. We've had a complete mask mandate, where businesses are threated with shutdown by the state if they allow people w/o masks inside, for several months now. No lockdowns recently but we are under curfew from 10pm to 5am. According to the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation (who report the governor's press releases) update I got last Thursday:Does it match these numbers?QuoteA county-by-county breakdown outlining the presence of COVID-19 in all of Ohio's 88 counties can be found on the Ohio Public Health Advisory System's website. All 88 counties have a level of spread that is at least three times more than what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) considers high incidence.
Governor DeWine also discussed key measurements regarding incidence cases per 100,000 residents over two weeks, as well as regional COVID-19 ICU utilization.
"We saw new cases per capita at the statewide level increase since last week, which indicates that COVID-19 continues to spread in both urban and rural communities throughout Ohio," said Governor DeWine.
There is a pretty little info-graphic with one map showing the incidence rate and the other the ICU utilization. The numbers show average incidence up over the previous week from 656.6 to 739.8 while ICU utilization dropped from 28.8% to 26.8%.
It looks like the highest ICU utilization is somewhere around 35-40%. It is hard to tell because it's just one of those different shades of blue sliding scales. It is definitely under the 50% mark though.
https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/covid-19/dashboards/key-metrics/hospitalizations
Overall covid patient counts have been steadily but slowly dropping since the start of the year. Covid patients in the ICU and on ventilators seem fairly stable. Overall ICU utilization has been hovering around 75%, but covid patients only make up about 20%. Only about a 1/4 of ventilators are in use.
Yes, my impression (and it is only an impression, I am not a health care professional) is that if you can keep the Covid ICU utilization under 30% then you are at least below the "highly-stressed" level. That should be a good thing.
I am a health care professional, and i agree that it is a good thing. There are a lot of other factors to consider too, but as far as ICU utilization goes, those are pretty good.The problem is state-wide averages aren't a particularly useful metric. If every hospital is running at 75% capacity, that's great. But if 1/2 the hospitals are running at 100% capacity and the other 1/2 are running at 50% capacity, that's terrible. A more useful measure would be the number or percentage of hospitals exceeding various thresholds.
Even that is prone to issues. For example,, a community hospital with 8 ICU beds needs to be differentiated from a major hospital with 150+ ICU beds. That's part of what I summed up as "a lot of other factors" but overall loads are a good place to start so long as your medical transport capacity can redirect/divert to balance those loads somewhat.I am a health care professional, and i agree that it is a good thing. There are a lot of other factors to consider too, but as far as ICU utilization goes, those are pretty good.The problem is state-wide averages aren't a particularly useful metric. If every hospital is running at 75% capacity, that's great. But if 1/2 the hospitals are running at 100% capacity and the other 1/2 are running at 50% capacity, that's terrible. A more useful measure would be the number or percentage of hospitals exceeding various thresholds.
Even that is prone to issues. For example,, a community hospital with 8 ICU beds needs to be differentiated from a major hospital with 150+ ICU beds. That's part of what I summed up as "a lot of other factors" but overall loads are a good place to start so long as your medical transport capacity can redirect/divert to balance those loads somewhat.I am a health care professional, and i agree that it is a good thing. There are a lot of other factors to consider too, but as far as ICU utilization goes, those are pretty good.The problem is state-wide averages aren't a particularly useful metric. If every hospital is running at 75% capacity, that's great. But if 1/2 the hospitals are running at 100% capacity and the other 1/2 are running at 50% capacity, that's terrible. A more useful measure would be the number or percentage of hospitals exceeding various thresholds.
Except hospitals are local, and patients tend to be transferred within regions, not within states. And that's exactly what broke down at the start of this surge. A lot of rural hospitals were reporting that they were being turned down, when they tried to transfer critical patients to regional centers capable of handling them. A better approach might involve focusing on regional capacity.Even that is prone to issues. For example,, a community hospital with 8 ICU beds needs to be differentiated from a major hospital with 150+ ICU beds. That's part of what I summed up as "a lot of other factors" but overall loads are a good place to start so long as your medical transport capacity can redirect/divert to balance those loads somewhat.I am a health care professional, and i agree that it is a good thing. There are a lot of other factors to consider too, but as far as ICU utilization goes, those are pretty good.The problem is state-wide averages aren't a particularly useful metric. If every hospital is running at 75% capacity, that's great. But if 1/2 the hospitals are running at 100% capacity and the other 1/2 are running at 50% capacity, that's terrible. A more useful measure would be the number or percentage of hospitals exceeding various thresholds.
The ICUs still not over whelmed?
Any day now, I am sure.
Pat and rawma -- I can't even tell what you two are arguing about at this point, but I think it's probably better for both of your blood pressures to just take a break and go do something else you enjoy. I get worked up over stuff on this forum from time to time, and I find it helps a lot to take a break and have a beer or something.Seems like Cabin-Fever got them! Their turning into FURRIES before our very eyes!
LQQK AWAY B~4 ITS 2 L8!!!1!
Damn it! And I thought I was on a roll! ;DPat and rawma -- I can't even tell what you two are arguing about at this point, but I think it's probably better for both of your blood pressures to just take a break and go do something else you enjoy. I get worked up over stuff on this forum from time to time, and I find it helps a lot to take a break and have a beer or something.Seems like Cabin-Fever got them! Their turning into FURRIES before our very eyes!
LQQK AWAY B~4 ITS 2 L8!!!1!
This time you make sense :D
The best part is about 50% of the country won't bat an eye at the bald faced hypocrisy. All of thier outrage and moralizing has been manufactured and it wont even register for these people. They will unironically think to themselves "right wingers saying the same thing a few months ago was bad because they weren't trusting the science, but now opening back up is good because it is trusting the science"
Clown world
The best part is about 50% of the country won't bat an eye at the bald faced hypocrisy. All of thier outrage and moralizing has been manufactured and it wont even register for these people. They will unironically think to themselves "right wingers saying the same thing a few months ago was bad because they weren't trusting the science, but now opening back up is good because it is trusting the science"
But here in California, we are experiencing higher covid-19 rates and has a tighter lockdown than we have in many months. The same is true across many other states.
The best part is about 50% of the country won't bat an eye at the bald faced hypocrisy. All of thier outrage and moralizing has been manufactured and it wont even register for these people. They will unironically think to themselves "right wingers saying the same thing a few months ago was bad because they weren't trusting the science, but now opening back up is good because it is trusting the science"
But here in California, we are experiencing higher covid-19 rates and has a tighter lockdown than we have in many months. The same is true across many other states.
Further, if this was about Donald Trump - why have there been lockdowns and other major measures in dozens of countries all over the world? Did Spain and Italy and dozens of other countries in the world all had lockdowns just to deal with Donald Trump?
Jhkim is right. It’s not about Donald Trump per se, it’s about the global reset initiative people like Trudeau and other Eurocrats are on record as saying the pandemic presents a convenient opportunity to pursue, that Trump incidentally was the biggest obstacle thereto. A *global* reset championed by European and US globalists would require Europe to lock down, too.
But we must always stop at the precise boundaries of how an unsympathetic argument is framed when we try to knock it down, taking it merely literally instead of seriously in our objections. This is how free speech expedites our coming together and why it is valuable in arriving at best solutions and next steps
The ICUs still not over whelmed?
Any day now, I am sure.
Reasonable responses to Shasarak's obvious sarcasm (easily detected by his use of black type) are a waste of time.
The ICUs still not over whelmed?
Any day now, I am sure.
For some, it's already happened. For others it may never happen. We aren't all having the same experience of Covid, not by a long shot.
The ICUs still not over whelmed?
Any day now, I am sure.
For some, it's already happened. For others it may never happen. We aren't all having the same experience of Covid, not by a long shot.
The ICUs still not over whelmed?
Any day now, I am sure.
For some, it's already happened. For others it may never happen. We aren't all having the same experience of Covid, not by a long shot.
Except it seems like it never happened only in the fevered imagination of a few poor souls.
The ICUs still not over whelmed?
Any day now, I am sure.
For some, it's already happened. For others it may never happen. We aren't all having the same experience of Covid, not by a long shot.
Except it seems like it never happened only in the fevered imagination of a few poor souls.
Maybe where you are. To be honest, it's kinda true where I am, here the hospitals braced themselves for an overwhelming surge that never came. Neither in the first wave, nor (so far, fingers crossed) in the second.
That's great.
Seriously, that's great, but I am capable of peeking out from my burrow and seeing that's not the case everywhere. And I don't live on a remote Pacific island, I live in mainland North America. I don't have to look very far afield to see where the whelm has become or is becoming overwhelming. We aren't all having the same experience of Covid. Peek out of your burrow for a moment.
The ICUs still not over whelmed?
Any day now, I am sure.
For some, it's already happened. For others it may never happen. We aren't all having the same experience of Covid, not by a long shot.
Except it seems like it never happened only in the fevered imagination of a few poor souls.
Maybe where you are. To be honest, it's kinda true where I am, here the hospitals braced themselves for an overwhelming surge that never came. Neither in the first wave, nor (so far, fingers crossed) in the second.
That's great.
Seriously, that's great, but I am capable of peeking out from my burrow and seeing that's not the case everywhere. And I don't live on a remote Pacific island, I live in mainland North America. I don't have to look very far afield to see where the whelm has become or is becoming overwhelming. We aren't all having the same experience of Covid. Peek out of your burrow for a moment.
That is the point, where is the beef?
That is the point, where is the beef?
Well, in the first wave when hospitals here cleared the decks for a possible surge, the "beef" was obvious in places like Milan, Guayaquil, and (closer to home) NYC.
That is the point, where is the beef?
Well, in the first wave when hospitals here cleared the decks for a possible surge, the "beef" was obvious in places like Milan, Guayaquil, and (closer to home) NYC.
Oh, I see. Your evidence that there is an imminent over whelming surge is that 8 months ago there was an over whelming surge.
Except it seems like it never happened only in the fevered imagination of a few poor souls.
That is the point, where is the beef?
Well, in the first wave when hospitals here cleared the decks for a possible surge, the "beef" was obvious in places like Milan, Guayaquil, and (closer to home) NYC.
Oh, I see. Your evidence that there is an imminent over whelming surge is that 8 months ago there was an over whelming surge.
Well, your assertion was that there was never an overwhelming surge, it was all only a fever dream. To wit:Except it seems like it never happened only in the fevered imagination of a few poor souls.
Never happened? I don't think so.
Biden will be tougher on China than President Trump because President Biden is very smart and strategic...
That is the point, where is the beef?
Well, in the first wave when hospitals here cleared the decks for a possible surge, the "beef" was obvious in places like Milan, Guayaquil, and (closer to home) NYC.
Oh, I see. Your evidence that there is an imminent over whelming surge is that 8 months ago there was an over whelming surge.
Well, your assertion was that there was never an overwhelming surge, it was all only a fever dream. To wit:Except it seems like it never happened only in the fevered imagination of a few poor souls.
Never happened? I don't think so.
That was in reference to the over whelming surge following Thanks Giving that never happened.
Okay. Thanks for the clarification. So "never" now means "not in the last eight weeks or so." Sounds like a kind of Gilbert & Sullivan take on the word "never," but fine, we can go with the new goalposts if you like.
So to be honest, I haven't been paying so much attention in the second wave since it has hardly happened here, but my impression is that both Montreal and Toronto in Canada, and Los Angeles and Phoenix in the US have experienced significant whelming hospital/ICU surges in this second wave that have pushed ICUs to the limits and beyond . There may be other cities with similar experience . But I'll let others with more first hand knowledge weigh in on those cases.
Um. It's a virus, I don't think it literally "gestates" at all. It maybe figuratively gestates...In the sense that the infection develops over time. Where are you going with this?Okay. Thanks for the clarification. So "never" now means "not in the last eight weeks or so." Sounds like a kind of Gilbert & Sullivan take on the word "never," but fine, we can go with the new goalposts if you like.
So to be honest, I haven't been paying so much attention in the second wave since it has hardly happened here, but my impression is that both Montreal and Toronto in Canada, and Los Angeles and Phoenix in the US have experienced significant whelming hospital/ICU surges in this second wave that have pushed ICUs to the limits and beyond . There may be other cities with similar experience . But I'll let others with more first hand knowledge weigh in on those cases.
Whats the gestation rate of the Chinese Wuhan Virus?
And also, does Canada celebrate American Thanks Giving?Canada celebrates Canadian Thanksgiving. Similar deal, different date. Also, interestingly, a COVID surge.
Um. It's a virus, I don't think it literally "gestates" at all. It maybe figuratively gestates...In the sense that the infection develops over time. Where are you going with this?Okay. Thanks for the clarification. So "never" now means "not in the last eight weeks or so." Sounds like a kind of Gilbert & Sullivan take on the word "never," but fine, we can go with the new goalposts if you like.
So to be honest, I haven't been paying so much attention in the second wave since it has hardly happened here, but my impression is that both Montreal and Toronto in Canada, and Los Angeles and Phoenix in the US have experienced significant whelming hospital/ICU surges in this second wave that have pushed ICUs to the limits and beyond . There may be other cities with similar experience . But I'll let others with more first hand knowledge weigh in on those cases.
Whats the gestation rate of the Chinese Wuhan Virus?And also, does Canada celebrate American Thanks Giving?Canada celebrates Canadian Thanksgiving. Similar deal, different date. Also, interestingly, a COVID surge.
So if that's your threshold, you're saying "never" now means "not in the last thirteen weeks or so?" Still a weird-ass definition of "never."
As part of the new surge of normalcy after the insurrectionist plague presidency, scientists are now suggesting we wear two masks instead of just one. Well, maybe you can get away with one if you're out in the open walking your dog, but definitely not if you're going to a supermarket.
https://www.npr.org/2021/01/26/960855995/some-health-experts-suggest-double-masking-as-new-coronavirus-variants-spread
So normal. Perfectly normal.
Who remembers FAUCI before COVID-19?
Here's a good video from a man who's made of promises:
Expect to wear those masks well into the 2050s!
While everyone was witnessing the spectacle of a demented old hair-sniffer and his knee-pad wielding running mate lying through their teeth to 'uphold the Constitution'... it seems suddenly Covid is harder to catch now.
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
Suddenly, now you need to be presenting with symptoms and have TWO PCR-positive results.
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.While everyone was witnessing the spectacle of a demented old hair-sniffer and his knee-pad wielding running mate lying through their teeth to 'uphold the Constitution'... it seems suddenly Covid is harder to catch now.
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
Suddenly, now you need to be presenting with symptoms and have TWO PCR-positive results.
That is so not what that link says. WTF are you even reading if that's what you got from that link?
Unless I'm missing something, that just says when the result is a weak positive and the result doesn't match the symptoms, it's a good idea to go back and test again.I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.While everyone was witnessing the spectacle of a demented old hair-sniffer and his knee-pad wielding running mate lying through their teeth to 'uphold the Constitution'... it seems suddenly Covid is harder to catch now.
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
Suddenly, now you need to be presenting with symptoms and have TWO PCR-positive results.
That is so not what that link says. WTF are you even reading if that's what you got from that link?
But when suddenly the WHO recommends two PCR tests and presenting symptoms for a positive diagnosis, where prior to this they only suggested one? It doesn't pass the smell test.
Meanwhile, in what is surely coincidence, Governor Newsom just canceled his stay at home order for California. That couldn't have anything to do with a recall petition that, last I checked, had 80 percent of the signatures needed to force the issue. Surely not.
Now shut up and go burn down some businesses like a good little brownshirt.
Repeating a test for verification isn't a nefarious scheme, it's a common practice in medicine. Of course, there are nut jobs that believe all of medicine is a nefarious scheme...Unless I'm missing something, that just says when the result is a weak positive and the result doesn't match the symptoms, it's a good idea to go back and test again.I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.While everyone was witnessing the spectacle of a demented old hair-sniffer and his knee-pad wielding running mate lying through their teeth to 'uphold the Constitution'... it seems suddenly Covid is harder to catch now.
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
Suddenly, now you need to be presenting with symptoms and have TWO PCR-positive results.
That is so not what that link says. WTF are you even reading if that's what you got from that link?
But when suddenly the WHO recommends two PCR tests and presenting symptoms for a positive diagnosis, where prior to this they only suggested one? It doesn't pass the smell test.
Meanwhile, in what is surely coincidence, Governor Newsom just canceled his stay at home order for California. That couldn't have anything to do with a recall petition that, last I checked, had 80 percent of the signatures needed to force the issue. Surely not.
Now shut up and go burn down some businesses like a good little brownshirt.
Except that prior to this, a single PCR test was all that was needed.Unless I'm missing something, that just says when the result is a weak positive and the result doesn't match the symptoms, it's a good idea to go back and test again.I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.While everyone was witnessing the spectacle of a demented old hair-sniffer and his knee-pad wielding running mate lying through their teeth to 'uphold the Constitution'... it seems suddenly Covid is harder to catch now.
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
Suddenly, now you need to be presenting with symptoms and have TWO PCR-positive results.
That is so not what that link says. WTF are you even reading if that's what you got from that link?
But when suddenly the WHO recommends two PCR tests and presenting symptoms for a positive diagnosis, where prior to this they only suggested one? It doesn't pass the smell test.
Meanwhile, in what is surely coincidence, Governor Newsom just canceled his stay at home order for California. That couldn't have anything to do with a recall petition that, last I checked, had 80 percent of the signatures needed to force the issue. Surely not.
Now shut up and go burn down some businesses like a good little brownshirt.
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.While everyone was witnessing the spectacle of a demented old hair-sniffer and his knee-pad wielding running mate lying through their teeth to 'uphold the Constitution'... it seems suddenly Covid is harder to catch now.
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
Suddenly, now you need to be presenting with symptoms and have TWO PCR-positive results.
That is so not what that link says. WTF are you even reading if that's what you got from that link?
But when suddenly the WHO recommends two PCR tests and presenting symptoms for a positive diagnosis, where prior to this they only suggested one? It doesn't pass the smell test.
Meanwhile, in what is surely coincidence, Governor Newsom just canceled his stay at home order for California. That couldn't have anything to do with a recall petition that, last I checked, had 80 percent of the signatures needed to force the issue. Surely not.
Now shut up and go burn down some businesses like a good little brownshirt.
Someone's salty.I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.While everyone was witnessing the spectacle of a demented old hair-sniffer and his knee-pad wielding running mate lying through their teeth to 'uphold the Constitution'... it seems suddenly Covid is harder to catch now.
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
Suddenly, now you need to be presenting with symptoms and have TWO PCR-positive results.
That is so not what that link says. WTF are you even reading if that's what you got from that link?
But when suddenly the WHO recommends two PCR tests and presenting symptoms for a positive diagnosis, where prior to this they only suggested one? It doesn't pass the smell test.
Meanwhile, in what is surely coincidence, Governor Newsom just canceled his stay at home order for California. That couldn't have anything to do with a recall petition that, last I checked, had 80 percent of the signatures needed to force the issue. Surely not.
Now shut up and go burn down some businesses like a good little brownshirt.
My dear Mr. Asshole. First, the study does not say what you seem to think it says. At all. Your reading is, frankly, bizarre. And when I say it doesn't say what you think it says, I don't mean you're misinterpreting it, I mean LITERALLY it doesn't say any of that. Did you link to the wrong study? Here's a hint, the word "symptom" doesn't even appear in it. It's a study about how to carefully read results for specimens tested using PCR methodology, and how there is concern that they're not following the instructions, and that a second test might be needed in cases where SOMEONE FUCKED UP IN FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS resulting in weak results. That's not "the virus isn't as contagious as we thought" it's "Of Jesus, fucking humans are not following the instructions and we need to issue guidelines to remind people that if they fuck up they need to re-do it."
Second, if you have me confused with someone who supports Gov Newsom, let me disabuse you of that sadly mistaken impression right now. I not only have signed the petition to recall Gov Newsom but I have been actively collecting and submitting signatures, as a signature taker, for quite a while now. I've gotten Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, and even one Green Party member to sign the petitions to recall Newsom. I loath Gov Newsom.
Finally, I run a small business. I do not support any attacks on small businesses, and if you think I had during the BLM riots, you are delusional.
In conclusion, literally everything you said was wrong, and you might be brain damaged.
Did you link to the wrong study? Here's a hint, the word "symptom" doesn't even appear in it. It's a study about how to carefully read results for specimens tested using PCR methodology, and how there is concern that they're not following the instructions, and that a second test might be needed in cases where SOMEONE FUCKED UP IN FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS resulting in weak results. That's not "the virus isn't as contagious as we thought" it's "Of Jesus, fucking humans are not following the instructions and we need to issue guidelines to remind people that if they fuck up they need to re-do it."It doesn't say symptoms, but it does say "clinical presentation", which in context means the same thing. Ghostmaker is right on that point, but wrong about the significance of the two tests. It literally just says to RTFM, oh and if you get a weak positive result, double check it.
Someone's salty.I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.While everyone was witnessing the spectacle of a demented old hair-sniffer and his knee-pad wielding running mate lying through their teeth to 'uphold the Constitution'... it seems suddenly Covid is harder to catch now.
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
Suddenly, now you need to be presenting with symptoms and have TWO PCR-positive results.
That is so not what that link says. WTF are you even reading if that's what you got from that link?
But when suddenly the WHO recommends two PCR tests and presenting symptoms for a positive diagnosis, where prior to this they only suggested one? It doesn't pass the smell test.
Meanwhile, in what is surely coincidence, Governor Newsom just canceled his stay at home order for California. That couldn't have anything to do with a recall petition that, last I checked, had 80 percent of the signatures needed to force the issue. Surely not.
Now shut up and go burn down some businesses like a good little brownshirt.
My dear Mr. Asshole. First, the study does not say what you seem to think it says. At all. Your reading is, frankly, bizarre. And when I say it doesn't say what you think it says, I don't mean you're misinterpreting it, I mean LITERALLY it doesn't say any of that. Did you link to the wrong study? Here's a hint, the word "symptom" doesn't even appear in it. It's a study about how to carefully read results for specimens tested using PCR methodology, and how there is concern that they're not following the instructions, and that a second test might be needed in cases where SOMEONE FUCKED UP IN FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS resulting in weak results. That's not "the virus isn't as contagious as we thought" it's "Of Jesus, fucking humans are not following the instructions and we need to issue guidelines to remind people that if they fuck up they need to re-do it."
Second, if you have me confused with someone who supports Gov Newsom, let me disabuse you of that sadly mistaken impression right now. I not only have signed the petition to recall Gov Newsom but I have been actively collecting and submitting signatures, as a signature taker, for quite a while now. I've gotten Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, and even one Green Party member to sign the petitions to recall Newsom. I loath Gov Newsom.
Finally, I run a small business. I do not support any attacks on small businesses, and if you think I had during the BLM riots, you are delusional.
In conclusion, literally everything you said was wrong, and you might be brain damaged.
You are thrice-damned; by action, association, and belief. Your words are worthless, as you have consistently supported those who seek to break small businesses, support so-called 'elite' oligarchs such as Newsom, and have raged against the slightest question of our elections having possible flaws and vulnerabilities.
You are a joke, and I dearly hope it was worth it to run interference for your masters.
Does this guidance result in a significantly different CNN chyron for daily new cases. I think that will be something to watch
I would care what you think, but that would require me to expend unnecessary energy.Someone's salty.I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.While everyone was witnessing the spectacle of a demented old hair-sniffer and his knee-pad wielding running mate lying through their teeth to 'uphold the Constitution'... it seems suddenly Covid is harder to catch now.
https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
Suddenly, now you need to be presenting with symptoms and have TWO PCR-positive results.
That is so not what that link says. WTF are you even reading if that's what you got from that link?
But when suddenly the WHO recommends two PCR tests and presenting symptoms for a positive diagnosis, where prior to this they only suggested one? It doesn't pass the smell test.
Meanwhile, in what is surely coincidence, Governor Newsom just canceled his stay at home order for California. That couldn't have anything to do with a recall petition that, last I checked, had 80 percent of the signatures needed to force the issue. Surely not.
Now shut up and go burn down some businesses like a good little brownshirt.
My dear Mr. Asshole. First, the study does not say what you seem to think it says. At all. Your reading is, frankly, bizarre. And when I say it doesn't say what you think it says, I don't mean you're misinterpreting it, I mean LITERALLY it doesn't say any of that. Did you link to the wrong study? Here's a hint, the word "symptom" doesn't even appear in it. It's a study about how to carefully read results for specimens tested using PCR methodology, and how there is concern that they're not following the instructions, and that a second test might be needed in cases where SOMEONE FUCKED UP IN FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS resulting in weak results. That's not "the virus isn't as contagious as we thought" it's "Of Jesus, fucking humans are not following the instructions and we need to issue guidelines to remind people that if they fuck up they need to re-do it."
Second, if you have me confused with someone who supports Gov Newsom, let me disabuse you of that sadly mistaken impression right now. I not only have signed the petition to recall Gov Newsom but I have been actively collecting and submitting signatures, as a signature taker, for quite a while now. I've gotten Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, and even one Green Party member to sign the petitions to recall Newsom. I loath Gov Newsom.
Finally, I run a small business. I do not support any attacks on small businesses, and if you think I had during the BLM riots, you are delusional.
In conclusion, literally everything you said was wrong, and you might be brain damaged.
You are thrice-damned; by action, association, and belief. Your words are worthless, as you have consistently supported those who seek to break small businesses, support so-called 'elite' oligarchs such as Newsom, and have raged against the slightest question of our elections having possible flaws and vulnerabilities.
You are a joke, and I dearly hope it was worth it to run interference for your masters.
Oh I would looooooove to know when I have ever even vaguely supported, in any way, Governor Newsom. Go on, this should be good.
Or how I have not supported small businesses, despite being a strong advocate for and member of the NFIB, and consistently voting in local and state elections for anyone who supports small businesses and against those who do not. How I have not supported small businesses, though I often rage against those who lump in small and medium sized businesses with their rants about "corporations" when they really mean "mega corporations", and routinely go on rants about how much I detest regulations on small businesses with numerous direct examples from my own small business which has been in my family since 1946. This should be good too.
Also, I love how you try the "Look over there, a banana!" cartoonish distraction of "but the Trump election!" as if that had anything to do with what we're talking about with this Covid report or Newsom.
Again, I think you might be brain damaged. It's one of the only rational explanations for your irrational behavior and thought processes. You might possibly be the stupidest poster I've ever encountered. And that is saying something, since I've been on message boards since they were run on 300 baud modems and were called BBS'es. You might be peak idiot.
ALBANY, N.Y. — The New York State attorney general accused the Cuomo administration of undercounting coronavirus-related deaths at nursing homes by as much as 50 percent, according to a report released on Thursday.
The count of deaths in state nursing homes has been a source of controversy for Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and state Health Department officials, who have been sensitive to any suggestion that they played any role in the number of nursing home deaths, which the state put at more than 8,500.
They have also been accused of obscuring a more accurate estimate of nursing home deaths, because the state only counted deaths at the actual facilities, rather than including deaths of residents who were transferred to a hospital and died there.
In the 76-page report released by the attorney general, Letitia James, a survey of nursing homes found consistent discrepancies between deaths reported to the attorney general’s investigators and those officially released by the Health Department.
In one instance, an unnamed facility reported 11 confirmed and presumed deaths to the Health Department as happening on site through early August. The attorney general’s survey of that same facility, however, found 40 deaths, including 27 at the home and 13 in hospitals.
“Preliminary data obtained by O.A.G. suggests that many nursing home residents died from Covid-19 in hospitals after being transferred from their nursing homes, which is not reflected in D.O.H.’s published total nursing home death data,” a summary of the report’s findings reads.
The findings of Ms. James, a Democrat, could put her in direct conflict with Mr. Cuomo, the state’s three-term Democratic incumbent, who has touted his and his administration’s response to the coronavirus crisis, despite more than 42,000 deaths in the state.
Ms. James’s report also found a number of homes that “failed to comply with critical infection control policies,” including not isolating residents who had tested positive for the virus or screening employees for it.
The death toll in the state’s nursing homes has been a source of agony for residents and their families, and a political liability for Mr. Cuomo, who has pushed back on accusations that his administration did not do enough to safeguard a highly vulnerable population. In particular, Mr. Cuomo was criticized for a March 25 memo from the Health Department, which ordered nursing homes to accept patients who had tested positive.
In late July, the Health Department released a report that refuted the assertion that that policy might have led to outbreaks in nursing homes, finding instead that most of those patients “were no longer contagious when admitted and therefore were not a source of infection.” The report also concluded that the virus was instead spread by employees who did not know they were contagious.
Lockdowns predicted to extend through 2024.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-life-wont-return-to-normal-for-at-least-two-years-expert-warns-saying-pandemic-isnt-over-until-its-over-globally-12203057?fbclid=IwAR20p7pIM2EcDqH0Bdf0CxQQ6hcjTwfWSSuIgBLovYcO0K-_wUmkQVld6uk
That's a long fucking 2 weeks to flatten the curve.
Lockdowns predicted to extend through 2024.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-life-wont-return-to-normal-for-at-least-two-years-expert-warns-saying-pandemic-isnt-over-until-its-over-globally-12203057?fbclid=IwAR20p7pIM2EcDqH0Bdf0CxQQ6hcjTwfWSSuIgBLovYcO0K-_wUmkQVld6uk
That's a long fucking 2 weeks to flatten the curve.
No, not "lockdowns". It says life won't return to "normal" until then, not that people will be locked down until then. It says, "We're still going to be living in some form of restrictions - travel restrictions, border controls." They are referring to airport screenings of people from foreign nations which are having active outbreaks.
So you didn't even read the article you were posting. You literally looked at the headline assumed wrongly what it said, and posted it. That or you did read it and lied. One or the other, both are fucked up on some level.
If these kinds of lockdowns are going to continue for years, then small, local businesses need to know so they can plan accordingly, and close down instead of limping along on government handouts until they finally dry up.Consider which policies would be most prudent and sensible, most likely to benefit small businesses, community groups, and the most vulnerable in society, and will be most respectful of human rights, autonomy and dignity.
Lockdowns predicted to extend through 2024.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-life-wont-return-to-normal-for-at-least-two-years-expert-warns-saying-pandemic-isnt-over-until-its-over-globally-12203057?fbclid=IwAR20p7pIM2EcDqH0Bdf0CxQQ6hcjTwfWSSuIgBLovYcO0K-_wUmkQVld6uk
That's a long fucking 2 weeks to flatten the curve.
No, not "lockdowns". It says life won't return to "normal" until then, not that people will be locked down until then. It says, "We're still going to be living in some form of restrictions - travel restrictions, border controls." They are referring to airport screenings of people from foreign nations which are having active outbreaks.
So you didn't even read the article you were posting. You literally looked at the headline assumed wrongly what it said, and posted it. That or you did read it and lied. One or the other, both are fucked up on some level.
Dude. The only two things we have to "fight" Covid are masks and lockdowns of various severity. We're locked down here in western WA. We're not welded into our houses, but businesses continue to be restricted or completely closed since fucking March of last year. If these kinds of lockdowns are going to continue for years, then small, local businesses need to know so they can plan accordingly, and close down instead of limping along on government handouts until they finally dry up.
Don't get caught up in semantics. It's a lockdown. if I can't life my life like I did in November 2019, it's a lockdown. Semantics is semantics. Italy told their government they'd had enough. Italy. Do you remember Italy? Even they've had enough.
Nothing you just said has anything to do with what that article said. NOTHING. Screening travelers arriving from foreign nations is not a lockdown on small local businesses.Locking down the borders is a type of lockdown. It's a vague term which is used to mean a lot of different things, from border controls to business closings to individuals under isolation or quarantine orders. That's why I always try to qualify or otherwise explain how I'm using the term, because it leads to people talking past each other.
Don't get caught up in semantics. It's a lockdown. if I can't life my life like I did in November 2019, it's a lockdown. Semantics is semantics. Italy told their government they'd had enough. Italy. Do you remember Italy? Even they've had enough.
The article that he posted is talking about the US needed to continue to have travel restrictions on people coming into the nation, like screening for the virus when you arrive at an airport from a foreign nation. That's not a fucking lockdown, by any definition of that term. Unless you thought, for example, that screening for terrorists at airports was also a "lockdown" because that is also a travel restriction?
Speaking to Sky News, Dr Clare Wenham, assistant professor of global health policy at London School of Economics, said the COVID-19 pandemic will not be over until the world's population is protected.
"At the moment, the data is showing it's going to be 2023/24 before the global vaccines are distributed to everybody," she said.
"That's a long time. And distributing some now might be able to get us back to normal life sooner."
Even once the UK population had been vaccinated, restrictions such as border controls would continue to exist because of the threat posed by resistant coronavirus variants being brought in from outside, she said.
Sir Jeremy Farrar, a member of the government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), has also warned that vaccinating "a lot of people in a few countries, leaving the virus unchecked in large parts of the world, will lead to more variants emerging".
Nothing you just said has anything to do with what that article said. NOTHING. Screening travelers arriving from foreign nations is not a lockdown on small local businesses.Locking down the borders is a type of lockdown. It's a vague term which is used to mean a lot of different things, from border controls to business closings to individuals under isolation or quarantine orders. That's why I always try to qualify or otherwise explain how I'm using the term, because it leads to people talking past each other.
You're correct that the article is primarily talking about travel restrictions not business closings. That's a valid point. But Ratman's first post just said lockdowns, without any qualifications like "small local business". And if you read the article closely there are a couple case where they suggest other measures may also be necessary, though they don't go into any details, so it's not just about borders. And travel restrictions can definitely impact small local businesses, because international trade is so integrated into local markets.
I would think promoting vaccinations might be something to add to your "masks and lockdowns" list of things governments are doing (even if it's not the government directly vaccinating people). There's also educating people on the virus, but that's shown itself to be almost useless in the face of widespread disinformation and bullheaded stupidity.Nothing you just said has anything to do with what that article said. NOTHING. Screening travelers arriving from foreign nations is not a lockdown on small local businesses.Locking down the borders is a type of lockdown. It's a vague term which is used to mean a lot of different things, from border controls to business closings to individuals under isolation or quarantine orders. That's why I always try to qualify or otherwise explain how I'm using the term, because it leads to people talking past each other.
You're correct that the article is primarily talking about travel restrictions not business closings. That's a valid point. But Ratman's first post just said lockdowns, without any qualifications like "small local business". And if you read the article closely there are a couple case where they suggest other measures may also be necessary, though they don't go into any details, so it's not just about borders. And travel restrictions can definitely impact small local businesses, because international trade is so integrated into local markets.
Masks and lockdowns are the only things governments are using to fight the Coof. If the pandemic is expected to last for the next 2-3 years, the lockdowns will continue.
Mistwell seems upset that I drew that conclusion, but I'd like to ask anyone if my statement underlined is incorrect.
I would think promoting vaccinations might be something to add to your "masks and lockdowns" list of things governments are doing (even if it's not the government directly vaccinating people). There's also educating people on the virus, but that's shown itself to be almost useless in the face of widespread disinformation and bullheaded stupidity.Nothing you just said has anything to do with what that article said. NOTHING. Screening travelers arriving from foreign nations is not a lockdown on small local businesses.Locking down the borders is a type of lockdown. It's a vague term which is used to mean a lot of different things, from border controls to business closings to individuals under isolation or quarantine orders. That's why I always try to qualify or otherwise explain how I'm using the term, because it leads to people talking past each other.
You're correct that the article is primarily talking about travel restrictions not business closings. That's a valid point. But Ratman's first post just said lockdowns, without any qualifications like "small local business". And if you read the article closely there are a couple case where they suggest other measures may also be necessary, though they don't go into any details, so it's not just about borders. And travel restrictions can definitely impact small local businesses, because international trade is so integrated into local markets.
Masks and lockdowns are the only things governments are using to fight the Coof. If the pandemic is expected to last for the next 2-3 years, the lockdowns will continue.
Mistwell seems upset that I drew that conclusion, but I'd like to ask anyone if my statement underlined is incorrect.
There's a huge variation in the types of lockdowns, and you missed the biggest weapon in their arsenal: Persuasion. Public health's primary responsibility isn't authoritarian shit like shutting down small businesses or banning evictions, it's informing the public and encouraging them to voluntarily engage in safe behavior. Examples include hand washing, physical distancing, ventilation, temperature checks, discouraging certain types of gatherings, and so on.Nothing you just said has anything to do with what that article said. NOTHING. Screening travelers arriving from foreign nations is not a lockdown on small local businesses.Locking down the borders is a type of lockdown. It's a vague term which is used to mean a lot of different things, from border controls to business closings to individuals under isolation or quarantine orders. That's why I always try to qualify or otherwise explain how I'm using the term, because it leads to people talking past each other.
You're correct that the article is primarily talking about travel restrictions not business closings. That's a valid point. But Ratman's first post just said lockdowns, without any qualifications like "small local business". And if you read the article closely there are a couple case where they suggest other measures may also be necessary, though they don't go into any details, so it's not just about borders. And travel restrictions can definitely impact small local businesses, because international trade is so integrated into local markets.
Masks and lockdowns are the only things governments are using to fight the Coof. If the pandemic is expected to last for the next 2-3 years, the lockdowns will continue.
Mistwell seems upset that I drew that conclusion, but I'd like to ask anyone if my statement underlined is incorrect.
I would think promoting vaccinations might be something to add to your "masks and lockdowns" list of things governments are doing (even if it's not the government directly vaccinating people). There's also educating people on the virus, but that's shown itself to be almost useless in the face of widespread disinformation and bullheaded stupidity.Nothing you just said has anything to do with what that article said. NOTHING. Screening travelers arriving from foreign nations is not a lockdown on small local businesses.Locking down the borders is a type of lockdown. It's a vague term which is used to mean a lot of different things, from border controls to business closings to individuals under isolation or quarantine orders. That's why I always try to qualify or otherwise explain how I'm using the term, because it leads to people talking past each other.
You're correct that the article is primarily talking about travel restrictions not business closings. That's a valid point. But Ratman's first post just said lockdowns, without any qualifications like "small local business". And if you read the article closely there are a couple case where they suggest other measures may also be necessary, though they don't go into any details, so it's not just about borders. And travel restrictions can definitely impact small local businesses, because international trade is so integrated into local markets.
Masks and lockdowns are the only things governments are using to fight the Coof. If the pandemic is expected to last for the next 2-3 years, the lockdowns will continue.
Mistwell seems upset that I drew that conclusion, but I'd like to ask anyone if my statement underlined is incorrect.
Vaccinations are only being rolled out now. And they are having distribution issues. I'd wait to see the numbers on distribution and the results.
I don't expect the lockdowns will be eased if the vaccination efforts have no or little effect on the numbers.
Don't get caught up in semantics. It's a lockdown. if I can't life my life like I did in November 2019, it's a lockdown. Semantics is semantics. Italy told their government they'd had enough. Italy. Do you remember Italy? Even they've had enough.
The article that he posted is talking about the US needed to continue to have travel restrictions on people coming into the nation, like screening for the virus when you arrive at an airport from a foreign nation. That's not a fucking lockdown, by any definition of that term. Unless you thought, for example, that screening for terrorists at airports was also a "lockdown" because that is also a travel restriction?
Resteraunts closed but bars stay open.
Do you have any citations for that? I've seen tons of rhetoric and very little data on the topic, but the data I've seen suggests spread in businesses like bars and restaurants is quite low.Resteraunts closed but bars stay open.
If that's what's happening where you are, then yes I agree, closing restaurants but not bars seems arbitrary and silly.
When I look back at past exposure alerts and case clusters where I am (leaving aside long term care facilities), the far and away number one risk is commercial airline flights. By a huge margin.
Next is bars, restaurants and gyms. More or less equally. It makes no sense to treat bars, restaurants and gyms differently from each other.
Do you have any citations for that? I've seen tons of rhetoric and very little data on the topic, but the data I've seen suggests spread in businesses like bars and restaurants is quite low.Resteraunts closed but bars stay open.
If that's what's happening where you are, then yes I agree, closing restaurants but not bars seems arbitrary and silly.
When I look back at past exposure alerts and case clusters where I am (leaving aside long term care facilities), the far and away number one risk is commercial airline flights. By a huge margin.
Next is bars, restaurants and gyms. More or less equally. It makes no sense to treat bars, restaurants and gyms differently from each other.
https://www.newsweek.com/restaurants-bars-account-less-2-percent-new-covid-19-cases-new-york-1554206
contantly taking my mask off and putting it back on again between bites.
Unfortunately, no, I can't. Locally, those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear. At present, they are dominated by recent exposures on a passenger ferry (not a typical risk location over the past year). I'd have to dig around to see if the older cases are archived anywhere I can find them.Shame. If we lived in an abnormal unpoliticized world, there would have been a wave of shutdowns based on essentially gut feelings about which businesses were highest risk, but then after a few weeks we'd have seen reports like "well, ach-tually, 95% of all cases have been traced to occult bookstores, and gyms and hair salons are totally safe". But we're not seeing that. Sure, some governmental entities have refused to provide the data and a few have been caught lying about it, but what about all the rest? There's been nearly dead silence on the topic. We're still in the gut feeling stage, and it doesn't even appear to be a topic considered worth of conversation.
contantly taking my mask off and putting it back on again between bites.
Really? Between bites? I dunno, bars and restaurants are open here and you have to wear one coming in, and moving around the room, but once you're at your table, the mask stays off.
Clearly "lockdown" doesn't mean the same thing everwhere. But then, I guess we always knew that.
Unfortunately, no, I can't. Locally, those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear. At present, they are dominated by recent exposures on a passenger ferry (not a typical risk location over the past year). I'd have to dig around to see if the older cases are archived anywhere I can find them.Shame. If we lived in an abnormal unpoliticized world, there would have been a wave of shutdowns based on essentially gut feelings about which businesses were highest risk, but then after a few weeks we'd have seen reports like "well, ach-tually, 95% of all cases have been traced to occult bookstores, and gyms and hair salons are totally safe". But we're not seeing that.
A preliminary analysis of 110 COVID-19 cases in Japan found that the odds of transmitting the pathogen in a closed environment was more than 18 times greater than in an open-air space. And the authors concluded that confined spaces could promote superspreader events. (The study has not yet been peer-reviewed.) Another preliminary preprint study, by researchers in London, examined clusters of COVID-19 cases and found that nearly all of them were indoor or indoor-outdoor settings. The largest clusters were found in indoor spaces such as nursing homes, churches, food-processing plants, schools, shopping areas, worker dormitories, prisons and ships.Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-superspreading-events-drive-most-covid-19-spread1/
Unfortunately, no, I can't. Locally, those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear. At present, they are dominated by recent exposures on a passenger ferry (not a typical risk location over the past year). I'd have to dig around to see if the older cases are archived anywhere I can find them.Shame. If we lived in an abnormal unpoliticized world, there would have been a wave of shutdowns based on essentially gut feelings about which businesses were highest risk, but then after a few weeks we'd have seen reports like "well, ach-tually, 95% of all cases have been traced to occult bookstores, and gyms and hair salons are totally safe". But we're not seeing that. Sure, some governmental entities have refused to provide the data and a few have been caught lying about it, but what about all the rest? There's been nearly dead silence on the topic. We're still in the gut feeling stage, and it doesn't even appear to be a topic considered worth of conversation.
Unfortunately, no, I can't. Locally, those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear. At present, they are dominated by recent exposures on a passenger ferry (not a typical risk location over the past year). I'd have to dig around to see if the older cases are archived anywhere I can find them.Shame. If we lived in an abnormal unpoliticized world, there would have been a wave of shutdowns based on essentially gut feelings about which businesses were highest risk, but then after a few weeks we'd have seen reports like "well, ach-tually, 95% of all cases have been traced to occult bookstores, and gyms and hair salons are totally safe". But we're not seeing that.
I don't think that data is easily generalizable, though. It's not that all restaurants have the same risk - it depends on their practices, setup, and clients. There are countries where contact tracing has been successful - like South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, and Japan. Partly, that has meant that people there having given up a fair amount of privacy to share tracking data. From data especially there, we definitely see some trends. Superspreader events are a main source - it's not that any one type of business is inherently more risky than another. It's mostly about being indoors, breathing in proximity.QuoteA preliminary analysis of 110 COVID-19 cases in Japan found that the odds of transmitting the pathogen in a closed environment was more than 18 times greater than in an open-air space. And the authors concluded that confined spaces could promote superspreader events. (The study has not yet been peer-reviewed.) Another preliminary preprint study, by researchers in London, examined clusters of COVID-19 cases and found that nearly all of them were indoor or indoor-outdoor settings. The largest clusters were found in indoor spaces such as nursing homes, churches, food-processing plants, schools, shopping areas, worker dormitories, prisons and ships.Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-superspreading-events-drive-most-covid-19-spread1/
There are more links to research in the article. Number of people, time together, spacing, and how hard they are breathing all make a difference. Singing, speaking, and aerobic exercise all produce more transmission - we see more spread from exercise than from yoga, for example.
I think the staged restrictions in California have aligned pretty well with this research - there are capacity restrictions on indoor spaces that reduce risk and separate people more. I think a key problem is that a lot of people ignore the guidelines and have large private gatherings - hence the post-holiday spike. I don't see any clear solution for that.
those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear.And here Down Under we got lots of exposure alerts for supermarkets - but not one case as a result of a customer going to the supermarket when someone else covid+ was there. Not one. Between staff at the place, yes. Especially staff working in coolrooms. But never from staff to customer, or between customers. Yet countless alerts for the places.
Apparently, I live in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Or you live in a hypercharged abnormally politicized one. Not sure which, but the scenario you outlined is precisely what happened here. Case in point, hairdressers. Initially assumed there was no way they could operate safely in a covid environment, and they were shut down. But public health was not in the business of defining "essential" businesses or closing by sectors, it was all about protocols. Hairdressers presented reasonable protocols and were allowed to reopen. To this day no case locally has ever been traced to a hairdresser. Consequently, they go about their business.Clearly you don't, because you just said you can't provide a single citation, which fully supports the idea nobody is out there sharing the data that demonstrates which businesses are hotspots, and which aren't. All we have is rhetoric and unsupported claims.
I don't think that data is easily generalizable, though. It's not that all restaurants have the same risk - it depends on their practices, setup, and clients. There are countries where contact tracing has been successful - like South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, and Japan. Partly, that has meant that people there having given up a fair amount of privacy to share tracking data. From data especially there, we definitely see some trends. Superspreader events are a main source - it's not that any one type of business is inherently more risky than another. It's mostly about being indoors, breathing in proximity.Then we should just ignore data? I can't believe you'd argue that. And even if you were, it should still be available.
Most significant are the superspreading events. Around the world we're seeing more and more studies showing (for example) that 10% of people cause 80% of the infections, 20% cause 20%, and 70% infect nobody at all. Most significant are those 10% who spread to a stack of people.Thanks for the links.
Of note: Phase 2 still involves heavy restrictions. 25% capacity limit, 6 feet distance and masking when not eating or drinking. Which is silly when I'm contantly taking my mask off and putting it back on again between bites, but like I said, our restrictions are based on fear.That's not what they ask you to do in Florida. You wear your mask while you order and until the first food/drink arrives, then you take it off and don't put it back on until right before getting up to leave the table. No between bites bullshit.
Of note: Phase 2 still involves heavy restrictions. 25% capacity limit, 6 feet distance and masking when not eating or drinking. Which is silly when I'm contantly taking my mask off and putting it back on again between bites, but like I said, our restrictions are based on fear.That's not what they ask you to do in Florida. You wear your mask while you order and until the first food/drink arrives, then you take it off and don't put it back on until right before getting up to leave the table. No between bites bullshit.
There are reasons people flee NY and go to florida.Are we talking about Trump again?
Apparently, I live in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Or you live in a hypercharged abnormally politicized one. Not sure which, but the scenario you outlined is precisely what happened here. Case in point, hairdressers. Initially assumed there was no way they could operate safely in a covid environment, and they were shut down. But public health was not in the business of defining "essential" businesses or closing by sectors, it was all about protocols. Hairdressers presented reasonable protocols and were allowed to reopen. To this day no case locally has ever been traced to a hairdresser. Consequently, they go about their business.Clearly you don't, because you just said you can't provide a single citation, which fully supports the idea nobody is out there sharing the data that demonstrates which businesses are hotspots, and which aren't. All we have is rhetoric and unsupported claims.
those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear.And here Down Under we got lots of exposure alerts for supermarkets - but not one case as a result of a customer going to the supermarket when someone else covid+ was there. Not one. Between staff at the place, yes. Especially staff working in coolrooms. But never from staff to customer, or between customers. Yet countless alerts for the places.
On the other hand, we had entire nursing homes get infected, and unfortunately about one-third of those infected died. And almost no alerts about them.
So you can't go by alerts. Most significant are the superspreading events. Around the world we're seeing more and more studies showing (for example) that 10% of people cause 80% of the infections, 20% cause 20%, and 70% infect nobody at all. Most significant are those 10% who spread to a stack of people. Some of it might be individual genetics - they can carry a high viral load to shed on others, yet show few symptoms - and some is circumstance, like a waiter working at three different conference centres. We can't test for the genetic part, so we have to look at the circumstances.
More than one person has started a database of the events, here's one guy (https://kmswinkels.medium.com/covid-19-superspreading-events-database-4c0a7aa2342b) talking about them. If we can sort out the superspreading events then the virus fizzles out.and another guy's taken this data and drilled down into it (https://probabilis.blogspot.com/2020/10/characteristics-of-high-risk-covid-19.html?m=1).
- Nearly all SSEs in the database took place indoors: the exceptions are SSEs that took place in settings with both indoor and outdoor elements and where it is not clear whether transmission occurred indoors or outdoors
- The vast majority of SSE transmissions took place in settings where people were essentially confined together for a prolonged period (for example, nursing homes, prisons, cruise ships, worker housing)
- A feature of these settings is that it is typically outsiders rather than the people who live or work in them (or their relatives) who have control over the circumstances in which they work or live (nursing home residents, hospital patients or inmates typically have little control in terms of precautions they can take)
- The great majority of SSEs happened during flu season in that location
- Food processing plants where temperatures are kept very low (meat, dairy, frozen foods) seem particularly vulnerable to SSEs compared to other types of factories and plants where very few SSEs occurred
Interestingly, there are no known cinema cases (https://covid19settings.blogspot.com/2020/09/where-are-all-movie-theater-covid-19.html). It appears to be that there are high ceilings (allowing the aersols to disperse), good airconditioning with filters, and people are mostly quiet. This is probably why there are no supermarket superspreading events for customers, either - the places always have high ceilings, the doors are opening and closing a zillion times a day letting fresh air in, and people aren't shouting and singing - but it's different for the staff, especially those working in the coolrooms.
- outdoor events are wayyyyy safer than indoors, no matter how you look at it.
- There does appear to be a high overlap with traditional flu season
- Vocalizing (singing, shouting, etc) and refrigeration (colder conditions) have a definitive impact - having one or both of these characteristics meant that the event had an almost 2x increase on how many people got sick.
- Unfortunately determining usage of masks, social distancing, ventilation, etc is prohibitively difficult via the sourced news articles, so I can't answer those questions through SSEs.
I would summarise it as, the risk factors are,
- sustained close contact, and things which amplify that contact, like,
- airconditioning
- shouting, singing, sharing eating implements
- in a cold climate
Then why can't you provide a source for the data? Because by my criteria, the data should be readily available. That was the whole point, the entire thrust of what I was saying.Apparently, I live in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Or you live in a hypercharged abnormally politicized one. Not sure which, but the scenario you outlined is precisely what happened here. Case in point, hairdressers. Initially assumed there was no way they could operate safely in a covid environment, and they were shut down. But public health was not in the business of defining "essential" businesses or closing by sectors, it was all about protocols. Hairdressers presented reasonable protocols and were allowed to reopen. To this day no case locally has ever been traced to a hairdresser. Consequently, they go about their business.Clearly you don't, because you just said you can't provide a single citation, which fully supports the idea nobody is out there sharing the data that demonstrates which businesses are hotspots, and which aren't. All we have is rhetoric and unsupported claims.
No, clearly I do. Our "lockdown," such as it was, played out exactly as you propose it should in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Even down to the specific example you proposed (hairdressers). So by your own criteria, I must live in such a world. And I agree with you. Covid has not been politicized here, and the result is a more pragmatic response.
Then why can't you provide a source for the data? Because by my criteria, the data should be readily available. That was the whole point, the entire thrust of what I was saying.Apparently, I live in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Or you live in a hypercharged abnormally politicized one. Not sure which, but the scenario you outlined is precisely what happened here. Case in point, hairdressers. Initially assumed there was no way they could operate safely in a covid environment, and they were shut down. But public health was not in the business of defining "essential" businesses or closing by sectors, it was all about protocols. Hairdressers presented reasonable protocols and were allowed to reopen. To this day no case locally has ever been traced to a hairdresser. Consequently, they go about their business.Clearly you don't, because you just said you can't provide a single citation, which fully supports the idea nobody is out there sharing the data that demonstrates which businesses are hotspots, and which aren't. All we have is rhetoric and unsupported claims.
No, clearly I do. Our "lockdown," such as it was, played out exactly as you propose it should in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Even down to the specific example you proposed (hairdressers). So by your own criteria, I must live in such a world. And I agree with you. Covid has not been politicized here, and the result is a more pragmatic response.
I'd be interested in a daily example. I'm not sure exactly what kind of information you're talking about.Then why can't you provide a source for the data? Because by my criteria, the data should be readily available. That was the whole point, the entire thrust of what I was saying.Apparently, I live in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Or you live in a hypercharged abnormally politicized one. Not sure which, but the scenario you outlined is precisely what happened here. Case in point, hairdressers. Initially assumed there was no way they could operate safely in a covid environment, and they were shut down. But public health was not in the business of defining "essential" businesses or closing by sectors, it was all about protocols. Hairdressers presented reasonable protocols and were allowed to reopen. To this day no case locally has ever been traced to a hairdresser. Consequently, they go about their business.Clearly you don't, because you just said you can't provide a single citation, which fully supports the idea nobody is out there sharing the data that demonstrates which businesses are hotspots, and which aren't. All we have is rhetoric and unsupported claims.
No, clearly I do. Our "lockdown," such as it was, played out exactly as you propose it should in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Even down to the specific example you proposed (hairdressers). So by your own criteria, I must live in such a world. And I agree with you. Covid has not been politicized here, and the result is a more pragmatic response.
Yeah, the data are shared, daily, they aren't hidden. And they are acted on (e.g. hairdressers).
But I agree, there is no user-friendly historical summary, and that is irritating. Not necessary for ongoing test-and-trace, but it would be helpful for debate on web forums!
Actually, I have noticed every jurisdiction reports things in different ways, makes it very hard to compare
I'd be interested in a daily example. I'm not sure exactly what kind of information you're talking about.
That's fairly useful, but to use an analogy, it's more comparable to active storm warnings than a database of historical climate data. Both have their purposes, but you can't use one in place of the other. What's lacking is the background data to make informed mid- or long-term decisions.
I'd be interested in a daily example. I'm not sure exactly what kind of information you're talking about.
Okay, well as I said the updates are still dominated by ferry exposures and hardly typical of the past year or even the past few months, but if you just want an example of what our daily alerts look like, here's today's:
http://www.nshealth.ca/covid-exposures?title=&field_covid_exposure_zone_value=All&order=field_covid_exposure_zone&sort=asc
Shutting down large events like concerts and sports seems justified. They're rare (though that could be selection bias), but when a SSE happens at one of them, they lead to huge numbers of cases (600+ on average).Yes. Though here in Victoria, our state Little Athletics has been shut down - but the Australian Tennis Open is continuing, "limited" to 30,000 visitors a day. "Based on public health advice." Ahem.
Nursing homes and prisons are responsible for a ridiculous number of SSE cases. (More than 40%.) Why aren't we focusing huge numbers of resources on these two institutions, and paying much less attention to bars and hair salons?Essentially it's a large number of people crammed together indoors - and almost all of them with immune systems weakened by poor food, lack of exercise and sunlight. Improving conditions for them would reduce covid (and other) infections, be decent and humane - but take some time (rebuilding shitty old buildings) and cost a lot of money. Much quicker and cheaper (for the government) to just close hairdressers.
Corona-chan likes refrigeration. That's interesting, because the last study I saw that tried to explain why areas like SE Asia and Africa had lower incidence rates dismissed temperature as a factor, and attributed it more to things like humidity. Not that it's a direct contradiction, because high and low temperatures don't necessarily have opposite effects, but it's something worth exploring further.It may simply be that every refrigerated space is also a confined space - and fans drive the air around. And of course chilling preserves all living organisms for longer, including viruses. So you have cool air preserving a virus and a bunch of fans spreading it evenly through that confined space.
Trying to fixing major and complex social ills because there's a theoretical chance they might provide some minor benefit in a current crisis sounds like a terrible idea. It's like trying to save people from a burning building by creating a committee to revise zoning laws.Nursing homes and prisons are responsible for a ridiculous number of SSE cases. (More than 40%.) Why aren't we focusing huge numbers of resources on these two institutions, and paying much less attention to bars and hair salons?Essentially it's a large number of people crammed together indoors - and almost all of them with immune systems weakened by poor food, lack of exercise and sunlight. Improving conditions for them would reduce covid (and other) infections, be decent and humane - but take some time (rebuilding shitty old buildings) and cost a lot of money. Much quicker and cheaper (for the government) to just close hairdressers.
Just to use my local state prison as an example, they can hold just < 3000 inmates and T&R about 100-200 per week Monday-Thursday. New intakes (but not transfers) are segregated for 14-17 days in weekly Monday-Thursday batches (so if you come in on a Monday you get a few extra days), but there isn't enough room (not enough separate units) to do every day individually. Transfers have initial quarantine done at first site of processing.Trying to fixing major and complex social ills because there's a theoretical chance they might provide some minor benefit in a current crisis sounds like a terrible idea. It's like trying to save people from a burning building by creating a committee to revise zoning laws.Nursing homes and prisons are responsible for a ridiculous number of SSE cases. (More than 40%.) Why aren't we focusing huge numbers of resources on these two institutions, and paying much less attention to bars and hair salons?Essentially it's a large number of people crammed together indoors - and almost all of them with immune systems weakened by poor food, lack of exercise and sunlight. Improving conditions for them would reduce covid (and other) infections, be decent and humane - but take some time (rebuilding shitty old buildings) and cost a lot of money. Much quicker and cheaper (for the government) to just close hairdressers.
How about: Double the pay of all nursing home employees and prison guards, but require them to spend three days in mandatory, supervised, on-site isolation with daily tests and symptom checks before being introduced into the general population. Then keep them on site for two weeks, followed by two weeks off, and repeat. Use prefab housing if needed for both the isolation period and the two week stint. Set up seven separate receiving buildings for all deliveries, one for each day. All goods received during a day are delivered to that day's warehouse, where they sit untouched for seven days, and only then are they taken out, sterilized, and used.
Or whatever. This isn't a serious set of proposals, but a simple illustration that nursing homes and prisons are contained, institutional environments. It's quite possible to thoroughly lock them down, without locking down the whole world. It would be hella expensive, but also a hell of lot cheaper than the ridiculously expensive pork they passed under the guise of coronavirus relief
Just to use my local state prison as an example, they can hold just < 3000 inmates and T&R about 100-200 per week Monday-Thursday. New intakes (but not transfers) are segregated for 14-17 days in weekly Monday-Thursday batches (so if you come in on a Monday you get a few extra days), but there isn't enough room (not enough separate units) to do every day individually. Transfers have initial quarantine done at first site of processing.Did you miss the part where I said it wasn't a serious proposal? It was a silly set of extreme measures designed to illustrate that it's possible to selectively target the most vulnerable populations, as opposed to doing the exact opposite and targeting the entire rest of the population and not doing much of anything special with the vulnerable populations. Well, except the part about forcing sick patients into nursing homes. That was a targeted measure. We should definitely make Pol Po... I mean Andrew Cuomo the next president!
As for having personnel remain on-site in the secure compound for extended periods, that would require huge increases to the supply chain. There is no room (by design) for any storage of personal food items for staff beyond a self-brought 8-16 hour supply. As you said, changing this would be prohibitively expensive, but it would also lead to many potential security risks. As is, many of the security personnel (but not support, such as medical) live on the outer grounds of the campus beyond the secured compound in a pair of small mobile home parks. If these were expanded with some added options, it might be possible to do something like you suggest, but beyond costs, you would then have to find qualified people to do these jobs that want to put up with those conditions, and recruiting from retired submarine crews only goes so far.
That's fairly useful, but to use an analogy, it's more comparable to active storm warnings than a database of historical climate data. Both have their purposes, but you can't use one in place of the other. What's lacking is the background data to make informed mid- or long-term decisions.
The average lifespan of a human is 72 years as a global average.
It's 76 in the USA.
MSNBC anchor Nicole Wallace floats the idea of using domestic drone strikes against American citizens who protest the covid-19 lockdowns.
https://politicodailynewss.com/watch-msnbc-panel-floats-drone-strikes-on-americans-for-incitement/
And she's not just a talking head divorced from reality, because she served as the communications director for George W, and was a senior advisor for McCain during his presidential run.
The real world has become a Paranoia scenario.
MSNBC anchor Nicole Wallace floats the idea of using domestic drone strikes against American citizens who protest the covid-19 lockdowns.
https://politicodailynewss.com/watch-msnbc-panel-floats-drone-strikes-on-americans-for-incitement/
And she's not just a talking head divorced from reality, because she served as the communications director for George W, and was a senior advisor for McCain during his presidential run.
The real world has become a Paranoia scenario.
But the connection to Covid is very tenuous, and none of it is really consequential when it comes to Covid, Covid restrictions, etc. etc. Maybe a topic for another thread.What the hell? She's arguing for drone strikes against people protesting covid-19 lockdowns. I can't imagine a more direct connection to a thread entitled "Covid, the 'lockdowns' etc.".
But the connection to Covid is very tenuous, and none of it is really consequential when it comes to Covid, Covid restrictions, etc. etc. Maybe a topic for another thread.What the hell? She's arguing for drone strikes against people protesting covid-19 lockdowns. I can't imagine a more direct connection to a thread entitled "Covid, the 'lockdowns' etc.".
I can't imagine anything that would cause the wheels to come off faster than domestic drone strikes.With as stupid as most people are with their electronic trails, that approach seems far less effective than just tapping their electronics to follow them and tracing their contacts until there is enough evidence to make arrests. Any actual strikes (likely not by drone) would be focused on those that resist arrest. I don't see this as becoming the dark future scenes of the Terminator franchise, but instead more like a weird widespread To Catch a Predator trap.
I can't imagine anything that would cause the wheels to come off faster than domestic drone strikes.
Particularly since there was a rather amusing case of an official DHS drone being hacked with $1000 worth of gear by a pack of Uni of Texas students.
Be a shame if someone spoofed the signals and routed that drone's missile shot somewhere else. Just sayin'.
I can't imagine anything that would cause the wheels to come off faster than domestic drone strikes.
Particularly since there was a rather amusing case of an official DHS drone being hacked with $1000 worth of gear by a pack of Uni of Texas students.
Be a shame if someone spoofed the signals and routed that drone's missile shot somewhere else. Just sayin'.
She may not be a "talking head divorced from reality" but she is a talking head divorced from authority...
Double masking is fucking hilarious.
Maybe try using a N95 mask instead - if you are smart enough to wear it properly.
People still buying into this incredible hoax? That last spring's nasty seasonal bug justified destroying the world economy and inflicting misery on millions of perfectly healthy people?
How much brain damage were you born with? Or were you hit with something later in life which caused you to be this stupid?
Double masking is fucking hilarious.
Maybe try using a N95 mask instead - if you are smart enough to wear it properly.
You helped elect a senile old hair-sniffer who's literally shuffling around and bumbling through speeches, while the Democrats try to take the nuclear codes away from him. You have no room to talk to ANYONE about 'brain damage'.People still buying into this incredible hoax? That last spring's nasty seasonal bug justified destroying the world economy and inflicting misery on millions of perfectly healthy people?
How much brain damage were you born with? Or were you hit with something later in life which caused you to be this stupid?
I've seen him posting since before I joined this forum, Mistwell. He's always been like this.
The best thing about COVID-19 is that it cured the seasonal flu. Went from something like ~100k annual deaths to almost zero. That's good news!
Along with motorcycle injuries and gunshot wounds.The best thing about COVID-19 is that it cured the seasonal flu. Went from something like ~100k annual deaths to almost zero. That's good news!
Amazing what happens when you reclassify virtually every respiratory infection as covid.
The problem really is confusing deaths caused by the Wuhan Flu Virus with the economic damage caused by governments flailing for solutions.
Along with motorcycle injuries and gunshot wounds.
Along with motorcycle injuries and gunshot wounds.The best thing about COVID-19 is that it cured the seasonal flu. Went from something like ~100k annual deaths to almost zero. That's good news!
Amazing what happens when you reclassify virtually every respiratory infection as covid.
Plus, this would have to be a worldwide conspiracy to inflate deaths in hundreds of country from Israel to Germany to Brazil -- since all of them also have had major covid-19 death rates similar to the U.S.
Plus, this would have to be a worldwide conspiracy to inflate deaths in hundreds of country from Israel to Germany to Brazil -- since all of them also have had major covid-19 death rates similar to the U.S.
Looking at how many deaths there have been reported in China, the only logical explanation is indeed a world wide conspiracy to inflate Wuhan Flu death numbers.
Plus, this would have to be a worldwide conspiracy to inflate deaths in hundreds of country from Israel to Germany to Brazil -- since all of them also have had major covid-19 death rates similar to the U.S.
Looking at how many deaths there have been reported in China, the only logical explanation is indeed a world wide conspiracy to inflate Wuhan Flu death numbers.
Ah, yes. I forgot that you believe the only source of truth is the Chinese government, and anyone who disagrees with the Chinese government is lying.
The best thing about COVID-19 is that it cured the seasonal flu. Went from something like ~100k annual deaths to almost zero. That's good news!
The problem really is confusing deaths caused by the Wuhan Flu Virus with the economic damage caused by governments flailing for solutions.
Our governor FINALLY lifted these idiotic mask mandates (I never wore one anyway) and the usual suspects are coming out in full force claiming he only cares about money and not people. Yes, literally thousands and thousands of businesses destroyed and millions of people out of work directly resulting in deaths from stuff like suicide, but if we only save one 93 year old with diabetes IT'S TOTALLY WORTH IT!
You could get hit by a fucking bus crossing the street. If that bothers you, don't cross the street. Instead these morons want us to outlaw buses...
Along with motorcycle injuries and gunshot wounds.
Two different things. Every death within 28 (or 60) days of a positive test is a "covid death", regardless of the actual cause.
What I'm talking about is in the UK from September 2020 they've lumped together all respiratory infections together (colds, flu, pneumonia) as "coronavirus" cases. Have to maintain the lie that there's a pandemic ravaging the land, even though there's nothing of the sort.
Viruses. Or virii, if you want to annoy pedants. Influenza is a many-headed hydra. That's why the flu shot each year is different; they have to choose which strains they think will be big and target them. It's very unlikely they'll all be beat back. Not that a slow down will do anything anyway. They'll bounce back. Some viruses do vanish, but unless we have near-total immunity like with small pox, that won't happen.The best thing about COVID-19 is that it cured the seasonal flu. Went from something like ~100k annual deaths to almost zero. That's good news!
It's true. This pandemic probably did more damage to the influenza virus than anything since before 1918. It's theoretically possible it's permanent damage, as failure to spread in a year on this level could be enough to find it replaced in the ecosystem by other things.
The problem really is confusing deaths caused by the Wuhan Flu Virus with the economic damage caused by governments flailing for solutions.
Our governor FINALLY lifted these idiotic mask mandates (I never wore one anyway) and the usual suspects are coming out in full force claiming he only cares about money and not people. Yes, literally thousands and thousands of businesses destroyed and millions of people out of work directly resulting in deaths from stuff like suicide, but if we only save one 93 year old with diabetes IT'S TOTALLY WORTH IT!
You could get hit by a fucking bus crossing the street. If that bothers you, don't cross the street. Instead these morons want us to outlaw buses...
Which business was destroyed by mask mandates again?
In Victoria, category 2 (do within 90 days) and 3 (180 days) procedures were shut down for most of 220 days - from March till December. Our peak ICU hospitals for covid was... 48. We originally had 450 ICU beds, and built it up to 4,500.I personally know of a similar scenario, that ended badly as well. I put off surgery to fix a pec tear that likely when I do get surgery later this year is going to not have the results I would like, but my deal was not even close to the situation you detail, and the one I know of. I think covid has done massive damage, but not in the actual death toll from the virus.
A guy I know had some bowel problems in March last year, was due for a scope - he almost got in June, but it didn't work out, he had to wait till December. Well, now he's got a colostomy bag and is undergoing chemo for liver cancer. He's in a lot of pain. He had a secure job but he's on unpaid leave now. His chances are not great, but should he, god willing survive - well he'll be disabled and will have lifelong problems. He's got a wife and a 12 and 10 year old. That could have been a day procedure in March.
Which business was destroyed by mask mandates again?
In Victoria, category 2 (do within 90 days) and 3 (180 days) procedures were shut down for most of 220 days - from March till December. Our peak ICU hospitals for covid was... 48. We originally had 450 ICU beds, and built it up to 4,500.I personally know of a similar scenario, that ended badly as well. I put off surgery to fix a pec tear that likely when I do get surgery later this year is going to not have the results I would like, but my deal was not even close to the situation you detail, and the one I know of. I think covid has done massive damage, but not in the actual death toll from the virus.
A guy I know had some bowel problems in March last year, was due for a scope - he almost got in June, but it didn't work out, he had to wait till December. Well, now he's got a colostomy bag and is undergoing chemo for liver cancer. He's in a lot of pain. He had a secure job but he's on unpaid leave now. His chances are not great, but should he, god willing survive - well he'll be disabled and will have lifelong problems. He's got a wife and a 12 and 10 year old. That could have been a day procedure in March.
Viruses. Or virii, if you want to annoy pedants. Influenza is a many-headed hydra. That's why the flu shot each year is different; they have to choose which strains they think will be big and target them. It's very unlikely they'll all be beat back. Not that a slow down will do anything anyway. They'll bounce back. Some viruses do vanish, but unless we have near-total immunity like with small pox, that won't happen.The best thing about COVID-19 is that it cured the seasonal flu. Went from something like ~100k annual deaths to almost zero. That's good news!
It's true. This pandemic probably did more damage to the influenza virus than anything since before 1918. It's theoretically possible it's permanent damage, as failure to spread in a year on this level could be enough to find it replaced in the ecosystem by other things.
The problem really is confusing deaths caused by the Wuhan Flu Virus with the economic damage caused by governments flailing for solutions.
Our governor FINALLY lifted these idiotic mask mandates (I never wore one anyway) and the usual suspects are coming out in full force claiming he only cares about money and not people. Yes, literally thousands and thousands of businesses destroyed and millions of people out of work directly resulting in deaths from stuff like suicide, but if we only save one 93 year old with diabetes IT'S TOTALLY WORTH IT!
You could get hit by a fucking bus crossing the street. If that bothers you, don't cross the street. Instead these morons want us to outlaw buses...
Which business was destroyed by mask mandates again?
Greetings!
Come on, now, Mistwell. Don't play being obtuse. The last year we have seen *dozens* of businesses, if not *thousands* go out of business and shut their doors.
These bankrupt businesses--shops, stores of many kinds, and restaurants--employed hundreds of thousands and likely millions of employees. They all have closed either directly through mask mandates, "social distancing" requirements, and government required lockdowns--and or in combination from such measures and a huge loss of in-person, buying customers. Just the other day, FRY's Electronics--from California--and very prominent in the Bay Area as well as Southern California--announced it is closing all of its stores permanently because of the pandemic. I'm not going to hunt down more specific restaurants and businesses--you know good and well the pandemic's impact on the economy has been absolutely enormous, with many, many businesses ruined forever.
Which business was destroyed by mask mandates again?
Imagine posting this and then expecting to be taken seriously. Won’t even bother to address Comrade Kim except to say he seems like a really lousy scientist.
Which business was destroyed by mask mandates again?
Imagine posting this and then expecting to be taken seriously. Won’t even bother to address Comrade Kim except to say he seems like a really lousy scientist.
Hey douchenozzle. Which businesses have been destroyed by a mask mandate? Answer the question. Name ONE business destroyed by a mask mandate. And don't fuck around pretending mask mandates are lock downs when they're nothing similar to each other.
He is a neocon traitor that sold out to China like the Judas bitch he is. What do you expect?
Which business was destroyed by mask mandates again?
Imagine posting this and then expecting to be taken seriously. Won’t even bother to address Comrade Kim except to say he seems like a really lousy scientist.
He is a neocon traitor that sold out to China like the Judas bitch he is. What do you expect?
Brad insultsBrad, third and last chance. Name one business which has gone under because of mask mandates.
I've seen him posting since before I joined this forum, Mistwell. He's always been like this.
To think I once believed Aussies were sensible people made of pretty stern stuff. But the way you've lapped up this coronabollocks (and what the actual fuck is going on in the People's Republic of Victoria?) says I was obviously wrong.
But sure, the coalition of bedwetting cowards, hypochondriacs and neurotics are surely the correct ones.
I don't think you're stupid, I think you're nuts. You were always a bit mental but at some point you went off the deep end into paranoid conspiracy world. You believe that there's an international conspiracy to pretend there's a pandemic that fucks up economies because reasons. You've become the weird anti-vaxxer parent that we all avoid at the school gate.
I don't think you're stupid, I think you're nuts. You were always a bit mental but at some point you went off the deep end into paranoid conspiracy world. You believe that there's an international conspiracy to pretend there's a pandemic that fucks up economies because reasons. You've become the weird anti-vaxxer parent that we all avoid at the school gate.
Says the guy who, almost a year into being fed an ever-changing reel of bullshit and lies, still thinks this is all true.
Bodies piling up in the streets! Except last year was indistinguishable from a bad flu year like 2017/18's winter. Nasty spring, then everything was pretty normal deaths-wise. Of course we've stored up plenty of unnecessary ones with the health service shielding itself from doing it's fucking job.
Yes, but there doesn't seem to be a reason to expect that to happen with covid-19. The reason the flu and the common cold persist is because they're not just one virus, they're many, and that foils both vaccines and natural immunity because the entire populace isn't going to be protected against them all. By contrast, covid-19 is just one virus. There are a handful of major strains that show some resistance to the vaccines, but so it's pretty minor. Unless covid-19 turns into a viral complex, comparing it to the flu is a bad idea.Viruses. Or virii, if you want to annoy pedants. Influenza is a many-headed hydra. That's why the flu shot each year is different; they have to choose which strains they think will be big and target them. It's very unlikely they'll all be beat back. Not that a slow down will do anything anyway. They'll bounce back. Some viruses do vanish, but unless we have near-total immunity like with small pox, that won't happen.The best thing about COVID-19 is that it cured the seasonal flu. Went from something like ~100k annual deaths to almost zero. That's good news!
It's true. This pandemic probably did more damage to the influenza virus than anything since before 1918. It's theoretically possible it's permanent damage, as failure to spread in a year on this level could be enough to find it replaced in the ecosystem by other things.
That is true when there isn't viral competition. But, weirdly, it does appear like viruses compete with each other, and they can die off if a different virus takes it's place in the ecosystem. Which seems to be happening with this coronavirus.
We will know this year. Israel has already vaccinated over half it's population in two months, and we should see the flu bounce back there if it will be bouncing back. I don't think it will though.
I've seen him posting since before I joined this forum, Mistwell. He's always been like this.
To think I once believed Aussies were sensible people made of pretty stern stuff. But the way you've lapped up this coronabollocks (and what the actual fuck is going on in the People's Republic of Victoria?) says I was obviously wrong.
But sure, the coalition of bedwetting cowards, hypochondriacs and neurotics are surely the correct ones.
I don't think you're stupid, I think you're nuts. You were always a bit mental but at some point you went off the deep end into paranoid conspiracy world. You believe that there's an international conspiracy to pretend there's a pandemic that fucks up economies because reasons. You've become the weird anti-vaxxer parent that we all avoid at the school gate.
Oh, I see you think that the Chinese Government is lying with no evidence but at the same time the other Governments are telling the truth even with documented evidence of them over counting Wuhan Flu deaths.
Well I guess that is how science works now.
Imagine posting this and then expecting to be taken seriously. Won’t even bother to address Comrade Kim except to say he seems like a really lousy scientist.
He is a neocon traitor that sold out to China like the Judas bitch he is. What do you expect?
Yes, but there doesn't seem to be a reason to expect that to happen with covid-19. The reason the flu and the common cold persist is because they're not just one virus, they're many, and that foils both vaccines and natural immunity because the entire populace isn't going to be protected against them all. By contrast, covid-19 is just one virus. There are a handful of major strains that show some resistance to the vaccines, but so it's pretty minor. Unless covid-19 turns into a viral complex, comparing it to the flu is a bad idea.Viruses. Or virii, if you want to annoy pedants. Influenza is a many-headed hydra. That's why the flu shot each year is different; they have to choose which strains they think will be big and target them. It's very unlikely they'll all be beat back. Not that a slow down will do anything anyway. They'll bounce back. Some viruses do vanish, but unless we have near-total immunity like with small pox, that won't happen.The best thing about COVID-19 is that it cured the seasonal flu. Went from something like ~100k annual deaths to almost zero. That's good news!
It's true. This pandemic probably did more damage to the influenza virus than anything since before 1918. It's theoretically possible it's permanent damage, as failure to spread in a year on this level could be enough to find it replaced in the ecosystem by other things.
That is true when there isn't viral competition. But, weirdly, it does appear like viruses compete with each other, and they can die off if a different virus takes it's place in the ecosystem. Which seems to be happening with this coronavirus.
We will know this year. Israel has already vaccinated over half it's population in two months, and we should see the flu bounce back there if it will be bouncing back. I don't think it will though.
More likely, it will follow the pattern of historical diseases. Spreads rapidly when new, usually with 2 humps, most of the population becomes immune, and then it dies down and survives in small pockets. It might resurge, but that would require a major mutation (which will become less likely, as fewer people are infected), or after immunity lapses in a large chunk of the population, usually because a new generation is born. Widedpread vaccination, of course, would foil this.
I expect the flu will bounce back in the winter of 2021/2022.
Oh, I see you think that the Chinese Government is lying with no evidence but at the same time the other Governments are telling the truth even with documented evidence of them over counting Wuhan Flu deaths.
Well I guess that is how science works now.Imagine posting this and then expecting to be taken seriously. Won’t even bother to address Comrade Kim except to say he seems like a really lousy scientist.
He is a neocon traitor that sold out to China like the Judas bitch he is. What do you expect?
At first, I was confused by this - but on reflection, I take it that "neocon traitor" is referring to Mistwell, not me. Right, Snowman0147? Otherwise that seems weird.
The China claim seems weird, though, since Shasarak is openly saying to trust the Chinese government and don't believe the governments of other countries. To clarify, I haven't accused the Chinese government of any specific lie here -- but I don't consider them a reliable source of truth, since I consider them untrustworthy and perfectly willing to lie for their purposes. As far as overcounting covid-19 deaths, there is evidence of Western governments both overcounting and undercounting covid-19 deaths. Undercounting happened especially earlier in the pandemic as people died without being tested for covid-19. cf.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/07/about-30-covid-deaths-may-not-be-classified-such
There are multiple checks for the overall death rates being consistent -- such as overall excess deaths as well as consistent distribution of ages and geography of deaths. I'm not claiming that the counts of every country are perfectly accurate, but I don't buy that dozens of countries have secretly colluded to intentionally fake millions of deaths, such as Kiero's claim that covid-19 is all a big hoax.
It's hard to even begin to address this nonsense because it's nonsense. We could try facts like the excess mortality rates but you don't deal with facts cos you're a mental.
I always like your NHS workers are lazy spiel cos that's possibly the most pathetic conspiracy theory of all time. I figure you're some sort of well paid IT guy who goldbricks the system to milk as much as he can out of it whilst doing as little as possible. You can't imagine that people may be passionate about they're jobs and not just leeches who don't want to work.
"Excess mortality" that isn't exceptional in the last 5 years, and even less so in the last 20. Equivalent to a bad flu year.
30-60% of NHS staff are "off sick", "isolating" or "shielding" from the reports given by trusts. Or taking the piss as it's commonly known. Encouraged by this ridiculous system whereby if you have the sniffles, you're supposed to be off for 10 days.
The flu is all just mutations on the same base virus. Just like there are mutations on the Covid-19 virus. Concerning the current Covid-19 variants, “There are probably too many variants to count” right now.No, that's just false. The flu is an entire family of viruses, with 7 genera. Even the UK variant of covid-19 had what, only 19 mutations? And that was considered a remarkably huge number.
One key issue we've gotten from this is a new type of RNA vaccine which is likely adaptable to the flu. In fact we can probably use that new type of vaccine against HIV, tuberculosis and malaria too. "RNA vaccines could include instructions for multiple antigens, either strung together in a single strand, or with several RNAs packaged together in a single nanoparticle." They're now working on an influenza "12-strand shot that could supplant the need for annual vaccinations."
I genuinely think, a few years from now, we may be able to kick the flu's ass, thanks to advances we made against Covid-19. Sort of like the Space program, sometimes focusing everyone on an emergency-level task with massive funding yields tech advances far beyond what we were aiming for.
"Excess mortality" that isn't exceptional in the last 5 years, and even less so in the last 20. Equivalent to a bad flu year.
30-60% of NHS staff are "off sick", "isolating" or "shielding" from the reports given by trusts. Or taking the piss as it's commonly known. Encouraged by this ridiculous system whereby if you have the sniffles, you're supposed to be off for 10 days.
Here's the excess mortality data that I see for 2020.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1v7Zk6FcDue6GTo_AB6WygIVb2fkPFxCn)
Source: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-raw-death-count?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute®ion=World
What source is saying that excess mortality isn't exceptional?
Greetings!To quote Immortan Joe, 'Mediocre!'.
Well, Gamedaddy just flamed out and threw a stupid fit, and Pundit brought the *BANHAMMER* down like the wrath of god. Gamedaddy was told more than once by other members to take his Covid arguments, political commentary, and conspiracy theory ranting to this sub-forum, here. Pundit even graciously warned Gamedaddy, and Gamedaddy proceeded to rant in the EN-World thread, and even *dared* Pundit to banhammer him. Gameaddy proceeded to lament--or conversely, brag--about how he had been banned from so many other forums, and that he was unfairly victimized and persecuted because he wanted to talk about "THE TRUTH".
Gamedaddy, by his own account, has been a member here and regular poster since 2006. 14 Years.
What the fuck is wrong with people like Gamedaddy? It is definitely difficult not to bring in political elements into any discussion, especially nowadays--and I think Pundit is keenly aware of this fact, and goes to some length to keep us all focused and on point, as for the appropriate forum, and does so in a gracious and fair-minded manner. Then Gamedaddy brazenly ignores Pundit's warning, purposely defying and provoking Pundit, and continues to rant about political theories in the gaming forum.
Geesus, man. Fucking sad. Gamedaddy seemed to scream, "YES! Please Banhammer me!"
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
What the fuck is wrong with people like Gamedaddy? It is definitely difficult not to bring in political elements into any discussion, especially nowadays--and I think Pundit is keenly aware of this fact, and goes to some length to keep us all focused and on point, as for the appropriate forum, and does so in a gracious and fair-minded manner. Then Gamedaddy brazenly ignores Pundit's warning, purposely defying and provoking Pundit, and continues to rant about political theories in the gaming forum.
Geesus, man. Fucking sad. Gamedaddy seemed to scream, "YES! Please Banhammer me!"
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Brad insultsBrad, third and last chance. Name one business which has gone under because of mask mandates.
We both know you cannot. Because it was a bullshit claim which you and others were trying to pretend meant "lockdowns" even though under no even vague definition of that phrase could it mean lockdowns. You DON'T wear masks when locked down because you're at home. Mask mandates are for when you're NOT LOCKED DOWN and just out in society at large. It's OK that you're a piece of shit liar who wanted to pretend black meant white, but now that you're called on it just calling me stupid while being unable to answer the simple question of "Who?" to your claim that businesses have gone under because of mask mandates doesn't make you look to bright there, porn boy.
Lockdowns are not mask mandates. Indeed, you don't wear a mask in a lockdown because you're staying at home. Mask mandates are for when you're NOT LOCKED DOWN. So, mask mandates are clearly not lockdowns.
Here's the excess mortality data that I see for 2020.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1v7Zk6FcDue6GTo_AB6WygIVb2fkPFxCn)
Source: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-raw-death-count?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute®ion=World
What source is saying that excess mortality isn't exceptional?
Yeah, no excess deaths in England. Dream on.
https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/static-reports/mortality-surveillance/excess-mortality-in-england-latest.html
It's hard to even begin to address this nonsense because it's nonsense. We could try facts like the excess mortality rates but you don't deal with facts cos you're a mental.
I always like your NHS workers are lazy spiel cos that's possibly the most pathetic conspiracy theory of all time. I figure you're some sort of well paid IT guy who goldbricks the system to milk as much as he can out of it whilst doing as little as possible. You can't imagine that people may be passionate about they're jobs and not just leeches who don't want to work.
"Excess mortality" that isn't exceptional in the last 5 years, and even less so in the last 20. Equivalent to a bad flu year.
30-60% of NHS staff are "off sick", "isolating" or "shielding" from the reports given by trusts. Or taking the piss as it's commonly known. Encouraged by this ridiculous system whereby if you have the sniffles, you're supposed to be off for 10 days.
I don't milk the system, because I don't even fucking use it. I just have the privilege of paying for it.
Mibbe you should consider accessing the NHS. Mental health problems aren't the stigma they used to be.
Mibbe you should consider accessing the NHS. Mental health problems aren't the stigma they used to be.
I'm not the one happily engaged in an abusive relationship with the government.
What makes you think he's the only target?Mibbe you should consider accessing the NHS. Mental health problems aren't the stigma they used to be.
I'm not the one happily engaged in an abusive relationship with the government.
No, you're the one who thinks there's a worldwide conspiracy out to get him.
What makes you think he's the only target?Mibbe you should consider accessing the NHS. Mental health problems aren't the stigma they used to be.
I'm not the one happily engaged in an abusive relationship with the government.
No, you're the one who thinks there's a worldwide conspiracy out to get him.
Don't think of it as a grave. It's the future you chose.
Here's the excess mortality data that I see for 2020.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1v7Zk6FcDue6GTo_AB6WygIVb2fkPFxCn)
Source: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-raw-death-count?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute®ion=World
What source is saying that excess mortality isn't exceptional?
I'm not talking about the US, I'm talking about the UK. With the exception of a spike in March/April last year, our pattern of deaths is normal.
People still buying into this incredible hoax? That last spring's nasty seasonal bug justified destroying the world economy and inflicting misery on millions of perfectly healthy people?
Brad insultsBrad, third and last chance. Name one business which has gone under because of mask mandates.
We both know you cannot. Because it was a bullshit claim which you and others were trying to pretend meant "lockdowns" even though under no even vague definition of that phrase could it mean lockdowns. You DON'T wear masks when locked down because you're at home. Mask mandates are for when you're NOT LOCKED DOWN and just out in society at large. It's OK that you're a piece of shit liar who wanted to pretend black meant white, but now that you're called on it just calling me stupid while being unable to answer the simple question of "Who?" to your claim that businesses have gone under because of mask mandates doesn't make you look to bright there, porn boy.
Oh the irony...wtf does "porn boy" mean, exactly?
RE: mask mandates, I know of a bunch of places that NO LONGER ARE IN BUSINESS directly because of the mask requirements. You literally are trying to claim that requiring masks has zero effect on a business, when the reality is it indeed does.
If you want a specific example, there was a small feed store close by that was fined multiple times for refusing to enforce an unenforceable order and thus went out of business because they didn't have the means to go to court. There were cops handing out citations to people in a fucking parking lot at a place that rents tubes here for no masks and they had to eventually just shut down because people didn't want to be harassed anymore about it. A parking lot where the closest you'd be is maybe 20-30 feet from other people. I don't know if that guy is going to make it, honestly.
I don't see how restricting to the UK data only fits with this. Are you arguing that yes, covid-19 exists for the U.S. and has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths, but it's a hoax that covid-19 could do the same in the UK? What about the rest of the world?
Here's the excess mortality data that I see for 2020.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1v7Zk6FcDue6GTo_AB6WygIVb2fkPFxCn)
Source: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-raw-death-count?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute®ion=World
What source is saying that excess mortality isn't exceptional?
I don't see how restricting to the UK data only fits with this. Are you arguing that yes, covid-19 exists for the U.S. and has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths, but it's a hoax that covid-19 could do the same in the UK? What about the rest of the world?
I didn't say it doesn't exist, I said it was nothing more than last spring's seasonal bug. A nasty one, like the 2017/18 winter flu season was.
The hoax is the hysterical and draconian government response to it. And frankly all the data is suspect given the mysterious way everyone decided to change how they classify deaths to this nonsense measure of "within 28 days of a positive test". I note your CDC recently reclassified all of last year's deaths.
Oh, I see you think that the Chinese Government is lying with no evidence but at the same time the other Governments are telling the truth even with documented evidence of them over counting Wuhan Flu deaths.
Well I guess that is how science works now.Imagine posting this and then expecting to be taken seriously. Won’t even bother to address Comrade Kim except to say he seems like a really lousy scientist.
He is a neocon traitor that sold out to China like the Judas bitch he is. What do you expect?
At first, I was confused by this - but on reflection, I take it that "neocon traitor" is referring to Mistwell, not me. Right, Snowman0147? Otherwise that seems weird.
The China claim seems weird, though, since Shasarak is openly saying to trust the Chinese government and don't believe the governments of other countries. To clarify, I haven't accused the Chinese government of any specific lie here -- but I don't consider them a reliable source of truth, since I consider them untrustworthy and perfectly willing to lie for their purposes. As far as overcounting covid-19 deaths, there is evidence of Western governments both overcounting and undercounting covid-19 deaths. Undercounting happened especially earlier in the pandemic as people died without being tested for covid-19. cf.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/07/about-30-covid-deaths-may-not-be-classified-such
There are multiple checks for the overall death rates being consistent -- such as overall excess deaths as well as consistent distribution of ages and geography of deaths. I'm not claiming that the counts of every country are perfectly accurate, but I don't buy that dozens of countries have secretly colluded to intentionally fake millions of deaths, such as Kiero's claim that covid-19 is all a big hoax.
Yes I am the "Neocon Traitor" apparently. Because I believe in free markets and globalism. Nevermind that socialists like Bernie Sanders are against the free-market and globalism, and conservatives like Dole, Bush, Bush, McCain, Romney, and pretty much everyone who ran as a Republican for the last 30 years besides Trump believed in free markets and globalism. But, I am the "traitor" here.
The problem with globalism is that it presumes a commonality of culture that straight up does not fucking exist.
Period. End of line. Do not tell me about how 'oh they're just like us', because no sir, some of those cultures outside the U.S. (and for that matter, the Western societies) are NOT particularly compatible.
And when you have major cultural clashes, eventually things get very, very ugly.
Man, we can't even agree on our own internal culture. Yeah, we've been exporting our culture, and at the same time we have deranged academics screeching about how we need to respect African tribal science, Muslim attitudes versus women, and that guns are the cause of all violent crime. A good turn of phrase for this might be 'schizophrenic'.The problem with globalism is that it presumes a commonality of culture that straight up does not fucking exist.
Period. End of line. Do not tell me about how 'oh they're just like us', because no sir, some of those cultures outside the U.S. (and for that matter, the Western societies) are NOT particularly compatible.
And when you have major cultural clashes, eventually things get very, very ugly.
With globalism, we export our culture. And let's be fucking straight - we absolute have been. Our movies, our television, or music, our art, our games, it's all been penetrating undemocratic nations for generations. It helped bring down the Soviet Union, it created a middle class in China, it's transforming Viet Nam now. People see comforts we have, and they want those comforts and ask the questions about why they don't have them.
The problem with globalism is that it presumes a commonality of culture that straight up does not fucking exist.
Period. End of line. Do not tell me about how 'oh they're just like us', because no sir, some of those cultures outside the U.S. (and for that matter, the Western societies) are NOT particularly compatible.
And when you have major cultural clashes, eventually things get very, very ugly.
With globalism, we export our culture. And let's be fucking straight - we absolute have been. Our movies, our television, or music, our art, our games, it's all been penetrating undemocratic nations for generations. It helped bring down the Soviet Union, it created a middle class in China, it's transforming Viet Nam now. People see comforts we have, and they want those comforts and ask the questions about why they don't have them.
With globalism, we export our culture. And let's be fucking straight - we absolute have been. Our movies, our television, or music, our art, our games, it's all been penetrating undemocratic nations for generations. It helped bring down the Soviet Union, it created a middle class in China, it's transforming Viet Nam now. People see comforts we have, and they want those comforts and ask the questions about why they don't have them.Man, we can't even agree on our own internal culture. Yeah, we've been exporting our culture, and at the same time we have deranged academics screeching about how we need to respect African tribal science, Muslim attitudes versus women, and that guns are the cause of all violent crime. A good turn of phrase for this might be 'schizophrenic'.
It's nice that you think movies and TV are going to bring everyone together to sing kum-ba-ya, but you're higher than an SR-71 in cruise mode if you think it's going to magically convince the CCP to give up power and shift to a republic or democratic mode of governance.
Many people around the world--as well as many governments--view American "Culture" as being an anti-Christian, corrosive, corrupt, and immoral trainwreck full of shit, and reject American culture thoroughly. Feminism, divorce, celebrating and promoting homosexuality, trans rainbow-ism, abortion, and a culture which is obsessed with race, identity politics, and consumed in trivia and materialism. A culture that is essentially perpetually selfish, narcissistic, petulant, vindictive, emotionally hysterical, and juvenile. A culture that is arrogant and smug, self-righteous, and hostile, dismissive, and antagonistic towards anyone and everywhere that refuses to consent or embrace American culture.
You dont export your culture by globalism, you export it with your army.
People around the world are pretty aware of the differences within American culture. They have different reactions to American politics, though, with different dividing lines. Latin America is more Christian than the U.S. -- but also more socialist. Europe is both more socialist and less Christian. Northern Africa and the Middle East are less Christian and are wary of U.S. imperialism. Southern Africa is more Christian but still tends to see the U.S. as imperialist. Overall, most countries are more left-leaning than the U.S. From the polls I've seen, after Trump took office, favorable views of the U.S. decreased in all countries except Israel, Kenya, and Russia.I dispute the idea that most nations are more left leaning than the US. The people who talk about the "rest of the world" usually just mean Europe and a few other commonwealth states, like Australia and Canada, and ignore anything outside the Western world as if it was unclean and best ignored. But when you consider the real rest of the world, it's divided. While Latin American has socialist tendencies, Africa and much of Asia do not. Even more importantly, the simplistic Western left/right split doesn't really map well to nationalistic totalitarian states with mixed economies run by socialists (like China), tribalistic nationalism and cronyism (hate to say it, but most of Africa), and even the highly conservative and traditionalistic states swayed by democratic populist socialism (much of Latin America). And even the comparison to Europe is fallacious, because the US is usually framed as a bizarre outlier, which is only true when you count arbitrary political units with an arbitrary degree of sovereignty. The truth is the US is roughly comparable to Europe in size, wealth, political subunits, and to a lesser degree population. There's probably a way to control for the various variables and make a better assessment of the alignment of the world on a muddled, simplistic axis -- but nobody ever does that because claiming the US is right wing is really just an analogue of "all the cool kids do drugs!"
Man, we can't even agree on our own internal culture. Yeah, we've been exporting our culture, and at the same time we have deranged academics screeching about how we need to respect African tribal science, Muslim attitudes versus women, and that guns are the cause of all violent crime. A good turn of phrase for this might be 'schizophrenic'.The problem with globalism is that it presumes a commonality of culture that straight up does not fucking exist.
Period. End of line. Do not tell me about how 'oh they're just like us', because no sir, some of those cultures outside the U.S. (and for that matter, the Western societies) are NOT particularly compatible.
And when you have major cultural clashes, eventually things get very, very ugly.
With globalism, we export our culture. And let's be fucking straight - we absolute have been. Our movies, our television, or music, our art, our games, it's all been penetrating undemocratic nations for generations. It helped bring down the Soviet Union, it created a middle class in China, it's transforming Viet Nam now. People see comforts we have, and they want those comforts and ask the questions about why they don't have them.
It's nice that you think movies and TV are going to bring everyone together to sing kum-ba-ya, but you're higher than an SR-71 in cruise mode if you think it's going to magically convince the CCP to give up power and shift to a republic or democratic mode of governance.
You mean we export the hollywood version of our culture, which is to say a corrupt, amoral, shitshow. It did not transform China, China realized they could take on our farmed out labor at slave wages and create a "middle class", but in a nation where the poverty line is around 700 USD per year, exactly what does middle class mean? China realized they could use greed as a powerful tool and operate much like a fascist nation now. Freedom wise, what exactly has China changed? They just do not have to disappear or lock as many people into concentration camps these days thanks to a quite compliant society. China also seems to be taking more and more control of that hollywood propaganda machine...I am sure it will not be to export more american culture. The Soviet Union was brought down for a lot of reasons, Balkanism, being an empire (with too many different cultures under one rule), and wild spending on the military at the cost of care of citizens (sound familiar?), the Soviet Union didnt collapse because of blue jeans and rock and roll.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.
You mean we export the hollywood version of our culture, which is to say a corrupt, amoral, shitshow. It did not transform China, China realized they could take on our farmed out labor at slave wages and create a "middle class", but in a nation where the poverty line is around 700 USD per year, exactly what does middle class mean? China realized they could use greed as a powerful tool and operate much like a fascist nation now. Freedom wise, what exactly has China changed? They just do not have to disappear or lock as many people into concentration camps these days thanks to a quite compliant society. China also seems to be taking more and more control of that hollywood propaganda machine...I am sure it will not be to export more american culture. The Soviet Union was brought down for a lot of reasons, Balkanism, being an empire (with too many different cultures under one rule), and wild spending on the military at the cost of care of citizens (sound familiar?), the Soviet Union didnt collapse because of blue jeans and rock and roll.
You continue to prove, on topic after topic, that you really talk out of your ass and have no clue most of the time. The middle class in China is very real and has very serious buying power. I know many of them. I work with them every week. Freedom-wise China changed drastically. You can now own property. You can now travel freely. You can now invest in new businesses.
Do you even fucking know a single person in China and have asked them about it? I am betting you don't. Because you're talking out of your ass based on some vague bullshit notions you've picked up from other shit talkers over the years who also don't know what the fuck they're talking about but think they can substitute knowledge with bluster.
You dont export your culture by globalism, you export it with your army.
Christianity has spread over the globe far faster and penetrated more thoroughly than any army. By comparison, conquerers like Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Napoleon, and Hitler have had only fleeting success in spreading their culture.
Within the Americas, English and Spanish culture have taken hold - but that's largely because of disease wiping out the former population, not armies per se. The same hasn't happened in Africa and Asia.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.
You mean we export the hollywood version of our culture, which is to say a corrupt, amoral, shitshow. It did not transform China, China realized they could take on our farmed out labor at slave wages and create a "middle class", but in a nation where the poverty line is around 700 USD per year, exactly what does middle class mean? China realized they could use greed as a powerful tool and operate much like a fascist nation now. Freedom wise, what exactly has China changed? They just do not have to disappear or lock as many people into concentration camps these days thanks to a quite compliant society. China also seems to be taking more and more control of that hollywood propaganda machine...I am sure it will not be to export more american culture. The Soviet Union was brought down for a lot of reasons, Balkanism, being an empire (with too many different cultures under one rule), and wild spending on the military at the cost of care of citizens (sound familiar?), the Soviet Union didnt collapse because of blue jeans and rock and roll.
You continue to prove, on topic after topic, that you really talk out of your ass and have no clue most of the time. The middle class in China is very real and has very serious buying power. I know many of them. I work with them every week. Freedom-wise China changed drastically. You can now own property. You can now travel freely. You can now invest in new businesses.
Do you even fucking know a single person in China and have asked them about it? I am betting you don't. Because you're talking out of your ass based on some vague bullshit notions you've picked up from other shit talkers over the years who also don't know what the fuck they're talking about but think they can substitute knowledge with bluster.
None of these things you invoke -- property, travel, investment -- occur without the tacit consent of the CCP. This is borne out by the new 'social credit' score system that is used to determine yes, what you can buy, where you can live, and where you can go.
But that suits you, doesn't it Misty?
Tell us more about how 'free' China is. Tell us about how they don't suppress religions, or crack down on dissidents. Oh wait. You can't.
but that's largely because of disease wiping out the former population, not armies per se.
This CCP dicksucking is really starting to piss me off. Especially from Misty who purports to be 'conservative'. My guess is he's a Lincoln Project degenerate.As usual, you are a fucking moron.
You mean we export the hollywood version of our culture, which is to say a corrupt, amoral, shitshow. It did not transform China, China realized they could take on our farmed out labor at slave wages and create a "middle class", but in a nation where the poverty line is around 700 USD per year, exactly what does middle class mean? China realized they could use greed as a powerful tool and operate much like a fascist nation now. Freedom wise, what exactly has China changed? They just do not have to disappear or lock as many people into concentration camps these days thanks to a quite compliant society. China also seems to be taking more and more control of that hollywood propaganda machine...I am sure it will not be to export more american culture. The Soviet Union was brought down for a lot of reasons, Balkanism, being an empire (with too many different cultures under one rule), and wild spending on the military at the cost of care of citizens (sound familiar?), the Soviet Union didnt collapse because of blue jeans and rock and roll.
You continue to prove, on topic after topic, that you really talk out of your ass and have no clue most of the time. The middle class in China is very real and has very serious buying power. I know many of them. I work with them every week. Freedom-wise China changed drastically. You can now own property. You can now travel freely. You can now invest in new businesses.
Do you even fucking know a single person in China and have asked them about it? I am betting you don't. Because you're talking out of your ass based on some vague bullshit notions you've picked up from other shit talkers over the years who also don't know what the fuck they're talking about but think they can substitute knowledge with bluster.
None of these things you invoke -- property, travel, investment -- occur without the tacit consent of the CCP. This is borne out by the new 'social credit' score system that is used to determine yes, what you can buy, where you can live, and where you can go.
But that suits you, doesn't it Misty?
Tell us more about how 'free' China is. Tell us about how they don't suppress religions, or crack down on dissidents. Oh wait. You can't.
You can not "own" property in China. You can merely rent it from the CCP.
You can not "own" property in China. You can merely rent it from the CCP.This CCP dicksucking is really starting to piss me off. Especially from Misty who purports to be 'conservative'. My guess is he's a Lincoln Project degenerate.
Overall, most countries are more left-leaning than the U.S. From the polls I've seen, after Trump took office, favorable views of the U.S. decreased in all countries except Israel, Kenya, and Russia.
I dispute the idea that most nations are more left leaning than the US. The people who talk about the "rest of the world" usually just mean Europe and a few other commonwealth states, like Australia and Canada, and ignore anything outside the Western world as if it was unclean and best ignored. But when you consider the real rest of the world, it's divided. While Latin American has socialist tendencies, Africa and much of Asia do not. Even more importantly, the simplistic Western left/right split doesn't really map well to nationalistic totalitarian states with mixed economies run by socialists (like China), tribalistic nationalism and cronyism (hate to say it, but most of Africa), and even the highly conservative and traditionalistic states swayed by democratic populist socialism (much of Latin America).
Seems to be higher in Africa, and I've seen some good arguments about the strength of clan/tribal ties in Africa and how that makes them an outlier in that regard. But I'm not sure how broadly it applies, and there are tons of counterexamples. It's probably a better example of how complicated it is to align the world than anything else.Overall, most countries are more left-leaning than the U.S. From the polls I've seen, after Trump took office, favorable views of the U.S. decreased in all countries except Israel, Kenya, and Russia.
I dispute the idea that most nations are more left leaning than the US. The people who talk about the "rest of the world" usually just mean Europe and a few other commonwealth states, like Australia and Canada, and ignore anything outside the Western world as if it was unclean and best ignored. But when you consider the real rest of the world, it's divided. While Latin American has socialist tendencies, Africa and much of Asia do not. Even more importantly, the simplistic Western left/right split doesn't really map well to nationalistic totalitarian states with mixed economies run by socialists (like China), tribalistic nationalism and cronyism (hate to say it, but most of Africa), and even the highly conservative and traditionalistic states swayed by democratic populist socialism (much of Latin America).
Fair enough. I agree that Western left/right doesn't map well to the rest of the world, and I don't have major disagreements with the most of your characterization. I'd add that tribalism and cronyism are common throughout most of the developing world including Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Central Asia - not just Africa. Many of the worst ethnic wars in recent decades have been in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.
You mean we export the hollywood version of our culture, which is to say a corrupt, amoral, shitshow. It did not transform China, China realized they could take on our farmed out labor at slave wages and create a "middle class", but in a nation where the poverty line is around 700 USD per year, exactly what does middle class mean? China realized they could use greed as a powerful tool and operate much like a fascist nation now. Freedom wise, what exactly has China changed? They just do not have to disappear or lock as many people into concentration camps these days thanks to a quite compliant society. China also seems to be taking more and more control of that hollywood propaganda machine...I am sure it will not be to export more american culture. The Soviet Union was brought down for a lot of reasons, Balkanism, being an empire (with too many different cultures under one rule), and wild spending on the military at the cost of care of citizens (sound familiar?), the Soviet Union didnt collapse because of blue jeans and rock and roll.
You continue to prove, on topic after topic, that you really talk out of your ass and have no clue most of the time. The middle class in China is very real and has very serious buying power. I know many of them. I work with them every week. Freedom-wise China changed drastically. You can now own property. You can now travel freely. You can now invest in new businesses.
Do you even fucking know a single person in China and have asked them about it? I am betting you don't. Because you're talking out of your ass based on some vague bullshit notions you've picked up from other shit talkers over the years who also don't know what the fuck they're talking about but think they can substitute knowledge with bluster.
None of these things you invoke -- property, travel, investment -- occur without the tacit consent of the CCP. This is borne out by the new 'social credit' score system that is used to determine yes, what you can buy, where you can live, and where you can go.
But that suits you, doesn't it Misty?
Tell us more about how 'free' China is. Tell us about how they don't suppress religions, or crack down on dissidents. Oh wait. You can't.
The line hasn't moved in the slightest, you cocksucker.As usual, you are a fucking moron.
You mean we export the hollywood version of our culture, which is to say a corrupt, amoral, shitshow. It did not transform China, China realized they could take on our farmed out labor at slave wages and create a "middle class", but in a nation where the poverty line is around 700 USD per year, exactly what does middle class mean? China realized they could use greed as a powerful tool and operate much like a fascist nation now. Freedom wise, what exactly has China changed? They just do not have to disappear or lock as many people into concentration camps these days thanks to a quite compliant society. China also seems to be taking more and more control of that hollywood propaganda machine...I am sure it will not be to export more american culture. The Soviet Union was brought down for a lot of reasons, Balkanism, being an empire (with too many different cultures under one rule), and wild spending on the military at the cost of care of citizens (sound familiar?), the Soviet Union didnt collapse because of blue jeans and rock and roll.
You continue to prove, on topic after topic, that you really talk out of your ass and have no clue most of the time. The middle class in China is very real and has very serious buying power. I know many of them. I work with them every week. Freedom-wise China changed drastically. You can now own property. You can now travel freely. You can now invest in new businesses.
Do you even fucking know a single person in China and have asked them about it? I am betting you don't. Because you're talking out of your ass based on some vague bullshit notions you've picked up from other shit talkers over the years who also don't know what the fuck they're talking about but think they can substitute knowledge with bluster.
None of these things you invoke -- property, travel, investment -- occur without the tacit consent of the CCP. This is borne out by the new 'social credit' score system that is used to determine yes, what you can buy, where you can live, and where you can go.
But that suits you, doesn't it Misty?
Tell us more about how 'free' China is. Tell us about how they don't suppress religions, or crack down on dissidents. Oh wait. You can't.
Ah yes, the continually moving line where the other guy has to prove perfection. I never said or implied China had achieved perfect levels of freedom. I said China is more free thanks to the impacts of globalism, and to portray their workers as slaves is bullshit. It doesn't "suit me" in the sense of course I want MORE freedom for the people of China, but unquestionably the impact the U.S. was having on China with our free trade was promoting MORE FREEDOM for China. And unquestionable the pull-back in free trade with China has resulted in LESS FREEDOM in China. That is my point. Which you fully understood and had to use this ridiculous strawman to try and deflect from it.
The line hasn't moved in the slightest, you cocksucker.As usual, you are a fucking moron.
You mean we export the hollywood version of our culture, which is to say a corrupt, amoral, shitshow. It did not transform China, China realized they could take on our farmed out labor at slave wages and create a "middle class", but in a nation where the poverty line is around 700 USD per year, exactly what does middle class mean? China realized they could use greed as a powerful tool and operate much like a fascist nation now. Freedom wise, what exactly has China changed? They just do not have to disappear or lock as many people into concentration camps these days thanks to a quite compliant society. China also seems to be taking more and more control of that hollywood propaganda machine...I am sure it will not be to export more american culture. The Soviet Union was brought down for a lot of reasons, Balkanism, being an empire (with too many different cultures under one rule), and wild spending on the military at the cost of care of citizens (sound familiar?), the Soviet Union didnt collapse because of blue jeans and rock and roll.
You continue to prove, on topic after topic, that you really talk out of your ass and have no clue most of the time. The middle class in China is very real and has very serious buying power. I know many of them. I work with them every week. Freedom-wise China changed drastically. You can now own property. You can now travel freely. You can now invest in new businesses.
Do you even fucking know a single person in China and have asked them about it? I am betting you don't. Because you're talking out of your ass based on some vague bullshit notions you've picked up from other shit talkers over the years who also don't know what the fuck they're talking about but think they can substitute knowledge with bluster.
None of these things you invoke -- property, travel, investment -- occur without the tacit consent of the CCP. This is borne out by the new 'social credit' score system that is used to determine yes, what you can buy, where you can live, and where you can go.
But that suits you, doesn't it Misty?
Tell us more about how 'free' China is. Tell us about how they don't suppress religions, or crack down on dissidents. Oh wait. You can't.
Ah yes, the continually moving line where the other guy has to prove perfection. I never said or implied China had achieved perfect levels of freedom. I said China is more free thanks to the impacts of globalism, and to portray their workers as slaves is bullshit. It doesn't "suit me" in the sense of course I want MORE freedom for the people of China, but unquestionably the impact the U.S. was having on China with our free trade was promoting MORE FREEDOM for China. And unquestionable the pull-back in free trade with China has resulted in LESS FREEDOM in China. That is my point. Which you fully understood and had to use this ridiculous strawman to try and deflect from it.
You are stating a degree of freedom in China that does not fucking exist.
The line hasn't moved in the slightest, you cocksucker.As usual, you are a fucking moron.
You mean we export the hollywood version of our culture, which is to say a corrupt, amoral, shitshow. It did not transform China, China realized they could take on our farmed out labor at slave wages and create a "middle class", but in a nation where the poverty line is around 700 USD per year, exactly what does middle class mean? China realized they could use greed as a powerful tool and operate much like a fascist nation now. Freedom wise, what exactly has China changed? They just do not have to disappear or lock as many people into concentration camps these days thanks to a quite compliant society. China also seems to be taking more and more control of that hollywood propaganda machine...I am sure it will not be to export more american culture. The Soviet Union was brought down for a lot of reasons, Balkanism, being an empire (with too many different cultures under one rule), and wild spending on the military at the cost of care of citizens (sound familiar?), the Soviet Union didnt collapse because of blue jeans and rock and roll.
You continue to prove, on topic after topic, that you really talk out of your ass and have no clue most of the time. The middle class in China is very real and has very serious buying power. I know many of them. I work with them every week. Freedom-wise China changed drastically. You can now own property. You can now travel freely. You can now invest in new businesses.
Do you even fucking know a single person in China and have asked them about it? I am betting you don't. Because you're talking out of your ass based on some vague bullshit notions you've picked up from other shit talkers over the years who also don't know what the fuck they're talking about but think they can substitute knowledge with bluster.
None of these things you invoke -- property, travel, investment -- occur without the tacit consent of the CCP. This is borne out by the new 'social credit' score system that is used to determine yes, what you can buy, where you can live, and where you can go.
But that suits you, doesn't it Misty?
Tell us more about how 'free' China is. Tell us about how they don't suppress religions, or crack down on dissidents. Oh wait. You can't.
Ah yes, the continually moving line where the other guy has to prove perfection. I never said or implied China had achieved perfect levels of freedom. I said China is more free thanks to the impacts of globalism, and to portray their workers as slaves is bullshit. It doesn't "suit me" in the sense of course I want MORE freedom for the people of China, but unquestionably the impact the U.S. was having on China with our free trade was promoting MORE FREEDOM for China. And unquestionable the pull-back in free trade with China has resulted in LESS FREEDOM in China. That is my point. Which you fully understood and had to use this ridiculous strawman to try and deflect from it.
You are stating a degree of freedom in China that does not fucking exist.
And you simply stating that's so doesn't make it so. Every freedom I mentioned is real and absolutely got better (or "more free") during our freer trade era with China. Many got worse when we pulled back from freer trade with China. That's not a coincidence.
I'll ask again, do you even know and talk to anyone in China? They can confirm what I am telling you.
Slightly back on topic, but it seems Andy Cuomo is refusing to resign, despite being accused of sexual harassment as well as engineering and covering up the deaths of over 10,000 NY people in nursing homes and homes for the developmentally disabled.Nobody seems to care much about the nursing home deaths, it wasn't until the #metoo stuff came out that the calls for his resignation got serious.
This is the guy they gave an honorary Emmy to, folks. This is the guy Fauci said was 'doing everything right'.
Honestly can not believe that people think anything good about the CCP.That's traitorous talk, Citizen. 50,000 points have been deducted from your Social Credit score. Please report to the nearest concentration camp for summary execution, and have a nice day!
Thanks for the post. It's always useful having an inside view.
I do. Through university and my professional life, I am friends with a lot of Chinese people. Some expats now living in UK and some who returned to China. Some of them I am close friends with. In fact, not wanting to reveal too much personal information online but effectively they are extended family. Full disclosure I have not had the chance to go to China (technically I passed through an airport once) nor do I speak Chinese.
I wanted to wait to comment on this topic until I had had a chance to speak to a Chinese friend who is actually on the mainland rather than one of my Chinese friends who is living in the UK (though I would also trust their opinion on this).
This person is well educated and what you might describe as new middle class in China. I promised I would not share more information about them than this because of the obvious dangers of doing that.
I literally showed them this thread and this reply for their approval of my summation of what they said.
Honestly can not believe that people think anything good about the CCP.That's traitorous talk, Citizen. 50,000 points have been deducted from your Social Credit score. Please report to the nearest concentration camp for summary execution, and have a nice day!
Slightly back on topic, but it seems Andy Cuomo is refusing to resign, despite being accused of sexual harassment as well as engineering and covering up the deaths of over 10,000 NY people in nursing homes and homes for the developmentally disabled.Only the first of those things matters nowadays.
While we're at it:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202103/1218007.shtml
Social credit score used to determine who boards a subway first.
Don't fucking tell me that's the ONLY thing it's used for.
The line hasn't moved in the slightest, you cocksucker.As usual, you are a fucking moron.
You mean we export the hollywood version of our culture, which is to say a corrupt, amoral, shitshow. It did not transform China, China realized they could take on our farmed out labor at slave wages and create a "middle class", but in a nation where the poverty line is around 700 USD per year, exactly what does middle class mean? China realized they could use greed as a powerful tool and operate much like a fascist nation now. Freedom wise, what exactly has China changed? They just do not have to disappear or lock as many people into concentration camps these days thanks to a quite compliant society. China also seems to be taking more and more control of that hollywood propaganda machine...I am sure it will not be to export more american culture. The Soviet Union was brought down for a lot of reasons, Balkanism, being an empire (with too many different cultures under one rule), and wild spending on the military at the cost of care of citizens (sound familiar?), the Soviet Union didnt collapse because of blue jeans and rock and roll.
You continue to prove, on topic after topic, that you really talk out of your ass and have no clue most of the time. The middle class in China is very real and has very serious buying power. I know many of them. I work with them every week. Freedom-wise China changed drastically. You can now own property. You can now travel freely. You can now invest in new businesses.
Do you even fucking know a single person in China and have asked them about it? I am betting you don't. Because you're talking out of your ass based on some vague bullshit notions you've picked up from other shit talkers over the years who also don't know what the fuck they're talking about but think they can substitute knowledge with bluster.
None of these things you invoke -- property, travel, investment -- occur without the tacit consent of the CCP. This is borne out by the new 'social credit' score system that is used to determine yes, what you can buy, where you can live, and where you can go.
But that suits you, doesn't it Misty?
Tell us more about how 'free' China is. Tell us about how they don't suppress religions, or crack down on dissidents. Oh wait. You can't.
Ah yes, the continually moving line where the other guy has to prove perfection. I never said or implied China had achieved perfect levels of freedom. I said China is more free thanks to the impacts of globalism, and to portray their workers as slaves is bullshit. It doesn't "suit me" in the sense of course I want MORE freedom for the people of China, but unquestionably the impact the U.S. was having on China with our free trade was promoting MORE FREEDOM for China. And unquestionable the pull-back in free trade with China has resulted in LESS FREEDOM in China. That is my point. Which you fully understood and had to use this ridiculous strawman to try and deflect from it.
You are stating a degree of freedom in China that does not fucking exist.
And you simply stating that's so doesn't make it so. Every freedom I mentioned is real and absolutely got better (or "more free") during our freer trade era with China. Many got worse when we pulled back from freer trade with China. That's not a coincidence.
I'll ask again, do you even know and talk to anyone in China? They can confirm what I am telling you.
I do. Through university and my professional life, I am friends with a lot of Chinese people. Some expats now living in UK and some who returned to China. Some of them I am close friends with. In fact, not wanting to reveal too much personal information online but effectively they are extended family. Full disclosure I have not had the chance to go to China (technically I passed through an airport once) nor do I speak Chinese.
I wanted to wait to comment on this topic until I had had a chance to speak to a Chinese friend who is actually on the mainland rather than one of my Chinese friends who is living in the UK (though I would also trust their opinion on this).
This person is well educated and what you might describe as new middle class in China. I promised I would not share more information about them than this because of the obvious dangers of doing that.
I literally showed them this thread and this reply for their approval of my summation of what they said.
Their view was that to describe the Chinese people as having more freedom is a misrepresentation of the situation particularly if one is speaking to Westerners.
In China it is true the government has permitted some of the population to do more things, start businesses etc. but they said it is important to understand that these activities benefit the government in terms of economic growth and spreading government messages/monitoring (use of internet and smart phones etc). These activities are very much at the pleasure of the CCP government rather than a freedom as a Westerner would understand it.
They said a better word than freedoms would be permissions.
The words they used when describing freedom and power in China were, and I will quote them, because I wrote them down
“Any power a Western government has is derived from the general population and representing them so flows up. It is understood that even when the government is exercising power the individual still has freedoms.
In China it is the CCP, the party itself for itself, that has power. There is no principle that says they must represent the population except the principle of power itself. So, the power flows down. There is no sense that an individual is anymore free to do what they want than they ever were. But they have been given more permissions. Obviously if things are made too intolerable for people, they will cause trouble.
The fundamental legal power of the state and the government has not diminished nor has the fundamental legal freedoms of individuals improved. However technology has allowed more connection and an understanding of what politics is like elsewhere in the world”
I asked them to elaborate on this: They said that it was because as a matter of political principle in China there is rule by law but not rule of law. For example, the government can still remove your right to travel or own property whenever they want for no reason. They also pointed to continued persecution of different minority groups, religions etc which they didn’t think had changed much.
As far as this person is aware there is no philosophical movement demanding freedom in China that is not heavily supressed nor have any of these groups been successful in forcing the government to provide more permissions certainly not individual freedoms. Additional permissions are very much driven by what the government wants to achieve. They did note that because manufacturing and production is very important where workers can organise to strike (which is very dangerous if unsuccessful!) then they can leverage their power. But again, they saw this as local or regional power politics not representation or really anything a Westerner would understand as freedom.
They did note (maybe you would say concede) that pure Communist ideology is not pushed as much these days which means there is less ideological opposition to allowing people to do things. Although this is as much because the super-rich in China want to be well, super rich. Also, they said amongst the middle class there is perhaps more of a view of looking out across the world as a whole rather than being inward looking and this might start to generate a genuine desire for freedom on a more political principal basis. For one thing there is more understanding of what happens abroad and the influence of Western educated Chinese will have an impact.
Also as our very discussion showed the internet and the ability to communicate and connect is probably the biggest driver of any progress in China on an individual freedom front. But many of the gains here are now probably receeding because of government awareness of what the internet can do. Internet traffic is monitored and unfortunately Western corporations will now often cooperate with the CCP.
With regard to the word slaves, we ended up having a long discussion about what this meant as it has a wide range of connotations depending on the time period and culture. They didn’t think that it was a useful word to use in assessing how free Chinese people are either for being more or less free. It just complicated the discussion*
Because of the above they didn’t think that Trump or his administration had much impact either way on the freedoms of the Chinese people. The Western media’s own hostility towards him has probably undercut the appeal of representative democracy a bit because it is being presented as being in lockstep with the CCP’s argument that democracy is dangerous.
Finally, they didn’t have a particular reason to believe the official accounts of the number of COVID cases or deaths but it is very difficult to know what has happened so couldn’t speculate further.
*(In short they didn't believe there was widespread slavery in China though some effectively indentured workers and prisoners could be called this. I disagreed because I think slavery is absolutely fundamental to Communism but this is an account of what they said not my views).
Thanks for your insights. The people I know in China, or who visit here from there, are much more in the manufacturing sector. They tell me their lives got MUCH better in terms of freedom (any measures of that term) when trade with the west was easier, and got harder in terms of freedom when things got more difficult to do trade with the west and when angry rhetoric between the two countries was taking place in terms of trade.LOL.
The purpose of wearing face masks has never been to prevent the wearer from inhaling small (i.e., airborne) particles.
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3767.pdf (see page viii):
"Facemasks do not seal tightly to the wearer’s face, do not provide the wearer with a reliable level of protection from inhaling smaller airborne particles, and are not considered respiratory protection."
The purpose of wearing face masks has never been to prevent the wearer from inhaling small (i.e., airborne) particles.
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3767.pdf (see page viii):
"Facemasks do not seal tightly to the wearer’s face, do not provide the wearer with a reliable level of protection from inhaling smaller airborne particles, and are not considered respiratory protection."
Better read/watch it now before it is flushed down the memory hole:
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3219.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovSLAuY8ib8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qkXV4kmp7c
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3767.pdf (see page viii):
"Facemasks do not seal tightly to the wearer’s face, do not provide the wearer with a reliable level of protection from inhaling smaller airborne particles, and are not considered respiratory protection."
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3994.pdf (tl:dr = no mask recommendation)
Better read/watch it now before it is flushed down the memory hole:
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3219.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovSLAuY8ib8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qkXV4kmp7c
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3767.pdf (see page viii):
"Facemasks do not seal tightly to the wearer’s face, do not provide the wearer with a reliable level of protection from inhaling smaller airborne particles, and are not considered respiratory protection."
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3994.pdf (tl:dr = no mask recommendation)
Once again, for the slow kids in the back: masks REDUCE the amount of LARGER airborne particles WHICH YOU PROJECT OUTWARD as a primary means of PROTECTING OTHERS FROM YOU. They have a lesser protection ( but still somewhat meaningful ) for you from others.
Hello McFly, is this thing on? It's been about 9 months since this information went public.
The primary purpose is to protect others from you projecting the virus outward, as it reduces the radius you project outward. The majority of the infections are caused by larger particles, not smaller ones, because you need to receive a larger quantity of the virus and not just a single particle of it to actually be infected by it.
How is this not sinking in after this long? It's not a magical device, it simply REDUCES THE CHANCE YOU WILL INFECT SOMEONE ELSE. You understand "reduces" right? You understand it's not a force field, but lowers the odds someone will get it from you when you wear a mask and have the virus but are not aware you have it, right?
I've explained numerous times why you're wrong. I don't know what it's not sinking in, you just repeat the same old disproved maxims and ignore the evidence. Large droplets don't seem to be the primary mode of transmission, and they're the only thing cloth or surgical mask masks have a chance of stopping. Covid-19 appears to be highly aerosolized. It's spread in small particles that quickly fill any enclosed area, and then increases in concentration. These small particles completely ignore masks, but are easily dissipated by air circulation. This explains the massive asymmetry between indoor and outdoor spread, why supermarkets and gyms aren't major locuses of transmission, and why there have been no superspreader events on airplanes. The only studies that show that show masks might have an effect involve masks like N95s being used in a clinical environment by trained professionals following strict standards. The on the public wearing masks are conclusive: Masks have no significant effect. I've linked to the papers several times in this thread.
Once again, for the slow kids in the back: masks REDUCE the amount of LARGER airborne particles WHICH YOU PROJECT OUTWARD as a primary means of PROTECTING OTHERS FROM YOU. They have a lesser protection ( but still somewhat meaningful ) for you from others.
Hello McFly, is this thing on? It's been about 9 months since this information went public.
The primary purpose is to protect others from you projecting the virus outward, as it reduces the radius you project outward. The majority of the infections are caused by larger particles, not smaller ones, because you need to receive a larger quantity of the virus and not just a single particle of it to actually be infected by it.
How is this not sinking in after this long? It's not a magical device, it simply REDUCES THE CHANCE YOU WILL INFECT SOMEONE ELSE. You understand "reduces" right? You understand it's not a force field, but lowers the odds someone will get it from you when you wear a mask and have the virus but are not aware you have it, right?
Better read/watch it now before it is flushed down the memory hole:
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3219.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovSLAuY8ib8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qkXV4kmp7c
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3767.pdf (see page viii):
"Facemasks do not seal tightly to the wearer’s face, do not provide the wearer with a reliable level of protection from inhaling smaller airborne particles, and are not considered respiratory protection."
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA3994.pdf (tl:dr = no mask recommendation)
Once again, for the slow kids in the back: masks REDUCE the amount of LARGER airborne particles WHICH YOU PROJECT OUTWARD as a primary means of PROTECTING OTHERS FROM YOU. They have a lesser protection ( but still somewhat meaningful ) for you from others.
Hello McFly, is this thing on? It's been about 9 months since this information went public.
The primary purpose is to protect others from you projecting the virus outward, as it reduces the radius you project outward. The majority of the infections are caused by larger particles, not smaller ones, because you need to receive a larger quantity of the virus and not just a single particle of it to actually be infected by it.
How is this not sinking in after this long? It's not a magical device, it simply REDUCES THE CHANCE YOU WILL INFECT SOMEONE ELSE. You understand "reduces" right? You understand it's not a force field, but lowers the odds someone will get it from you when you wear a mask and have the virus but are not aware you have it, right?
The transmission mode (large aerosols or small aerosols) is still not settled:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293495/
"The most common types of viruses causing infections in the respiratory tract through aerosol transmission are influenza viruses, rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, respiratory syncytial viruses (RSVs), and parainfluenza viruses (Morawska, 2006)."
https://first10em.com/covid-19-is-spread-by-aerosols-an-evidence-review/
As for masks. Effective with respect to snot and spit from sneezing and coughing, sure; "large" aerosols, to some extent. But that extent is highly variable. I will grant you that masks do divert flow, and hence reduce the rate of aerosol travel. But then just keeping your distance has the same effect. Hence I do believe that social distancing guidelines are effective, as are reasonable number-of-people-in-a-room limitations.
I leave the details of estimated facemask effectiveness (e.g., calculation of bypass flow vs thru-mask flow, determination of particle deviation from streamflow based on Stoke's number, filter material efficiency, etc.) all with proper characterization of parameter and model uncertainty and evaluated within a proper uncertainty framework, as a exercise for the reader.
;)
I've explained numerous times why you're wrong. I don't know what it's not sinking in, you just repeat the same old disproved maxims and ignore the evidence. Large droplets don't seem to be the primary mode of transmission, and they're the only thing cloth or surgical mask masks have a chance of stopping. Covid-19 appears to be highly aerosolized. It's spread in small particles that quickly fill any enclosed area, and then increases in concentration. These small particles completely ignore masks, but are easily dissipated by air circulation. This explains the massive asymmetry between indoor and outdoor spread, why supermarkets and gyms aren't major locuses of transmission, and why there have been no superspreader events on airplanes. The only studies that show that show masks might have an effect involve masks like N95s being used in a clinical environment by trained professionals following strict standards. The on the public wearing masks are conclusive: Masks have no significant effect. I've linked to the papers several times in this thread.
Once again, for the slow kids in the back: masks REDUCE the amount of LARGER airborne particles WHICH YOU PROJECT OUTWARD as a primary means of PROTECTING OTHERS FROM YOU. They have a lesser protection ( but still somewhat meaningful ) for you from others.
Hello McFly, is this thing on? It's been about 9 months since this information went public.
The primary purpose is to protect others from you projecting the virus outward, as it reduces the radius you project outward. The majority of the infections are caused by larger particles, not smaller ones, because you need to receive a larger quantity of the virus and not just a single particle of it to actually be infected by it.
How is this not sinking in after this long? It's not a magical device, it simply REDUCES THE CHANCE YOU WILL INFECT SOMEONE ELSE. You understand "reduces" right? You understand it's not a force field, but lowers the odds someone will get it from you when you wear a mask and have the virus but are not aware you have it, right?
That's why ventilation is important. That, and the growing evidence that a disproportionate percentage of all cases can be traced to superspreader events, is a strong argument in favor of shutting down large indoor gatherings, like concerts or indoor sports. But masks are utterly pointless. They're a token showing tribal affiliation and support for totalitarian central control, nothing more.
I've linked many studies, including the only large randomized control study on covid-19 and masks (conclusion: masks don't work), (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817) and until now you've linked zero. Since you seem to like the CDC, here's a study from May by the CDC that says wearing masks doesn't help with influenza. (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article) And here's the European CDC, who in the last month changed from saying masks have zero effect to maybe they have a small effect. (https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/covid-19-face-masks-community-first-update.pdf) It's worth reading, because it's current and tries to summarize the information available prior to the pandemic (universal consensus that masks don't work), to now (a few studies maybe, but so far the data is pretty much crap).
You continue to be wrong on this Pat and you've never been able to support your claims with studies which actually support the claims you make about them. Yes, you can ALSO get it from smaller particles, and yes ventilation matters, but that does not mean large particles don't matter and don't transmit it and are not a primary means of transmitting it which can be helped by masks.
Also my wife got it from a supermarket and supermarkets have in fact been one traceable, provable transmission location here in Los Angeles.
But bottom line, masks help to reduce the spread of your larger particles to others, which does in fact pose more risk to others, so pick out a cool one you like and wear it you fucking stubborn partisan fool.
Your studies are largely focused on protective effects, not on source control. The latter is, admittedly, harder to test (both practically and ethically).I've linked many studies, including the only large randomized control study on covid-19 and masks (conclusion: masks don't work), (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817) and until now you've linked zero. Since you seem to like the CDC, here's a study from May by the CDC that says wearing masks doesn't help with influenza. (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article) And here's the European CDC, who in the last month changed from saying masks have zero effect to maybe they have a small effect. (https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/covid-19-face-masks-community-first-update.pdf) It's worth reading, because it's current and tries to summarize the information available prior to the pandemic (universal consensus that masks don't work), to now (a few studies maybe, but so far the data is pretty much crap).
You continue to be wrong on this Pat and you've never been able to support your claims with studies which actually support the claims you make about them. Yes, you can ALSO get it from smaller particles, and yes ventilation matters, but that does not mean large particles don't matter and don't transmit it and are not a primary means of transmitting it which can be helped by masks.
Also my wife got it from a supermarket and supermarkets have in fact been one traceable, provable transmission location here in Los Angeles.
But bottom line, masks help to reduce the spread of your larger particles to others, which does in fact pose more risk to others, so pick out a cool one you like and wear it you fucking stubborn partisan fool.
More than 98% of superspreader cases occurred indoors. If large particles were the primary mode of transmission, then there would be more outdoor spread in places like stadiums where people are packed together, which simply hasn't happened.
And yes, supermarkets do spread the disease. So do schools. But both are spreading them at rates far lower than expected. That's the whole point. It's absolutely absurd to argue based on whether cases exist or not, because we're talking about rates of transmission, not about the disease magically disappearing. It's like me saying that masks don't work because I know someone who wore a mask and caught the disease -- that's a garbage argument, whatever side you're standing on.
Seriously, you are using articles from 2006 about generic viruses when we have study after study on this specific virus from the past year which tells us the typical transmission is from larger particles?
Yes, of course distancing helps. Just as masks help. Just as ventilation helps. And exposure time. And number of people. They all help.
So why not wear a mask? Pick out some cool ones.
The hamster study looked at source control and concluded it had an effect, but that's a lab study with fuzzy tribbles and cages wearing masks rather than humans in the real world, so at best it's suggestive rather than conclusive. Other theoretical studies, like the handful that look at improper use, suggest the opposite. The studies of the impact of mandates on the infection rates in various areas also include both, and they're highly ambiguous. For every region where the infection rate went down, there's another where it went up, and it seems to largely correspond to preexisting patterns (if it's going up it keeps going up, and vice versa). But it's pretty clear that prior to pandemic, everyone advised against masks, so the early mandates involved going against the consensus, and there's still no clear evidence they have a significant effect. The evidence on whether the disease is spread significantly by large droplets vs. whether it's aersolized is circumstantial, but fairly strong because, thanks to contract tracing, we now have a much better idea how it spreads, and it's much, much higher in situations where there is poor ventilation, and close to zero where there's good airflow. But the generalization of your second point is well taken; there's far too much certainty in public discussion. There's still an awful lot we don't know about the disease.Your studies are largely focused on protective effects, not on source control. The latter is, admittedly, harder to test (both practically and ethically).I've linked many studies, including the only large randomized control study on covid-19 and masks (conclusion: masks don't work), (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817) and until now you've linked zero. Since you seem to like the CDC, here's a study from May by the CDC that says wearing masks doesn't help with influenza. (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article) And here's the European CDC, who in the last month changed from saying masks have zero effect to maybe they have a small effect. (https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/covid-19-face-masks-community-first-update.pdf) It's worth reading, because it's current and tries to summarize the information available prior to the pandemic (universal consensus that masks don't work), to now (a few studies maybe, but so far the data is pretty much crap).
You continue to be wrong on this Pat and you've never been able to support your claims with studies which actually support the claims you make about them. Yes, you can ALSO get it from smaller particles, and yes ventilation matters, but that does not mean large particles don't matter and don't transmit it and are not a primary means of transmitting it which can be helped by masks.
Also my wife got it from a supermarket and supermarkets have in fact been one traceable, provable transmission location here in Los Angeles.
But bottom line, masks help to reduce the spread of your larger particles to others, which does in fact pose more risk to others, so pick out a cool one you like and wear it you fucking stubborn partisan fool.
More than 98% of superspreader cases occurred indoors. If large particles were the primary mode of transmission, then there would be more outdoor spread in places like stadiums where people are packed together, which simply hasn't happened.
And yes, supermarkets do spread the disease. So do schools. But both are spreading them at rates far lower than expected. That's the whole point. It's absolutely absurd to argue based on whether cases exist or not, because we're talking about rates of transmission, not about the disease magically disappearing. It's like me saying that masks don't work because I know someone who wore a mask and caught the disease -- that's a garbage argument, whatever side you're standing on.
But it's pretty clear that prior to pandemic, everyone advised against masks, so the early mandates involved going against the consensus, and there's still no clear evidence they have a significant effect. The evidence on whether the disease is spread significantly by large droplets vs. whether it's aersolized is circumstantial, but fairly strong because, thanks to contract tracing, we now have a much better idea how it spreads, and it's much, much higher in situations where there is poor ventilation, and close to zero where there's good airflow. But the generalization of your second point is well taken; there's far too much certainty in public discussion. There's still an awful lot we don't know about the disease.
The hamster study looked at source control and concluded it had an effect, but that's a lab study with fuzzy tribbles and cages wearing masks rather than humans in the real world, so at best it's suggestive rather than conclusive. Other theoretical studies, like the handful that look at improper use, suggest the opposite. The studies of the impact of mandates on the infection rates in various areas also include both, and they're highly ambiguous. For every region where the infection rate went down, there's another where it went up, and it seems to largely correspond to preexisting patterns (if it's going up it keeps going up, and vice versa).
I've linked many studies, including the only large randomized control study on covid-19 and masks (conclusion: masks don't work) (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817) and until now you've linked zero.
No. Mask wearing was widespread in those countries when people got any kind of sniffles, long before covid-19. But it's a social convention, or a form of etiquette, and a cultural difference is not scientific consensus. Even if you can find formal recommendations that recommended wearing masks in every country you mentioned, that's still just a handful, and doesn't change the broad consensus as shown in the scientific literature and agencies like the CDC and the WHO.But it's pretty clear that prior to pandemic, everyone advised against masks, so the early mandates involved going against the consensus, and there's still no clear evidence they have a significant effect. The evidence on whether the disease is spread significantly by large droplets vs. whether it's aersolized is circumstantial, but fairly strong because, thanks to contract tracing, we now have a much better idea how it spreads, and it's much, much higher in situations where there is poor ventilation, and close to zero where there's good airflow. But the generalization of your second point is well taken; there's far too much certainty in public discussion. There's still an awful lot we don't know about the disease.
Prior to the pandemic, everyone did *not* advise against masks. Among countries that have had the *lowest* death rates like South Korea and Japan, masks were not only recommended by officials, but they were already common practice among the public. The U.S. CDC initially advised reserving masks for health care practitioners, but the U.S. also has one of the highest rates of covid deaths per capita (along with Belgium, Italy, and the UK).
The problem with studying mask mandates is that it's a study of public behavior and psychology, which is bound to have varying effects. Not everyone obeys the mandate, and even if they do, people may behave in more risky ways by trusting masks too much and/or wear masks improperly (like under the nose, or removing the mask to speak).What are you talking about? That's a strength, not a problem. Because it's not a lab study, or a study in a controlled clinical environment like a hospital, it means it's not operating under unrealistic standards that fall down when applied to people who aren't medical professionals working in a very controlled environment with abundant training, resources, and motivation. And if you actually looked at the studies, you would have noticed nearly all of them consider compliance, which has typically been in the 85-95% range. In fact, many of those studies concluded that that voluntary compliance rates are already so high than the possible incremental benefit from a mandate was hard to suss out, or wouldn't amount to anything significant.
You claim this shows that "masks don't work" - but what it specifically shows is that surgical masks (which have no filtration) don't significantly protect the wearer. That doesn't mean that masks don't work, and therefore surgeons should do without masks - or that filtering masks don't have any effect.Are you really being this disingenuous? That study literally shows that masks have no significant effect. Of course it only applies to the specific circumstances of the study, but it's a 100% accurate statement, and if you had read just the rest of that sentence, you'd have seen that I summarized a bunch of other studies and just called that one out as one of the stronger examples. The rest of the paragraph also covered a bunch other studies looking at masks from different angles, at a very high level, as well.
I think there is good reason to think that masks can reduce the spread from people carrying the disease. I think there is good reason to think that masks can reduce the spread from people carrying the disease. Even aerosolized particle spread can be reduced by wearing a mask. Particles still spread, but if there are fewer of them going less distance, then the mask can reduce transmission.Then what are those good reasons? Those simplistic graphics you and Mistwell love so much are just theoretical models, not evidence. They made sense at the start of the pandemic, when they though the disease was spread by large droplets, but now that we have more evidence, they don't seem to hold up. Aerosolized particles are not significantly reduced by a mask, the particles pass through without being hindered. What can be affected is airflow, a mask can cause air speed to be reduced or redirected, usually around the sides of the mask. But that only affects the transmission of large droplets. Studies show that small droplets quickly spread throughout any enclosed area, and are quickly found in roughly equal concentrations everywhere. It's not about directed transmission, it's about the gradual build of the concentration, which increases the chance someone in the area becomes infected. (It's also about talking; continually opening your mouth and ejecting new particles adds to the concentration faster -- that's another reason people speculate why transmission was so low on the jam-packed Japanese trains, they pressed up against each other, but not chatty.) That's the point of aerosolization, and that explains why masks seem useless while ventilation is important.
Prior to the pandemic, everyone did *not* advise against masks. Among countries that have had the *lowest* death rates like South Korea and Japan, masks were not only recommended by officials, but they were already common practice among the public. The U.S. CDC initially advised reserving masks for health care practitioners, but the U.S. also has one of the highest rates of covid deaths per capita (along with Belgium, Italy, and the UK).
I've linked many studies, including the only large randomized control study on covid-19 and masks (conclusion: masks don't work), (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817) and until now you've linked zero.
You continue to be wrong on this Pat and you've never been able to support your claims with studies which actually support the claims you make about them. Yes, you can ALSO get it from smaller particles, and yes ventilation matters, but that does not mean large particles don't matter and don't transmit it and are not a primary means of transmitting it which can be helped by masks.
Also my wife got it from a supermarket and supermarkets have in fact been one traceable, provable transmission location here in Los Angeles.
But bottom line, masks help to reduce the spread of your larger particles to others, which does in fact pose more risk to others, so pick out a cool one you like and wear it you fucking stubborn partisan fool.
Bottom line, CDC proof masks help reduce the risk you infect others. Your studies were talking about the protective effect for the person wearing the mask, which ignores the point you were responding to.If you were actually ill, and wearing a proper mask, not a filthy rag, of course. Because "asymptomatic transmission" is utter bollocks.
No I made no such claim. Do you not understand what the words "until now" mean?
I've linked many studies, including the only large randomized control study on covid-19 and masks (conclusion: masks don't work), (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817) and until now you've linked zero.
Wow, I literally linked to one in the post you were quoting and you cut the link and claimed I didn't link to any.
That, or you managed to reply so quick my link was an edit in the 20 seconds after the post, and you never saw it. In which case, you can go back to the post now to see it.
Bottom line, CDC proof masks help reduce the risk you infect others. Your studies were talking about the protective effect for the person wearing the mask, which ignores the point you were responding to.
The proof that masks, social distancing and lockdowns are worthless has been proven in the real world study called California vs. Florida
or even just in the same areas pre/post the idiot mandates. Of course, anyone who smelled a fart through their face diaper should have figured that one out all by their lonesome.
The problem with studying mask mandates is that it's a study of public behavior and psychology, which is bound to have varying effects. Not everyone obeys the mandate, and even if they do, people may behave in more risky ways by trusting masks too much and/or wear masks improperly (like under the nose, or removing the mask to speak).What are you talking about? That's a strength, not a problem. Because it's not a lab study, or a study in a controlled clinical environment like a hospital, it means it's not operating under unrealistic standards that fall down when applied to people who aren't medical professionals working in a very controlled environment with abundant training, resources, and motivation. And if you actually looked at the studies, you would have noticed nearly all of them consider compliance, which has typically been in the 85-95% range. In fact, many of those studies concluded that that voluntary compliance rates are already so high than the possible incremental benefit from a mandate was hard to suss out, or wouldn't amount to anything significant.
I've repeatedly, endlessly stated my full position: That mask mandates, which involve cloth masks worn by the public, have no significant effect on reducing the transmission of sars-cov-2. That doesn't mean zero effect. Could be positive; a couple studies suggest it is. But there are others that suggest it's negative, and that masks actually hurt. But either way, the effect is small enough that it's lost in the noise. And yes, that means cloth masks and surgical masks, because those are the masks actually worn by the public. It doesn't mean N95s or respirators, because they're not widely worn by the public (and even if they were, it would be pointless, because the chance any random person will get a good seal is essentially nil).
As a resident of Florida, I can tell you that mask use varied (and still varies) quite a bit. When I went down towards Miami, masks seemed to be everywhere, while around Melbourne it seemed like very few people wore them. In Orlando, mask use was prevalent, but I don't know if I'd say "most people used them" (excepting those visiting medical facilities, where compliance was enforced by armed security).The proof that masks, social distancing and lockdowns are worthless has been proven in the real world study called California vs. Florida
They use masks in Florida, and they had a mask mandate for most of the time. Even without a mandate, most people used them.
The proof that masks, social distancing and lockdowns are worthless has been proven in the real world study called California vs. Florida
They use masks in Florida, and they had a mask mandate for most of the time. Even without a mandate, most people used them.
As a resident of Florida, I can tell you that mask use varied (and still varies) quite a bit. When I went down towards Miami, masks seemed to be everywhere, while around Melbourne it seemed like very few people wore them. In Orlando, mask use was prevalent, but I don't know if I'd say "most people used them" (excepting those visiting medical facilities, where compliance was enforced by armed security).
As for what's the best government PR to get people to behave responsibly and reduce spread? I don't know for certain. I'd be interested in different views, and don't have a strong opinion.There are people who studied this for a long time. Essentially their conclusions are that we need persuasion, education, and engagement with and acknowledgement of people's genuine issues and concerns - rather than coercion, hectoring, etc.
In all of these examples, a concern about the promotion of risky behavior masquerades as a concern about health. But in reality, resistance to harm reduction is typically a cloak for moral judgments about what constitutes responsible behavior. When people express worry that PrEP will promote condomless sex, it just reveals their preconceptions about what counts as responsible sex. This bias, in turn, perpetuates stigma, the low uptake of PrEP, and preventable HIV infections. Likewise, a moralistic approach to coronavirus prevention—including shaming anyone whose adherence to social-distancing measures is less than 100 percent—will ultimately fail. If public-health officials assume that guidance on strategies such as seksbuddies or double bubbles will promote risky behavior, they will miss a crucial opportunity to reduce the potential harms of actions that some Americans are already taking.
Instead of moralizing, harm reduction comes from a place of pragmatism and compassion. It accepts that compromises will happen—usually for perfectly understandable reasons—and aims to reduce any associated harms as much as possible.
I don't think masks work. There was basically no evidence for or against at the start of the pandemic, because the previous studies on masks were almost exclusively focused on clinical environments, and most of those just looked at N95s. It wasn't just there was no evidence that masks worked against sars2 in specific, they also had no real evidence that cloths masks worn by the wider public in everyday settings had any effect on respiratory diseases. But sometimes you have to act without knowledge, and they initially assumed covid-19 wasn't aerosolized (in fact, it took a while before they realized it was airborne), and they thought the disease was about 10 times deadlier than it turned out to be, so there was a good argument to support the public wearing masks as a stop gap while the evidence and understanding caught up. But of course, that's when they were telling everyone not to wear masks, and the CDC lied through their teeth about the N95s.The problem with studying mask mandates is that it's a study of public behavior and psychology, which is bound to have varying effects. Not everyone obeys the mandate, and even if they do, people may behave in more risky ways by trusting masks too much and/or wear masks improperly (like under the nose, or removing the mask to speak).What are you talking about? That's a strength, not a problem. Because it's not a lab study, or a study in a controlled clinical environment like a hospital, it means it's not operating under unrealistic standards that fall down when applied to people who aren't medical professionals working in a very controlled environment with abundant training, resources, and motivation. And if you actually looked at the studies, you would have noticed nearly all of them consider compliance, which has typically been in the 85-95% range. In fact, many of those studies concluded that that voluntary compliance rates are already so high than the possible incremental benefit from a mandate was hard to suss out, or wouldn't amount to anything significant.I've repeatedly, endlessly stated my full position: That mask mandates, which involve cloth masks worn by the public, have no significant effect on reducing the transmission of sars-cov-2. That doesn't mean zero effect. Could be positive; a couple studies suggest it is. But there are others that suggest it's negative, and that masks actually hurt. But either way, the effect is small enough that it's lost in the noise. And yes, that means cloth masks and surgical masks, because those are the masks actually worn by the public. It doesn't mean N95s or respirators, because they're not widely worn by the public (and even if they were, it would be pointless, because the chance any random person will get a good seal is essentially nil).
You're talking only about the *mandates* here, which I don't see as the main issue. The question most relevant for an individual is "Can masks help reduce the spread?" i.e. Should I wear a mask when going outside if I want to help reduce transmission? My full position is: "By maintaining reasonable social distancing, wearing masks, and avoiding large groups indoors, people can greatly reduce the spread of covid-19. The exact effect of masks is not well-known, but there is good reason to believe they reduce the range and amount of infectious droplets spread by breathing, coughing, and speaking."
For definite individual behavior, I think the evidence is clearer. The studies clearly show a reduction in amount and range of even small droplets, and these are backed by secondary evidence from population studies (which have limitations, but are still the best information).
Regarding surgical vs cloth vs N95 -- the point is that it's silly to expect a surgical mask, which has *zero* filtration, to offer protection to the wearer. But it can still have benefit of reducing how far the wearer spread droplets, especially if they cough or sneeze. Cloth and N95 masks offer filtration both ways. Having a complete seal for an N95 isn't necessary for it to still have a benefit, which is addressed in the studies I linked.
The question of whether masks should be mandatory or just recommended is secondary, and it is more a public relations and/or rights question than a scientific one. You write many of those studies concluded that that voluntary compliance rates are already so high than the possible incremental benefit from a mandate was hard to suss out. But this is inherently already accepting that the voluntary compliance rates are a benefit. As for what's the best government PR to get people to behave responsibly and reduce spread? I don't know for certain. I'd be interested in different views, and don't have a strong opinion.
I don't think I agree with her on a lot of the specifics, but I'm firmly behind that kind of approach. As I've said many times, I think the public health messaging during the pandemic has been disastrously bad. Their job -- their only real job -- is to assess threats, and then educate and persuade the public. They failed, and failed at a spectacular level. Though I think it's more than just the hectoring and moralizing, public health also failed to address the uncertainty when it came to a lot of their conclusions (granted, that's hard in the first place, and there's a lot of pressure to do otherwise because the public always wants clear answers even when they don't exist), and they also destroyed the trust the public had in them by lying. The last is probably the worst, because it might be a generation before significant chunks of the public believe them again.As for what's the best government PR to get people to behave responsibly and reduce spread? I don't know for certain. I'd be interested in different views, and don't have a strong opinion.There are people who studied this for a long time. Essentially their conclusions are that we need persuasion, education, and engagement with and acknowledgement of people's genuine issues and concerns - rather than coercion, hectoring, etc.
Julia Marcus (https://twitter.com/JuliaLMarcus) is a good one to follow on these things, and she's not some right-winger rejecting stuff for the sake of it, she's very lefty, has she/her in her profile, etc. She has a series of articles (https://www.theatlantic.com/author/julia-marcus/) on these topics at the Atlantic and the one I found most interesting was her comparing the covid restrictions to the "just say no" and "abstinence" approaches with drugs and HIV/AIDS here (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/no-one-telling-americans-how-reopen-their-lives/612172/). For reference, she wrote this in May last year.QuoteIn all of these examples, a concern about the promotion of risky behavior masquerades as a concern about health. But in reality, resistance to harm reduction is typically a cloak for moral judgments about what constitutes responsible behavior. When people express worry that PrEP will promote condomless sex, it just reveals their preconceptions about what counts as responsible sex. This bias, in turn, perpetuates stigma, the low uptake of PrEP, and preventable HIV infections. Likewise, a moralistic approach to coronavirus prevention—including shaming anyone whose adherence to social-distancing measures is less than 100 percent—will ultimately fail. If public-health officials assume that guidance on strategies such as seksbuddies or double bubbles will promote risky behavior, they will miss a crucial opportunity to reduce the potential harms of actions that some Americans are already taking.
Instead of moralizing, harm reduction comes from a place of pragmatism and compassion. It accepts that compromises will happen—usually for perfectly understandable reasons—and aims to reduce any associated harms as much as possible.
Julia Marcus (https://twitter.com/JuliaLMarcus) is a good one to follow on these things, and she's not some right-winger rejecting stuff for the sake of it, she's very lefty, has she/her in her profile, etc. She has a series of articles (https://www.theatlantic.com/author/julia-marcus/) on these topics at the Atlantic and the one I found most interesting was her comparing the covid restrictions to the "just say no" and "abstinence" approaches with drugs and HIV/AIDS here (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/no-one-telling-americans-how-reopen-their-lives/612172/). For reference, she wrote this in May last year.QuoteIn all of these examples, a concern about the promotion of risky behavior masquerades as a concern about health. But in reality, resistance to harm reduction is typically a cloak for moral judgments about what constitutes responsible behavior. When people express worry that PrEP will promote condomless sex, it just reveals their preconceptions about what counts as responsible sex. This bias, in turn, perpetuates stigma, the low uptake of PrEP, and preventable HIV infections. Likewise, a moralistic approach to coronavirus prevention—including shaming anyone whose adherence to social-distancing measures is less than 100 percent—will ultimately fail. If public-health officials assume that guidance on strategies such as seksbuddies or double bubbles will promote risky behavior, they will miss a crucial opportunity to reduce the potential harms of actions that some Americans are already taking.
Instead of moralizing, harm reduction comes from a place of pragmatism and compassion. It accepts that compromises will happen—usually for perfectly understandable reasons—and aims to reduce any associated harms as much as possible.
I don't think I agree with her on a lot of the specifics, but I'm firmly behind that kind of approach. As I've said many times, I think the public health messaging during the pandemic has been disastrously bad. Their job -- their only real job -- is to assess threats, and then educate and persuade the public. They failed, and failed at a spectacular level. Though I think it's more than just the hectoring and moralizing, public health also failed to address the uncertainty when it came to a lot of their conclusions (granted, that's hard in the first place, and there's a lot of pressure to do otherwise because the public always wants clear answers even when they don't exist), and they also destroyed the trust the public had in them by lying. The last is probably the worst, because it might be a generation before significant chunks of the public believe them again.
Pat - Worldwide, are there any governments or institutions that you think have done a good job of communicating on public health during the pandemic?I'm not familiar with any, though I don't think public health has any control over the partisanship of the wider society. The way they can rise above that is to studiously avoid taking sides, sticking purely to facts, not stepping outside their boundaries (no suggestions on what to do "to help the economy", for instance), admitting areas of uncertainty, and never ever manipulating the truth. I'll step back a bit from saying it's their job to persuade, because while that should be the end result of their messaging, I think making it a goal creates too much pressure to sacrifice the truth in favor of attempting to change behavior, like Fauci's lies about masks and herd immunity. But in the mid and long term, that doesn't help. In fact it's horribly damaging, because the distrust it creates may never be overcome. So truth should take priority over anything else. It's okay to not know, or to be wrong. It's not okay to mislead or deceive, and every effort should be taken to avoid even the appearance of dishonesty.
I agree that not moralizing is good in messaging, but really, I don't know what would work best given the hyper-partisan and social-media-dominated landscape. I feel like anything that splits along partisan political lines will end up being politicized and moralized about on social media, and the outrage and moralizing will occupy more attention than factual discussion.
I agree that not moralizing is good in messaging, but really, I don't know what would work best given the hyper-partisan and social-media-dominated landscape.Julia Marcus talks about this (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/dudes-who-wont-wear-masks/613375/), noting that males are less likely to mask up than women, and how once you engage with them, acknowledge, respect and address their concerns, they're more likely to do it.
But even macho men like Huff, whose Twitter bio declares, “I support Toxic Masculinity,” aren’t immune to public-health advice: In his video, he appears to be wearing a seatbelt.But some years ago, refusing to wear a seatbelt was likewise a statement of macho. Over time the message got across, so much so that the guy wouldn't even have thought of it, but just belted up as he got in.
Yet unlike a seatbelt, which directly benefits the user, masks primarily protect everyone else, particularly people who are older or have underlying health conditions that make them vulnerable to the coronavirus.There are things like breath tests, zebra crossings, traffic lights and indicators which do benefit the user, but primarily benefit others. I doubt this mask-refuser just barrels across children's crossings at 60 miles an hour. In that case, the danger to others is clear, and ordinary decent people will act accordingly. Masks are less clear, and part of the reason for that lack of clarity is the mixed messaging from public health authorities.
Bottom line, CDC proof masks help reduce the risk you infect others. Your studies were talking about the protective effect for the person wearing the mask, which ignores the point you were responding to.If you were actually ill, and wearing a proper mask, not a filthy rag, of course. Because "asymptomatic transmission" is utter bollocks.
Julia Marcus (https://twitter.com/JuliaLMarcus) is a good one to follow on these things, and she's not some right-winger rejecting stuff for the sake of it, she's very lefty, has she/her in her profile, etc. She has a series of articles (https://www.theatlantic.com/author/julia-marcus/) on these topics at the Atlantic and the one I found most interesting was her comparing the covid restrictions to the "just say no" and "abstinence" approaches with drugs and HIV/AIDS here (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/no-one-telling-americans-how-reopen-their-lives/612172/). For reference, she wrote this in May last year.QuoteIn all of these examples, a concern about the promotion of risky behavior masquerades as a concern about health. But in reality, resistance to harm reduction is typically a cloak for moral judgments about what constitutes responsible behavior. When people express worry that PrEP will promote condomless sex, it just reveals their preconceptions about what counts as responsible sex. This bias, in turn, perpetuates stigma, the low uptake of PrEP, and preventable HIV infections. Likewise, a moralistic approach to coronavirus prevention—including shaming anyone whose adherence to social-distancing measures is less than 100 percent—will ultimately fail. If public-health officials assume that guidance on strategies such as seksbuddies or double bubbles will promote risky behavior, they will miss a crucial opportunity to reduce the potential harms of actions that some Americans are already taking.
Instead of moralizing, harm reduction comes from a place of pragmatism and compassion. It accepts that compromises will happen—usually for perfectly understandable reasons—and aims to reduce any associated harms as much as possible.
I don't think I agree with her on a lot of the specifics, but I'm firmly behind that kind of approach. As I've said many times, I think the public health messaging during the pandemic has been disastrously bad. Their job -- their only real job -- is to assess threats, and then educate and persuade the public. They failed, and failed at a spectacular level. Though I think it's more than just the hectoring and moralizing, public health also failed to address the uncertainty when it came to a lot of their conclusions (granted, that's hard in the first place, and there's a lot of pressure to do otherwise because the public always wants clear answers even when they don't exist), and they also destroyed the trust the public had in them by lying. The last is probably the worst, because it might be a generation before significant chunks of the public believe them again.
Pat - Worldwide, are there any governments or institutions that you think have done a good job of communicating on public health during the pandemic?
I agree that not moralizing is good in messaging, but really, I don't know what would work best given the hyper-partisan and social-media-dominated landscape. I feel like anything that splits along partisan political lines will end up being politicized and moralized about on social media, and the outrage and moralizing will occupy more attention than factual discussion.
Julia Marcus (https://twitter.com/JuliaLMarcus) is a good one to follow on these things, and she's not some right-winger rejecting stuff for the sake of it, she's very lefty, has she/her in her profile, etc. She has a series of articles (https://www.theatlantic.com/author/julia-marcus/) on these topics at the Atlantic and the one I found most interesting was her comparing the covid restrictions to the "just say no" and "abstinence" approaches with drugs and HIV/AIDS here (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/no-one-telling-americans-how-reopen-their-lives/612172/). For reference, she wrote this in May last year.QuoteIn all of these examples, a concern about the promotion of risky behavior masquerades as a concern about health. But in reality, resistance to harm reduction is typically a cloak for moral judgments about what constitutes responsible behavior. When people express worry that PrEP will promote condomless sex, it just reveals their preconceptions about what counts as responsible sex. This bias, in turn, perpetuates stigma, the low uptake of PrEP, and preventable HIV infections. Likewise, a moralistic approach to coronavirus prevention—including shaming anyone whose adherence to social-distancing measures is less than 100 percent—will ultimately fail. If public-health officials assume that guidance on strategies such as seksbuddies or double bubbles will promote risky behavior, they will miss a crucial opportunity to reduce the potential harms of actions that some Americans are already taking.
Instead of moralizing, harm reduction comes from a place of pragmatism and compassion. It accepts that compromises will happen—usually for perfectly understandable reasons—and aims to reduce any associated harms as much as possible.
I don't think I agree with her on a lot of the specifics, but I'm firmly behind that kind of approach. As I've said many times, I think the public health messaging during the pandemic has been disastrously bad. Their job -- their only real job -- is to assess threats, and then educate and persuade the public. They failed, and failed at a spectacular level. Though I think it's more than just the hectoring and moralizing, public health also failed to address the uncertainty when it came to a lot of their conclusions (granted, that's hard in the first place, and there's a lot of pressure to do otherwise because the public always wants clear answers even when they don't exist), and they also destroyed the trust the public had in them by lying. The last is probably the worst, because it might be a generation before significant chunks of the public believe them again.
Pat - Worldwide, are there any governments or institutions that you think have done a good job of communicating on public health during the pandemic?
I agree that not moralizing is good in messaging, but really, I don't know what would work best given the hyper-partisan and social-media-dominated landscape. I feel like anything that splits along partisan political lines will end up being politicized and moralized about on social media, and the outrage and moralizing will occupy more attention than factual discussion.
Facui was given a good amount of rope before he hung his credibility on lies. The man from the word go was trying to mislead people. People in America have huge amounts of respect for the lab coat and the title of Doctor. He has proven himself to be another civil "servant" who is immune to consequences for doing a bad job.
The WHO also hurt its credibility nearly immediately, by covering for China.
Fresh off getting poked by the gracious host (I deserved it; bad choice of words on my part elsethread), let's go for the gusto here!
Let's talk about Surgisphere, shall we?
The Lancet, to much ballyhoo and left-leaning media cheering, publishes a study showing, purportedly, that the 'cocktail' (hydroxylchloroquine + zinc and something else I can't remember) isn't effective against Covid-19. Much hooting and sneering from the peanut gallery, since U.S. President Trump had suggested it as a possible treatment.
Skip ahead a week or two, and people start asking -questions- about the Lancet study. Turns out their data comes from a org called 'Surgisphere', whose origins seem... kinda murky. Anyone familiar with climate change shenanigans is probably getting a funny sense of deja vu.
And then Surgisphere just ... vanishes, as though they'd been crafted for one role and were no longer needed, especially with people asking why their science advisor was a SF/F author. The Lancet retracts their study, but the damage is done.
So the question is, cui bono? Who profits? Certainly Trump's political enemies (which covers most of the left side of the spectrum). There's also been questions about money raised; a competing treatment, Remdesivir, would be far more expensive and lucrative than the HCQ cocktail.
So, who's up for signing onto that mission to colonize Mars? Cause I gotta tell you, clown world is losing its charm.
Asymptomatic transmission is arguable amongst the not mentally ill with a leaning towards best wear a mask just in case. I noted today whilst picking up my kids that the loudest anti-vaxxer mother wasn't wearing a mask putting her clearly in Keiro's company.
Asymptomatic transmission is arguable amongst the not mentally ill with a leaning towards best wear a mask just in case. I noted today whilst picking up my kids that the loudest anti-vaxxer mother wasn't wearing a mask putting her clearly in Keiro's company.
Just in case what? You want to tell everyone else you're really not a sheep, just a virtue-signalling cunt who wants everyone to know how magnanimous and wonderful you are for "considering others"?
Please.
Cunt really is your go to word isn't it?
On balance it's a small thing to do if there is a reasonable chance of reducing risk to theirs. I know you don't care about other people, that's not you being a mental it's a straightforward personality disorder, but here in normal world we do. In the end it's not that unreasonable and has probably helped with the flu virus as well.
I've actually been wanting to ask about how the worldwide conspiracy works in your eyes. Who is behind it, how are they coordinating it between so many nations and what are they're ultimate goals? Lay it out.
Cunt really is your go to word isn't it?
On balance it's a small thing to do if there is a reasonable chance of reducing risk to theirs. I know you don't care about other people, that's not you being a mental it's a straightforward personality disorder, but here in normal world we do. In the end it's not that unreasonable and has probably helped with the flu virus as well.
I've actually been wanting to ask about how the worldwide conspiracy works in your eyes. Who is behind it, how are they coordinating it between so many nations and what are they're ultimate goals? Lay it out.
Which is why the flu shot is encouraged in at risk populations and it isn't that big a deal for healthy people.
COVID-19 is different though. Everything is different! Forget all you knew and despair!
Check Public Health England's own report suggesting the immunity provided by the "vaccines" are inferior to that acquired by exposure to the virus and recovery. Which incidentally, might be fostering mutations. In other words if you're otherwise healthy, you may be making things worse being vaccinated. Never mind that if you've had it, you don't need vaccinating.
As for the flu jab, equally pointless. In "good" years it's 40% effective, in bad ones 5-10%. And even then it doesn't even make you immune, but might lessen your symptoms.
Funny, "cases" everywhere went up following mask mandates, not down. So it's questionable that it's helping.
A recent CDC study (which unfortunately I can't look for while at work) showed that mask mandates had no statistically significant effect on transmission reduction.
Off the top of my head I believe the data showed that where strict masking mandates were followed, after 60 days there was a 0.5 - 0.7% reduction in transmission. After 100 days of strict masking that % increased to something like 1.6% in reduction of transmission.
Funny, "cases" everywhere went up following mask mandates, not down. So it's questionable that it's helping.
A recent CDC study (which unfortunately I can't look for while at work) showed that mask mandates had no statistically significant effect on transmission reduction.
Off the top of my head I believe the data showed that where strict masking mandates were followed, after 60 days there was a 0.5 - 0.7% reduction in transmission. After 100 days of strict masking that % increased to something like 1.6% in reduction of transmission.
Are you referring to this study?
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm
If so yes, a 1.8% reduction in cases and 1.9% reduction in deaths after 100 days. Based on U.S. death rates since last April, that would be around 35 lives saved every day from masking - less because some states have not had mask mandates.
Almost 2000 people die every day from heart disease, and ~130 every day from suicides. 35/day is pretty insignificant comparatively, ergo, the effect of wearing masks is statistically insignificant unless you are a fucking moron.
Cunt really is your go to word isn't it?
On balance it's a small thing to do if there is a reasonable chance of reducing risk to theirs. I know you don't care about other people, that's not you being a mental it's a straightforward personality disorder, but here in normal world we do. In the end it's not that unreasonable and has probably helped with the flu virus as well.
I've actually been wanting to ask about how the worldwide conspiracy works in your eyes. Who is behind it, how are they coordinating it between so many nations and what are they're ultimate goals? Lay it out.
Funny, "cases" everywhere went up following mask mandates, not down. So it's questionable that it's helping.
A recent CDC study (which unfortunately I can't look for while at work) showed that mask mandates had no statistically significant effect on transmission reduction.
Off the top of my head I believe the data showed that where strict masking mandates were followed, after 60 days there was a 0.5 - 0.7% reduction in transmission. After 100 days of strict masking that % increased to something like 1.6% in reduction of transmission.
That's because they weren't wearing TWO masks!
Masks are an extremely simple, low-effort step to reduce spread. Why not do it, if it saves 35 lives a day - especially since it is only for a limited time until the vaccine is fully distributed.
I understand greater pushback about lockdowns since that has much greater impact and effort - but that doesn't apply to masks.
Also, you're using "statistically significant" to mean "small", but that's not what it means. The effect is statistically significant to within p < 0.01 according to the study. Note that is the effect of mask mandate orders, not overall mask use. The total effects of masks is at least 2-3 times greater than that, because even without the mandates, around 40% of Americans wear masks, and even with the mandates, many people do not wear masks (maybe 10 - 20%?). And many people wear them improperly.
No one wears two masks! That would be crazy.
Its three masks or bust.
I was going to make an actual post in reply, but instead I deleted it and will just say you must lead a sad fucking existence where you think 35 alleged deaths per day in a country with 330mil people is statistically significant. Are you the same type of dude to punish the entire class with detention because one dumbass was caught chewing gum?
No one wears two masks! That would be crazy.
Its three masks or bust.
Look, wear three masks for just two more weeks. We promise this time. Seriously.
No one wears two masks! That would be crazy.
Its three masks or bust.
Look, wear three masks for just two more weeks. We promise this time. Seriously.
If you are not prepared to wear three masks for ever then you might as well just kill Grandma right now.Well, she's statistically insignificant, isn't she? Now where's my rifle...
If you are not prepared to wear three masks for ever then you might as well just kill Grandma right now.Well, she's statistically insignificant, isn't she? Now where's my rifle...
If being vaccinated doesn't mean we can ease up on the rules and calm down, then certainly the little fact of their already being dead isn't going to stop us from needing to protect them.
How else are Brads Grandmas going to vote for Biden again next election?
I was going to make an actual post in reply, but instead I deleted it and will just say you must lead a sad fucking existence where you think 35 alleged deaths per day in a country with 330mil people is statistically significant. Are you the same type of dude to punish the entire class with detention because one dumbass was caught chewing gum?
The homicide rate in the U.S. is an average of around 40 deaths per day. Would you say that all homicides in the U.S. are statistically insignificant, and not worth any concern?
Are you referring to this study?
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm
If so yes, a 1.8% reduction in cases and 1.9% reduction in deaths after 100 days. Based on U.S. death rates since last April, that would be around 35 lives saved every day from masking - less because some states have not had mask mandates.
Almost 2000 people die every day from heart disease, and ~130 every day from suicides. 35/day is pretty insignificant comparatively, ergo, the effect of wearing masks is statistically insignificant unless you are a fucking moron.
Masks are an extremely simple, low-effort step to reduce spread. Why not do it, if it saves 35 lives a day - especially since it is only for a limited time until the vaccine is fully distributed.
Are you referring to this study?
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm
If so yes, a 1.8% reduction in cases and 1.9% reduction in deaths after 100 days. Based on U.S. death rates since last April, that would be around 35 lives saved every day from masking - less because some states have not had mask mandates.
Almost 2000 people die every day from heart disease, and ~130 every day from suicides. 35/day is pretty insignificant comparatively, ergo, the effect of wearing masks is statistically insignificant unless you are a fucking moron.
Masks are an extremely simple, low-effort step to reduce spread. Why not do it, if it saves 35 lives a day - especially since it is only for a limited time until the vaccine is fully distributed.
Masks are not simple at all. As I keep posting, even the then candidate now President of the United States utterly fucked up using his mask, on public television, as an example of how even a high profile politician who should be setting an example dropped the ball for all to see.
I think masks are a mildly good idea, but not the panacea worth utterly freaking out in a Wal-mart over, as some people seem to think.
In the end, you can't police every moment of every person's day, to make sure they're never, ever touching their face and mask except to don and remove them. Christ, our local RPG pub is looking towards limited re-opening, with the rule that you must wear a mask except when taking a drink. Allowing people to touch their face and mask to move it aside to take a slurp is idiotic, but people are dumb about using their masks.
The only way mask wearing is simple, is if you're using it for show and/or a badge of compliance.
Are you referring to this study?
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm
If so yes, a 1.8% reduction in cases and 1.9% reduction in deaths after 100 days. Based on U.S. death rates since last April, that would be around 35 lives saved every day from masking - less because some states have not had mask mandates.
Almost 2000 people die every day from heart disease, and ~130 every day from suicides. 35/day is pretty insignificant comparatively, ergo, the effect of wearing masks is statistically insignificant unless you are a fucking moron.
Masks are an extremely simple, low-effort step to reduce spread. Why not do it, if it saves 35 lives a day - especially since it is only for a limited time until the vaccine is fully distributed.
Masks are not simple at all. As I keep posting, even the then candidate now President of the United States utterly fucked up using his mask, on public television, as an example of how even a high profile politician who should be setting an example dropped the ball for all to see.
I think masks are a mildly good idea, but not the panacea worth utterly freaking out in a Wal-mart over, as some people seem to think.
In the end, you can't police every moment of every person's day, to make sure they're never, ever touching their face and mask except to don and remove them. Christ, our local RPG pub is looking towards limited re-opening, with the rule that you must wear a mask except when taking a drink. Allowing people to touch their face and mask to move it aside to take a slurp is idiotic, but people are dumb about using their masks.
The only way mask wearing is simple, is if you're using it for show and/or a badge of compliance.
LOL,
Ratman: Biden is a simple moron!
Also Ratman: Masks are not simple, even Biden messed one up!
I think masks are a mildly good idea, but not the panacea worth utterly freaking out in a Wal-mart over, as some people seem to think.
I think masks are a mildly good idea, but not the panacea worth utterly freaking out in a Wal-mart over, as some people seem to think.
I agree that people get too freaked out over lack of masks, and worse, sometimes think of them like a serious protection so they are willing to do more risky things than they would otherwise.
That said, mask use doesn't have to be perfect for them to be useful. Sure, ideally people would get a good seal wearing N95 masks and never touch their face - but there is still plenty of benefit possible even without keeping to perfect medical procedure.
Man, I'm not even expecting perfect medical procedure. I'd be happy if, for example, I could be relatively sure that Bob McMask wasn't scratching his nose under his mask before getting out of his car to get grocieries.
Man, I'm not even expecting perfect medical procedure. I'd be happy if, for example, I could be relatively sure that Bob McMask wasn't scratching his nose under his mask before getting out of his car to get grocieries.
I'm much more bugged by people who take their mask off to cough, or to speak. Scratching his nose means his hands are dirty, but infection by airborne droplets is a lot easier and faster than infection by touching surfaces. I pretty much expect people's hands to be dirty regardless of mask use.
Man, I'm not even expecting perfect medical procedure. I'd be happy if, for example, I could be relatively sure that Bob McMask wasn't scratching his nose under his mask before getting out of his car to get grocieries.
I'm much more bugged by people who take their mask off to cough, or to speak. Scratching his nose means his hands are dirty, but infection by airborne droplets is a lot easier and faster than infection by touching surfaces. I pretty much expect people's hands to be dirty regardless of mask use.
Yes, those too, but is it so much to ask for people to not touch their faces while in public? It's a small, simple thing that can help prevent people from dying of Covid.
https://www.theweek.in/wire-updates/international/2021/03/23/fgn68-uk-holidaymakers-fine.html
£5,000 fine if you're caught trying to leave the UK without a government-approved excuse. Sounds perfectly reasonable and not at all totalitarian.
Well, it says protests will be permitted, so just say you need to travel to take part in a protest.https://www.theweek.in/wire-updates/international/2021/03/23/fgn68-uk-holidaymakers-fine.html
£5,000 fine if you're caught trying to leave the UK without a government-approved excuse. Sounds perfectly reasonable and not at all totalitarian.
All this while they're actively resettling 15 year olds with a full beard.
Is it possible that the WHO have changed their advice in the last year?
So what's the current WHO guidance?
So what's the current WHO guidance?
So what's the current WHO guidance?Probably different than what it was a year ago. Which means that: a) the WHO has done a remarkable amount of science on a still poorly-understood virus that overturns decades of solid previous research, or b) it's irrelevant, as this just proves the WHO is more interested in political statements than actual scientific medical information...
The WHO does not recommend the wearing of masks by the mass population:
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-press-conference-full-30mar2020.pdf?sfvrsn=6b68bc4a_2
That's not exactly what the article says. It's not first, then later. It's just different rules for different categories, all at once.The WHO does not recommend the wearing of masks by the mass population:
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-press-conference-full-30mar2020.pdf?sfvrsn=6b68bc4a_2
Yes, over a year ago that's where they were at.
And then they figured out how the virus was spreading and, like you do with science, changed their recommendation with the new evidence. (https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200608/who-changes-stance-says-public-should-wear-masks) First they changed on those over 60, those with pre-existing conditions, and health care workers. Later, they changed to the general public.
Did you not realize you were looking at March 2020 and thought it was March 2021?
The WHO does not recommend the wearing of masks by the mass population:
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-press-conference-full-30mar2020.pdf?sfvrsn=6b68bc4a_2
Yes, over a year ago that's where they were at.
And then they figured out how the virus was spreading and, like you do with science, changed their recommendation with the new evidence. (https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200608/who-changes-stance-says-public-should-wear-masks) First they changed on those over 60, those with pre-existing conditions, and health care workers. Later, they changed to the general public.
Did you not realize you were looking at March 2020 and thought it was March 2021?
The WHO does not recommend the wearing of masks by the mass population:
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-press-conference-full-30mar2020.pdf?sfvrsn=6b68bc4a_2
Yes, over a year ago that's where they were at.
And then they figured out how the virus was spreading and, like you do with science, changed their recommendation with the new evidence. (https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200608/who-changes-stance-says-public-should-wear-masks) First they changed on those over 60, those with pre-existing conditions, and health care workers. Later, they changed to the general public.
Did you not realize you were looking at March 2020 and thought it was March 2021?
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-biden-administration-is-developing-a-vaccine-passport-program-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/trending/new-york-covid-digital-vaccine-passport-excelsior-pass-msg-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-proposes-vaccination-passport-coronavirus-2021-3
Plan to go to the bar? Watch a game? Fly on an airplane? Go to work?
The Totalitarian Clock has ticked a few minutes closer to midnight.
I’m gonna make a bet that the people who called Trump “literally Hitler!” are just fine with a mandatory vaccine for a particularly nasty cold virus...And the transit papers. Don't forget the transit papers.
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-biden-administration-is-developing-a-vaccine-passport-program-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/trending/new-york-covid-digital-vaccine-passport-excelsior-pass-msg-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-proposes-vaccination-passport-coronavirus-2021-3
Plan to go to the bar? Watch a game? Fly on an airplane? Go to work?
The Totalitarian Clock has ticked a few minutes closer to midnight.
What ideological bent? Anti-totalitarianism? Opposing extremists isn't an ideology, it covers most humans.https://www.businessinsider.com/the-biden-administration-is-developing-a-vaccine-passport-program-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/trending/new-york-covid-digital-vaccine-passport-excelsior-pass-msg-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-proposes-vaccination-passport-coronavirus-2021-3
Plan to go to the bar? Watch a game? Fly on an airplane? Go to work?
The Totalitarian Clock has ticked a few minutes closer to midnight.
Meanwhile Los Angeles, which given your ideological bent must look like the pit of totalitarian rule, is opening bars, opening stadiums, and making travel easier right now. Offices which were closed are now opening, amusement parts which were closed are now opening, same with gyms, etc.. And none of it involves proof of vaccination. It's just based on the infection, hospitalization, and death numbers dropping.
If your theory were correct, none of that would be opening.
This has nothing to do with Gavin Newsome staring down the barrel of a recall, of course.https://www.businessinsider.com/the-biden-administration-is-developing-a-vaccine-passport-program-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/trending/new-york-covid-digital-vaccine-passport-excelsior-pass-msg-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-proposes-vaccination-passport-coronavirus-2021-3
Plan to go to the bar? Watch a game? Fly on an airplane? Go to work?
The Totalitarian Clock has ticked a few minutes closer to midnight.
Meanwhile Los Angeles, which given your ideological bent must look like the pit of totalitarian rule, is opening bars, opening stadiums, and making travel easier right now. Offices which were closed are now opening, amusement parts which were closed are now opening, same with gyms, etc.. And none of it involves proof of vaccination. It's just based on the infection, hospitalization, and death numbers dropping.
If your theory were correct, none of that would be opening.
What ideological bent? Anti-totalitarianism? Opposing extremists isn't an ideology, it covers most humans.https://www.businessinsider.com/the-biden-administration-is-developing-a-vaccine-passport-program-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/trending/new-york-covid-digital-vaccine-passport-excelsior-pass-msg-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-proposes-vaccination-passport-coronavirus-2021-3
Plan to go to the bar? Watch a game? Fly on an airplane? Go to work?
The Totalitarian Clock has ticked a few minutes closer to midnight.
Meanwhile Los Angeles, which given your ideological bent must look like the pit of totalitarian rule, is opening bars, opening stadiums, and making travel easier right now. Offices which were closed are now opening, amusement parts which were closed are now opening, same with gyms, etc.. And none of it involves proof of vaccination. It's just based on the infection, hospitalization, and death numbers dropping.
If your theory were correct, none of that would be opening.
And I'm pretty sure LA doesn't have vaccine passports, so I'm not even sure why you brought it up. Sure, they handled the virus terribly, but pandemics come in waves, and we've been on the downswing for a while. But hey, looks like it's going back up, so let's see if LA is the next in line for a monstrous abrogation of basic human rights.
https://uproxx.com/viral/marjorie-taylor-greene-vaccine-passports-mark-of-the-beast/There's also a major Democrat push to eject her from the House.
The most sane and stable person in Congress (reminder: Biden and Harris are no longer members of Congress) has moved on from warning us all about Jewish space lasers, to calling vaccine passports Biden's Mark of the Beast. No, I'm not sure how that works.
Totalitarians must be eating this up, because damn it's a lot easier to sell someone a shit sandwich if your competition is selling a sandwich full of shards of glass (that were used to make space lasers).
https://uproxx.com/viral/marjorie-taylor-greene-vaccine-passports-mark-of-the-beast/
The most sane and stable person in Congress (reminder: Biden and Harris are no longer members of Congress) has moved on from warning us all about Jewish space lasers, to calling vaccine passports Biden's Mark of the Beast. No, I'm not sure how that works.
Totalitarians must be eating this up, because damn it's a lot easier to sell someone a shit sandwich if your competition is selling a sandwich full of shards of glass (that were used to make space lasers).
Good for her to faithfully represent her constituents. Too bad though that we have a population behind the idiotic beliefs she champions.https://uproxx.com/viral/marjorie-taylor-greene-vaccine-passports-mark-of-the-beast/
The most sane and stable person in Congress (reminder: Biden and Harris are no longer members of Congress) has moved on from warning us all about Jewish space lasers, to calling vaccine passports Biden's Mark of the Beast. No, I'm not sure how that works.
Totalitarians must be eating this up, because damn it's a lot easier to sell someone a shit sandwich if your competition is selling a sandwich full of shards of glass (that were used to make space lasers).
MTG is purely the prerogative of her constituents. Congress used to be full "local yokels" who represent their district. You still see it with minority politicians. With white politicians? Very rare nowadays. No more Charlie Wilson's, Ron Paul's or James Traficant's.
https://uproxx.com/viral/marjorie-taylor-greene-vaccine-passports-mark-of-the-beast/
The most sane and stable person in Congress (reminder: Biden and Harris are no longer members of Congress) has moved on from warning us all about Jewish space lasers, to calling vaccine passports Biden's Mark of the Beast. No, I'm not sure how that works.
Totalitarians must be eating this up, because damn it's a lot easier to sell someone a shit sandwich if your competition is selling a sandwich full of shards of glass (that were used to make space lasers).
16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has [a]the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
MTG is purely the prerogative of her constituents.Absolutely. I'm very strongly in favor of more minority views being represented in Congress. The problem with representing half a million people geographically contiguous people is you almost always end up with someone very bland. The exceptions are in districts with a one-party lock, where nutjobs like AOC or MTG can get elected. There's a good argument for drastically increasing the number of reps, or for detaching one of the houses of Congress from the land and allowing them to be voted in by more widely dispersed but cohesive groups. That would allow minority parties to have representation equal to their popular support, instead of effectively zero. For instance, the Libertarian Party won 3.28% of the votes in the 2016 presidential election -- yet in the House, they won 0 seats, when that percentage should translate into about 14. The Green Party got 1.1% in the same election, which should translate into about 5 seats. The system is strongly biased against minority views.
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-biden-administration-is-developing-a-vaccine-passport-program-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/trending/new-york-covid-digital-vaccine-passport-excelsior-pass-msg-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-proposes-vaccination-passport-coronavirus-2021-3
Plan to go to the bar? Watch a game? Fly on an airplane? Go to work?
The Totalitarian Clock has ticked a few minutes closer to midnight.
How is that the opposite. It's perfectly consistent to oppose totalitarian measures and to... oppose totalitarian measures.https://www.businessinsider.com/the-biden-administration-is-developing-a-vaccine-passport-program-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/trending/new-york-covid-digital-vaccine-passport-excelsior-pass-msg-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-proposes-vaccination-passport-coronavirus-2021-3
Plan to go to the bar? Watch a game? Fly on an airplane? Go to work?
The Totalitarian Clock has ticked a few minutes closer to midnight.
Conversely, I've seen conservative complaints that it's insane if covid restrictions apply to people who have already been vaccinated -- which is the exact opposite complaint.
One can complain that there are covid restrictions at all - but complaining about those isn't new (i.e. shifting the clock).So when the Overton Windows of Totalitarianism has shifted dramatically in the past year, we can't talk about new restrictions anymore because it's not new?
to calling vaccine passports Biden's Mark of the Beast.
This has nothing to do with Gavin Newsome staring down the barrel of a recall, of course.https://www.businessinsider.com/the-biden-administration-is-developing-a-vaccine-passport-program-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/trending/new-york-covid-digital-vaccine-passport-excelsior-pass-msg-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-proposes-vaccination-passport-coronavirus-2021-3
Plan to go to the bar? Watch a game? Fly on an airplane? Go to work?
The Totalitarian Clock has ticked a few minutes closer to midnight.
Meanwhile Los Angeles, which given your ideological bent must look like the pit of totalitarian rule, is opening bars, opening stadiums, and making travel easier right now. Offices which were closed are now opening, amusement parts which were closed are now opening, same with gyms, etc.. And none of it involves proof of vaccination. It's just based on the infection, hospitalization, and death numbers dropping.
If your theory were correct, none of that would be opening.
Totally nothing at all.
What ideological bent? Anti-totalitarianism? Opposing extremists isn't an ideology, it covers most humans.https://www.businessinsider.com/the-biden-administration-is-developing-a-vaccine-passport-program-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/trending/new-york-covid-digital-vaccine-passport-excelsior-pass-msg-2021-3
https://www.businessinsider.com/eu-proposes-vaccination-passport-coronavirus-2021-3
Plan to go to the bar? Watch a game? Fly on an airplane? Go to work?
The Totalitarian Clock has ticked a few minutes closer to midnight.
Meanwhile Los Angeles, which given your ideological bent must look like the pit of totalitarian rule, is opening bars, opening stadiums, and making travel easier right now. Offices which were closed are now opening, amusement parts which were closed are now opening, same with gyms, etc.. And none of it involves proof of vaccination. It's just based on the infection, hospitalization, and death numbers dropping.
If your theory were correct, none of that would be opening.
And I'm pretty sure LA doesn't have vaccine passports, so I'm not even sure why you brought it up. Sure, they handled the virus terribly, but pandemics come in waves, and we've been on the downswing for a while. But hey, looks like it's going back up, so let's see if LA is the next in line for a monstrous abrogation of basic human rights.
Everything is ideology to a leftist.
Conversely, I've seen conservative complaints that it's insane if covid restrictions apply to people who have already been vaccinated -- which is the exact opposite complaint.
How is that the opposite. It's perfectly consistent to oppose totalitarian measures and to... oppose totalitarian measures.One can complain that there are covid restrictions at all - but complaining about those isn't new (i.e. shifting the clock).So when the Overton Windows of Totalitarianism has shifted dramatically in the past year, we can't talk about new restrictions anymore because it's not new?
I'm right of center, sparky. You really pretending Pat's free of ideological influence?So what's my ideology?
But this isn't new restrictions. It's a *relaxing* of previously-implemented restrictions for people who are vaccinated. Complaining about both seems like damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't.What you're describing isn't a relaxing of restrictions, it's the equivalent of a Mafia protection racket.
1) Keep restrictions in place for everyone regardless of vaccination.
"This is senseless totalitarianism just to exert control. There's no reason to restrict people who are vaccinated."
2) Give passes so vaccinated people can ignore restrictions.
"Now vaccination is the Mark of the Beast. The Totalitarianism Clock is ticking down to midnight."
2) Give passes so vaccinated people can ignore restrictions.
"Now vaccination is the Mark of the Beast. The Totalitarianism Clock is ticking down to midnight."
We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
And even if somehow covid-19 vanishes entirely, what about the flu? That still kills a lot of people each year. We've set a precedent.We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
My money's on "never". There will be new variants (we've already had a few) that will require updated vaccines, and the existence of new strains will require us to continue to mask and live in various levels of restrictions for the forseeable future.
We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
My money's on "never". There will be new variants (we've already had a few) that will require updated vaccines, and the existence of new strains will require us to continue to mask and live in various levels of restrictions for the forseeable future.
We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
My money's on "never". There will be new variants (we've already had a few) that will require updated vaccines, and the existence of new strains will require us to continue to mask and live in various levels of restrictions for the forseeable future.
We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
My money's on "never". There will be new variants (we've already had a few) that will require updated vaccines, and the existence of new strains will require us to continue to mask and live in various levels of restrictions for the forseeable future.
Trump and plenty of top Republicans predicted that all of the covid nonsense would disappear as soon as Biden was elected. Since that prediction failed to come true, people will predict the opposite. If this prediction fails to come true, then it still won't matter. It seems like the predictions about a second civil war have gone quieter now.
I feel like this is a product of both partisan sides predicting ever-closer doomsdays from whatever the other side is doing.
Good for her to faithfully represent her constituents. Too bad though that we have a population behind the idiotic beliefs she champions.https://uproxx.com/viral/marjorie-taylor-greene-vaccine-passports-mark-of-the-beast/
The most sane and stable person in Congress (reminder: Biden and Harris are no longer members of Congress) has moved on from warning us all about Jewish space lasers, to calling vaccine passports Biden's Mark of the Beast. No, I'm not sure how that works.
Totalitarians must be eating this up, because damn it's a lot easier to sell someone a shit sandwich if your competition is selling a sandwich full of shards of glass (that were used to make space lasers).
MTG is purely the prerogative of her constituents. Congress used to be full "local yokels" who represent their district. You still see it with minority politicians. With white politicians? Very rare nowadays. No more Charlie Wilson's, Ron Paul's or James Traficant's.
MTG is purely the prerogative of her constituents.Absolutely. I'm very strongly in favor of more minority views being represented in Congress. The problem with representing half a million people geographically contiguous people is you almost always end up with someone very bland. The exceptions are in districts with a one-party lock, where nutjobs like AOC or MTG can get elected. There's a good argument for drastically increasing the number of reps, or for detaching one of the houses of Congress from the land and allowing them to be voted in by more widely dispersed but cohesive groups. That would allow minority parties to have representation equal to their popular support, instead of effectively zero. For instance, the Libertarian Party won 3.28% of the votes in the 2016 presidential election -- yet in the House, they won 0 seats, when that percentage should translate into about 14. The Green Party got 1.1% in the same election, which should translate into about 5 seats. The system is strongly biased against minority views.
The problem is with the political discourse that's going to use her opposition as a weapon to promote covid vaccines.
The Constitution doesn't determine the number of reps, that's set by Congress. They gradually increased the number until 1910, and then froze it at 435 (with temporary exemptions when new states were admitted). The Founders thought 30,000 to 40,000 people per rep was the maximum reasonable amount, and to get back to that we'd need about 10,000 members of Congress.MTG is purely the prerogative of her constituents.Absolutely. I'm very strongly in favor of more minority views being represented in Congress. The problem with representing half a million people geographically contiguous people is you almost always end up with someone very bland. The exceptions are in districts with a one-party lock, where nutjobs like AOC or MTG can get elected. There's a good argument for drastically increasing the number of reps, or for detaching one of the houses of Congress from the land and allowing them to be voted in by more widely dispersed but cohesive groups. That would allow minority parties to have representation equal to their popular support, instead of effectively zero. For instance, the Libertarian Party won 3.28% of the votes in the 2016 presidential election -- yet in the House, they won 0 seats, when that percentage should translate into about 14. The Green Party got 1.1% in the same election, which should translate into about 5 seats. The system is strongly biased against minority views.
The problem is with the political discourse that's going to use her opposition as a weapon to promote covid vaccines.
Not a fan of proportional representation systems. I would be fine if we returned to the original constitution when it comes to reps and senators though.
We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
My money's on "never". There will be new variants (we've already had a few) that will require updated vaccines, and the existence of new strains will require us to continue to mask and live in various levels of restrictions for the forseeable future.
We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
My money's on "never". There will be new variants (we've already had a few) that will require updated vaccines, and the existence of new strains will require us to continue to mask and live in various levels of restrictions for the forseeable future.
Let's play a game. I'll bet you're wrong, and that by the end of 2022 or before, masks will no longer be a requirement for the overwhelming majority of the U.S.. Do you bet against me?
We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
My money's on "never". There will be new variants (we've already had a few) that will require updated vaccines, and the existence of new strains will require us to continue to mask and live in various levels of restrictions for the forseeable future.
Let's play a game. I'll bet you're wrong, and that by the end of 2022 or before, masks will no longer be a requirement for the overwhelming majority of the U.S.. Do you bet against me?
I'm game. We need to define "overwhelming majority" clearly first. 51%? 75%? 99%? Of what? States? Cities? Counties? Overall population?
And, to be perfectly clear, I am not saying it's impossible that mask wearing will no longer be required. If you claim that kind of absolutism about my opinion when we resolve the wager, you lose regardless of the state of mask wearing.
You're going to want to be more specific if making a wager with Ratman_Alternative Facts_tf. Start with "what population?" (the world, a hemisphere, a continent, a country, a state, a city, or...?). You also might want to define what qualifies as "mask wearing is required" means, because there is quite a bit of variation on that even now.We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
My money's on "never". There will be new variants (we've already had a few) that will require updated vaccines, and the existence of new strains will require us to continue to mask and live in various levels of restrictions for the forseeable future.
Let's play a game. I'll bet you're wrong, and that by the end of 2022 or before, masks will no longer be a requirement for the overwhelming majority of the U.S.. Do you bet against me?
I'm game. We need to define "overwhelming majority" clearly first. 51%? 75%? 99%? Of what? States? Cities? Counties? Overall population?
And, to be perfectly clear, I am not saying it's impossible that mask wearing will no longer be required. If you claim that kind of absolutism about my opinion when we resolve the wager, you lose regardless of the state of mask wearing.
I'll let you define those terms. I figured around 75% of the population wouldn't be required to wear masks by around that date. But If you want to go more specific to a locality I am fine with that too.
We've passed all those goalposts, and it keeps getting pushed further back. Now we're being told that people who have gotten the shot still have to wear masks and follow all the rules, and things won't go back to normal until 2023, or maybe never (the new normal).
My money's on "never". There will be new variants (we've already had a few) that will require updated vaccines, and the existence of new strains will require us to continue to mask and live in various levels of restrictions for the forseeable future.
Let's play a game. I'll bet you're wrong, and that by the end of 2022 or before, masks will no longer be a requirement for the overwhelming majority of the U.S.. Do you bet against me?
I'm game. We need to define "overwhelming majority" clearly first. 51%? 75%? 99%? Of what? States? Cities? Counties? Overall population?
And, to be perfectly clear, I am not saying it's impossible that mask wearing will no longer be required. If you claim that kind of absolutism about my opinion when we resolve the wager, you lose regardless of the state of mask wearing.
I'll let you define those terms. I figured around 75% of the population wouldn't be required to wear masks by around that date. But If you want to go more specific to a locality I am fine with that too.
Greetings!Self righteousness collides with reality.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/man-brutally-attacked-after-confronting-maskless-group/ar-BB1fplno?ocid=spartanntp
Up in Canada, some guy goes into a gas station, and proceeds to confront a group of people not wearing masks--a man, three women, and a boy. The man knocks the maskless-man's phone to the ground--an attack--and then gets his ass beat. The man struck him in the head and dropped him to the floor, where the women apparently joined in on kicking, hitting, and stomping the fuckstick even more.
*laughing*
Reminds me of the guy that was maskless and enjoying his coffee outside, when some chick comes up to him and throws her hot coffee at him. That guy proceeded to smack the shit out of the woman, and her nutless, soy-drinking boyfriend that thought he was going to defend her from this guy's counterattack.
All the fucking self-appointed mask monitors are just gonna continue getting their asses fucking ploughed.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Greetings!Self righteousness collides with reality.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/man-brutally-attacked-after-confronting-maskless-group/ar-BB1fplno?ocid=spartanntp
Up in Canada, some guy goes into a gas station, and proceeds to confront a group of people not wearing masks--a man, three women, and a boy. The man knocks the maskless-man's phone to the ground--an attack--and then gets his ass beat. The man struck him in the head and dropped him to the floor, where the women apparently joined in on kicking, hitting, and stomping the fuckstick even more.
*laughing*
Reminds me of the guy that was maskless and enjoying his coffee outside, when some chick comes up to him and throws her hot coffee at him. That guy proceeded to smack the shit out of the woman, and her nutless, soy-drinking boyfriend that thought he was going to defend her from this guy's counterattack.
All the fucking self-appointed mask monitors are just gonna continue getting their asses fucking ploughed.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Dipshit would've been in the clear if he hadn't slapped the guy's phone away. At that point, it's game on.
Well don't stop now, tell us all about all the different people who'll knife the guy. Get weird if you have to, really dig deep.
Well don't stop now, tell us all about all the different people who'll knife the guy. Get weird if you have to, really dig deep.
Hey, remember a while back how I pointed out NASA was being internally gutted and turned into a skinsuit for the progs to wear?
And how a couple folks thought I was full of shit for saying so?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9442385/NASA-employees-asked-help-volunteer-migrant-camps.html
Yeah, that'll get us to the Moon and Mars.
Oh look...
https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com/wp-content/uploads/5thsciencereview-masksharm-1.pdf
You fucking sheep amuse me.
You fucking sheep amuse me.Everybody's got their kinks, but voyeuristic bestiality is exactly what I imagined would amuse Brad.
You fucking sheep amuse me.Everybody's got their kinks, but voyeuristic bestiality is exactly what I imagined would amuse Brad.
https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/second-vaccine-site-paused-after-adverse-reactions-to-johnson-johnson-shots/The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
Yeah, this seems really neat. Good plan taking experimental vaccines, guys.
https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/second-vaccine-site-paused-after-adverse-reactions-to-johnson-johnson-shots/The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
Yeah, this seems really neat. Good plan taking experimental vaccines, guys.
The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
So do I, and it's fairly common. These aren't placebos, they're fairly strong medicine. That's why many doctors are advising people who are low risk or have various other conditions to not get vaccinated. It's a balance between two different types of risks, and your personal physician should be making decisions based on your personal best interest. That's in direct conflict with public health, where they want everyone to get the shot because they're looking at the overall effect not the individual trade offs.The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
Not disagreeing that much, but I personally know five people who have taken a vaccine and all of them have varying degrees of what can be called "side-effects". Only one was reported, however, as he is still in the hospital. The others range from getting super sick for a couple days to sick for two days. Like I said, I'm not signing up for this stuff...
Contrast this with the number of people I personally know who got sick from Chinavirus: two. And one of them said it was like the flu, the other is an 85 year old man who seemed to be okay after a week.
The issue is likely your memory; Brad has always been this stupid.You fucking sheep amuse me.Everybody's got their kinks, but voyeuristic bestiality is exactly what I imagined would amuse Brad.
I vaguely remember Brad being less stupid than this, what happened
The issue is likely your memory; Brad has always been this stupid.You fucking sheep amuse me.Everybody's got their kinks, but voyeuristic bestiality is exactly what I imagined would amuse Brad.
I vaguely remember Brad being less stupid than this, what happened
So do I, and it's fairly common. These aren't placebos, they're fairly strong medicine. That's why many doctors are advising people who are low risk or have various other conditions to not get vaccinated. It's a balance between two different types of risks, and your personal physician should be making decisions based on your personal best interest. That's in direct conflict with public health, where they want everyone to get the shot because they're looking at the overall effect not the individual trade offs.The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
Not disagreeing that much, but I personally know five people who have taken a vaccine and all of them have varying degrees of what can be called "side-effects". Only one was reported, however, as he is still in the hospital. The others range from getting super sick for a couple days to sick for two days. Like I said, I'm not signing up for this stuff...
Contrast this with the number of people I personally know who got sick from Chinavirus: two. And one of them said it was like the flu, the other is an 85 year old man who seemed to be okay after a week.
Based on local scuttlebutt, the Pfizer vaccine has the least side effects, and Moderna the most. And in both cases, the second shot is the rough one. I don't know anyone who's taken the J&J shot, so I can't directly compare. I do know more people who've had the virus than you, including one who was on a ventilator for more than a month.
The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
Not disagreeing that much, but I personally know five people who have taken a vaccine and all of them have varying degrees of what can be called "side-effects". Only one was reported, however, as he is still in the hospital. The others range from getting super sick for a couple days to sick for two days. Like I said, I'm not signing up for this stuff...
Contrast this with the number of people I personally know who got sick from Chinavirus: two. And one of them said it was like the flu, the other is an 85 year old man who seemed to be okay after a week.
So do I, and it's fairly common. These aren't placebos, they're fairly strong medicine. That's why many doctors are advising people who are low risk or have various other conditions to not get vaccinated. It's a balance between two different types of risks, and your personal physician should be making decisions based on your personal best interest. That's in direct conflict with public health, where they want everyone to get the shot because they're looking at the overall effect not the individual trade offs.
Based on local scuttlebutt, the Pfizer vaccine has the least side effects, and Moderna the most. And in both cases, the second shot is the rough one. I don't know anyone who's taken the J&J shot, so I can't directly compare. I do know more people who've had the virus than you, including one who was on a ventilator for more than a month.
This matches my experience for what that is worth. I had both Pfizer shots, zero side effects other than a very mild sore arm. My wife had moderna, pretty strong reaction to it for a day and a half (though she had Covid actively, months ago).
The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
Not disagreeing that much, but I personally know five people who have taken a vaccine and all of them have varying degrees of what can be called "side-effects". Only one was reported, however, as he is still in the hospital. The others range from getting super sick for a couple days to sick for two days. Like I said, I'm not signing up for this stuff...
Contrast this with the number of people I personally know who got sick from Chinavirus: two. And one of them said it was like the flu, the other is an 85 year old man who seemed to be okay after a week.
So do I, and it's fairly common. These aren't placebos, they're fairly strong medicine. That's why many doctors are advising people who are low risk or have various other conditions to not get vaccinated. It's a balance between two different types of risks, and your personal physician should be making decisions based on your personal best interest. That's in direct conflict with public health, where they want everyone to get the shot because they're looking at the overall effect not the individual trade offs.
Based on local scuttlebutt, the Pfizer vaccine has the least side effects, and Moderna the most. And in both cases, the second shot is the rough one. I don't know anyone who's taken the J&J shot, so I can't directly compare. I do know more people who've had the virus than you, including one who was on a ventilator for more than a month.
This matches my experience for what that is worth. I had both Pfizer shots, zero side effects other than a very mild sore arm. My wife had moderna, pretty strong reaction to it for a day and a half (though she had Covid actively, months ago).
I just got my first Pfizer shot on Friday. Nothing but a sore arm. I know a lot of people who have had the vaccine, and many have had temporary discomfort - but no major health problems. I only indirectly know people who have gotten covid, but those include much more severe reactions including two people from my church who had relatives die.
All the medical professionals that I know have been eager to get their own vaccinations.
That's one of the stranger things about the public health response -- they're recommending people who had the virus take the vaccine. That's usually pointless, because a vaccine typically just induces or mimics the body's usual immune response. If you've had the virus, you're immune. But they're not 100% sure of that with covid-19, and they're not 100% sure how long it lasts, so they're doubling up just in case those unlikely scenarios are true.So do I, and it's fairly common. These aren't placebos, they're fairly strong medicine. That's why many doctors are advising people who are low risk or have various other conditions to not get vaccinated. It's a balance between two different types of risks, and your personal physician should be making decisions based on your personal best interest. That's in direct conflict with public health, where they want everyone to get the shot because they're looking at the overall effect not the individual trade offs.The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
Not disagreeing that much, but I personally know five people who have taken a vaccine and all of them have varying degrees of what can be called "side-effects". Only one was reported, however, as he is still in the hospital. The others range from getting super sick for a couple days to sick for two days. Like I said, I'm not signing up for this stuff...
Contrast this with the number of people I personally know who got sick from Chinavirus: two. And one of them said it was like the flu, the other is an 85 year old man who seemed to be okay after a week.
Based on local scuttlebutt, the Pfizer vaccine has the least side effects, and Moderna the most. And in both cases, the second shot is the rough one. I don't know anyone who's taken the J&J shot, so I can't directly compare. I do know more people who've had the virus than you, including one who was on a ventilator for more than a month.
This matches my experience for what that is worth. I had both Pfizer shots, zero side effects other than a very mild sore arm. My wife had moderna, pretty strong reaction to it for a day and a half (though she had Covid actively, months ago).
Well, that was premature. The J&J vaccine is now associated with rare bloodclots, as well.https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/second-vaccine-site-paused-after-adverse-reactions-to-johnson-johnson-shots/The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
Yeah, this seems really neat. Good plan taking experimental vaccines, guys.
Well, that was premature. The J&J vaccine is now associated with rare bloodclots, as well.https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/second-vaccine-site-paused-after-adverse-reactions-to-johnson-johnson-shots/The 18 at one site seems high, but 14 of those were minor, and 4.5 million have received the J&J vaccine, so it'd probably just a random cluster. And unlike AstraZeneca's rare and weird blood clot problem, those are typical and expected reactions.
Yeah, this seems really neat. Good plan taking experimental vaccines, guys.
https://www.wgbh.org/news/national-news/2021/04/13/us-recommends-pause-for-j-j-vaccine-over-clot-reports
Well, that was premature. The J&J vaccine is now associated with rare bloodclots, as well.
https://www.wgbh.org/news/national-news/2021/04/13/us-recommends-pause-for-j-j-vaccine-over-clot-reports
I would like to note the clots occurred in six people out of 6.8 million vaccinated.
You have a better chance of walking outside after getting vaccinated and being hit by a car.
I would like to note the clots occurred in six people out of 6.8 million vaccinated.I would like to note that over the last 15 months in the US, 246 childhood deaths were associated covid-19, out of a total population of about 74 million. Children are a lot more likely to drown or die in a car accident. Why were schools closed?
You have a better chance of walking outside after getting vaccinated and being hit by a car.
Or why weren't schools closed, decades earlier? About twice as many children die each year from the regular flu.
Or why weren't schools closed, decades earlier? About twice as many children die each year from the regular flu.
Because people back then weren't such immense pussies.
I would like to note the clots occurred in six people out of 6.8 million vaccinated.I would like to note that over the last 15 months in the US, 246 childhood deaths were associated covid-19, out of a total population of about 74 million. Children are a lot more likely to drown or die in a car accident. Why were schools closed?
You have a better chance of walking outside after getting vaccinated and being hit by a car.
Or why weren't schools closed, decades earlier? About twice as many children die each year from the regular flu.
That's one of the stranger things about the public health response -- they're recommending people who had the virus take the vaccine. That's usually pointless, because a vaccine typically just induces or mimics the body's usual immune response. If you've had the virus, you're immune. But they're not 100% sure of that with covid-19, and they're not 100% sure how long it lasts, so they're doubling up just in case those unlikely scenarios are true.
Taking the vaccine is probably worth the downsides for those who are high risk, like the elderly, those with preexisting conditions, or those with high risk of exposure like frontline healthcare workers. But in many other cases, the net benefit for an individual who hasn't had the disease is minor or even negative in many cases. Younger, healthy people are extremely unlikely to get a severe case, whereas strong reactions like your wife's aren't uncommon, meaning it's a trade off between a very unlikely but dangerous circumstance and a quite likely negative condition that could aggravate other problems, including as-yet unknown ones. The reason it's being pushed so hard to everyone is because of collective public health reasons, not for the benefit of the individual. For many, cost/benefit seems to be mostly a wash; it's more "close your eyes and think of Fauci" than anything else.
But for someone who's already been infected, the trade offs skew dramatically further against, because it's rather unlikely the vaccine will provide any benefit they already lack.
Schools were closed in many countries because it reduces the spread through the population overall. If the disease spreads through schools, it doesn't just affect children - it also affects parents, guardians, grandparents, and teachers, as well as everyone else to whom those people spread to. With a new disease, we have the possibility of saving hundreds of thousands of lives of all ages by slowing its spread until we have better treatment and vaccination.That's a bald-faced lie. We knew from very early on that even the kids who caught the disease weren't spreading it to adults at anywhere near the rate that covid-19 was spreading through the normal population. Still not clear why, but the evidence was unambiguous.
With the flu, first of all, the overall death rate is at least 10 times lower.Another lie. Among children (the group we're talking about), the flu is more deadly than covid-19.
I'd be curious to see some studies on long covid and the vaccines.That's one of the stranger things about the public health response -- they're recommending people who had the virus take the vaccine. That's usually pointless, because a vaccine typically just induces or mimics the body's usual immune response. If you've had the virus, you're immune. But they're not 100% sure of that with covid-19, and they're not 100% sure how long it lasts, so they're doubling up just in case those unlikely scenarios are true.
Both my wife and another person I know saw lingering covid symptoms clear up after the first dose of the vaccine. For my friend, she had severe long-covid symptoms, diagnosed by her doctor with lots of meds to address it. And now, after just her first dose of the vaccine, most have cleared up after having suffered from them for 6 months.
This is a really weird virus.
Disagree. You're overstating the frequency of severe cases with long-lasting effects among the young and healthy. It happens, but it's still extremely rare.QuoteTaking the vaccine is probably worth the downsides for those who are high risk, like the elderly, those with preexisting conditions, or those with high risk of exposure like frontline healthcare workers. But in many other cases, the net benefit for an individual who hasn't had the disease is minor or even negative in many cases. Younger, healthy people are extremely unlikely to get a severe case, whereas strong reactions like your wife's aren't uncommon, meaning it's a trade off between a very unlikely but dangerous circumstance and a quite likely negative condition that could aggravate other problems, including as-yet unknown ones. The reason it's being pushed so hard to everyone is because of collective public health reasons, not for the benefit of the individual. For many, cost/benefit seems to be mostly a wash; it's more "close your eyes and think of Fauci" than anything else.
But for someone who's already been infected, the trade offs skew dramatically further against, because it's rather unlikely the vaccine will provide any benefit they already lack.
Yeah, no. Younger healthy people are unlikely to get a severe case but long term harmful symptoms are now very common for otherwise young and healthy people. People love to analyze this in terms of people either dying or being fine if they get Covid, but that's not reality. Reality is it's a spectrum of harms from the virus, and a LOT LOT LOT of people were experiencing ongoing harmful impacts from getting covid which were not "Died" but which are pretty fucking meaningful to your quality of life if you have them. Current studies are showing that for the 90% who experienced only mild COVID-19 illness, one-third continue to have lingering effects even 9 months after their illness. Stuff like "I used to jog 3 miles every morning and now I am out of breath going up my stairs." The study I just read said, "Many of these individuals are young and have no pre-existing medical conditions, indicating that even relatively healthy individuals may face long-term impacts from their illness."
For those who have already had Covid, the impact skews HARD to helping them if they are the 1/3 who have lingering effects from the virus. Because so far the vaccine is the only thing that helps get rid of those symptoms.
I'd be curious to see some studies on long covid and the vaccines.That's one of the stranger things about the public health response -- they're recommending people who had the virus take the vaccine. That's usually pointless, because a vaccine typically just induces or mimics the body's usual immune response. If you've had the virus, you're immune. But they're not 100% sure of that with covid-19, and they're not 100% sure how long it lasts, so they're doubling up just in case those unlikely scenarios are true.
Both my wife and another person I know saw lingering covid symptoms clear up after the first dose of the vaccine. For my friend, she had severe long-covid symptoms, diagnosed by her doctor with lots of meds to address it. And now, after just her first dose of the vaccine, most have cleared up after having suffered from them for 6 months.
This is a really weird virus.
Completely concur that it's a strange virus.Disagree. You're overstating the frequency of severe cases with long-lasting effects among the young and healthy. It happens, but it's still extremely rare.QuoteTaking the vaccine is probably worth the downsides for those who are high risk, like the elderly, those with preexisting conditions, or those with high risk of exposure like frontline healthcare workers. But in many other cases, the net benefit for an individual who hasn't had the disease is minor or even negative in many cases. Younger, healthy people are extremely unlikely to get a severe case, whereas strong reactions like your wife's aren't uncommon, meaning it's a trade off between a very unlikely but dangerous circumstance and a quite likely negative condition that could aggravate other problems, including as-yet unknown ones. The reason it's being pushed so hard to everyone is because of collective public health reasons, not for the benefit of the individual. For many, cost/benefit seems to be mostly a wash; it's more "close your eyes and think of Fauci" than anything else.
But for someone who's already been infected, the trade offs skew dramatically further against, because it's rather unlikely the vaccine will provide any benefit they already lack.
Yeah, no. Younger healthy people are unlikely to get a severe case but long term harmful symptoms are now very common for otherwise young and healthy people. People love to analyze this in terms of people either dying or being fine if they get Covid, but that's not reality. Reality is it's a spectrum of harms from the virus, and a LOT LOT LOT of people were experiencing ongoing harmful impacts from getting covid which were not "Died" but which are pretty fucking meaningful to your quality of life if you have them. Current studies are showing that for the 90% who experienced only mild COVID-19 illness, one-third continue to have lingering effects even 9 months after their illness. Stuff like "I used to jog 3 miles every morning and now I am out of breath going up my stairs." The study I just read said, "Many of these individuals are young and have no pre-existing medical conditions, indicating that even relatively healthy individuals may face long-term impacts from their illness."
For those who have already had Covid, the impact skews HARD to helping them if they are the 1/3 who have lingering effects from the virus. Because so far the vaccine is the only thing that helps get rid of those symptoms.
[citation needed]
In what world is 1/3 "extremely rare?" You saying you know better than the studies on the topic because....reasons?
Schools were closed in many countries because it reduces the spread through the population overall. If the disease spreads through schools, it doesn't just affect children - it also affects parents, guardians, grandparents, and teachers, as well as everyone else to whom those people spread to. With a new disease, we have the possibility of saving hundreds of thousands of lives of all ages by slowing its spread until we have better treatment and vaccination.That's a bald-faced lie. We knew from very early on that even the kids who caught the disease weren't spreading it to adults at anywhere near the rate that covid-19 was spreading through the normal population. Still not clear why, but the evidence was unambiguous.
The school closings were due to the teachers' and administrators' fear and their powerful political sway, not any concern for children (for whom remote learning was disastrous failure), or for the families of the children.
With the flu, first of all, the overall death rate is at least 10 times lower.Another lie. Among children (the group we're talking about), the flu is more deadly than covid-19.
What secret political motivations? The teacher's unions have been very been very public and very clear in their goals, including demanding far stricter measures than groups like the American Association of Pediatrics or even the CDC recommend. This is in the open, common knowledge, and regularly reported in the news.Schools were closed in many countries because it reduces the spread through the population overall. If the disease spreads through schools, it doesn't just affect children - it also affects parents, guardians, grandparents, and teachers, as well as everyone else to whom those people spread to. With a new disease, we have the possibility of saving hundreds of thousands of lives of all ages by slowing its spread until we have better treatment and vaccination.That's a bald-faced lie. We knew from very early on that even the kids who caught the disease weren't spreading it to adults at anywhere near the rate that covid-19 was spreading through the normal population. Still not clear why, but the evidence was unambiguous.
The school closings were due to the teachers' and administrators' fear and their powerful political sway, not any concern for children (for whom remote learning was disastrous failure), or for the families of the children.
I'm not going to argue about secret political motivations. That seems like a rabbit hole to me. However, school closings happened in dozens of countries from Israel to South Korea. In all the cases that I've read, the stated reason is to reduce community transmission - which includes protecting teachers and families, not just children. Yes, I've seen papers claiming that student-to-student transmission is low compared to the rest of the community - but there have been outbreaks in schools. Papers like the below suggest that transmission is lower in schools, but it still says "cases do increase at moderate to high pre-existing COVID rates".
https://caldercenter.org/publications/what-extent-does-person-schooling-contribute-spread-covid-19-evidence-michigan-and
You can argue that we have known the disease really well and the science is unquestionable that there is no increased risk from in-person schools - but it seems to me that in other places, you have argued that it is right for people to question scientific assurances.
Are you getting tired of seeing the Conspiracy Facts being proven correct time and time again byt the MSM?
Are you getting tired of seeing the Conspiracy Facts being proven correct time and time again byt the MSM?
Ah, yes. The good ol' ToryGraph, who is racking up the COVID-19 denial frequent flyer miles. Including an IPSO-forced take down and a number of lawsuits. "Just because they were infected by the coronavirus and died because their body didn't have enough oxygen, that doesn't mean they *actually* died of COVID. Just look at the comorbidities."
Also, as another point on a similar topic, when you've got all the beds in the local ICU filled by people on ventilators, the 87-year-old (who was my father) gets sent to a hospital twenty miles further on where they can actually investigate why he's been spitting up blood for the past twenty-four hours. And then he dies. My brother's church has had roughly three times the number of deaths in the past 12 months than in any other twelve month period in his twenty-plus years as their pastor. Sure, it's anecdotal, but it's part of a larger pattern that shows that people are dying who otherwise wouldn't because of the virus (not because of the lockdown like some of you idiots seem to think).
Are you getting tired of seeing the Conspiracy Facts being proven correct time and time again byt the MSM?
Ah, yes. The good ol' ToryGraph, who is racking up the COVID-19 denial frequent flyer miles. Including an IPSO-forced take down and a number of lawsuits. "Just because they were infected by the coronavirus and died because their body didn't have enough oxygen, that doesn't mean they *actually* died of COVID. Just look at the comorbidities."
Also, as another point on a similar topic, when you've got all the beds in the local ICU filled by people on ventilators, the 87-year-old (who was my father) gets sent to a hospital twenty miles further on where they can actually investigate why he's been spitting up blood for the past twenty-four hours. And then he dies. My brother's church has had roughly three times the number of deaths in the past 12 months than in any other twelve month period in his twenty-plus years as their pastor. Sure, it's anecdotal, but it's part of a larger pattern that shows that people are dying who otherwise wouldn't because of the virus (not because of the lockdown like some of you idiots seem to think).
Sorry to hear of your father's passing.
Just to be clear, he died while en route to the twenty-miles further away hospital? And your claim is that he would have not died if he had been able to go to the closer hospital?
I have no doubt that deaths for 2020 were up for your brother's church. Church populations tend to skew older, and COVID has a higher mortality rate in older populations.
And the knock-on effects of lockdowns do kill people.
https://www.city-journal.org/death-and-lockdowns
Man I'm not listening to that whiny-voiced beanie with a small dick attached for twenty minutes, summarize or gtfo. Tl;dlTim Pool's just the millennial equivalent of a weather bunny; he mostly just reads the news. Skip forward a few minutes, look at the article showing on the page, and search for the original.
Man I'm not listening to that whiny-voiced beanie with a small dick attached for twenty minutes, summarize or gtfo. Tl;dlTim Pool's just the millennial equivalent of a weather bunny; he mostly just reads the news. Skip forward a few minutes, look at the article showing on the page, and search for the original.
Presto
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9460389/Pentagon-scientists-invent-microchip-senses-COVID-19-body-symptoms.html
I have no doubt that deaths for 2020 were up for your brother's church. Church populations tend to skew older, and COVID has a higher mortality rate in older populations.
And the knock-on effects of lockdowns do kill people.
https://www.city-journal.org/death-and-lockdowns
I would like to note the clots occurred in six people out of 6.8 million vaccinated.
You have a better chance of walking outside after getting vaccinated and being hit by a car.
[citation needed]
In what world is 1/3 "extremely rare?" You saying you know better than the studies on the topic because....reasons?
It's about what I would have expected, the main exceptions are suicide (I expected it to go up significantly, maybe all the rioting helped) and the flu (surprised it didn't go down, like the other respiratory ailments).I have no doubt that deaths for 2020 were up for your brother's church. Church populations tend to skew older, and COVID has a higher mortality rate in older populations.
And the knock-on effects of lockdowns do kill people.
https://www.city-journal.org/death-and-lockdowns
The lockdowns are obviously a tradeoff. Given hundreds of thousands of people dying, it is an extreme measure. Still, the article uses selective views. It cites a *predicted* rise in suicide, and also an *unexpected* measured rise in vehicle accidents. But it fails to note that the predicted rise in suicides did not go as expected. In a typical economic recession, suicides will go up but accidents and other causes of deaths go down - for an overall lower rate of mortality. But this recession was not typical. I was surprised by the actual 2020 stats - given below.
(https://cdn.jamanetwork.com/ama/content_public/journal/jama/0/jvp210048t1_1617198261.3911.png?Expires=1621386605&Signature=sU6h0tcZQGgUwwEqKf0tcrbcrrHfPeDQKfgdavEpClY1r3NIPRt2hae9zm7G4QV9CkE7-gSGahyqU-fnQHR~PalNaGVUXXgOerpSmU6kpjUq4KZ2LXAghAdBPfx~WFDktDzxodkRmmKj44TqRlPZKVoWD68hD2g89KQL2PIIq5bylUGLo-LBNXpd~Siaww-19hVPMuN~smENmK8WVJLXtaGWPJOLMFMsfYSwi4~4OWlDOZeIEPAHRG-H8tR-mK8UpwVK2mnqt7DAii1IzM-ajnVGUud-wKO47NcTxH9F1cOhBchqHGMXD7M10EAGKmAEZAfOVr~P-mfO-jDr9f6cwQ__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIE5G5CRDK6RD3PGA)
Source: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778234
There's a minor decrease in cancer and suicide - along with flu and respiratory disease, but significant increases in heart disease and accidents especially. (Note that absolute numbers always go up because the population has been increasing.)
You made the initial claim. It's up to you to back it up.[citation needed]
In what world is 1/3 "extremely rare?" You saying you know better than the studies on the topic because....reasons?
Man you are seriously lazy. You had no citation for your "rare" claim but I have to do your homework for you? Fine, here, first link on Google, many more articles saying the same thing if you bother to look:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertglatter/2021/02/20/nearly-one-third-of-covid-19-survivors-have-symptoms-some-up-to-9-months-later-new-study-finds/?sh=7a9711ed4eb2
I'm thinking of filling this out, printing it, putting a yellow star on the reverse and pinning to my shirt star side up.
(https://abc-7.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/vaccine-card.jpg)
Are you getting tired of seeing the Conspiracy Facts being proven correct time and time again byt the MSM?
Ah, yes. The good ol' ToryGraph, who is racking up the COVID-19 denial frequent flyer miles. Including an IPSO-forced take down and a number of lawsuits. "Just because they were infected by the coronavirus and died because their body didn't have enough oxygen, that doesn't mean they *actually* died of COVID. Just look at the comorbidities."
Also, as another point on a similar topic, when you've got all the beds in the local ICU filled by people on ventilators, the 87-year-old (who was my father) gets sent to a hospital twenty miles further on where they can actually investigate why he's been spitting up blood for the past twenty-four hours. And then he dies. My brother's church has had roughly three times the number of deaths in the past 12 months than in any other twelve month period in his twenty-plus years as their pastor. Sure, it's anecdotal, but it's part of a larger pattern that shows that people are dying who otherwise wouldn't because of the virus (not because of the lockdown like some of you idiots seem to think).
Sorry to hear of your father's passing.
Just to be clear, he died while en route to the twenty-miles further away hospital? And your claim is that he would have not died if he had been able to go to the closer hospital?
I have no doubt that deaths for 2020 were up for your brother's church. Church populations tend to skew older, and COVID has a higher mortality rate in older populations.
And the knock-on effects of lockdowns do kill people.
https://www.city-journal.org/death-and-lockdowns
Are you getting tired of seeing the Conspiracy Facts being proven correct time and time again byt the MSM?
Ah, yes. The good ol' ToryGraph, who is racking up the COVID-19 denial frequent flyer miles. Including an IPSO-forced take down and a number of lawsuits. "Just because they were infected by the coronavirus and died because their body didn't have enough oxygen, that doesn't mean they *actually* died of COVID. Just look at the comorbidities."
Also, as another point on a similar topic, when you've got all the beds in the local ICU filled by people on ventilators, the 87-year-old (who was my father) gets sent to a hospital twenty miles further on where they can actually investigate why he's been spitting up blood for the past twenty-four hours. And then he dies. My brother's church has had roughly three times the number of deaths in the past 12 months than in any other twelve month period in his twenty-plus years as their pastor. Sure, it's anecdotal, but it's part of a larger pattern that shows that people are dying who otherwise wouldn't because of the virus (not because of the lockdown like some of you idiots seem to think).
Sorry to hear of your father's passing.
Just to be clear, he died while en route to the twenty-miles further away hospital? And your claim is that he would have not died if he had been able to go to the closer hospital?
I have no doubt that deaths for 2020 were up for your brother's church. Church populations tend to skew older, and COVID has a higher mortality rate in older populations.
And the knock-on effects of lockdowns do kill people.
https://www.city-journal.org/death-and-lockdowns
My dad died at the second hospital -- where the doctors who had been following him after his stroke didn't have privileges. If he had been at the first hospital, the neurologist and the GI specialist who had been following him would have been able to see him, rather than a crew that didn't know him. It took three days, so the trip itself wasn't what killed him.
Even The Atlantic is calling the fetish for cleaning surfaces "hygiene theater".
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/end-hygiene-theater/618576
The CDC has finally admitted what scientists have been saying for months and months:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/science-and-research/surface-transmission.html (updated April 5, 2021)
COVID-19 is primarily spread through aerosolization.
Even The Atlantic is calling the fetish for cleaning surfaces "hygiene theater".
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/end-hygiene-theater/618576
Even The Atlantic is calling the fetish for cleaning surfaces "hygiene theater".
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/end-hygiene-theater/618576
Nothin surprising there, 20 years on and we're still wasting our fuckin time at airport checkpoints. We love us some performatism.
That's an entertaining clip. Nothing we didn't know, but it's always interesting to see them say it. My favorite:
"I mean, there's no such thing as unbiased news. It just doesn't exist. There's too many agendas. There's too many people that have jobs that need to feed their families, for it to be unbiased. It's impossible. The most unbiased news is grassroots, out of people's basements with podcasts. That's the most unbiased you could probably get."
A CNNer is literally saying that alt-news is a better source of information than mainstream news.
The CDC has finally admitted what scientists have been saying for months and months:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/science-and-research/surface-transmission.html (updated April 5, 2021)
COVID-19 is primarily spread through aerosolization.
Even The Atlantic is calling the fetish for cleaning surfaces "hygiene theater".
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/end-hygiene-theater/618576Even The Atlantic is calling the fetish for cleaning surfaces "hygiene theater".
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/end-hygiene-theater/618576
Nothin surprising there, 20 years on and we're still wasting our fuckin time at airport checkpoints. We love us some performatism.
...because it is all about control.
...and fear has always been the best gateway to control.
Have you considered we ought to be controlled, look at what we waste our time doing when we're notIf we're not qualified to run our own lives, doesn't that prove, more than anything, that we're not qualified to control each other?
Have you considered we ought to be controlled, look at what we waste our time doing when we're notIf we're not qualified to run our own lives, doesn't that prove, more than anything, that we're not qualified to control each other?
First a former director of the CDC, now CNN's Chief Medical Correspondent.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/04/cnns-sanjay-gupta-supports-former-cdc-directors-informed-theory-that-covid-escaped-from-wuhan-lab/
Both believe the most likely source of COVID-19 is that it escaped from a Wuhan lab.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/04/officials-allow-only-covid-vaccinated-people-to-board-ships-evacuating-caribbean-volcanic-eruption/
A volcano in the Caribbean erupted last week. This isn't an eruption like the one in Iceland that shut down air travel in Europe a decade ago by throwing a lot of ash into the sky. No, this was a huge explosion followed by pyroclastic flows. Which, if you don't know, are superheated ash and gas that kill anyone it touches. In other words, like lava, except it travels 60-125 miles per hour. Good luck outrunning that.
So they're evacuating the island.
But only the people who had covid vaccinations.
Shame the guillotine went out of fashion as a form of neckwear for politicians.
Have you considered we ought to be controlled, look at what we waste our time doing when we're notIf we're not qualified to run our own lives, doesn't that prove, more than anything, that we're not qualified to control each other?
I'm using a real narrow "we" here confined to the site membership, idk about the people outside that box.
Have you considered we ought to be controlled, look at what we waste our time doing when we're notIf we're not qualified to run our own lives, doesn't that prove, more than anything, that we're not qualified to control each other?
I'm using a real narrow "we" here confined to the site membership, idk about the people outside that box.
An idealist! I don't think I have as much faith in humanity, even a small selection of it, as you do.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/04/officials-allow-only-covid-vaccinated-people-to-board-ships-evacuating-caribbean-volcanic-eruption/
A volcano in the Caribbean erupted last week. This isn't an eruption like the one in Iceland that shut down air travel in Europe a decade ago by throwing a lot of ash into the sky. No, this was a huge explosion followed by pyroclastic flows. Which, if you don't know, are superheated ash and gas that kill anyone it touches. In other words, like lava, except it travels 60-125 miles per hour. Good luck outrunning that.
So they're evacuating the island.
But only the people who had covid vaccinations.
Shame the guillotine went out of fashion as a form of neckwear for politicians.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/04/officials-allow-only-covid-vaccinated-people-to-board-ships-evacuating-caribbean-volcanic-eruption/
A volcano in the Caribbean erupted last week. This isn't an eruption like the one in Iceland that shut down air travel in Europe a decade ago by throwing a lot of ash into the sky. No, this was a huge explosion followed by pyroclastic flows. Which, if you don't know, are superheated ash and gas that kill anyone it touches. In other words, like lava, except it travels 60-125 miles per hour. Good luck outrunning that.
So they're evacuating the island.
But only the people who had covid vaccinations.
Shame the guillotine went out of fashion as a form of neckwear for politicians.
Your post made it sound like people were being killed by superfast flows...Only if you read things into my post that aren't there. Though you could read my post and think people were directly fleeing an eruption, instead of being evacuated because there was an eruption nearby, because I didn't go into much detail. But I assumed that the timing (last week) and common knowledge of how eruptions work (people fleeing lava or pyroclastic flows are things that only really happen in movies) would dispel any confusion, and even if not, anyone interested in the subject would click on the link.
Your post made it sound like people were being killed by superfast flows...Only if you read things into my post that aren't there. Though you could read my post and think people were directly fleeing an eruption, instead of being evacuated because there was an eruption nearby, because I didn't go into much detail. But I assumed that the timing (last week) and common knowledge of how eruptions work (people fleeing lava or pyroclastic flows are things that only really happen in movies) would dispel any confusion, and even if not, anyone interested in the subject would click on the link.
Some of your assumptions are sketchy. Dozens dead from covid assumes all 20K people being evacuated catch the disease, which is not even close to a realistic assumption. And the whole point is the government's decision. It wasn't to isolate or otherwise trying to contain people who might be infected, or otherwise taking reasonable measures to mitigate any potential problems. They're not even, like the cruise ship itself, insisting on a negative PCR test. Their position is no shot, no evacuation. That's more than appalling. It's in the same category as death camps or death squads.
Your post made it sound like people were being killed by superfast flows...Only if you read things into my post that aren't there. Though you could read my post and think people were directly fleeing an eruption, instead of being evacuated because there was an eruption nearby, because I didn't go into much detail. But I assumed that the timing (last week) and common knowledge of how eruptions work (people fleeing lava or pyroclastic flows are things that only really happen in movies) would dispel any confusion, and even if not, anyone interested in the subject would click on the link.
Some of your assumptions are sketchy. Dozens dead from covid assumes all 20K people being evacuated catch the disease, which is not even close to a realistic assumption. And the whole point is the government's decision. It wasn't to isolate or otherwise trying to contain people who might be infected, or otherwise taking reasonable measures to mitigate any potential problems. They're not even, like the cruise ship itself, insisting on a negative PCR test. Their position is no shot, no evacuation. That's more than appalling. It's in the same category as death camps or death squads.
Why do you still keep responding to this communist? He has got to be on the CCP payroll for all the bullshit he posts.
Your post made it sound like people were being killed by superfast flows...Only if you read things into my post that aren't there. Though you could read my post and think people were directly fleeing an eruption, instead of being evacuated because there was an eruption nearby, because I didn't go into much detail. But I assumed that the timing (last week) and common knowledge of how eruptions work (people fleeing lava or pyroclastic flows are things that only really happen in movies) would dispel any confusion, and even if not, anyone interested in the subject would click on the link.
Some of your assumptions are sketchy. Dozens dead from covid assumes all 20K people being evacuated catch the disease, which is not even close to a realistic assumption. And the whole point is the government's decision. It wasn't to isolate or otherwise trying to contain people who might be infected, or otherwise taking reasonable measures to mitigate any potential problems. They're not even, like the cruise ship itself, insisting on a negative PCR test. Their position is no shot, no evacuation. That's more than appalling. It's in the same category as death camps or death squads.
Yes, and leaving people to to die when a natural disaster happens can lead them to getting killed. That's why this is a problem. And I think even night watchmen state libertarians would agree that not leaving their citizens to the mercy of a volcano is one of the basic functions of a government.Your post made it sound like people were being killed by superfast flows...Only if you read things into my post that aren't there. Though you could read my post and think people were directly fleeing an eruption, instead of being evacuated because there was an eruption nearby, because I didn't go into much detail. But I assumed that the timing (last week) and common knowledge of how eruptions work (people fleeing lava or pyroclastic flows are things that only really happen in movies) would dispel any confusion, and even if not, anyone interested in the subject would click on the link.
Some of your assumptions are sketchy. Dozens dead from covid assumes all 20K people being evacuated catch the disease, which is not even close to a realistic assumption. And the whole point is the government's decision. It wasn't to isolate or otherwise trying to contain people who might be infected, or otherwise taking reasonable measures to mitigate any potential problems. They're not even, like the cruise ship itself, insisting on a negative PCR test. Their position is no shot, no evacuation. That's more than appalling. It's in the same category as death camps or death squads.
The usual problem people have with death camps is, well, the death. It's that people are being killed.
In this case, though, as far as I can tell, no one has died from the pyroclastic flows - and everyone from the affected areas was successfully evacuated.
I don't have enough information to tell exactly how that was accomplished, but I would guess that unvaccinated people were evacuated by means other than cruise ship -- like by bus or car to the rest of the island, or on fishing boats to other islands (mentioned in the UN article).
As for my assumptions: there's already ten dead from covid on Saint Vincent with less then 2000 infections under normal conditions. If half of the evacuees were infected with the same death rate - that would be fifty dead. But it's likely the rate would be higher with poor conditions among evacuees.
Yes, and leaving people to to die when a natural disaster happens can lead them to getting killed. That's why this is a problem. And I think even night watchmen state libertarians would agree that not leaving their citizens to the mercy of a volcano is one of the basic functions of a government.
And if they did have alternate plans for unvaccinated people, why does it require speculation and inference from minor details to uncover? This is a PR nightmare, you'd think someone involved would want to clarify that, no, they're really not committing massive human rights violations. Unless they think it's not a problem.
And assuming half the evacuees catch a specific disease seems far beyond extreme.
So from the conservative blog post (legalinsurrection.com), it sounds like death camps and massive human rights violations - but maybe it's just a PR nightmare and no one was actually left to die?No, it's repeated across many news sites. I checked at least 3 or 4, and in fact my post originally had another link, but I edited that one in because it covered the details better. First time I've been to their website, in fact. I only ended up there because someone suggested they were doing an okay job of covering the ins and out of the Chauvin trial, and I ran across the article while looking over their feed. That's a massive set of false assumptions on your part, along with a dishonest attempt to impute bias instead of dealing with the facts.
If people were actually left to die, that's horrible and I condemn it - but at this point I am skeptical that is actually the case.
If people were *not* left to die, then I think the primary responsibility is on legalinsurrection.com to not lie about it - not on the Saint Vincent government to debunk their false accusations.
What I've read about the St. Vincent evacuation is that the only people being accepted by the surrounding islands are people who have been vaccinated. So the Prime Minister of St. Vincent said that only vaccinated people would be allowed on the cruise ships that are evacuating people to other islands. Meanwhile, the unvaccinated folks are being sent to the unaffected southern half of the island where refugee camps are (still, as of the 4/14 articles I read) being set up. Typical Caribbean inefficiency, but not deliberate malice as far as I can tell.That's a reasonable explanation. Still a bad decision, and still begs the question why they didn't get in front of the bad publicity. But it's less death camp and more ghettoization.
What I've read about the St. Vincent evacuation is that the only people being accepted by the surrounding islands are people who have been vaccinated. So the Prime Minister of St. Vincent said that only vaccinated people would be allowed on the cruise ships that are evacuating people to other islands. Meanwhile, the unvaccinated folks are being sent to the unaffected southern half of the island where refugee camps are (still, as of the 4/14 articles I read) being set up. Typical Caribbean inefficiency, but not deliberate malice as far as I can tell.That's a reasonable explanation. Still a bad decision, and still begs the question why they didn't get in front of the bad publicity. But it's less death camp and more ghettoization.
Public relations is part of disaster relief, generally a very big part. It's where the money comes from that allows them to fund it (for non-profits), and where goodwill comes from that gives them the public support needed to act (for the government).What I've read about the St. Vincent evacuation is that the only people being accepted by the surrounding islands are people who have been vaccinated. So the Prime Minister of St. Vincent said that only vaccinated people would be allowed on the cruise ships that are evacuating people to other islands. Meanwhile, the unvaccinated folks are being sent to the unaffected southern half of the island where refugee camps are (still, as of the 4/14 articles I read) being set up. Typical Caribbean inefficiency, but not deliberate malice as far as I can tell.That's a reasonable explanation. Still a bad decision, and still begs the question why they didn't get in front of the bad publicity. But it's less death camp and more ghettoization.
Well, there's the entire "Half the island is a disaster zone" thing, where publicity would be less important than disaster relief. On the other hand, refugee camps still without full amenities (like water and latrines) five days after the disaster doesn't exactly contradict the impression that a first-world person would have of death camps.
My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
Rescue services? Are the cruise ships acting as first responders? I tend to think the rescue ships are taking in people that are already rescued and located far from areas where not getting on the ship leads to "burn" as you put it. I believe most of them load up at Kingstown, right?Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
Ah yes, when there's a volcano it's really important whether the ship that's coming to rescue you is a technically a first responder.Rescue services? Are the cruise ships acting as first responders? I tend to think the rescue ships are taking in people that are already rescued and located far from areas where not getting on the ship leads to "burn" as you put it. I believe most of them load up at Kingstown, right?Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
None of the people in the southern parts of the island are in danger of burning. The rescue was in getting them from the afflicted areas to the southern parts of the island. Once there, efforts to relocate them to other nations are not "rescue" or even emergent. That those relocation efforts require a prerequisite isn't nearly as horrific as you make it sound--nobody burns for not taking the vaccine.Ah yes, when there's a volcano it's really important whether the ship that's coming to rescue you is a technically a first responder.Rescue services? Are the cruise ships acting as first responders? I tend to think the rescue ships are taking in people that are already rescued and located far from areas where not getting on the ship leads to "burn" as you put it. I believe most of them load up at Kingstown, right?Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
Or it is, if you're trying to deflect the argument.
Where are you getting that from? I've read every article linked in the thread, and a not single one uses the word "relocate". The word they use for the cruise ships is "evacuate". Repeatedly, in multiple articles.None of the people in the southern parts of the island are in danger of burning. The rescue was in getting them from the afflicted areas to the southern parts of the island. Once there, efforts to relocate them to other nations are not "rescue" or even emergent. That those relocation efforts require a prerequisite isn't nearly as horrific as you make it sound--nobody burns for not taking the vaccine.Ah yes, when there's a volcano it's really important whether the ship that's coming to rescue you is a technically a first responder.Rescue services? Are the cruise ships acting as first responders? I tend to think the rescue ships are taking in people that are already rescued and located far from areas where not getting on the ship leads to "burn" as you put it. I believe most of them load up at Kingstown, right?Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
Or it is, if you're trying to deflect the argument.
So what's the current count on those that burned to death because they were refused permission to board cruise ships exclusively because they were not vaccinated?At this point, fuck you. If you're make false claims and refuse to back them up, and completely ignore everything I said, you're clearly not willing to fairly deal with the issues.
So what's the current count on those that burned to death because they were refused permission to board cruise ships exclusively because they were not vaccinated?
Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
So what's the current count on those that burned to death because they were refused permission to board cruise ships exclusively because they were not vaccinated?
Is this bad thing only bad if people died from it?
Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
You're another alternative facts fuckwit.
So is the bad thing only bad if people died from it, or what?
So if there's horrific discrimination and bias in a response to a life-threatening emergency, it's fine as long as the life-threatening emergency doesn't actually take any lives?Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
You're another alternative facts fuckwit.
So is the bad thing only bad if people died from it, or what?
Potentially dying from a fake disease is bad, possibly getting melted by lava because you don't have a vaccine for the fake disease isn't bad. Clear enough?
15-20,000 people are being evacuated due to a volcano. And it's not precautionary, or due to tremors, or because of something that's less than instantly fatal like ash. They're being evacuated because some of the most dangerous and deadly volcanic events are happening, specifically fast moving pyroclastic flows that will kill anyone they touch. There's no indication that anyone was rescued from the jaws of fiery death, but that's irrelevant. It's a volcano, erupting, in a very dangerous way. Volcanoes are highly unpredictable, and very deadly. That nobody was poisoned or burned to death doesn't mean the danger wasn't real.
They're talking about people in shelters and rationing water. In other words, they're crowding people together in conditions where sanitation is poor. That creates a huge risk for the spread of disease, and not just the latest respiratory one. They're also talking about ashfalls, and while I don't know the nature of the particulates being ejected, that's another serious health risk.
You said the government wanted those that didn't take the drugs the government wanted them to take to burn. I'm pointing out that nobody was going to burn because they didn't take the drugs (i.e. a covid vaccine).So if there's horrific discrimination and bias in a response to a life-threatening emergency, it's fine as long as the life-threatening emergency doesn't actually take any lives?Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
You're another alternative facts fuckwit.
If your only argument is literally ignoring everything I said and making up things I never said, you don't have a good argument.
It's clear enough to me that Brad is a flat earth dumbass, but thats old news.So is the bad thing only bad if people died from it, or what?
Potentially dying from a fake disease is bad, possibly getting melted by lava because you don't have a vaccine for the fake disease isn't bad. Clear enough?
I didn't say anything about want. I said that's what the government was doing. And they did.You said the government wanted those that didn't take the drugs the government wanted them to take to burn. I'm pointing out that nobody was going to burn because they didn't take the drugs (i.e. a covid vaccine).So if there's horrific discrimination and bias in a response to a life-threatening emergency, it's fine as long as the life-threatening emergency doesn't actually take any lives?Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
You're another alternative facts fuckwit.
If your only argument is literally ignoring everything I said and making up things I never said, you don't have a good argument.
The new claim seems to be that even though there were zero casualties, people were *almost* melted by lava.No, that's not the new claim. It's not an old claim, either. People never claimed that, and nobody changed their argument, as you're trying to imply. No, they've been consistent from the start.
No, volcanoes are not predictable. This is another example of you using a trite, irrelevant tautology (they predicted something! that means it's predictable!) and pretending it proves something. It doesn't. Volcanoes are one of the most unpredictable natural phenomena we know. Scientists have gotten better at understanding how they function, and at recognizing warning signs like gas emission and the like, but that doesn't mean they can predict the behavior with a high degree of certainty over any reasonable period of time.15-20,000 people are being evacuated due to a volcano. And it's not precautionary, or due to tremors, or because of something that's less than instantly fatal like ash. They're being evacuated because some of the most dangerous and deadly volcanic events are happening, specifically fast moving pyroclastic flows that will kill anyone they touch. There's no indication that anyone was rescued from the jaws of fiery death, but that's irrelevant. It's a volcano, erupting, in a very dangerous way. Volcanoes are highly unpredictable, and very deadly. That nobody was poisoned or burned to death doesn't mean the danger wasn't real.
Volcanoes *are* predictable, though, thanks to modern science. That's why people were being evacuated in advance of the eruption last Monday. There are margins of uncertainty in the prediction, but there were designated red zones and as far as I can tell, everyone was safely moved out of them. If you have any news stories to the contrary, I'd be interested to read them.
Recent death count? You mean zero? Because there have been zero covid deaths among the evacuatees (and less than half a dozen cases), you're arguing that covid needs to the biggest priority?They're talking about people in shelters and rationing water. In other words, they're crowding people together in conditions where sanitation is poor. That creates a huge risk for the spread of disease, and not just the latest respiratory one. They're also talking about ashfalls, and while I don't know the nature of the particulates being ejected, that's another serious health risk.
I agree that crowding people together creates risk of disease. That's why they should try to keep people separated based on risk of infection, including vaccination status. They should worry about all infectious diseases, but based on recent death count, covid-19 is top of the list.
Didn't say anything about want? But your quote has that word in it... must be more of your alternative facts then.
If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.
I didn't say anything about want. I said that's what the government was doing. And they did.
I'll repeat: You used to be better than this. What happened?Pat, you've never been better than this. What happened to you?
Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
That the immediate crisis is over and nobody burned is irrelevant from a moral action standpoint. That's like saying it's fine if the government evacuates only the people who make more than $100,000/year from a burning building, as long as the fire fighters manage to put the fire out. As long as nobody ends up burning, it's perfectly okay, right?
Wrong.
There's a difference between wanting them to burn, and wanting them to take a drug.Didn't say anything about want? But your quote has that word in it... must be more of your alternative facts then.
If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.
I didn't say anything about want. I said that's what the government was doing. And they did.
So you admit you did say something about want?There's a difference between wanting them to burn, and wanting them to take a drug.Didn't say anything about want? But your quote has that word in it... must be more of your alternative facts then.
If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.
I didn't say anything about want. I said that's what the government was doing. And they did.
Or there should be.
That raises a separate set of issues, which you don't seem to recognize. But how about: The government pulls everyone from a burning building, then shoves all the poor people without passports into a shelter across the street, where they don't have running water, and may even pick up some of those trendy medieval diseases that San Fransisco made popular again. Those with passports get to fly off to a resort.Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
That the immediate crisis is over and nobody burned is irrelevant from a moral action standpoint. That's like saying it's fine if the government evacuates only the people who make more than $100,000/year from a burning building, as long as the fire fighters manage to put the fire out. As long as nobody ends up burning, it's perfectly okay, right?
Wrong.
After firefighters rescue everyone from a burning building, it's fine for the government to only allow those with passports to go to the airport and board planes going to another country, since those without passports won't be allowed off the planes in the foreign destination. The government will allow anyone to get a passport and then board a plane, but it will take weeks to get one if you haven't already done so. Meanwhile, nobody with or without a passport is left inside the burning building.
Wanna compare that to the US border issue? Many more people die in Mexico and Central America than have died to this volcano, and those people are having a harder time getting in than just needing a vaccination. You think everybody should be allowed on the cruise ships, so should everybody be allowed across the border? We owe them a flight to a resort too, right?That raises a separate set of issues, which you don't seem to recognize. But how about: The government pulls everyone from a burning building, then shoves all the poor people without passports into a shelter across the street, where they don't have running water, and may even pick up some of those trendy medieval diseases that San Fransisco made popular again. Those with passports get to fly off to a resort.Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
That the immediate crisis is over and nobody burned is irrelevant from a moral action standpoint. That's like saying it's fine if the government evacuates only the people who make more than $100,000/year from a burning building, as long as the fire fighters manage to put the fire out. As long as nobody ends up burning, it's perfectly okay, right?
Wrong.
After firefighters rescue everyone from a burning building, it's fine for the government to only allow those with passports to go to the airport and board planes going to another country, since those without passports won't be allowed off the planes in the foreign destination. The government will allow anyone to get a passport and then board a plane, but it will take weeks to get one if you haven't already done so. Meanwhile, nobody with or without a passport is left inside the burning building.
Is that a problem?
I don't admit anything, because that implies some level of guilt. But that's what I said. You don't need to ask, because it's right there, and I have no history of denying my own words.So you admit you did say something about want?There's a difference between wanting them to burn, and wanting them to take a drug.Didn't say anything about want? But your quote has that word in it... must be more of your alternative facts then.
If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.
I didn't say anything about want. I said that's what the government was doing. And they did.
Or there should be.
And, again, who burned?Oh look, another example.
What crowd, it's all the same chuds thinking all the same things, and we're all replying to ourselves.This Guy isn't wrong.
Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.Wanna compare that to the US border issue? Many more people die in Mexico and Central America than have died to this volcano, and those people are having a harder time getting in than just needing a vaccination. You think everybody should be allowed on the cruise ships, so should everybody be allowed across the border? We owe them a flight to a resort too, right?That raises a separate set of issues, which you don't seem to recognize. But how about: The government pulls everyone from a burning building, then shoves all the poor people without passports into a shelter across the street, where they don't have running water, and may even pick up some of those trendy medieval diseases that San Fransisco made popular again. Those with passports get to fly off to a resort.Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
That the immediate crisis is over and nobody burned is irrelevant from a moral action standpoint. That's like saying it's fine if the government evacuates only the people who make more than $100,000/year from a burning building, as long as the fire fighters manage to put the fire out. As long as nobody ends up burning, it's perfectly okay, right?
Wrong.
After firefighters rescue everyone from a burning building, it's fine for the government to only allow those with passports to go to the airport and board planes going to another country, since those without passports won't be allowed off the planes in the foreign destination. The government will allow anyone to get a passport and then board a plane, but it will take weeks to get one if you haven't already done so. Meanwhile, nobody with or without a passport is left inside the burning building.
Is that a problem?
What crowd, it's all the same chuds thinking all the same things, and we're all replying to ourselves.People sing in the shower or dance in front of their bedroom mirror. It's still a performance, even if the audience is one.
What crowd, it's all the same chuds thinking all the same things, and we're all replying to ourselves.People sing in the shower or dance in front of their bedroom mirror. It's still a performance, even if the audience is one.
The new claim seems to be that even though there were zero casualties, people were *almost* melted by lava.
No, that's not the new claim. It's not an old claim, either. People never claimed that, and nobody changed their argument, as you're trying to imply. No, they've been consistent from the start.
You have a nasty habit of "rephrasing" what people say in ways that completely change what they actually said. That's not a valid way to make a case. It's a dishonest attempt to change an opponent's argument into something that's easier to rebut, in the hopes that that they'll unthinkingly accept your reframing, and trap themselves by trying to defend the made-up indefensible position you just created, instead of defending the position they actually hold.
Since nobody falls for that crap anymore, all it really amounts to is a derailing technique. You're saying you don't want to a real discussion on the subject, and ceding the entire argument.
I'll repeat: You used to be better than this. What happened?
Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.Wanna compare that to the US border issue? Many more people die in Mexico and Central America than have died to this volcano, and those people are having a harder time getting in than just needing a vaccination. You think everybody should be allowed on the cruise ships, so should everybody be allowed across the border? We owe them a flight to a resort too, right?That raises a separate set of issues, which you don't seem to recognize. But how about: The government pulls everyone from a burning building, then shoves all the poor people without passports into a shelter across the street, where they don't have running water, and may even pick up some of those trendy medieval diseases that San Fransisco made popular again. Those with passports get to fly off to a resort.Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
That the immediate crisis is over and nobody burned is irrelevant from a moral action standpoint. That's like saying it's fine if the government evacuates only the people who make more than $100,000/year from a burning building, as long as the fire fighters manage to put the fire out. As long as nobody ends up burning, it's perfectly okay, right?
Wrong.
After firefighters rescue everyone from a burning building, it's fine for the government to only allow those with passports to go to the airport and board planes going to another country, since those without passports won't be allowed off the planes in the foreign destination. The government will allow anyone to get a passport and then board a plane, but it will take weeks to get one if you haven't already done so. Meanwhile, nobody with or without a passport is left inside the burning building.
Is that a problem?
Mexico and Guatemala are politics and economics. Quagmires of misery, caused by humans but resistant to clear answers when it comes to causes, solutions, who's to blame, and pretty much anything else involved. Even worse, most interventions seem to make things worse, not better. (And yet, people remain extremely confident that their solution will work (even if very similar solutions failed repeatedly in the past), and that anyone who refuses to throw all the resources they demand at the problem right away is Evil.)
That's why it's easy to get support for one, and not the other. They're treated very differently in the public mind. This isn't unique to these two circumstances, either. Look at the various causes of death. We take extraordinary action, trillions upon trillions of dollars and horrendous violations of civil rights, to fight a so-called war against terror. Which kills a handful of people compared to heart disease, cancer, car crashes, and all kinds of other things that don't get a fraction of those resources.
Or look at the various ways the value of a human life can be calculated. For instance, the EPA typically considers a human life to be worth about $9 million. That's the amount they'll spend on environmental measures that can be calculated to save a single life. Conversely, the median household income in the US is about $68K/year. Consider a working life of 45 years (start at 20, retire at 65), and that works out to lifetime earnings of only a bit over $3 million. And that's the median household income, not the median individual income, so the real number is considerably less. But even if we run with that number, we'll take measures to prevent the loss of life that at least triple the value of that human life to the system. And that calculation varies widely, depending on the type of threat.
This isn't an issue about how we value a human differently in different circumstances. It's about equal treatment, and human dignity. That, however we decide to value a life under different circumstances, when the government is purportedly acting for society, that they value all those lives equally. That we don't discriminate based on whether they're rich or poor, whether they're green or blue, whether they come from the right side or the left side of the tracks, or their personal beliefs. All people are equally deserving of rescue from burning buildings and pyroclastic flows.
Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.Wanna compare that to the US border issue? Many more people die in Mexico and Central America than have died to this volcano, and those people are having a harder time getting in than just needing a vaccination. You think everybody should be allowed on the cruise ships, so should everybody be allowed across the border? We owe them a flight to a resort too, right?That raises a separate set of issues, which you don't seem to recognize. But how about: The government pulls everyone from a burning building, then shoves all the poor people without passports into a shelter across the street, where they don't have running water, and may even pick up some of those trendy medieval diseases that San Fransisco made popular again. Those with passports get to fly off to a resort.Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
That the immediate crisis is over and nobody burned is irrelevant from a moral action standpoint. That's like saying it's fine if the government evacuates only the people who make more than $100,000/year from a burning building, as long as the fire fighters manage to put the fire out. As long as nobody ends up burning, it's perfectly okay, right?
Wrong.
After firefighters rescue everyone from a burning building, it's fine for the government to only allow those with passports to go to the airport and board planes going to another country, since those without passports won't be allowed off the planes in the foreign destination. The government will allow anyone to get a passport and then board a plane, but it will take weeks to get one if you haven't already done so. Meanwhile, nobody with or without a passport is left inside the burning building.
Is that a problem?
Mexico and Guatemala are politics and economics. Quagmires of misery, caused by humans but resistant to clear answers when it comes to causes, solutions, who's to blame, and pretty much anything else involved. Even worse, most interventions seem to make things worse, not better. (And yet, people remain extremely confident that their solution will work (even if very similar solutions failed repeatedly in the past), and that anyone who refuses to throw all the resources they demand at the problem right away is Evil.)
That's why it's easy to get support for one, and not the other. They're treated very differently in the public mind. This isn't unique to these two circumstances, either. Look at the various causes of death. We take extraordinary action, trillions upon trillions of dollars and horrendous violations of civil rights, to fight a so-called war against terror. Which kills a handful of people compared to heart disease, cancer, car crashes, and all kinds of other things that don't get a fraction of those resources.
Or look at the various ways the value of a human life can be calculated. For instance, the EPA typically considers a human life to be worth about $9 million. That's the amount they'll spend on environmental measures that can be calculated to save a single life. Conversely, the median household income in the US is about $68K/year. Consider a working life of 45 years (start at 20, retire at 65), and that works out to lifetime earnings of only a bit over $3 million. And that's the median household income, not the median individual income, so the real number is considerably less. But even if we run with that number, we'll take measures to prevent the loss of life that at least triple the value of that human life to the system. And that calculation varies widely, depending on the type of threat.
This isn't an issue about how we value a human differently in different circumstances. It's about equal treatment, and human dignity. That, however we decide to value a life under different circumstances, when the government is purportedly acting for society, that they value all those lives equally. That we don't discriminate based on whether they're rich or poor, whether they're green or blue, whether they come from the right side or the left side of the tracks, or their personal beliefs. All people are equally deserving of rescue from burning buildings and pyroclastic flows.
So the smoothbrain is pro open borders, why I'm not surprised? I mean This Guy not you Pat.
Illegal migration benefits the following groups:
The corrupt governments in latin america since it provides a safety valve for social unrest.
The big corporations in the USA that can pay less since the illegals create a downward pressure on salaries.
The DNC since they want to create a serf class and a new voting plantation.
It harms the following groups:
The people in the countries from where the illegals come since the more likelly to do the travel are the more likelly to vote against the corrupt government.
The poor in all the countries and in the USA since the corrupt governments here don't have the pressure to fix their shit and the poor in the USA have increased competition for the jobs and a downward pressure on salaries.
And this includes all races, if you're poor you'll be negativelly affected by open borders.
Legal immigrants since they did things the right way and now have people that didn't there.
The tax payer since people that haven't paid shit get to use the tax funded stuff there.
Guess the smoothbrain socialist isn't so much in favor of poor people but of those like the Kook Brothers, and their ilk.
Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.I feel less sympathy for those impacted by a natural event than those impacted by the abuse and neglect of other humans. I'm not saying that anyone deserves to be killed by a tsunami, volcano, or lightning strike, but those have far less emotional impact on me than people being shitty to other people.
Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.I feel less sympathy for those impacted by a natural event than those impacted by the abuse and neglect of other humans. I'm not saying that anyone deserves to be killed by a tsunami, volcano, or lightning strike, but those have far less emotional impact on me than people being shitty to other people.
And really, if god is going to strike people down, who are we to side with those fuckers? They are obviously objectively evil if god is jerking off some lava cum on them.Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.I feel less sympathy for those impacted by a natural event than those impacted by the abuse and neglect of other humans. I'm not saying that anyone deserves to be killed by a tsunami, volcano, or lightning strike, but those have far less emotional impact on me than people being shitty to other people.
I mean humans were also an act of God depending on who you ask, so. Same shit different scoop.
Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.I feel less sympathy for those impacted by a natural event than those impacted by the abuse and neglect of other humans. I'm not saying that anyone deserves to be killed by a tsunami, volcano, or lightning strike, but those have far less emotional impact on me than people being shitty to other people.
And really, if god is going to strike people down, who are we to side with those fuckers? They are obviously objectively evil if god is jerking off some lava cum on them.Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.I feel less sympathy for those impacted by a natural event than those impacted by the abuse and neglect of other humans. I'm not saying that anyone deserves to be killed by a tsunami, volcano, or lightning strike, but those have far less emotional impact on me than people being shitty to other people.
I mean humans were also an act of God depending on who you ask, so. Same shit different scoop.
kim have you seen like any benefits out of this stance of yours in fifteen years? Here specifically I mean
kim have you seen like any benefits out of this stance of yours in fifteen years? Here specifically I mean
I feel that it improves the ratio of content to noise in conversation.
One of the things I appreciate about posting here in Pundit's forum is learning about how people of opposing views think. If I'm just engaging in insults or arguing over who said what, I don't learn what they're actually thinking about the issues.
Plus, Kim's a gamer. So he reads and talks about games.
If we judge the value of a forum only by its off-topic section, then we end up going the way of rpg.net. Which nobody wants.
Your post made it sound like people were being killed by superfast flows...Only if you read things into my post that aren't there. Though you could read my post and think people were directly fleeing an eruption, instead of being evacuated because there was an eruption nearby, because I didn't go into much detail. But I assumed that the timing (last week) and common knowledge of how eruptions work (people fleeing lava or pyroclastic flows are things that only really happen in movies) would dispel any confusion, and even if not, anyone interested in the subject would click on the link.
Some of your assumptions are sketchy. Dozens dead from covid assumes all 20K people being evacuated catch the disease, which is not even close to a realistic assumption. And the whole point is the government's decision. It wasn't to isolate or otherwise trying to contain people who might be infected, or otherwise taking reasonable measures to mitigate any potential problems. They're not even, like the cruise ship itself, insisting on a negative PCR test. Their position is no shot, no evacuation. That's more than appalling. It's in the same category as death camps or death squads.
Why do you still keep responding to this communist? He has got to be on the CCP payroll for all the bullshit he posts.
No, you don't get to play the victim. You've been attacking me, by maliciously misinterpreting what I've been saying. I initially assumed good faith, and gave you every chance, but at this point there seems to be no other reasonable explanation. My responses have been extraordinarily mild, and even when I've bluntly called you out for your bad actions, I've explained exactly what you've done instead of resorting to simple insults.The new claim seems to be that even though there were zero casualties, people were *almost* melted by lava.
No, that's not the new claim. It's not an old claim, either. People never claimed that, and nobody changed their argument, as you're trying to imply. No, they've been consistent from the start.
You have a nasty habit of "rephrasing" what people say in ways that completely change what they actually said. That's not a valid way to make a case. It's a dishonest attempt to change an opponent's argument into something that's easier to rebut, in the hopes that that they'll unthinkingly accept your reframing, and trap themselves by trying to defend the made-up indefensible position you just created, instead of defending the position they actually hold.
Since nobody falls for that crap anymore, all it really amounts to is a derailing technique. You're saying you don't want to a real discussion on the subject, and ceding the entire argument.
I'll repeat: You used to be better than this. What happened?
Pat, as far as I can tell, what has happened is that you have gotten more emotional and more insulting. You have been launching personal attacks at me for a week or two now. In general, I make it a policy not to reply to personal insults, but in this case I'll briefly reply.
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
Again, that would be reasonable explanation. But do you have a source?Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
No. If the evacuation destinations will not accept people who are unvaccinated, it's not like the island Government can force them to accept people, right? The decision isn't even being made by the Government of the island. IF you are allowed to go to a neighboring island by that neighboring island's government, then you can go there. If you are not allowed to go to a neighboring island by that neighboring island's government, then you can go to the part of the island not in danger. They are not the ones making any segregation decisions, nor does either involve "rescue services."
The problem with people being shitty to each other is how do you fix it? Volcanoes are easy. People are so messy often the best thing you can do is walk away, because whatever you do will make it worse.Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.I feel less sympathy for those impacted by a natural event than those impacted by the abuse and neglect of other humans. I'm not saying that anyone deserves to be killed by a tsunami, volcano, or lightning strike, but those have far less emotional impact on me than people being shitty to other people.
Again, that would be reasonable explanation. But do you have a source?Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.If you don't take the drugs the government wants you to take, burn? Nice.My general reaction to most of that is they're at bigger risk from things like diphtheria than covid-19. If the people on the cruise ships going to other islands are treated much better, it's still a horrible case of discrimination.Was there discrimination in who was offered the vaccine?
No. If the evacuation destinations will not accept people who are unvaccinated, it's not like the island Government can force them to accept people, right? The decision isn't even being made by the Government of the island. IF you are allowed to go to a neighboring island by that neighboring island's government, then you can go there. If you are not allowed to go to a neighboring island by that neighboring island's government, then you can go to the part of the island not in danger. They are not the ones making any segregation decisions, nor does either involve "rescue services."
Because all the articles that have been linked in this thread have said it was the government of St. Thomas who made that call, and that the cruise ships softened it a little bit (only requiring a negative PCR test, instead of a vaccination).
Yes, it's possible this could just be terrible messaging. The articles aren't that comprehensive. But as I said before, it's been a week and a half. Don't you think they would have realized by now how badly they came across, and corrected it? Governments tend to be very sensitive to bad press.
Edit: A more plausible scenario is they corrected the report, but the news mostly ignored it because it wasn't dramatic enough. But in that case, it would still be out there, somewhere. Find a link, and you'll have proven your case. But until then, we have to rely on what's been said.
Some are due to be temporarily housed in the neighboring islands of St. Lucia, Grenada, Barbados, and Antigua.
But most of the islands would require vaccination before they take anybody in.
"If people are willing to welcome you at a time of COVID-19, they will wish you to have the highest level of protection possible," Gonsalves told reporters on Saturday.
St. Lucia is not requesting people to be vaccinated to come, he said, but it may require vaccination on arrival.
So it would appear they are being evacuated to four neighboring islands. Three of them (Grenada, Barbados and Antigua) require vaccinations before you can leave for them as a destination. St. Lucia does not appear to require that, but may require that you be vaccinated prior to arrival. But in sum if you're just gathering people quick to board for neighboring islands the ship is likely going to dock at all four (or at least more than one of them), and it would need vaccinated passengers to get permission to dock at three of those four in the least. So it makes sense the just issued a rule saying "vaccinated only, so we can have permission dock at any of the four neighboring locations."You're still speculating a lot, but that seems plausible. I can see that as an example of a practical decision made in a crisis that has unfortunate implications. It would be good to have it directly clarified, though, and something put in place to ensure that that decisions like that aren't made again. For instance, quarantine protocols (heresy I know, quarantine the sick instead of entire countries), and talking to the neighboring countries to waive those rules. The silence on this specific issue is still very strange.
So it would appear they are being evacuated to four neighboring islands. Three of them (Grenada, Barbados and Antigua) require vaccinations before you can leave for them as a destination. St. Lucia does not appear to require that, but may require that you be vaccinated prior to arrival. But in sum if you're just gathering people quick to board for neighboring islands the ship is likely going to dock at all four (or at least more than one of them), and it would need vaccinated passengers to get permission to dock at three of those four in the least. So it makes sense the just issued a rule saying "vaccinated only, so we can have permission dock at any of the four neighboring locations."You're still speculating a lot, but that seems plausible. I can see that as an example of a practical decision made in a crisis that has unfortunate implications. It would be good to have it directly clarified, though, and something put in place to ensure that that decisions like that aren't made again. For instance, quarantine protocols (heresy I know, quarantine the sick instead of entire countries), and talking to the neighboring countries to waive those rules. The silence on this specific issue is still very strange.
Pat is upset that another claims to be a victim...and then goes on to claim Pat is the bigger victim. Pat belongs on RPGnet.No, you don't get to play the victim. You've been attacking me, by maliciously misinterpreting what I've been saying. I initially assumed good faith, and gave you every chance, but at this point there seems to be no other reasonable explanation. My responses have been extraordinarily mild, and even when I've bluntly called you out for your bad actions, I've explained exactly what you've done instead of resorting to simple insults.The new claim seems to be that even though there were zero casualties, people were *almost* melted by lava.
No, that's not the new claim. It's not an old claim, either. People never claimed that, and nobody changed their argument, as you're trying to imply. No, they've been consistent from the start.
You have a nasty habit of "rephrasing" what people say in ways that completely change what they actually said. That's not a valid way to make a case. It's a dishonest attempt to change an opponent's argument into something that's easier to rebut, in the hopes that that they'll unthinkingly accept your reframing, and trap themselves by trying to defend the made-up indefensible position you just created, instead of defending the position they actually hold.
Since nobody falls for that crap anymore, all it really amounts to is a derailing technique. You're saying you don't want to a real discussion on the subject, and ceding the entire argument.
I'll repeat: You used to be better than this. What happened?
Pat, as far as I can tell, what has happened is that you have gotten more emotional and more insulting. You have been launching personal attacks at me for a week or two now. In general, I make it a policy not to reply to personal insults, but in this case I'll briefly reply.
And no, this isn't me being emotional. This is just text, on a screen, where I've dropped some of the traditional niceties because you keep missing the point when I present it in a more circumlocutious way. But instead of address the points I'm making, you're doing it again. You're telling me what I think. Which is a conversation ender.
I'm serious about everything I've said. We've rarely directly interacted, but you're someone I've seen on and off on various messageboards, for more than two decades. You've always seemed quite reasonable. And you have been, in the past, here. But in the last couple years, you've adopted some of the rhetorical techniques which were first popularized by the SJW crowd, but are now common in most corners of the internet.
I can't stop from you doing that, but I'm trying to make you aware that, by doing so, you're killing any chance of a real conversation. The reason I'm specifically addressing you on this point, and ignoring some other people, is because I think you're generally a rational and reasonable person who thinks things through and makes good points. We need more of that, and less of this adversarial, attack everyone, win at any costs, tell people what they think, claim everyone who disagrees has evil motives, kind of crap that has turned so much of the internet into a cesspool.
You've expressed interest in having substantive conversations. That's exactly what I'm trying to address. Most of the conversations I've had with you lately crash up against the rocks because you do something like tell my what I feel, or ascribe to me beliefs I don't hold. Which, to repeat myself, is a conversation ender. I have to spend most of my time telling you what I don't believe, repeating what I do believe, and unpacking and refuting the various nasty implications your wrap into your statements. When that happens, aAny discussion immediately stalls, and usually crashes and burns.
You can't fix the fact that nature hurts people either.The problem with people being shitty to each other is how do you fix it? Volcanoes are easy. People are so messy often the best thing you can do is walk away, because whatever you do will make it worse.Different circumstances. A volcano is a natural threat. In the parlance, an Act of God. Beyond human control, and thus those affected are widely considered to deserve our sympathy.I feel less sympathy for those impacted by a natural event than those impacted by the abuse and neglect of other humans. I'm not saying that anyone deserves to be killed by a tsunami, volcano, or lightning strike, but those have far less emotional impact on me than people being shitty to other people.
HappyDaze's fee-fees are hurt. So sad.Nah. No hurt feelings on my part. I'm quite happy to point out what a lying fuck you are with your fake ass information that you'll try to spin over and over in some idiotic attempt to never admit you're wrong. Of course, for you, such is simply another Tuesday.
I admit I'm wrong fairly regularly, far more frequently than the vast majority of people here or elsewhere. Plus, I back up my statements with reasoning and sources.HappyDaze's fee-fees are hurt. So sad.Nah. No hurt feelings on my part. I'm quite happy to point out what a lying fuck you are with your fake ass information that you'll try to spin over and over in some idiotic attempt to never admit you're wrong. Of course, for you, such is simply another Tuesday.
I suppose people are going to burn too, right?I admit I'm wrong fairly regularly, far more frequently than the vast majority of people here or elsewhere. Plus, I back up my statements with reasoning and sources.HappyDaze's fee-fees are hurt. So sad.Nah. No hurt feelings on my part. I'm quite happy to point out what a lying fuck you are with your fake ass information that you'll try to spin over and over in some idiotic attempt to never admit you're wrong. Of course, for you, such is simply another Tuesday.
Your fee-fees are hurt, and you're lashing out irrationally. So sad.
Are your fee-fees on fire?I suppose people are going to burn too, right?I admit I'm wrong fairly regularly, far more frequently than the vast majority of people here or elsewhere. Plus, I back up my statements with reasoning and sources.HappyDaze's fee-fees are hurt. So sad.Nah. No hurt feelings on my part. I'm quite happy to point out what a lying fuck you are with your fake ass information that you'll try to spin over and over in some idiotic attempt to never admit you're wrong. Of course, for you, such is simply another Tuesday.
Your fee-fees are hurt, and you're lashing out irrationally. So sad.
No. Just like before, nobody burned, you lying piece of shit.Are your fee-fees on fire?I suppose people are going to burn too, right?I admit I'm wrong fairly regularly, far more frequently than the vast majority of people here or elsewhere. Plus, I back up my statements with reasoning and sources.HappyDaze's fee-fees are hurt. So sad.Nah. No hurt feelings on my part. I'm quite happy to point out what a lying fuck you are with your fake ass information that you'll try to spin over and over in some idiotic attempt to never admit you're wrong. Of course, for you, such is simply another Tuesday.
Your fee-fees are hurt, and you're lashing out irrationally. So sad.
Pat! Perhaps I missed it where you claimed that people down there in the Caribbean on some island were being burned the fuck up by lava. Or ash. Or hot fucking poison gas. Where did you say that, exactly?It's the same post where I talked about my time on Barsoom.
Pat! Perhaps I missed it where you claimed that people down there in the Caribbean on some island were being burned the fuck up by lava. Or ash. Or hot fucking poison gas. Where did you say that, exactly?It's the same post where I talked about my time on Barsoom.
Pat! Perhaps I missed it where you claimed that people down there in the Caribbean on some island were being burned the fuck up by lava. Or ash. Or hot fucking poison gas. Where did you say that, exactly?It's the same post where I talked about my time on Barsoom.
Pat! Perhaps I missed it where you claimed that people down there in the Caribbean on some island were being burned the fuck up by lava. Or ash. Or hot fucking poison gas. Where did you say that, exactly?It's the same post where I talked about my time on Barsoom.
About three bonfires high.Pat! Perhaps I missed it where you claimed that people down there in the Caribbean on some island were being burned the fuck up by lava. Or ash. Or hot fucking poison gas. Where did you say that, exactly?It's the same post where I talked about my time on Barsoom.
I just want to know how high you jumped when you were there. I mean, the highest point you reached with a single jump. Approximately, since I doubt you had a device to measure altitude. Because let's not get crazy here.
Greetings!I've quoted the little bitch's statement at least three times. If you've ignored it, that's on you.
Pat! Perhaps I missed it where you claimed that people down there in the Caribbean on some island were being burned the fuck up by lava. Or ash. Or hot fucking poison gas. Where did you say that, exactly?
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Are the people who have been burned up in the room with you right now?Greetings!I've quoted the little bitch's statement at least three times. If you've ignored it, that's on you.
Pat! Perhaps I missed it where you claimed that people down there in the Caribbean on some island were being burned the fuck up by lava. Or ash. Or hot fucking poison gas. Where did you say that, exactly?
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Pat! Perhaps I missed it where you claimed that people down there in the Caribbean on some island were being burned the fuck up by lava. Or ash. Or hot fucking poison gas. Where did you say that, exactly?It's the same post where I talked about my time on Barsoom.
The Thern Poverty Law Center has classified the Heliumite flag as a symbol of hate.Pat! Perhaps I missed it where you claimed that people down there in the Caribbean on some island were being burned the fuck up by lava. Or ash. Or hot fucking poison gas. Where did you say that, exactly?It's the same post where I talked about my time on Barsoom.
this is stolen Confederate valor you fucking asshole
we're all replying to ourselves.
I would be interested in what you currently think about what happened in Saint Vincent. At this point, what is your position on what the government of Saint Vincent did? Do you currently think there was a massive human right violation?I don't know, it's not clear what happened.
In general, my moral stance regarding infectious disease and providing aid:
Aid should be provided to everyone, absolutely. But when infectious disease is a danger, there are good reasons to differentiate and separate between infected and uninfected, and vaccinated and unvaccinated. That doesn't mean abandon either side - but it may mean treating them differently. For example, if some people are known to be infected with a disease, they might be quarantined - but still treated, respected, and cared for. That's not inherently discrimination or a human rights violation.
In general, my moral stance regarding infectious disease and providing aid:
Aid should be provided to everyone, absolutely. But when infectious disease is a danger, there are good reasons to differentiate and separate between infected and uninfected, and vaccinated and unvaccinated. That doesn't mean abandon either side - but it may mean treating them differently. For example, if some people are known to be infected with a disease, they might be quarantined - but still treated, respected, and cared for. That's not inherently discrimination or a human rights violation.
The other stuff, you're making a horrible mish-mash of historical standard practice and the new wave of totalitarianism. Yes, there's a difference between the infected and the non-infected. That's what quarantine is for, isolating the infected. Not entire populations of healthy people. That's what's utterly bizarre about covid-19. The whole idea of public health has been flipped on its head. We live in an upside down world where narrowly targeted measures to isolate those who are a clear danger of infection have been turned into isolating and discriminating against the uninfected and uncontagious. It's equivalent to the justice system switching from locking up people who have been proven guilty via the legal process, to locking everyone up and only allowing people out after they "voluntarily" accept a treatment that will prevent them from committing any crimes in the future.
What justifies quarantine isn't that it's only done to a small number of people, so therefore it's OK to oppress them. It's that it is implemented by a democratic government, where people have rights regardless of their health. For example, if the Italian people don't like how their government handled the pandemic, then they can elect different people with a platform of change in the next election.Don't agree at all. Look at what you're saying -- you're justifying quarantine not on the basis of the nature of the restrictions or how its implemented, but on the type of government that's implementing it. By your logic, the most restrictive and overreaching quarantine is fine, as long as the government is democratic. But even the most modest, reasonable quarantine is unjust, if it comes from any other type of government. While there's an argument to be made that any action taken by an undemocratic government is unjust, that doesn't mean that undemocratic nations are unable to act admirably, or that all actions taken by a democratic government are just. The justness, or rightness, or validity of a quarantine can't be defined just by the type of government that imposes it. And of course it's different from a criminal conviction, because getting infected by a disease is not a matter of guilt. But otherwise the analogy holds.
We're all replying to ourselves?we're all replying to ourselves.
We're all replying to ourselves?
We're all replying to ourselvesWe're all replying to ourselves?we're all replying to ourselves.
We're all replying to ourselves?
We're all replying to ourselvesWe're all replying to ourselves?we're all replying to ourselves.
We're all replying to ourselves?
We're all replying to ourselves.
Needless to say I don't own a mask and have never worn one.Needless to say you probably live in your mother's basement and have no employment that requires you to leave it.
Needless to say you probably live in your mother's basement and have no employment that requires you to leave it.
The meltdown from the lockdown fanatics at the prospect of mask-wearing being made voluntary two weeks from now is utterly hilarious. Masks are the most visible symbol of compliance from the cowardly majority, when that goes their entire grip on people goes.
Needless to say I don't own a mask and have never worn one.
Did the businesses in your town/city have mask requirements? All the places I go have had mask mandates, and only recently lifted them for the vaccinated only.
If I refused to wear a mask, especially early in the lockdowns, I would not have been able to go to the store without leaving the State. And that's a long way to go for a box of Cherrios.
Needless to say I don't own a mask and have never worn one.Needless to say you probably live in your mother's basement and have no employment that requires you to leave it.
Needless to say I don't own a mask and have never worn one.Needless to say you probably live in your mother's basement and have no employment that requires you to leave it.
Thats the type of person who needs triple masking.
Yeah, no reasonable person gets so bent outta shape about someone else not wearing a mask; he got some kinda deep-seated mask issues.
I bet he was born with a caul like the kid in The Shining :/
Spoiler alert, mask mandates are likely to make a comeback before mid August.It's all part of the Pillow Prophet's vision that puts Trump back in the White House on August 13, 2021.
Spoiler alert, mask mandates are likely to make a comeback before mid August.
And lockdowns.I don't think the economy can survive another full scale lockdown.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9813079/LA-restaurants-close-California-coronavirus-hospitalizations-hit-highest-point-months.html
And lockdowns.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9813079/LA-restaurants-close-California-coronavirus-hospitalizations-hit-highest-point-months.html
And lockdowns.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9813079/LA-restaurants-close-California-coronavirus-hospitalizations-hit-highest-point-months.html
And lockdowns.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9813079/LA-restaurants-close-California-coronavirus-hospitalizations-hit-highest-point-months.html
Just to be clear, despite your article and you implying "lockdowns" in relation to LA restaurants, TWO restaurants decided on their own to close here in LA. And I suspect that was cover for economic issues (restaurants open and close all the time - it's a volatile and difficult business, and we have tens of thousands of restaurants in LA.) So far, no lockdown.
My favorite bar just asked (on a voluntary basis) that unvaccinated customers use the outdoor tables rather than indoor ones.
I do wish we could increase our vaccination rates here. Rather than the conspiracy theory nutters like Spinachcat being the major issue here, it's more often African Americans and Hispanics who are reluctant to get the vaccine. One from distrust of Government, the other from distrust of chemicals in general, mostly.
And lockdowns.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9813079/LA-restaurants-close-California-coronavirus-hospitalizations-hit-highest-point-months.html
Just to be clear, despite your article and you implying "lockdowns" in relation to LA restaurants, TWO restaurants decided on their own to close here in LA. And I suspect that was cover for economic issues (restaurants open and close all the time - it's a volatile and difficult business, and we have tens of thousands of restaurants in LA.) So far, no lockdown.
My favorite bar just asked (on a voluntary basis) that unvaccinated customers use the outdoor tables rather than indoor ones.
I do wish we could increase our vaccination rates here. Rather than the conspiracy theory nutters like Spinachcat being the major issue here, it's more often African Americans and Hispanics who are reluctant to get the vaccine. One from distrust of Government, the other from distrust of chemicals in general, mostly.
I do wish we could increase our vaccination rates here. Rather than the conspiracy theory nutters like Spinachcat being the major issue here, it's more often African Americans and Hispanics who are reluctant to get the vaccine. One from distrust of Government, the other from distrust of chemicals in general, mostly.
Funny, I haven't seen anyone require a hospital admission for a "common fucking cold* but I've seen plenty lately for Covid-19. Your dismissal of reality is foolish and harmful to others.I do wish we could increase our vaccination rates here. Rather than the conspiracy theory nutters like Spinachcat being the major issue here, it's more often African Americans and Hispanics who are reluctant to get the vaccine. One from distrust of Government, the other from distrust of chemicals in general, mostly.
I'm brown, I'm not "reluctant" to get vaccinated (the term itself is more NLP bollocks, implying that if only you could find the right lever, people could be persuaded). I have no interest whatsoever in a therapeutic treatment for the common fucking cold.
Funny, I haven't seen anyone require a hospital admission for a "common fucking cold* ...I do wish we could increase our vaccination rates here. Rather than the conspiracy theory nutters like Spinachcat being the major issue here, it's more often African Americans and Hispanics who are reluctant to get the vaccine. One from distrust of Government, the other from distrust of chemicals in general, mostly.
I'm brown, I'm not "reluctant" to get vaccinated (the term itself is more NLP bollocks, implying that if only you could find the right lever, people could be persuaded). I have no interest whatsoever in a therapeutic treatment for the common fucking cold.
Oh, do shut up, you foolish child. You know nothing of value in this conversation. Go back to your elfgame-talk. A self-limited viral URI (aka, "common cold") is not going to get someone admitted.Funny, I haven't seen anyone require a hospital admission for a "common fucking cold* ...I do wish we could increase our vaccination rates here. Rather than the conspiracy theory nutters like Spinachcat being the major issue here, it's more often African Americans and Hispanics who are reluctant to get the vaccine. One from distrust of Government, the other from distrust of chemicals in general, mostly.
I'm brown, I'm not "reluctant" to get vaccinated (the term itself is more NLP bollocks, implying that if only you could find the right lever, people could be persuaded). I have no interest whatsoever in a therapeutic treatment for the common fucking cold.
That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.HappyDaze is qualified on that subject, and you probably are not.
That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
Correct. The "common cold" is a term for a self-limited upper respiratory infection of viral origin. It is not a cause for hospitalization. That's not to say that hospitalization cannot happen when it ceased to be a "common cold" through an accompanying lower respiratory involvement (typically asthma exacerbation or pnemonia), but that's no longer the same diagnosis. Those hospitalizations will not list cold/common cold for cause; they will list asthma, pneumonia, or something else as the cause. In contrast, respiratory distress and/or failure d/t Covid-19 has been listed as a cause for hospitalization.That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
The common cold? Maybe you mean side effects related to it, like pneumonia which doesn’t develop overnight, even on the elderly. Now, the Flu is slightly different. And then There’s COVID. Don’t take my word for it though, I couldn’t possibly be as educated as YOU in the matter.
Funny, I haven't seen anyone require a hospital admission for a "common fucking cold* but I've seen plenty lately for Covid-19. Your dismissal of reality is foolish and harmful to others.
I've explained what the common cold is in my previous posts. It is not something that requires hospitalization, because it stops being the "common cold" when it is no longer a self-limited URI.Funny, I haven't seen anyone require a hospital admission for a "common fucking cold* but I've seen plenty lately for Covid-19. Your dismissal of reality is foolish and harmful to others.
The common cold is a colloquialism for a whole host of respiratory viruses of varying severity. For people with weakened or compromised immune systems, they can require hospital admission.
Before 2020, no big deal was made out of it, because it was a simple fact of life. I'm not dismissing anything, I had covid in January. It was a bad cold. I've had worse flu.
Take your own advice, you brainless, ignorant shill. Neither will a simple Covid19 infection. In both cases, it is the body's reaction to the virus that causes the dangerous condition (swelling in the lungs, etc.), which is why both viruses are so worrisome in compromised people. The Covid virus itself has never killed anyone, any more than the cold virus has; the cytokine storm caused by the body's immune system is what kills most Covid deaths. If you had even a modicum of medical knowledge, you would understand this. But you are so stupid that you can't even comprehend how little you understand. Go back to your poorly-run storygames, you boot-licking, drooling moronic example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.Oh, do shut up, you foolish child. You know nothing of value in this conversation. Go back to your elfgame-talk. A self-limited viral URI (aka, "common cold") is not going to get someone admitted.Funny, I haven't seen anyone require a hospital admission for a "common fucking cold* ...I do wish we could increase our vaccination rates here. Rather than the conspiracy theory nutters like Spinachcat being the major issue here, it's more often African Americans and Hispanics who are reluctant to get the vaccine. One from distrust of Government, the other from distrust of chemicals in general, mostly.
I'm brown, I'm not "reluctant" to get vaccinated (the term itself is more NLP bollocks, implying that if only you could find the right lever, people could be persuaded). I have no interest whatsoever in a therapeutic treatment for the common fucking cold.
That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
Whatever his credentials, he's pretty obviously not qualified if his argument is that: A common cold cannot kill you because the reaction of the body and secondary infections are what actually causes your death. Covid can kill you because the reaction of the body and secondary infections are what actually caused your death, but it started with Covid and that's what is listed on the death certificate (which is a political distinction, not a medical one). I don't care if he claims to have invented medicine; if his statements are wrong, they are wrong.That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.HappyDaze is qualified on that subject, and you probably are not.
That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
The common cold? Maybe you mean side effects related to it, like pneumonia which doesn’t develop overnight, even on the elderly. Now, the Flu is slightly different. And then There’s COVID. Don’t take my word for it though, I couldn’t possibly be as educated as YOU in the matter.
Take your own advice, you brainless, ignorant shill. Neither will a simple Covid19 infection. In both cases, it is the body's reaction to the virus that causes the dangerous condition (swelling in the lungs, etc.), which is why both viruses are so worrisome in compromised people. The Covid virus itself has never killed anyone, any more than the cold virus has; the cytokine storm caused by the body's immune system is what kills most Covid deaths. If you had even a modicum of medical knowledge, you would understand this. But you are so stupid that you can't even comprehend how little you understand. Go back to your poorly-run storygames, you boot-licking, drooling moronic example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
1. How many people have died in your hospitals from covid 19 and only due to covid 19? I have seen the figures you publish online, but these are deaths within 28 days of a positive
covid test, so they could have died from other causes. I just want to know the exact figures from 1st February 2020 to 3rd April 2021 for death due to covid 19 alone.
There have been 79 deaths with covid.
There have been 2 deaths from covid alone.
2. The Number and Percentage of people with 'underlying health conditions' in the overall total.
79 and 97.53%
3. The Number and Percentage of those without 'underlying health conditions'.
2 and 2.47% respectively.
And "listing" is not biology. It is a decision made by the hospital, not a consequence of the actual operation of the virus. If I define murder as only happening to men, it doesn't prevent a woman from being stabbed to death. The fact that you lean on what the hospital labels it, instead of the actual biological cause, just proves you are trying to be deceptive. Otherwise, demonstrate you advanced knowledge by describing the process that Covid uses to kill a perfectly healthy person. Guaranteed it will involve the same kind of body reaction or secondary infection as can happen with the flu or other similar viruses.Those hospitalizations will not list cold/common cold for cause; they will list asthma, pneumonia, or something else as the cause. In contrast, respiratory distress and/or failure d/t Covid-19 has been listed as a cause for hospitalization.That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
The common cold? Maybe you mean side effects related to it, like pneumonia which doesn’t develop overnight, even on the elderly. Now, the Flu is slightly different. And then There’s COVID. Don’t take my word for it though, I couldn’t possibly be as educated as YOU in the matter.
Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
The common cold? Maybe you mean side effects related to it, like pneumonia which doesn’t develop overnight, even on the elderly. Now, the Flu is slightly different. And then There’s COVID. Don’t take my word for it though, I couldn’t possibly be as educated as YOU in the matter.
It's the side effects of the Covid virus that kills people, just like the cold or flu. The virus itself does not. This is a medical fact. It's not like ebola, which directly destroys cells and causes hemorrhaging.
I like the spin that no one ever died from the 'Flu' before.Who is saying that?
Seriously can not make this shit up.
And your existence is a net negative for humanity. Every breath you take is oxygen stolen from a more useful purpose, like deflecting solar radiation or a forest fire.Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
The common cold? Maybe you mean side effects related to it, like pneumonia which doesn’t develop overnight, even on the elderly. Now, the Flu is slightly different. And then There’s COVID. Don’t take my word for it though, I couldn’t possibly be as educated as YOU in the matter.
It's the side effects of the Covid virus that kills people, just like the cold or flu. The virus itself does not. This is a medical fact. It's not like ebola, which directly destroys cells and causes hemorrhaging.
I like the spin that no one ever died from the 'Flu' before.Who is saying that?
Seriously can not make this shit up.
I have real people thanking me for my help everyday as I tend them or their loved ones. I can easily dismiss your foolishness.And your existence is a net negative for humanity. Every breath you take is oxygen stolen from a more useful purpose, like deflecting solar radiation or a forest fire.Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
The common cold? Maybe you mean side effects related to it, like pneumonia which doesn’t develop overnight, even on the elderly. Now, the Flu is slightly different. And then There’s COVID. Don’t take my word for it though, I couldn’t possibly be as educated as YOU in the matter.
It's the side effects of the Covid virus that kills people, just like the cold or flu. The virus itself does not. This is a medical fact. It's not like ebola, which directly destroys cells and causes hemorrhaging.
Which has no bearing on the method by which Covid kills, the arbitrary nature of defining when a cold or Covid becomes somethin else, or basic biology, all of which you are wrong about. Which is why you can't defend your position.I have real people thanking me for my help everyday as I tend them or their loved ones. I can easily dismiss your foolishness.And your existence is a net negative for humanity. Every breath you take is oxygen stolen from a more useful purpose, like deflecting solar radiation or a forest fire.Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
The common cold? Maybe you mean side effects related to it, like pneumonia which doesn’t develop overnight, even on the elderly. Now, the Flu is slightly different. And then There’s COVID. Don’t take my word for it though, I couldn’t possibly be as educated as YOU in the matter.
It's the side effects of the Covid virus that kills people, just like the cold or flu. The virus itself does not. This is a medical fact. It's not like ebola, which directly destroys cells and causes hemorrhaging.
I don't have to defend my anything from fools like you. But I can still pity you for being so foolish.Which has no bearing on the method by which Covid kills, the arbitrary nature of defining when a cold or Covid becomes somethin else, or basic biology, all of which you are wrong about. Which is why you can't defend your position.I have real people thanking me for my help everyday as I tend them or their loved ones. I can easily dismiss your foolishness.And your existence is a net negative for humanity. Every breath you take is oxygen stolen from a more useful purpose, like deflecting solar radiation or a forest fire.Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.That statement alone disqualifies your opinion on this issue. People (especially the old and vulnerable... the same people threatened by Covid19) are hospitalized and die every day from the common cold. You are so ignorant that it should hurt to be you.
The common cold? Maybe you mean side effects related to it, like pneumonia which doesn’t develop overnight, even on the elderly. Now, the Flu is slightly different. And then There’s COVID. Don’t take my word for it though, I couldn’t possibly be as educated as YOU in the matter.
It's the side effects of the Covid virus that kills people, just like the cold or flu. The virus itself does not. This is a medical fact. It's not like ebola, which directly destroys cells and causes hemorrhaging.
So, this is Australia right now.
For the greater good of the collective citizen. You wouldnt want to be considered selfish/racist/genocidal now would you? because if you are out there breathing the air freely, you are dangerous.So, this is Australia right now.
I find it silly how you can enter AU as a citizen, but they won’t let you leave.
For the greater good of the collective citizen. You wouldnt want to be considered selfish/racist/genocidal now would you? because if you are out there breathing the air freely, you are dangerous.So, this is Australia right now.
I find it silly how you can enter AU as a citizen, but they won’t let you leave.
For the greater good of the collective citizen. You wouldnt want to be considered selfish/racist/genocidal now would you? because if you are out there breathing the air freely, you are dangerous.So, this is Australia right now.
I find it silly how you can enter AU as a citizen, but they won’t let you leave.
Strange flex, at least in the US we remain largely free to decide for ourselves how we live our lives. Still think you’re better off taking the vaccine and moving on past this, especially if you’re in a low-resource country.
So, this is Australia right now.
For the greater good of the collective citizen. You wouldnt want to be considered selfish/racist/genocidal now would you? because if you are out there breathing the air freely, you are dangerous.So, this is Australia right now.
I find it silly how you can enter AU as a citizen, but they won’t let you leave.
Strange flex, at least in the US we remain largely free to decide for ourselves how we live our lives. Still think you’re better off taking the vaccine and moving on past this, especially if you’re in a low-resource country.
The last year and a half should have showed you that is not as true as you and I would like for it to be. The going narrative now is you are dangerous to your fellow citizen by simply living and being out and about. Want to end masks? get vaccinated. Wait, I mean get vaccinated and wear a mask. Wait, maybe get vaccinated, wear a mask and lets do some form of shut down non-essential business bullshit again. Of course who is essential and who is not is a very, very, very subjective question our lords and masters will decide for us.
Wearing masks for me was never about making a statement. And no, I don’t feel submissive in having to wear a mask in the worst of a Pandemic. It doesn’t hurt my ego as a free citizen to comply with mask ordinances.
Wearing masks for me was never about making a statement. And no, I don’t feel submissive in having to wear a mask in the worst of a Pandemic. It doesn’t hurt my ego as a free citizen to comply with mask ordinances.
So you don't mind unnecessarily exposing yourself to the risk of bacterial pneumonia, along with the possibility of much nastier long-term harm caused by inhalation of mask fibres?
I feel healthier than ever. In fact, in terms of comfort I recommend tommie copper over anything else. I know they won’t fully protected me but at least if someone is being gross next to me I can just put mine on and feel cozy. I must emphasize I keep at least 9 feet away from most people.
I feel healthier than ever. In fact, in terms of comfort I recommend tommie copper over anything else. I know they won’t fully protected me but at least if someone is being gross next to me I can just put mine on and feel cozy. I must emphasize I keep at least 9 feet away from most people.
Voluntarily suppressing your immune system as well. Good luck!
My immune system is superb, thanks. Not thanks to doctors, but due to a healthy balanced diet.
My immune system is superb, thanks. Not thanks to doctors, but due to a healthy balanced diet.
A healthy immune system requires regular challenge. If you're not exposing yourself to other people, it isn't getting exercised enough.
It’s a big open world out there. All sorts of viruses available to pick and choose from. Covid, isn’t on my list. A lot of people who made it out the first infection didn’t survive the second. All these quick mutations make it unpredictable. South America got a variant that’s just as bad as the Delta. I bet that will be the next super variant, and so on and on. I wish people were a little less optimistic and more realistic. We had a chance to stop Covid, and we were largely unprepared. So now we gotta roll with it. In a few years, we just might reach herd immunity.
Come to think of it, back in high school, instead of practicing fire drills all the time, we could have been taught pandemic protocol. The fact so many adults have a problem wearing a mask for no real reason is alarming.
"It isn't the Black Death." = Healthcare's Godwin.It’s a big open world out there. All sorts of viruses available to pick and choose from. Covid, isn’t on my list. A lot of people who made it out the first infection didn’t survive the second. All these quick mutations make it unpredictable. South America got a variant that’s just as bad as the Delta. I bet that will be the next super variant, and so on and on. I wish people were a little less optimistic and more realistic. We had a chance to stop Covid, and we were largely unprepared. So now we gotta roll with it. In a few years, we just might reach herd immunity.
Come to think of it, back in high school, instead of practicing fire drills all the time, we could have been taught pandemic protocol. The fact so many adults have a problem wearing a mask for no real reason is alarming.
"As bad as the Delta" - are you joking? It's mild compared to earlier strains. We have herd immunity already, because coronaviruses are endemic, which is also why you can't "stop" it. The overwhelming majority of people under 70 and without co-morbities survived just fine.
The fact that so many adults can be convinced to wear a piece of fabric or plastic over their face that does nothing at all is pretty alarming. You really need to get some proportion, this isn't the Black Death.
"It isn't the Black Death." = Healthcare's Godwin."You're killing grandma!" is a better candidate.
And lockdowns.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9813079/LA-restaurants-close-California-coronavirus-hospitalizations-hit-highest-point-months.html
Just to be clear, despite your article and you implying "lockdowns" in relation to LA restaurants, TWO restaurants decided on their own to close here in LA. And I suspect that was cover for economic issues (restaurants open and close all the time - it's a volatile and difficult business, and we have tens of thousands of restaurants in LA.) So far, no lockdown.
My favorite bar just asked (on a voluntary basis) that unvaccinated customers use the outdoor tables rather than indoor ones.
I do wish we could increase our vaccination rates here. Rather than the conspiracy theory nutters like Spinachcat being the major issue here, it's more often African Americans and Hispanics who are reluctant to get the vaccine. One from distrust of Government, the other from distrust of chemicals in general, mostly.
Yeah, because African-Americans have absolutely no reason at all to distrust experimental injections pushed by the government..... [sarc/off] ::)
I do wish we could increase our vaccination rates here. Rather than the conspiracy theory nutters like Spinachcat being the major issue here, it's more often African Americans and Hispanics who are reluctant to get the vaccine. One from distrust of Government, the other from distrust of chemicals in general, mostly.
I'm brown, I'm not "reluctant" to get vaccinated (the term itself is more NLP bollocks, implying that if only you could find the right lever, people could be persuaded). I have no interest whatsoever in a therapeutic treatment for the common fucking cold.
"It isn't the Black Death." = Healthcare's Godwin.
It doesn't have to be the worst ever to be bad.
Wearing masks for me was never about making a statement. And no, I don’t feel submissive in having to wear a mask in the worst of a Pandemic. It doesn’t hurt my ego as a free citizen to comply with mask ordinances.
So you don't mind unnecessarily exposing yourself to the risk of bacterial pneumonia, along with the possibility of much nastier long-term harm caused by inhalation of mask fibres?
I feel healthier than ever. In fact, in terms of comfort I recommend tommie copper over anything else. I know they won’t fully protected me but at least if someone is being gross next to me I can just put mine on and feel cozy. I must emphasize I keep at least 9 feet away from most people.
For the greater good of the collective citizen. You wouldnt want to be considered selfish/racist/genocidal now would you? because if you are out there breathing the air freely, you are dangerous.So, this is Australia right now.
I find it silly how you can enter AU as a citizen, but they won’t let you leave.
Strange flex, at least in the US we remain largely free to decide for ourselves how we live our lives. Still think you’re better off taking the vaccine and moving on past this, especially if you’re in a low-resource country.
The last year and a half should have showed you that is not as true as you and I would like for it to be. The going narrative now is you are dangerous to your fellow citizen by simply living and being out and about. Want to end masks? get vaccinated. Wait, I mean get vaccinated and wear a mask. Wait, maybe get vaccinated, wear a mask and lets do some form of shut down non-essential business bullshit again. Of course who is essential and who is not is a very, very, very subjective question our lords and masters will decide for us.
Well, I guess that will vary from person to person. I’m highly independent from other people outside my immediate circle. I can easily go another year on ‘lockdown’ and quite frankly, in some regions of the country I feel it’s absolutely necessary. Wearing masks for me was never about making a statement. And no, I don’t feel submissive in having to wear a mask in the worst of a Pandemic. It doesn’t hurt my ego as a free citizen to comply with mask ordinances.
"It isn't the Black Death." = Healthcare's Godwin.
It doesn't have to be the worst ever to be bad.
"You're killing grandma!" is a better candidate.
Don't be a buffoon. The claims of "it's just the cold" were conclusively proven false long ago. It's not just a cold. People are in fact dying at much higher rates from this than a cold or flu. It is spreading much faster than both as well. It is causing longer term damage even for people who survive it than the cold or flu. This isn't open for debate anymore. By how much is open for debate, but the fact it is worse than the cold isn't anymore.
Meanwhile in Clownworld UK, they've quietly turned the NHS app into the NHS Covid Pass (https://www.wired.co.uk/article/nhs-app-covid-vaccine-passport?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB). But of course vaccine passports are just a "conspiracy theory". Or they were. And of course there will be robust debate and a specific law passed to enable these things...Conspiracy theory, you say?
Conspiracy theory, you say?
https://dailycaller.com/2021/07/28/centers-for-disease-control-prevention-rochelle-walensky-vaccine-passes-path-forward-us/
Oh.
But hey, no more mean tweets amirite?
Nothing to see here, move along citizen.Wow. Someone's nest was getting seriously feathered here.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1419653002818990085.html
A month ago, our government was ruling out vaccine passports, claiming there was no domestic application for them. Then mysteriously, country after country has suddenly declared they are imposing them on their people.There are massive worldwide protests against the lockdowns and vaccine mandates, and the media and politicians are almost universal in condemning them. Here's my favorite, from Australia:
In the Philippines, they won't allow people to buy food without proof of vaccination. France is trying to pass a law stopping you from being able to receive your wages unless you've been jabbed. The Israeli mainstream media are talking about how the unvaccinated should be treated as second-class citizens.
A month ago, our government was ruling out vaccine passports, claiming there was no domestic application for them. Then mysteriously, country after country has suddenly declared they are imposing them on their people.There are massive worldwide protests against the lockdowns and vaccine mandates, and the media and politicians are almost universal in condemning them. Here's my favorite, from Australia:
In the Philippines, they won't allow people to buy food without proof of vaccination. France is trying to pass a law stopping you from being able to receive your wages unless you've been jabbed. The Israeli mainstream media are talking about how the unvaccinated should be treated as second-class citizens.
"Uh, look. They're a pack of drongos, idiots, morons, absolute cretins, and I can use worse language than that."
- Mark McGowan, Premier of Western Australia, Future Fuhrer of Dust and Dingos
Dozens of politicians are calling their constituents morons. Even more are calling them selfish. Saying you're a moron if you don't see that I'm so smart that you should immediately put me in charge and let me run your life. That you're selfish, if you don't support my grab for power!
Nothing to see here, move along citizen.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1419653002818990085.html
Honestly I'm not sure how this type of contract could be considered "legal" in any way, and particularly given that it's governments entering into it -- Just completely unconscionable. Shocking dereliction of duty and a demonstration of precisely how government & corporations coordinate on actions but structure their efforts so that neither assume any responsibility.
Lock them all up.
On Sunday Israel (one of the most vaccinated countries on the planet) starts rolling out the 3rd jabs for everyone and is considering another lockdown because of rising "cases".
So much for two jabs to freedom.
Hey guys, if you're going to try and astroturf, don't give all your bot accounts the same goddamn script.
The level of economic ignorance in your post is staggering.Hey guys, if you're going to try and astroturf, don't give all your bot accounts the same goddamn script.
That’s funny! However, it still doesn’t invalidate reality. Today I heard on the radio, vaccinated people can be just as transmissible as non-vaccinated. HOWEVER, you won’t get as sick. I’ll listen to the ‘experts’ and draw my own conclusion and opinion. But I can’t ignore the facts, Covid is real and it’s nasty. There’s another surge on the way, it’s obvious by now. Are lockdowns necessary? IMO, Yes. Should small business go bankrupt? No! The solution lies in real tax breaks and more stimulus. I certainly hope to see a 4th and 5th check, as a taxpayer I’m ok with it.
I hope to God you're being sarcastic.Hey guys, if you're going to try and astroturf, don't give all your bot accounts the same goddamn script.
That’s funny! However, it still doesn’t invalidate reality. Today I heard on the radio, vaccinated people can be just as transmissible as non-vaccinated. HOWEVER, you won’t get as sick. I’ll listen to the ‘experts’ and draw my own conclusion and opinion. But I can’t ignore the facts, Covid is real and it’s nasty. There’s another surge on the way, it’s obvious by now. Are lockdowns necessary? IMO, Yes. Should small business go bankrupt? No! The solution lies in real tax breaks and more stimulus. I certainly hope to see a 4th and 5th check, as a taxpayer I’m ok with it.
I hope to God you're being sarcastic.
CDC is really panicking now that it's coming out that vaccinated people are readily catching and spreading the virus. They already manipulate the data by refusing to track positive PCR tests ("cases") among vaccinated people unless the person is hospitalized specifically for it. Uneven data collection procedure for stabbed & non-stabbed people is vastly understating the stabbed cohort, and overstating the non-stabbed cohort.
(Absent from all the panic is the reality that deaths are super low and naturally acquired immunity is real, effective, and already prevalent).
Imagine if everybody actually found out that the experimental medical treatment does nothing for new variants... ;)
Cases certainly are going up faster than anticipated. You can not count on the honor system and believe people will be responsible, or honest with their vaccination status.
Now, is it fair with everyone else? I don’t recall this happening during the flu pandemic.
What’s the end game? Ignoring the virus won’t make it go away.
Cases certainly are going up faster than anticipated. You can not count on the honor system and believe people will be responsible, or honest with their vaccination status.
Now, is it fair with everyone else? I don’t recall this happening during the flu pandemic.
What’s the end game? Ignoring the virus won’t make it go away.
Don't you get it? The "vaccines" don't work. Worse still, through antibody dependent enhancement, they are likely making infections more likely.
Ignoring it absolutely would have made it go away, just as seasonal bugs in every year before 2020 went away of their own accord.
Pfizer's trial data from the stabs was released,
(https://i.imgur.com/UftEbTH.png)
The level of economic ignorance in your post is staggering.Hey guys, if you're going to try and astroturf, don't give all your bot accounts the same goddamn script.
That’s funny! However, it still doesn’t invalidate reality. Today I heard on the radio, vaccinated people can be just as transmissible as non-vaccinated. HOWEVER, you won’t get as sick. I’ll listen to the ‘experts’ and draw my own conclusion and opinion. But I can’t ignore the facts, Covid is real and it’s nasty. There’s another surge on the way, it’s obvious by now. Are lockdowns necessary? IMO, Yes. Should small business go bankrupt? No! The solution lies in real tax breaks and more stimulus. I certainly hope to see a 4th and 5th check, as a taxpayer I’m ok with it.
Well, the point of the vaccine isn’t it so you’re free from Covid, but to build you up to fight the infection. Therefore vaccines do work. However, we are dealing with a man made ever evolving virus. Truth is, no one knows for sure what’s going to unfold. Eventually one lucky ‘expert’ will get it right. We could very well be in the first step to extinction.
You can't be "free from" an endemic virus, that's a foolish ideal. Nor is any of this effort worth it for something as unimportant as coronavirus.
The level of economic ignorance in your post is staggering.Hey guys, if you're going to try and astroturf, don't give all your bot accounts the same goddamn script.
That’s funny! However, it still doesn’t invalidate reality. Today I heard on the radio, vaccinated people can be just as transmissible as non-vaccinated. HOWEVER, you won’t get as sick. I’ll listen to the ‘experts’ and draw my own conclusion and opinion. But I can’t ignore the facts, Covid is real and it’s nasty. There’s another surge on the way, it’s obvious by now. Are lockdowns necessary? IMO, Yes. Should small business go bankrupt? No! The solution lies in real tax breaks and more stimulus. I certainly hope to see a 4th and 5th check, as a taxpayer I’m ok with it.
Its so bad even Pat can see it.
You guys missing the big picture. We getting a infrastructure bill for another few trillion soon. Money that will wildly be mismanaged. Another stimulus check here and there won’t make a difference. At least it’s being spent on you. It’s gonna take at least 80 years in a perfect world to erase the pandemic’s debit. And since we don’t live in a perfect world... It’s just a few more trillions added to an infinite debt. We already got inflation, what’s another 50 cents on your cup of coffee?
Would you rather allow possibly hundreds of thousands of people be evicted with no income and be roaming the streets, or would you rather pay 50 more cents on your cup of coffee and keep a decent quality of life?
The level of economic ignorance in your post is staggering.Hey guys, if you're going to try and astroturf, don't give all your bot accounts the same goddamn script.
That’s funny! However, it still doesn’t invalidate reality. Today I heard on the radio, vaccinated people can be just as transmissible as non-vaccinated. HOWEVER, you won’t get as sick. I’ll listen to the ‘experts’ and draw my own conclusion and opinion. But I can’t ignore the facts, Covid is real and it’s nasty. There’s another surge on the way, it’s obvious by now. Are lockdowns necessary? IMO, Yes. Should small business go bankrupt? No! The solution lies in real tax breaks and more stimulus. I certainly hope to see a 4th and 5th check, as a taxpayer I’m ok with it.
Its so bad even Pat can see it.
You guys missing the big picture. We getting a infrastructure bill for another few trillion soon. Money that will wildly be mismanaged. Another stimulus check here and there won’t make a difference. At least it’s being spent on you. It’s gonna take at least 80 years in a perfect world to erase the pandemic’s debit. And since we don’t live in a perfect world... It’s just a few more trillions added to an infinite debt. We already got inflation, what’s another 50 cents on your cup of coffee?
Would you rather allow possibly hundreds of thousands of people be evicted with no income and be roaming the streets, or would you rather pay 50 more cents on your cup of coffee and keep a decent quality of life?
You can't be "free from" an endemic virus, that's a foolish ideal. Nor is any of this effort worth it for something as unimportant as coronavirus.
Yes, so unimportant it shut down the whole world. And alongside your bold claim of the common cold being the real threat in this pandemic, I’m convinced you aren’t from this planet.
Sharing this important statistical analysis (https://drrollergator.substack.com/p/damned-lies-and-vaccine-statistics) that was made by a statistician acquaintance of Bret Weinstein. Looks at Israeli data and claims to show that the vaccines have no protective effect for people who have been infected with Covid -- In other words, vaccines might reduce odds of getting infected, but don't provide further protection.I wrote about year ago here that there would never be a vaccine against corona virus and that Wuhan flu would be endemic like influenza or common cold.
I think this is very important information to take seriously, since many people suggest that vaccines are protective even once infection has occurred. From this analysis it seems that is yet another Noble Lie™ that medical experts may be telling us.
Yes, so unimportant it shut down the whole world. And alongside your bold claim of the common cold being the real threat in this pandemic, I’m convinced you aren’t from this planet.
#1 Public health is about all health outcomes, not just a single disease like #COVID19. It is important to also consider harms from public health measures. #totalharms
#2 Public health is about the long term rather than the short term. Spring #COVID19 #lockdowns simply delayed and postponed the pandemic to the fall.
#3 Public health is about everyone. It should not be used to shift the burden of disease from the affluent to the less affluent, as the #COVID19 #lockdowns have done.
#4 Pubic health is global. Public health scientists need to consider the global impact of their recommendations.
#5 Risks and harms cannot be completely eliminated, but they can be reduced. Elimination and zero-COVID strategies backfire, making things worse.
#6 Public health should focus on high-risk populations. For #COVID19, many standard public health measures were never used to protect high-risk older people, leading to unnecessary deaths.
#7 While contact tracing and isolation is critically important for some infectious diseases, it is futile and counterproductive for common infections such as influenza and #COVID19.
#8 A case is only a case if a person is sick. Mass testing asymptomatic individuals is harmful to public health.
#9 Public health is about trust. To gain the trust of the public, public health officials and the media must be honest and trust the public. Shaming and fear should never be used in a pandemic.
#10 Public health scientists and officials must be honest with what is not known. For example, epidemic models should be run with the whole range of plausible input parameters.
#11 In public health, open civilized debate is profoundly critical. Censoring, silencing and smearing leads to fear of speaking, herd thinking and distrust
#12 It is important for public health scientists and officials to listen to the public, who are living the public health consequences. This pandemic has proved that many non-epidemiologists understand public health better than some epidemiologists
Yes, so unimportant it shut down the whole world. And alongside your bold claim of the common cold being the real threat in this pandemic, I’m convinced you aren’t from this planet.
Are you really so dim you can only see what's in front of your face? Governments chose to "shut down the world", they didn't have to. In real pandemics the bodies pile up in the streets all by themselves and the government does everything they can to keep people calm. They don't repeatedly stoke fears and hype up something that's harmless to the overwhelming majority.
And again, had the fucking virus, it's a nothing burger. Have you been infected? Or have you been cowering at home this whole time, allowing liars to convince you there was a mortal threat?
If you don’t want to either vaccinate or wear a mask because you feel you know better than science
The pandemic virtually changed nothing about my everyday routine, with the exception of masking up. If masks are required to shop for groceries, what am I to do? Be stubborn and starve, or wear a mask (which totally makes sense) to comply with mandates? Wearing a mask has absolutely no negative impact on my quality of life. It may not fully protected me, but it minimizes my chances of contracting and possibly spreading Covid.Have you read any of the numerous links that have been provided on masks? Even one? Because the evidence is overwhelming that they have no effect. The science hasn't changed. The evidence suggested that masks didn't work before the pandemic even started, so the first recommendations to wear a mask went against the scientific evidence. You could possibly justify them, because people didn't know a lot about covid early on, but within a month or two the evidence was very strong that covid-19 was spread via aerosolization, which makes masks pointless. We now have studies that are high up the tiers of evidence-based medicine, and worldwide examples of countries that masked up and didn't mask up, and the evidence that masks don't work has only gotten stronger and stronger.
If you don’t want to either vaccinate or wear a mask because you feel you know better than science, I mean SCIENCE, not Fauci, it’s on you. I see people driving alone with their masks on and feel that’s completely pointless and unnecessary. However, when you’re around other people I’ll absolutely say I feel safer if everyone is wearing a mask. I don’t see where politics fit in pandemic protocol. It’s silly and only distracting to the real issue, which is Covid.
If you support wearing masks, then you are politicizing public health.
If you support wearing masks, then you are politicizing public health.
It’s easier to draw rushed conclusions and point fingers than facing the facts.
I think it’s smart to wear masks, wearing a mask by yourself doesn’t do anything.
Wearing a mask in a public place makes a difference, period.
You basically saying if I don’t say what you want to hear, then I must be fitted into a category. Isn’t that the same narrative being driven by the woke/cancel culture? Meanwhile you present no credible data or facts alongside your disagreement.
Wearing a mask in a public place makes a difference, period.No, they don't. Period. And the evidence to support that statement has been posted in this very thread. The fact that you want to believe they do doesn't have any bearing on the actual reality.
You basically saying if I don’t say what you want to hear, then I must be fitted into a category. Isn’t that the same narrative being driven by the woke/cancel culture? Meanwhile you present no credible data or facts alongside your disagreement.I have posted dozens of links to studies and analyses of masks, in this thread. I have posted extensive rationales for why masks don't work, in this very thread. Zelen posted a very good link, within the last page.
The flu, plague only killed as many people because they were new deseases that swooped through a civilization without the resources or means to rapidly fight back the infections. You can’t compare medieval age medicine to todays medicine. ‘Hygiene’ wasn’t even a thing back then. World population back then, 2B. Today, 8Billion.
Now, I’m not cowering home. I’ve been a home person my whole life. The pandemic virtually changed nothing about my everyday routine, with the exception of masking up. If masks are required to shop for groceries, what am I to do? Be stubborn and starve, or wear a mask (which totally makes sense) to comply with mandates? Wearing a mask has absolutely no negative impact on my quality of life. It may not fully protected me, but it minimizes my chances of contracting and possibly spreading Covid.
If you don’t want to either vaccinate or wear a mask because you feel you know better than science, I mean SCIENCE, not Fauci, it’s on you. I see people driving alone with their masks on and feel that’s completely pointless and unnecessary. However, when you’re around other people I’ll absolutely say I feel safer if everyone is wearing a mask. I don’t see where politics fit in pandemic protocol. It’s silly and only distracting to the real issue, which is Covid.
Maybe this isn't about saving lives, it's about getting the whole population vaccinated.
In the newest version of Mage, the Technocracy are the protagonists.If you don’t want to either vaccinate or wear a mask because you feel you know better than science
I am vaccinated and wear a mask when requested but:
Science (TM) isn't magic nor is it a person, nor is it one consensus or opinion. There have been many differing opinions and perspectives on the Science (TM). An appeal to Science (TM) is a very faulty view of how Science (TM) works.
Even Scientists, holy speakers of the word of the Science (TM) have baises, make mistakes and can be swayed by the public opinion of common bodies and media and personal pressure.
It's depressing to me to see how quickly some businesses here are starting to post 'masks required' signs again. Ignored one just last night :/Private businesses that require masks within their wall are violating what state law? A business can post a dress code if it wishes, and if they want to specify the use of "facial wear" they can do so. You're not having any rights violated if you are barred entry because you choose not to follow their dress code.
What's interesting this time, is by doing that, they're violating state law. I hope the state and the governor here actually have the courage to follow through on enforcing the laws they passed forbidding vaccine or mask mandates, because I'm looking forward to seeing a few of these fascists prosecuted for pulling their little tin-pot dictator routines :)
Private businesses that require masks within their wall are violating what state law?
Which states? Based on what I have read, most of the anti-Mask & anti-Proof-of-Submission legislation is tissue paper. I have very little faith in state governments taking any meaningful action against these types of measures -- At least for now. It's possible that state-level Republican parties become more hard-line on this stance, but that'll take at least one election cycle (which is pretty far away if we consider time to actually draft and pass laws).
The most important thing is just the social aspect in the first place. If going into the grocery store like a normal human being means that you get accosted by vocal science deniers, then it's going to be really grim regardless of legality.
We get the countries we deserve as a society. Americans stood up from the very beginning. Argentina, in general, simply complied.
We get the countries we deserve as a society. Americans stood up from the very beginning. Argentina, in general, simply complied.
Funny this perspective, because right now other countries are doing a much better job at standing up than America. In France and Germany, there are protests with hundreds of thousands if not millions protesting. In Australia they just called out the army to crack skulls of any people who dare protest a lockdown after ... 13 octagenarian & nonagenarians died over a few weeks.
All over the world, it's amazing how the narrative shifts.
- Is your movement pro-establishment astroturf? - If so, public demonstrations are safe. In fact, they are necessary and important! Covid fears your noble cause and retreats from your honorable demonstration of virtue
- Is your movement anti-establishment populism? - If so, you are a dangerous extremist. Public demonstrations are dangerous superspreader events that lead to millions of deaths and if those deaths don't materialize then assuredly you've caused much invisible suffering with long-Covid and all the strain on the healthcare system. The establishment cares about your health, that's why the military will be dispatched to literally beat your head in, grapple you to the ground, and throw you in a holding pen with hundreds of others so you don't spread the killer virus.
The system reveals it has no legitimacy and no morality, but sadly many people refuse to see that the concern is power, not saving lives.
Wishing everyone lots of health in the coming days. Follow science, not stupid. I yield.
Do you have a source on that? I tried googling the Australian cases but nothing showed up.
Since then, Australia's biggest city has reported 13 deaths.
On Friday, Sydney entered its sixth week of a nine-week lockdown with 170 new cases, down from a record 239 a day earlier. Of the new cases, at least 42 spent time in the community while infectious.
BTW, I noticed how the word populist carries a different meaning in English. In Spanish, populism is a demagogic movement which seeks to destroy or modify the political institutions for its own perpetuation; wokeism is populism. It's demagoguery that seeks to abolish the republic and bend laws for its purposes. In English, populism means sort of like a grassroots movement which represents the sentiments and interests of the common folk/middle class.
We get the countries we deserve as a society. Americans stood up from the very beginning. Argentina, in general, simply complied.
Funny this perspective, because right now other countries are doing a much better job at standing up than America. In France and Germany, there are protests with hundreds of thousands if not millions protesting. In Australia they just called out the army to crack skulls of any people who dare protest a lockdown after ... 13 octagenarian & nonagenarians died over a few weeks.
All over the world, it's amazing how the narrative shifts.
- Is your movement pro-establishment astroturf? - If so, public demonstrations are safe. In fact, they are necessary and important! Covid fears your noble cause and retreats from your honorable demonstration of virtue
- Is your movement anti-establishment populism? - If so, you are a dangerous extremist. Public demonstrations are dangerous superspreader events that lead to millions of deaths and if those deaths don't materialize then assuredly you've caused much invisible suffering with long-Covid and all the strain on the healthcare system. The establishment cares about your health, that's why the military will be dispatched to literally beat your head in, grapple you to the ground, and throw you in a holding pen with hundreds of others so you don't spread the killer virus.
The system reveals it has no legitimacy and no morality, but sadly many people refuse to see that the concern is power, not saving lives.
Do you have a source on that? I tried googling the Australian cases but nothing showed up. Glad to see the French and the German are still awake. Maybe this will be last straw and people will regain their dignity and set things in order; end the EU, kick Merkel out, kick migrants out, stop the massive waves of diversity, cut the marxist propaganda and return to a traditional, normal and free Europe.
This is why you need guns; so you don't end up taking tear gas because the government wants to inject you with something for your safety. You don't see such extremes in America because they know people will fight back. While the "German" and "French" governments are literally sending the cops on their people, America has to offer laughable incentives.
Over here, my people just slumber. We've been demoralized after decades and decades of blatant corruption and clown world. We just take it for granted, so we don't expect much change. The only criticisms are the mishandling of the pandemic, the length of the quarantine and the absence of vaccines. Should there be a mandatory vaccination program, I doubt people would resist. All the sheeple would suddenly turn into state agents because "you're gonna kill us all !!!!". Funny how countries with small vaccination percentages are not dying by the hundred thousands...
BTW, I noticed how the word populist carries a different meaning in English. In Spanish, populism is a demagogic movement which seeks to destroy or modify the political institutions for its own perpetuation; wokeism is populism. It's demagoguery that seeks to abolish the republic and bend laws for its purposes. In English, populism means sort of like a grassroots movement which represents the sentiments and interests of the common folk/middle class.
You're from Spain right? For a very long time Spain and Latin-America has been ruled by the left, and our education system and press has been co-opted.
The true opposite of populism (true populism) isn't democracy, it's elitism. Democracy is a synonym of populism, sin it's the rule of the people, for the people from the people.
And the left has (allmost all), turned to fascism, because megacorporations bought their talking heads and the sheep just follows. It's easier to turn a commie/socialist/fascist/nazi into another of those than it is to turn them into REAL liberals that respect the fundamental liberties of the individual.
And here's another trick they played on the populace: Neo-Liberalism = Bad. Not a single leftist can define it. They just use it to mean capitalism. But thing is... Liberalism was, is and always will be in favor of the free market, because it's in favor of economic liberty.
Mindo you I?m not a lazess fare type, I do think there's some regulations that make sense and are neccessary.
You're from Spain right? For a very long time Spain and Latin-America has been ruled by the left, and our education system and press has been co-opted.
The true opposite of populism (true populism) isn't democracy, it's elitism. Democracy is a synonym of populism, sin it's the rule of the people, for the people from the people.
And the left has (allmost all), turned to fascism, because megacorporations bought their talking heads and the sheep just follows. It's easier to turn a commie/socialist/fascist/nazi into another of those than it is to turn them into REAL liberals that respect the fundamental liberties of the individual.
And here's another trick they played on the populace: Neo-Liberalism = Bad. Not a single leftist can define it. They just use it to mean capitalism. But thing is... Liberalism was, is and always will be in favor of the free market, because it's in favor of economic liberty.
Mindo you I?m not a lazess fare type, I do think there's some regulations that make sense and are neccessary.
I'm not sure if you're asking me or him. I can tell you as an Argentinian you're spot on. Especially the "neoliberalism bad" part. They blame everything on it, yet cannot define it and we're actually very far from being capitalist countries.
For the record, in Spanish (as well as in many other English-speaking countries) liberal just means libertarian; free market economics, laissez-faire. Neo-liberal would be the return of free market policies after decades of keynesianism and its subsequent failure. In the US, liberal just means "progressive"; the opposite of conservative.
Argentina went through its biggest crisis at the time (biggest one is right now) in the 90's and early 2000's, while we were implementing liberal economic reforms, which were ironically caused by high public spending and foreign debt to sustain it. We couldn't afford it so we ended up defaulting on it and economic liberalism was blamed for it. Ever since then we've been living under the kirchnerist regime which is made up socialist sympathizers, former terrorists, and upper-class politicians who were part of 90's liberalism and have switched sides; preaching socialist narrative while owning hotels which magically produce money even though no one stays in them. It's the economic, moral and intellectual shithole you'd expect.
In central Florida, the number of hospitalizations from acute Covid+ patients has grown large enough and rapidly enough that they have gone to status black. This means they have stopped non-essentiql surgeries/procedures and many outpatient services to focus resources on the surge. Yes, Covid is mpacting the health & healthcare of even those without the disease.
In Spain the commies are currently celebrating the "Riders Law" which just left in the unemployment statistic over 8,000 people. A true socialist success.
And here's another trick they played on the populace: Neo-Liberalism = Bad. Not a single leftist can define it. They just use it to mean capitalism. But thing is... Liberalism was, is and always will be in favor of the free market, because it's in favor of economic liberty.The weird thing is neoliberalism has a concrete origin: The Mont Pelerin Society. This was a group of primarily economists, but also political philosophers, who in the 40s, 50s, and 60s got together to create an intellectual foundation to combat the omnipresence and omniacceptance of socialist thinking at the time. They were the fringe of the fringe, but came into prominence in the 1970s when stagflation disproved the central theory of Milton Keynes. Keynes had argued that inflation and unemployment were linked, and if you increased inflation then the number of people unemployed would always shrink. This was the dominant mode of economic/political thinking, and was used as an excuse for monetary inflation, government spending, and the increase of the welfare state from the 30s through the 60s. But stagflation was high inflation and unemployment, and the establishment of the time had no idea how to stop it. Milton Friedman, of the Mont Pelerin Society, provided the explanation and eventual cure.
They are not focused on cases of infection or (directly) on death rates; they are worried about a surge of hospitalized patients with acute symptomatic Covid.In central Florida, the number of hospitalizations from acute Covid+ patients has grown large enough and rapidly enough that they have gone to status black. This means they have stopped non-essentiql surgeries/procedures and many outpatient services to focus resources on the surge. Yes, Covid is mpacting the health & healthcare of even those without the disease.
After more than a year with little to no measures, and they still have lower death rates than other states like NY, Massachussets or New Jersey, which did enforce quarantine measures and more people took the holy vaccine. Spikes in cases are natural and expected; that's the second, third and fourth wave everybody talks about.
Wishing everyone lots of health in the coming days. Follow science, not stupid. I yield.
This is why you need guns; so you don't end up taking tear gas because the government wants to inject you with something for your safety.
Funny, I ran a code tonight on a 51y/o woman that felt the same way. She didn't need any well wishes when it was over, but her family sure did.Wishing everyone lots of health in the coming days. Follow science, not stupid. I yield.
I have a functioning immune system that hasn't been compromised by the vaccines. I don't need well wishes, thanks.
Funny, I ran a code tonight on a 51y/o woman that felt the same way. She didn't need any well wishes when it was over, but her family sure did.
The day before that, NPR ran a piece where they interviewed a Harvard professor on how to overcome vaccine "reluctance", and it was purely about blatant emotional manipulation. He was literally saying all of public health's effort should be spent on endless weepy stories about people who end up dying of covid, but at the last moment they regret not taking a vaccine, only to be told it's too late (they need to work to keep the gloating out of their voices). He wanted the same narrative everywhere, at all levels, because it affects people more strongly when there's a personal link. It should be spammed endlessly by every local hospital, in every community, and, presumably, in every online forum....Funny, I ran a code tonight on a 51y/o woman that felt the same way. She didn't need any well wishes when it was over, but her family sure did.Wishing everyone lots of health in the coming days. Follow science, not stupid. I yield.
I have a functioning immune system that hasn't been compromised by the vaccines. I don't need well wishes, thanks.
What the he'll are you going on about? If you don't understand what I wrote (and that's blatantly obvious from your post), just ask for clarification.Funny, I ran a code tonight on a 51y/o woman that felt the same way. She didn't need any well wishes when it was over, but her family sure did.
That is funny, it's hilarious in fact :D
Did you get an erection when you 'ran the code', or are you suggesting you unplugged a ventilator or something, and do you believe the FBI need to know about any of your extremely dubious actions tonight?
As for "breaking narrative," last night I got to see a vaccinated patient having severe Covid-related respiratory distress.The day before that, NPR ran a piece where they interviewed a Harvard professor on how to overcome vaccine "reluctance", and it was purely about blatant emotional manipulation. He was literally saying all of public health's effort should be spent on endless weepy stories about people who end up dying of covid, but at the last moment they regret not taking a vaccine, only to be told it's too late (they need to work to keep the gloating out of their voices). He wanted the same narrative everywhere, at all levels, because it affects people more strongly when there's a personal link. It should be spammed endlessly by every local hospital, in every community, and, presumably, in every online forum....Funny, I ran a code tonight on a 51y/o woman that felt the same way. She didn't need any well wishes when it was over, but her family sure did.Wishing everyone lots of health in the coming days. Follow science, not stupid. I yield.
I have a functioning immune system that hasn't been compromised by the vaccines. I don't need well wishes, thanks.
Funny, I ran a code tonight on a 51y/o woman that felt the same way. She didn't need any well wishes when it was over, but her family sure did.Wishing everyone lots of health in the coming days. Follow science, not stupid. I yield.
I have a functioning immune system that hasn't been compromised by the vaccines. I don't need well wishes, thanks.
I'm not a doctor, but I do sneak into my local hospital to perform amateur heart transplants. While there, I witnessed a Republican dying of Covid. She begged the doctor to give her the vaccine, but the doctor said it was too late. She died surrounded by her grief striken family. And when she drew her last breath, everyone in congress stood up and said "If only she'd gotten vaccinated, she would still be alive." and then everyone clapped. And then the baby looked at me.And that baby's name was Albert Einstein, right? :)
Funny, I ran a code tonight on a 51y/o woman that felt the same way. She didn't need any well wishes when it was over, but her family sure did.
...
The day before that, NPR ran a piece where they interviewed a Harvard professor on how to overcome vaccine "reluctance", and it was purely about blatant emotional manipulation. He was literally saying all of public health's effort should be spent on endless weepy stories about people who end up dying of covid, but at the last moment they regret not taking a vaccine, only to be told it's too late (they need to work to keep the gloating out of their voices). He wanted the same narrative everywhere, at all levels, because it affects people more strongly when there's a personal link. It should be spammed endlessly by every local hospital, in every community, and, presumably, in every online forum....
The Science (TM) of psychology is pretty well known. The people that don't trust the vaccine will not trust it if you keep yelling at them or mandating it by law. More will take the vaccine if you actually let them be. If you don't trust their own bodily autonomy, then this turns into a war.
Thats why I always dislike jabs at anti-vaxers (despite being a vaxer myself). Do you want to make more people vaccinated or do you want to feel smug and angry at others?
Did she in fact tell you that or was she just listed as unvaccinated?
Anti-vaxxer is the new fascist. It has no meaning except as a way to label someone who is no longer considered part of the group. It's Donald Sutherland, pointing and wailing "anti-vaxxxeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!"
OK let’s say for a moment that we agree with the lockdowns, what I want to know is; how deadly does a disease have to be for us to lock down society? Why aren’t we discussing this? If the next flu is really bad do we lock down? Probably not, but where is the line drawn?Well, ebola wasn't enough if we're to judge from some of Dr. Fauci's remarks in 2014.
OK let’s say for a moment that we agree with the lockdowns, what I want to know is; how deadly does a disease have to be for us to lock down society? Why aren’t we discussing this? If the next flu is really bad do we lock down? Probably not, but where is the line drawn?Well, ebola wasn't enough if we're to judge from some of Dr. Fauci's remarks in 2014.
Truth is, Lockdowns will continue indefinitely until governments are deposed.Those terms are acceptable.
The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
how deadly does a disease have to be for us to lock down society? Why aren’t we discussing this?
The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
I have never actually seen a hospital overloaded due to Covid. I hear about it all the time. Maybe it does happen, but I can't ever remember a news crew getting some footage, even from a distance.
The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
I have never actually seen a hospital overloaded due to Covid. I hear about it all the time. Maybe it does happen, but I can't ever remember a news crew getting some footage, even from a distance.
What do you mean by overloaded? There seems to be this idea that it should be patients in trollies in the hospital corridors but what it actually means is a lack of ICU beds. I've said before that an ICU bed isn't one if there isn't an ICU trained nurse dedicated to that bed. As I mentioned I can't speak to US healthcare which may have a surfeit of beds but in the UK there's a limit which is nearly reached every year in flu season. Covid could be a tipping point.
This is where I get a little irked by high functioning glaikit like Keiro. The flu vaccine does what it's intended to do which is keep hospital admissions as low as possible, the Covid vaccines should hopefully do the same thing. Otherwise it's a matter of hoping you don't have that random event that means you need to be in a local ICU cos you may have to be driven 50 miles down the road in an ambulance. That's a fucker if you have a stroke.
That's what I mean. We get told that the hospitals will be overwhelmed, and then... they don't get overwhelmed.
The US system may be flawed and absurdly expensive, but it's not as threadbare as the UK's. Per capita, there are way more ICU beds. If you think a strong flu season in the UK may justify a lockdown because of a lack of ICU beds, then the NHS is absurdly under capacity.The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
Florida is getting hit hard right now, and it's not just ICUs and ventilators. Many of the Covid patients are being put in PCU level care and doubled (two per room) which is not ideal, but leaves ICU to concentrate on the sickest (which also lay backed up in the ED). Both ICU and PCU nurses have stretched assignments (so less time and date ruin available per patient) and ED nurses have their base load plus lingering admitted patients without assigned beds. There are simply not enough nurses (and way too few respiratory therapists) to maintain the optimal staffing levels, so we are constantly operating with contingency staffing as core, and when a staff member is infected, things get harder. Equipment is also an issue; my hospital ran out of bipap machines yesterday and was down to only 4 available highflow oxygen setups (both intermediate respiratory interventions). When you run out of the intermediate interventions, it then taxes the supply of ventilators (and the staff qualified to use them).The US system may be flawed and absurdly expensive, but it's not as threadbare as the UK's. Per capita, there are way more ICU beds. If you think a strong flu season in the UK may justify a lockdown because of a lack of ICU beds, then the NHS is absurdly under capacity.The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
Incidentally, I'm seeing more reports of hospitals being overwhelmed in the US than during any of the previous waves. During the peak of the last wave, you could count the entire nation's worth on one hand (LA had a few). Today, NPR was reporting up to 53 hospitals at capacity in at least one hard-hit state (might have been NY, but I'm not sure), but they didn't make it clear whether they were talking about ICU beds (limited ability to flex), or general beds (not as hard a limit). They were also talking about mobilizing the national stockpile of respirators (to GA maybe?). Wish they spent more time on facts and less on propaganda.
The US system may be flawed and absurdly expensive, but it's not as threadbare as the UK's.
If you would like to check the actual status of hospital beds and usage, here is one tool. You might find that not everything you hear is accurate...
https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization
If you would like to check the actual status of hospital beds and usage, here is one tool. You might find that not everything you hear is accurate...Your own source shows 86% inpatient capacity and 91% ICU capacity (with almost half off the latter being from Covid) in Florida. That's also going from licensed beds, which can exceed staffed beds (few hospitals can consistently maintain staffing for 100% of their licensed beds).
https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization
If you look at the ICU beds, it's still 77% in total, but about 1 in 4 (23%) are covid-19.If you would like to check the actual status of hospital beds and usage, here is one tool. You might find that not everything you hear is accurate...
https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization
So if I'm reading this right 77 of 100 beds in the US are occupied and 1 in 7 of those (10%) are from the coof? Not terrible in the aggregate but I imagine you could have bad situations locally.
If you would like to check the actual status of hospital beds and usage, here is one tool. You might find that not everything you hear is accurate...Your own source shows 86% inpatient capacity and 91% ICU capacity (with almost half off the latter being from Covid) in Florida. That's also going from licensed beds, which can exceed staffed beds (few hospitals can consistently maintain staffing for 100% of their licensed beds).
https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization
I said almost half the ICU beds in Florida were occupied by Covid patients, not half of the inpatient beds.If you would like to check the actual status of hospital beds and usage, here is one tool. You might find that not everything you hear is accurate...Your own source shows 86% inpatient capacity and 91% ICU capacity (with almost half off the latter being from Covid) in Florida. That's also going from licensed beds, which can exceed staffed beds (few hospitals can consistently maintain staffing for 100% of their licensed beds).
https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization
ICU occupancy rates generally are designed around constant 75% occupancy (less means they aren't profitable). Florida is the only state in the nation reporting moderate Flu activity (including three outbreaks of RSV and a higher than normal level of parainfluenzas), which may be driving higher hospitalization rates in addition to Covid. The statistics from the HHS say that only 27% of general beds are from Covid.
And I said 27% of the inpatient beds were Covid, not the ICU beds.I said almost half the ICU beds in Florida were occupied by Covid patients, not half of the inpatient beds.If you would like to check the actual status of hospital beds and usage, here is one tool. You might find that not everything you hear is accurate...Your own source shows 86% inpatient capacity and 91% ICU capacity (with almost half off the latter being from Covid) in Florida. That's also going from licensed beds, which can exceed staffed beds (few hospitals can consistently maintain staffing for 100% of their licensed beds).
https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization
ICU occupancy rates generally are designed around constant 75% occupancy (less means they aren't profitable). Florida is the only state in the nation reporting moderate Flu activity (including three outbreaks of RSV and a higher than normal level of parainfluenzas), which may be driving higher hospitalization rates in addition to Covid. The statistics from the HHS say that only 27% of general beds are from Covid.
The US system may be flawed and absurdly expensive, but it's not as threadbare as the UK's. Per capita, there are way more ICU beds. If you think a strong flu season in the UK may justify a lockdown because of a lack of ICU beds, then the NHS is absurdly under capacity.The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
Incidentally, I'm seeing more reports of hospitals being overwhelmed in the US than during any of the previous waves. During the peak of the last wave, you could count the entire nation's worth on one hand (LA had a few). Today, NPR was reporting up to 53 hospitals at capacity in at least one hard-hit state (might have been NY, but I'm not sure), but they didn't make it clear whether they were talking about ICU beds (limited ability to flex), or general beds (not as hard a limit). They were also talking about mobilizing the national stockpile of respirators (to GA maybe?). Wish they spent more time on facts and less on propaganda.
Obama is such a cool, guy he gives away presents on his birthday.Yeah. When he was President he gave all of the U.S. AIDS, and now the patient is dying. So, what's your point?! ;)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9891873/63-people-Marthas-Vineyard-tested-positive-Covid-Obamas-60th-birthday-bash.html
Obama is such a cool, guy he gives away presents on his birthday.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9891873/63-people-Marthas-Vineyard-tested-positive-Covid-Obamas-60th-birthday-bash.html
Obama is such a cool, guy he gives away presents on his birthday.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9891873/63-people-Marthas-Vineyard-tested-positive-Covid-Obamas-60th-birthday-bash.html
If there not afraid of covid, then why should we?
No seriously think on that! These ARE the very people that brought the lockdowns, told us to stay in doors, and trying to force us to take vaccines that are NOT PROVEN. They put so many restrictions on us YET constantly break their own rules. If it is as deadly as they say it was these would be the very FIRST to bunker up and let the world rot. Instead they are having parties with hundreds of people in close proximity. THEY KNOW THIS IS A JOKE!!!!!
The NHS is in a bit of a state due to a decades worth of Tory austerity. Since 2017 it's dropped right down in the rankings for the Commonwealth Fund.
https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2021/aug/mirror-mirror-2021-reflecting-poorly
The NHS is in a bit of a state due to a decades worth of Tory austerity. Since 2017 it's dropped right down in the rankings for the Commonwealth Fund.
https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2021/aug/mirror-mirror-2021-reflecting-poorly
The NHS is in a state because the management is utterly incompetent, and the organisation is run for the benefit of the staff first. No surprise that despite being the "envy of the world" literally no one anywhere else has copied it.
You been reading Taxpayers Alliance stuff again? You really should lay off it, rots your mind.
There is bad management in some trusts, it's inevitable. OTOH the cuts in funding in the last decade are very real including pay freezes for those oh so lucky staff. The significant fall in rankings in the Commonwealth Report is due to this. You're talking nonsense.
Just read about some tourists in Hawaii that faked vaccinatio cards to bypass a 10 day quarantine and are facing thousands of dollars in fines and/or jail time. Some people that faked vaccination cards to enter Canada are facing much higher fines.Both houses in New York passed a bill to make it illegal to posses or forget covid-19 vaccine cards, and it's up for Cuomo's slimy signature. NY assembly member Dinowitz is calling people who do so "despicable". There's a similar bill in process in NJ.
You been reading Taxpayers Alliance stuff again? You really should lay off it, rots your mind.
There is bad management in some trusts, it's inevitable. OTOH the cuts in funding in the last decade are very real including pay freezes for those oh so lucky staff. The significant fall in rankings in the Commonwealth Report is due to this. You're talking nonsense.
Arbitrarily cutting the number of beds to "accommodate social distancing" is just one of the many incompetent acts of the communist shit-show that is the NHS.
Pay freezes? Do you have any idea what it's like out in the real world, beyond the coddled public sector? They didn't stop hiring diversity managers on ridiculous salaries in all this time, so spare me the bollocks about pay.
Even you have admitted that people with pre-existing conditions are at risk from covid. A clinical decision to protect them from infection doesn't seem like bad management at all.
You've stated that you're in the top tax bracket. I have no problem with that but implying an auxiliary nurse on 18 grand isn't living in the real world seems a little hypocritical
Even you have admitted that people with pre-existing conditions are at risk from covid. A clinical decision to protect them from infection doesn't seem like bad management at all.
You've stated that you're in the top tax bracket. I have no problem with that but implying an auxiliary nurse on 18 grand isn't living in the real world seems a little hypocritical
It wasn't a "clinical decision" to reduce capacity whilst simultaneously ceasing treatment of everything else for a bad season of the sniffles. Which then dragged out for months past the peak.
I'm a Higher Rate taxpayer, not an Additional Rate one. When the NHS can afford to be advertising roles like this (https://www.jobs.nhs.uk/xi/vacancy/916584352), then they have more than enough money to pay their nurses more. If they so chose. So spare me the "poor nurses" bullshit.
Or maybe -- try this on for size -- they could not hire some overpriced duhversity manager, and afford to pay people more than 18 grand a year.Even you have admitted that people with pre-existing conditions are at risk from covid. A clinical decision to protect them from infection doesn't seem like bad management at all.
You've stated that you're in the top tax bracket. I have no problem with that but implying an auxiliary nurse on 18 grand isn't living in the real world seems a little hypocritical
It wasn't a "clinical decision" to reduce capacity whilst simultaneously ceasing treatment of everything else for a bad season of the sniffles. Which then dragged out for months past the peak.
I'm a Higher Rate taxpayer, not an Additional Rate one. When the NHS can afford to be advertising roles like this (https://www.jobs.nhs.uk/xi/vacancy/916584352), then they have more than enough money to pay their nurses more. If they so chose. So spare me the "poor nurses" bullshit.
So now covid is just sniffles for everybody and no one at all was at risk? You're heaving the goalposts around a bit there mate.
I'm just saying that mibbe you can try living in the real world like people on 18 grand a year do. You're the one accusing them of living in some lovely fantasy land.
I don't really have a problem with the hiring of an Equality, diversity and inclusion manager. It may save a fortune in constructive dismissal cases.
I have seen enough tiktoks of NHS staff living the high life pretending to be some kind of video stars while their patients die from the Wuhan China virus to give them much benefit of the doubt.
I have seen enough tiktoks of NHS staff living the high life pretending to be some kind of video stars while their patients die from the Wuhan China virus to give them much benefit of the doubt.
No seriously fuck those tiktok nurses and doctors. Why are they on tiktok during work hours to begin with? They should be fired.
At least the patient was sedated. Imagine the horror for the OR team of having to witness traffic court.I have seen enough tiktoks of NHS staff living the high life pretending to be some kind of video stars while their patients die from the Wuhan China virus to give them much benefit of the doubt.
No seriously fuck those tiktok nurses and doctors. Why are they on tiktok during work hours to begin with? They should be fired.
You think tiktok bad!? What about that one doctor that appeared for traffic court on video while operating on a sedated patient. According to him, there was a scheduling conflict.
So now covid is just sniffles for everybody and no one at all was at risk? You're heaving the goalposts around a bit there mate.
I'm just saying that mibbe you can try living in the real world like people on 18 grand a year do. You're the one accusing them of living in some lovely fantasy land.
I don't really have a problem with the hiring of an Equality, diversity and inclusion manager. It may save a fortune in constructive dismissal cases.
https://showme.missouri.edu/2021/study-finds-covid-19-reinfection-rate-less-than-1-for-those-with-severe-illness/
Of possible interest for those that already have gotten it. There are several other good studies from Europe and Israel with similar results for those of you that have caught it and are not getting the Poke.
So NZ has finally suffered a breach in our Iron Dome and woudnt you know it, one of the infected cases is a fully vaccinated nurse.
I guess they only had two doses of the "vaccine"
You obviously haven't seen the dramatic differences in symptoms between vaccinated breakthroughs and the unvaccinated infected. If you did, even your small mind would grok that the vaccine makes a difference.So NZ has finally suffered a breach in our Iron Dome and woudnt you know it, one of the infected cases is a fully vaccinated nurse.
I guess they only had two doses of the "vaccine"
Wouldn't matter how many doses they have, the "vaccine" doesn't work. Especially since the "Delta" variant has evolved in response to it.
The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
I have never actually seen a hospital overloaded due to Covid. I hear about it all the time. Maybe it does happen, but I can't ever remember a news crew getting some footage, even from a distance.
So NZ has finally suffered a breach in our Iron Dome and woudnt you know it, one of the infected cases is a fully vaccinated nurse.
I guess they only had two doses of the "vaccine"
Wouldn't matter how many doses they have, the "vaccine" doesn't work. Especially since the "Delta" variant has evolved in response to it.
Every single study has show hospitalization and death rates from Delta are drastically lower if you are vaccinated versus unvaccinated.Why don't you cite those studies? Because Delta is new, setting up a study that's high on the tiers of evidence based medicine takes a while, and so does working through the peer-review process. So I really doubt there are a raft of studies in academic journals.
Every single study has show hospitalization and death rates from Delta are drastically lower if you are vaccinated versus unvaccinated.
https://www.statnews.com/2021/08/18/health-workers-overwhelmed-covid-deaths-among-unvaccinated/I'm working on the "front line" as an ED nurse 3-4 days a week right now in central Floroda. It is bad, but that source of yours reads like a pure propaganda piece.
Meanwhile, in the real world…
https://www.statnews.com/2021/08/18/health-workers-overwhelmed-covid-deaths-among-unvaccinated/I'm working on the "front line" as an ED nurse 3-4 days a week right now in central Floroda. It is bad, but that source of yours reads like a pure propaganda piece.
Meanwhile, in the real world…
The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
I have never actually seen a hospital overloaded due to Covid. I hear about it all the time. Maybe it does happen, but I can't ever remember a news crew getting some footage, even from a distance.
I saw it. My nearest hospital in fact. Ambulances lined up outside. Patients being treated in those ambulances because there were no remaining beds inside. Hallways full of patients in beds too.
Ehhh, consider the source...The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
I have never actually seen a hospital overloaded due to Covid. I hear about it all the time. Maybe it does happen, but I can't ever remember a news crew getting some footage, even from a distance.
I saw it. My nearest hospital in fact. Ambulances lined up outside. Patients being treated in those ambulances because there were no remaining beds inside. Hallways full of patients in beds too.
Pardon me if I take an anonymous internet anecdote with no corroborating evidence with a grain of salt.
To give you an idea of what I'm seeing:
Back on Monday I was working triage (assigning acuity and managing who gets treated first). By 0900, all of our ED rooms were full (excepting a few trauma bays), and about 40% were with symptomatic Covid patients. Almost half of our rooms were with patients that already had admission orders but no inpatient beds to move to.
By noon, we had filled all of the hallway beds (rotating Covid patients into rooms ASAP) and by 1400, I was personally providing meds and treatments for 26 acuity 4 & 5 patients in the lobby alongside one of our physicians, and there was a growing line stretching for about 30 yards outside the entrance. That was all patients, as only minors and those with specific needs are allowed any visitors at the moment.
I can't agree that 99% of those being treated for Covid symptoms are unvaccinated; what I've seen is that about 1/5 of those with moderate or severe symptoms are vaccinated, but that's before digging and seeing that those symptomatic vaccinated tend to have significant comorbidities more often than the symptomatic unvaccinated (still demonstrating that the vaccines are having a beneficial impact).
Rimdesevir and vitamins B12 & D are being used quite often in my ED, the other two meds not so much at all. DM is quite common in those with severe symptoms (not sure on percentage though), along with interrelated obesity.To give you an idea of what I'm seeing:
Back on Monday I was working triage (assigning acuity and managing who gets treated first). By 0900, all of our ED rooms were full (excepting a few trauma bays), and about 40% were with symptomatic Covid patients. Almost half of our rooms were with patients that already had admission orders but no inpatient beds to move to.
By noon, we had filled all of the hallway beds (rotating Covid patients into rooms ASAP) and by 1400, I was personally providing meds and treatments for 26 acuity 4 & 5 patients in the lobby alongside one of our physicians, and there was a growing line stretching for about 30 yards outside the entrance. That was all patients, as only minors and those with specific needs are allowed any visitors at the moment.
I can't agree that 99% of those being treated for Covid symptoms are unvaccinated; what I've seen is that about 1/5 of those with moderate or severe symptoms are vaccinated, but that's before digging and seeing that those symptomatic vaccinated tend to have significant comorbidities more often than the symptomatic unvaccinated (still demonstrating that the vaccines are having a beneficial impact).
Ivormectin (sorry about the spelling) or the sweet hydrocloraquine (again spelling) catching as therapies? Is vitamin D part of treatment? Curious because I see where some docs are doing stuff like this, I have a friend who is a nurse and she said they use remdezovere (again slaughtered spelling) but I have no idea what the leading treatments are for people having problems. I did read that 40 percent of deaths are people with Diabetes, that seems to be a big stat that I do not hear much and I was curious if that is true.
I think it's irresponsible to say that vaccination doesn't work at all. At the same time, it's important to be honest which is something the CDC has consistently failed to do for over a year. The masks were bullshit, the 95% effectiveness figures we saw touted were obvious bullshit, the deceptive & coercive tactics to get people vaccinated, and countless other lies.
Each individual must think about their individual risk and evaluate whether they think the vaccine is beneficial enough to warrant the long term risks (including the social risk).
I just wish we (and by that I mean society as a whole) could have a mature conversation that was about minimizing harm from Covid rather than focusing obsessively on measures like masks & lockdowns & passports that haven't and won't work to actually minimize harm. Apparently it's better to introduce medical tyranny than to dare providing monoclonal antibodies or ivermectin freely to the population.
I think it's irresponsible to say that vaccination doesn't work at all. At the same time, it's important to be honest which is something the CDC has consistently failed to do for over a year. The masks were bullshit, the 95% effectiveness figures we saw touted were obvious bullshit, the deceptive & coercive tactics to get people vaccinated, and countless other lies.
Each individual must think about their individual risk and evaluate whether they think the vaccine is beneficial enough to warrant the long term risks (including the social risk).
I just wish we (and by that I mean society as a whole) could have a mature conversation that was about minimizing harm from Covid rather than focusing obsessively on measures like masks & lockdowns & passports that haven't and won't work to actually minimize harm. Apparently it's better to introduce medical tyranny than to dare providing monoclonal antibodies or ivermectin freely to the population.
Vaccination as a general principle works. These "vaccines" do fuck all.
Ehhh, consider the source...The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
I have never actually seen a hospital overloaded due to Covid. I hear about it all the time. Maybe it does happen, but I can't ever remember a news crew getting some footage, even from a distance.
I saw it. My nearest hospital in fact. Ambulances lined up outside. Patients being treated in those ambulances because there were no remaining beds inside. Hallways full of patients in beds too.
Pardon me if I take an anonymous internet anecdote with no corroborating evidence with a grain of salt.
Ehhh, consider the source...The latest coronavirus may have displaced the various flu bugs, but assuming that's not true, I fully expect we'll see lockdowns during the next strong flu season.
Welcome to the new normal.
That is entirely possible. I can't speak yo the US system, it's probably fabulous, but the winter flu virus puts the NHS in an awful position. Coronavirus on top of that could stretch it beyond crisis.
This is one of those things you may not be worried about, it's just the sniffles likesay, but you don't want to be hit by a car or jumped by a jakie during this time. Remember that drunk drivers and random jakies are much more committed n vee the festive season..
Basically ICU beds are already full in the winter and any of us could randomly need one. There's no need of a big, or even small, conspiracy for any government to consider a lockdown during the worst period.
I have never actually seen a hospital overloaded due to Covid. I hear about it all the time. Maybe it does happen, but I can't ever remember a news crew getting some footage, even from a distance.
I saw it. My nearest hospital in fact. Ambulances lined up outside. Patients being treated in those ambulances because there were no remaining beds inside. Hallways full of patients in beds too.
Pardon me if I take an anonymous internet anecdote with no corroborating evidence with a grain of salt.
Even if true, and I'm super skeptical, it still doesn't change that I haven't seen it, and I mean to say that it's all words with not even a photo or news reporter in a hallway showing this stuff. Considering how eager the establishment media are swinging for vaccinations, I'd think a few live reports of overwhelmed hospitals with piles of corpses would be a powerful motivator.
Hell, I'd consider getting one of the vaccinations if the "overwhelemed" situation were in any way demonstrable.
Some good news regarding pursuing early treatment, apparently Ron Desantis is now considering providing ivermectin & zinc ionophores, among others, as early treatment options starting as early as next week. With any luck, promoting early treatment options like this will have a marked impact both reducing case numbers and saving lives. I think there's a lot of people who aren't eager to take injections, but are okay with taking common preventative medications.
Even if true, and I'm super skeptical, it still doesn't change that I haven't seen it, and I mean to say that it's all words with not even a photo or news reporter in a hallway showing this stuff. Considering how eager the establishment media are swinging for vaccinations, I'd think a few live reports of overwhelmed hospitals with piles of corpses would be a powerful motivator.
Hell, I'd consider getting one of the vaccinations if the "overwhelemed" situation were in any way demonstrable.
Even if true, and I'm super skeptical, it still doesn't change that I haven't seen it, and I mean to say that it's all words with not even a photo or news reporter in a hallway showing this stuff. Considering how eager the establishment media are swinging for vaccinations, I'd think a few live reports of overwhelmed hospitals with piles of corpses would be a powerful motivator.
Hell, I'd consider getting one of the vaccinations if the "overwhelemed" situation were in any way demonstrable.
Here's at least news reporters in hospital hallways. It doesn't show piles of corpses, but if they did, then you'd rightly say it was staged because doctors wouldn't pile the corpses up. Instead, it shows hospital rooms with people on ventilators.
For further viewing, here are some of the reports on the situation currently in Alabama.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFSU-upzlTA
Even if true, and I'm super skeptical, it still doesn't change that I haven't seen it, and I mean to say that it's all words with not even a photo or news reporter in a hallway showing this stuff. Considering how eager the establishment media are swinging for vaccinations, I'd think a few live reports of overwhelmed hospitals with piles of corpses would be a powerful motivator.
Hell, I'd consider getting one of the vaccinations if the "overwhelemed" situation were in any way demonstrable.
Here's at least news reporters in hospital hallways. It doesn't show piles of corpses, but if they did, then you'd rightly say it was staged because doctors wouldn't pile the corpses up. Instead, it shows hospital rooms with people on ventilators.
Some people in a hospital with Covid. 9 patients out of how much capacity? Up 103% compared to what? More (intentionally?) vague numbers, they kind I complained about earlier.
This doesn't look like an overwhelmed hospital at all.QuoteFor further viewing, here are some of the reports on the situation currently in Alabama.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFSU-upzlTA
Good God, between the guy doing the "ONE TWO PUNCH!" and the lady comparing vaccinations to skydiving, I think I became more vaccine hesitant, if that's even possible at this point.
But God bless him, JKhim will try anyway. The man is a fucking saint.You misspelled pond scum.
But God bless him, JKhim will try anyway. The man is a fucking saint.You misspelled pond scum.
Even if true, and I'm super skeptical, it still doesn't change that I haven't seen it, and I mean to say that it's all words with not even a photo or news reporter in a hallway showing this stuff. Considering how eager the establishment media are swinging for vaccinations, I'd think a few live reports of overwhelmed hospitals with piles of corpses would be a powerful motivator.
Hell, I'd consider getting one of the vaccinations if the "overwhelemed" situation were in any way demonstrable.
Here's at least news reporters in hospital hallways. It doesn't show piles of corpses, but if they did, then you'd rightly say it was staged because doctors wouldn't pile the corpses up. Instead, it shows hospital rooms with people on ventilators.
Some people in a hospital with Covid. 9 patients out of how much capacity? Up 103% compared to what? More (intentionally?) vague numbers, they kind I complained about earlier.
This doesn't look like an overwhelmed hospital at all.QuoteFor further viewing, here are some of the reports on the situation currently in Alabama.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFSU-upzlTA
Good God, between the guy doing the "ONE TWO PUNCH!" and the lady comparing vaccinations to skydiving, I think I became more vaccine hesitant, if that's even possible at this point.
And this is the problem even trying to respond to requests like this. Someone asks for a photo or video of overcrowded hospitals, with no standard set for what they would consider overcrowded to look like and no expertise in what overcrowding looks like. So someone answers, and it doesn't matter what the answer would be, the response is incredibly predictably "that doesn't look like overcrowded to me," and "that's too vague an answer to the vague question with no established standards or expertise I asked."
There is no winning in that scenario. It's an impossible goal because no answer can be specific enough given the questions parameters are vague, the person asking has no standards or expertise to assess an answer, and there is a bias going in to support the assumption that there isn't overcrowding.
And if I asked you for specifics you wouldn't give them or would give such absurd standards like "It has to look like a battlefield with hundreds of beds and people visibly coding with nobody able to respond." Because you're not looking for an honest answer. You're looking for validation of your preconceived notions.
But God bless him, JKhim will try anyway. The man is a fucking saint.
Even if true, and I'm super skeptical, it still doesn't change that I haven't seen it, and I mean to say that it's all words with not even a photo or news reporter in a hallway showing this stuff. Considering how eager the establishment media are swinging for vaccinations, I'd think a few live reports of overwhelmed hospitals with piles of corpses would be a powerful motivator.
Hell, I'd consider getting one of the vaccinations if the "overwhelemed" situation were in any way demonstrable.
Here's at least news reporters in hospital hallways. It doesn't show piles of corpses, but if they did, then you'd rightly say it was staged because doctors wouldn't pile the corpses up. Instead, it shows hospital rooms with people on ventilators.
Some people in a hospital with Covid. 9 patients out of how much capacity? Up 103% compared to what? More (intentionally?) vague numbers, they kind I complained about earlier.
This doesn't look like an overwhelmed hospital at all.QuoteFor further viewing, here are some of the reports on the situation currently in Alabama.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFSU-upzlTA
Good God, between the guy doing the "ONE TWO PUNCH!" and the lady comparing vaccinations to skydiving, I think I became more vaccine hesitant, if that's even possible at this point.
And this is the problem even trying to respond to requests like this. Someone asks for a photo or video of overcrowded hospitals, with no standard set for what they would consider overcrowded to look like and no expertise in what overcrowding looks like. So someone answers, and it doesn't matter what the answer would be, the response is incredibly predictably "that doesn't look like overcrowded to me," and "that's too vague an answer to the vague question with no established standards or expertise I asked."
There is no winning in that scenario. It's an impossible goal because no answer can be specific enough given the questions parameters are vague, the person asking has no standards or expertise to assess an answer, and there is a bias going in to support the assumption that there isn't overcrowding.
And if I asked you for specifics you wouldn't give them or would give such absurd standards like "It has to look like a battlefield with hundreds of beds and people visibly coding with nobody able to respond." Because you're not looking for an honest answer. You're looking for validation of your preconceived notions.
And this is the problem with questioning a narrative. You Just throw accusations about my motivation and deflect from answering questions. I could say there's no evidence or line of argumentation that hospitals are not overcrowded that you will accept.
See any number of threads where we've interacted. I gave him every possible benefit of the doubt, and he kept acting like pond scum. It's a shame. He wasn't like this before.But God bless him, JKhim will try anyway. The man is a fucking saint.You misspelled pond scum.
Not sure why you dislike him? I find him pretty respectful to people. I find you pretty respectful to people as well, if you're looking for a gauge of my assessments :)
Even if true, and I'm super skeptical, it still doesn't change that I haven't seen it, and I mean to say that it's all words with not even a photo or news reporter in a hallway showing this stuff. Considering how eager the establishment media are swinging for vaccinations, I'd think a few live reports of overwhelmed hospitals with piles of corpses would be a powerful motivator.
Hell, I'd consider getting one of the vaccinations if the "overwhelemed" situation were in any way demonstrable.
Here's at least news reporters in hospital hallways. It doesn't show piles of corpses, but if they did, then you'd rightly say it was staged because doctors wouldn't pile the corpses up. Instead, it shows hospital rooms with people on ventilators.
Some people in a hospital with Covid. 9 patients out of how much capacity? Up 103% compared to what? More (intentionally?) vague numbers, they kind I complained about earlier.
This doesn't look like an overwhelmed hospital at all.QuoteFor further viewing, here are some of the reports on the situation currently in Alabama.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFSU-upzlTA
Good God, between the guy doing the "ONE TWO PUNCH!" and the lady comparing vaccinations to skydiving, I think I became more vaccine hesitant, if that's even possible at this point.
And this is the problem even trying to respond to requests like this. Someone asks for a photo or video of overcrowded hospitals, with no standard set for what they would consider overcrowded to look like and no expertise in what overcrowding looks like. So someone answers, and it doesn't matter what the answer would be, the response is incredibly predictably "that doesn't look like overcrowded to me," and "that's too vague an answer to the vague question with no established standards or expertise I asked."
There is no winning in that scenario. It's an impossible goal because no answer can be specific enough given the questions parameters are vague, the person asking has no standards or expertise to assess an answer, and there is a bias going in to support the assumption that there isn't overcrowding.
And if I asked you for specifics you wouldn't give them or would give such absurd standards like "It has to look like a battlefield with hundreds of beds and people visibly coding with nobody able to respond." Because you're not looking for an honest answer. You're looking for validation of your preconceived notions.
And this is the problem with questioning a narrative. You Just throw accusations about my motivation and deflect from answering questions. I could say there's no evidence or line of argumentation that hospitals are not overcrowded that you will accept.
Well I saw it with my own eyes at my closest hospital (which I had plenty of comparison for, pre-pandemic, and which I'm pretty familiar with during the pandemic as I donated face masks to them a couple of times and spoke with their staff). They also ran out of nurses (who were sick too). Paramedics were warned that critically ill or seriously injured patients would not be admitted to that overcrowded emergency room, even if they were the closest facilities to the patients. Which let me tell you, isn't a nice thing to hear when it's YOUR closest emergency room.
My region of hospitals also hit “Medical gridlock" where rashes of emergency rooms closed at the same time, leaving paramedics spinning their ambulance wheels waiting for empty beds to deliver patients. Much of that was due to a sudden nursing shortage. You need a fixed number of nurses for each bed at your hospital/ICU/ER room, and they didn't have the nurses even when they turned to the emergency temporary nurse registry. So some hospitals which had beds couldn't take patients for those beds, which put pressure on the nearby hospitals to take that overload, which cause a cascade effect.
If you have some evidence that what I saw, and what I heard from the nurses and doctors in person, wasn't what it looked like and what they claimed directly to me then I am open to hearing it. The news also backed up what I saw, specifically about that hospital near me. It was listed as overloaded, and was.
You've already accused me of not wanting an honest answer. I don't know why you're even replying to me at this point, except maybe out of conversational momentum.
You've already accused me of not wanting an honest answer. I don't know why you're even replying to me at this point, except maybe out of conversational momentum.
Doesnt Mistwells hospital always get over whelmed?
You've already accused me of not wanting an honest answer. I don't know why you're even replying to me at this point, except maybe out of conversational momentum.
Doesnt Mistwells hospital always get over whelmed?
And unlike war spending, it produced nothing of value in the process. People were paid to stay at home and not create economic activity. Money literally pissed down the drain.
And unlike war spending, it produced nothing of value in the process. People were paid to stay at home and not create economic activity. Money literally pissed down the drain.
Depends how you look at it. If you go to the mall you’ll see people who weren’t likely to be there spending money. In a way, they’re jumpstarting the economy. Then you have the people who saved, and think they’re a step ahead when in reality hyper inflation kept them in the same financial level. Restaurant owners in particular, are the ones crying the most about lack of staff. Did you know waiters get paid as low as $5/hr? Without costumers there’s no tips. I don’t think it’s fair we allow the less fortunate to suffer in the middle of a global crisis. It’s the whole point of paying taxes!
And unlike war spending, it produced nothing of value in the process. People were paid to stay at home and not create economic activity. Money literally pissed down the drain.
Depends how you look at it. If you go to the mall you’ll see people who weren’t likely to be there spending money. In a way, they’re jumpstarting the economy. Then you have the people who saved, and think they’re a step ahead when in reality hyper inflation kept them in the same financial level. Restaurant owners in particular, are the ones crying the most about lack of staff. Did you know waiters get paid as low as $5/hr? Without costumers there’s no tips. I don’t think it’s fair we allow the less fortunate to suffer in the middle of a global crisis. It’s the whole point of paying taxes!
If you pay people solely to consume, there will be a price to pay. I am guessing you do not get out much, do many projects around the house, etc. to not notice there are supply chain issues all over the place in the USA. From individual 50 packs of doritos to vinyl. Chips in cars. And so on and so on. Paying taxes IS NOT to prevent the less fortunate from suffering. It is to provide a safety net, not a cushy effort free existence.
And unlike war spending, it produced nothing of value in the process. People were paid to stay at home and not create economic activity. Money literally pissed down the drain.
Depends how you look at it. If you go to the mall you’ll see people who weren’t likely to be there spending money. In a way, they’re jumpstarting the economy. Then you have the people who saved, and think they’re a step ahead when in reality hyper inflation kept them in the same financial level. Restaurant owners in particular, are the ones crying the most about lack of staff. Did you know waiters get paid as low as $5/hr? Without costumers there’s no tips. I don’t think it’s fair we allow the less fortunate to suffer in the middle of a global crisis. It’s the whole point of paying taxes!
If you pay people solely to consume, there will be a price to pay. I am guessing you do not get out much, do many projects around the house, etc. to not notice there are supply chain issues all over the place in the USA. From individual 50 packs of doritos to vinyl. Chips in cars. And so on and so on. Paying taxes IS NOT to prevent the less fortunate from suffering. It is to provide a safety net, not a cushy effort free existence.
You skipped the global crisis part, and jumped to assumptions. I don’t pay taxes to keep the less fortunate comfy, I pay taxes so in a moment of crisis everyone gets the assistance they need. I come out daily and still to experience a shortage of anything. With the exception of next gen consoles and graphics cards due to yes, a chip shortage.
Maybe some regions are affected more than others, but if you’re in either coast you’re unlikely to experience shortages. What I’m experiencing is Biden inflation, and here’s a interesting point… Did you know only 8% of the past ‘covid relief’ bills were actually stimulus and payment assistance? A lot of money was used for a lot of unrelated crap.
Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.And unlike war spending, it produced nothing of value in the process. People were paid to stay at home and not create economic activity. Money literally pissed down the drain.
Depends how you look at it. If you go to the mall you’ll see people who weren’t likely to be there spending money. In a way, they’re jumpstarting the economy. Then you have the people who saved, and think they’re a step ahead when in reality hyper inflation kept them in the same financial level. Restaurant owners in particular, are the ones crying the most about lack of staff. Did you know waiters get paid as low as $5/hr? Without costumers there’s no tips. I don’t think it’s fair we allow the less fortunate to suffer in the middle of a global crisis. It’s the whole point of paying taxes!
If you pay people solely to consume, there will be a price to pay. I am guessing you do not get out much, do many projects around the house, etc. to not notice there are supply chain issues all over the place in the USA. From individual 50 packs of doritos to vinyl. Chips in cars. And so on and so on. Paying taxes IS NOT to prevent the less fortunate from suffering. It is to provide a safety net, not a cushy effort free existence.
You skipped the global crisis part, and jumped to assumptions. I don’t pay taxes to keep the less fortunate comfy, I pay taxes so in a moment of crisis everyone gets the assistance they need. I come out daily and still to experience a shortage of anything. With the exception of next gen consoles and graphics cards due to yes, a chip shortage.
Maybe some regions are affected more than others, but if you’re in either coast you’re unlikely to experience shortages. What I’m experiencing is Biden inflation, and here’s a interesting point… Did you know only 8% of the past ‘covid relief’ bills were actually stimulus and payment assistance? A lot of money was used for a lot of unrelated crap.
Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.And unlike war spending, it produced nothing of value in the process. People were paid to stay at home and not create economic activity. Money literally pissed down the drain.
Depends how you look at it. If you go to the mall you’ll see people who weren’t likely to be there spending money. In a way, they’re jumpstarting the economy. Then you have the people who saved, and think they’re a step ahead when in reality hyper inflation kept them in the same financial level. Restaurant owners in particular, are the ones crying the most about lack of staff. Did you know waiters get paid as low as $5/hr? Without costumers there’s no tips. I don’t think it’s fair we allow the less fortunate to suffer in the middle of a global crisis. It’s the whole point of paying taxes!
If you pay people solely to consume, there will be a price to pay. I am guessing you do not get out much, do many projects around the house, etc. to not notice there are supply chain issues all over the place in the USA. From individual 50 packs of doritos to vinyl. Chips in cars. And so on and so on. Paying taxes IS NOT to prevent the less fortunate from suffering. It is to provide a safety net, not a cushy effort free existence.
You skipped the global crisis part, and jumped to assumptions. I don’t pay taxes to keep the less fortunate comfy, I pay taxes so in a moment of crisis everyone gets the assistance they need. I come out daily and still to experience a shortage of anything. With the exception of next gen consoles and graphics cards due to yes, a chip shortage.
Maybe some regions are affected more than others, but if you’re in either coast you’re unlikely to experience shortages. What I’m experiencing is Biden inflation, and here’s a interesting point… Did you know only 8% of the past ‘covid relief’ bills were actually stimulus and payment assistance? A lot of money was used for a lot of unrelated crap.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
Medicare in the US found a perfect govermental solution to that problem: They just don't investigate fraud. That lets them brag their administrative costs are low, as well, because they don't have to spend all that money on fraud prevention.Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
Let us also remember that furlough schemes have also encouraged massive fraud. It's endemic in this country, our tax authorities have had to devote a lot of their already stretched resources (largely due to their own staff taking the piss and "working" from home) to investigating all sorts of elaborate schemes to grift money from the government.
The first stimulus was sent out too soon. People were buying TVs and making downpayments in automobiles. They should have waited till about now to release a decent lump sum. I’m almost certain a last check will come thru with likely a proof of vaccine requirement.How does that make any sense at all? A year ago, some people were going under. Today, some people are still doing fine. An equal lump sum given to everyone at any random point in time will help some people who desperately need it, but be too late to really help others (who have already been kicked out for failure to pay rent, lost their jobs because they didn't have childcare or couldn't pay for car repairs, and ruined their credit ratings), and be a side of gravy to the rest. The number of people in the first category, who really need it at that exact moment, is going to very small no matter what date you pick.
Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.And unlike war spending, it produced nothing of value in the process. People were paid to stay at home and not create economic activity. Money literally pissed down the drain.
Depends how you look at it. If you go to the mall you’ll see people who weren’t likely to be there spending money. In a way, they’re jumpstarting the economy. Then you have the people who saved, and think they’re a step ahead when in reality hyper inflation kept them in the same financial level. Restaurant owners in particular, are the ones crying the most about lack of staff. Did you know waiters get paid as low as $5/hr? Without costumers there’s no tips. I don’t think it’s fair we allow the less fortunate to suffer in the middle of a global crisis. It’s the whole point of paying taxes!
If you pay people solely to consume, there will be a price to pay. I am guessing you do not get out much, do many projects around the house, etc. to not notice there are supply chain issues all over the place in the USA. From individual 50 packs of doritos to vinyl. Chips in cars. And so on and so on. Paying taxes IS NOT to prevent the less fortunate from suffering. It is to provide a safety net, not a cushy effort free existence.
You skipped the global crisis part, and jumped to assumptions. I don’t pay taxes to keep the less fortunate comfy, I pay taxes so in a moment of crisis everyone gets the assistance they need. I come out daily and still to experience a shortage of anything. With the exception of next gen consoles and graphics cards due to yes, a chip shortage.
Maybe some regions are affected more than others, but if you’re in either coast you’re unlikely to experience shortages. What I’m experiencing is Biden inflation, and here’s a interesting point… Did you know only 8% of the past ‘covid relief’ bills were actually stimulus and payment assistance? A lot of money was used for a lot of unrelated crap.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
The first stimulus was sent out too soon. People were buying TVs and making downpayments in automobiles. They should have waited till about now to release a decent lump sum. I’m almost certain a last check will come thru with likely a proof of vaccine requirement.
They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.Medicare in the US found a perfect govermental solution to that problem: They just don't investigate fraud. That lets them brag their administrative costs are low, as well, because they don't have to spend all that money on fraud prevention.Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
Let us also remember that furlough schemes have also encouraged massive fraud. It's endemic in this country, our tax authorities have had to devote a lot of their already stretched resources (largely due to their own staff taking the piss and "working" from home) to investigating all sorts of elaborate schemes to grift money from the government.
Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
Let us also remember that furlough schemes have also encouraged massive fraud. It's endemic in this country, our tax authorities have had to devote a lot of their already stretched resources (largely due to their own staff taking the piss and "working" from home) to investigating all sorts of elaborate schemes to grift money from the government.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1148376They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.Medicare in the US found a perfect govermental solution to that problem: They just don't investigate fraud. That lets them brag their administrative costs are low, as well, because they don't have to spend all that money on fraud prevention.Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
Let us also remember that furlough schemes have also encouraged massive fraud. It's endemic in this country, our tax authorities have had to devote a lot of their already stretched resources (largely due to their own staff taking the piss and "working" from home) to investigating all sorts of elaborate schemes to grift money from the government.
How are staff being told to work from home taking the piss? Surely doing what your employer tells you to the exact opposite.
How are staff being told to work from home taking the piss? Surely doing what your employer tells you to the exact opposite.
They can't do their jobs remotely because that requires access to systems which don't leave the office. Furthermore, a lot of their work is based on letter correspondence. HMRC has a backlog of a million unopened letters because there was no one to process them for months.
They're taking the piss and so are their employers. But I'm not surprised that you leapt up to defend the workshy public sector once again.
War spending produces nothing of value.
In unrelated news, China admitted there are covid-19 outbreaks in at least 15 cities. Which of course means the real outbreak is much, much bigger.
One of the cities is Wuhan, where they want to test 12 million people for sars2. How are they doing it?
Automated testing stations! Where you put your mouth on the plastic dildo and a robot shoves a cotton swab down your throat! And it's completely contact free, except for the part you and the next person and the next person all put your mouths on!
Who would've thought China would come up with something even more fun than anal probing diplomats!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eX4oy_5E8s
Yes, that's literally what I said. I know it's hard to remember everything you just quoted, but remember where I said "you put your mouth on the plastic dildo"? Surprise, surprise it's a reference to the part you put in your mouth. The "you" should have given it away.War spending produces nothing of value.
In unrelated news, China admitted there are covid-19 outbreaks in at least 15 cities. Which of course means the real outbreak is much, much bigger.
One of the cities is Wuhan, where they want to test 12 million people for sars2. How are they doing it?
Automated testing stations! Where you put your mouth on the plastic dildo and a robot shoves a cotton swab down your throat! And it's completely contact free, except for the part you and the next person and the next person all put your mouths on!
Who would've thought China would come up with something even more fun than anal probing diplomats!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eX4oy_5E8s
Nope. The part you put your mouth on is attached to it by you, and removed by you when you leave. I mean, it's almost like you linked to a site which is intended as counter-propaganda which itself employs propaganda?
You can see the actual test here, and you will see the patient places the nozzle on themselves and then removes it when they are done:
https://www.scmp.com/video/china/3117816/robotic-arm-conducts-covid-19-tests-china-fights-coronavirus-flare
Your source is dated, and much has changed with CMS since 2012.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1148376They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.Medicare in the US found a perfect govermental solution to that problem: They just don't investigate fraud. That lets them brag their administrative costs are low, as well, because they don't have to spend all that money on fraud prevention.Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
Let us also remember that furlough schemes have also encouraged massive fraud. It's endemic in this country, our tax authorities have had to devote a lot of their already stretched resources (largely due to their own staff taking the piss and "working" from home) to investigating all sorts of elaborate schemes to grift money from the government.
(avoiding the paywall: http://files.mccn.edu/media/ds/Berwick%20et%20al%202012.pdf)
Definitely. But it's also hard to find any decent studies on the subject, and all the more recent sources I found referred back that study. It's heavy obfuscated.Your source is dated, and much has changed with CMS since 2012.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1148376They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.Medicare in the US found a perfect govermental solution to that problem: They just don't investigate fraud. That lets them brag their administrative costs are low, as well, because they don't have to spend all that money on fraud prevention.Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
Let us also remember that furlough schemes have also encouraged massive fraud. It's endemic in this country, our tax authorities have had to devote a lot of their already stretched resources (largely due to their own staff taking the piss and "working" from home) to investigating all sorts of elaborate schemes to grift money from the government.
(avoiding the paywall: http://files.mccn.edu/media/ds/Berwick%20et%20al%202012.pdf)
Without bogging down on details, CMS does do audits, and they expect participants to self-audit too. Their own audits get much more involved if the self-audits are not up to par (solid self-audits with disclosed fallouts won't get you scrutinized nearly so much as half-assed self-audits that come up "clean"). It's a feedback loop to get participants to honestly self-report for fear of drawing the eyes of the inquisition.Definitely. But it's also hard to find any decent studies on the subject, and all the more recent sources I found referred back that study. It's heavy obfuscated.Your source is dated, and much has changed with CMS since 2012.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1148376They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.Medicare in the US found a perfect govermental solution to that problem: They just don't investigate fraud. That lets them brag their administrative costs are low, as well, because they don't have to spend all that money on fraud prevention.Public spending does a lot of damage, because it misallocates resources. For instance, the economy is generally pretty good at shutting down unproductive sectors and shifting the money and other resources to more productive areas. This is the creative destruction that drives economic growth. But when the government props up entire sectors, those resources are basically frozen in stasis, and can't be reallocated. This doesn't just hurt those individual sectors, there are also some theories that say misallocation is what drives the boom/bust cycle.
There's always been a wide consensus to support the less fortunate, but it's needs to be targeted and limited. The idea that if we can just throw money and vague feelings at a problem and solve it is fundamentally a broken one.
Let us also remember that furlough schemes have also encouraged massive fraud. It's endemic in this country, our tax authorities have had to devote a lot of their already stretched resources (largely due to their own staff taking the piss and "working" from home) to investigating all sorts of elaborate schemes to grift money from the government.
(avoiding the paywall: http://files.mccn.edu/media/ds/Berwick%20et%20al%202012.pdf)
Without bogging down on details, CMS does do audits, and they expect participants to self-audit too. Their own audits get much more involved if the self-audits are not up to par (solid self-audits with disclosed fallouts won't get you scrutinized nearly so much as half-assed self-audits that come up "clean"). It's a feedback loop to get participants to honestly self-report for fear of drawing the eyes of the inquisition.It should be obvious, but in case it wasn't, I was being hyperbolic when I said they don't investigate fraud. They do, but the amount they spent on fraud prevention is tiny, compared to say a credit card company. In general, they've used that to claim their administrative costs are low, even though it's a bad trade off, because each additional dollar they spend on fraud prevention would reduce fraud by a multiple of that. Medicaid is even worse. The reason this happens is purely political; waste is just a number, but if you make life slightly inconvenient for even a single family, that's a sob story your enemies can run forever.
Yes, that's literally what I said. I know it's hard to remember everything you just quoted, but remember where I said "you put your mouth on the plastic dildo"? Surprise, surprise it's a reference to the part you put in your mouth. The "you" should have given it away.War spending produces nothing of value.
In unrelated news, China admitted there are covid-19 outbreaks in at least 15 cities. Which of course means the real outbreak is much, much bigger.
One of the cities is Wuhan, where they want to test 12 million people for sars2. How are they doing it?
Automated testing stations! Where you put your mouth on the plastic dildo and a robot shoves a cotton swab down your throat! And it's completely contact free, except for the part you and the next person and the next person all put your mouths on!
Who would've thought China would come up with something even more fun than anal probing diplomats!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eX4oy_5E8s
Nope. The part you put your mouth on is attached to it by you, and removed by you when you leave. I mean, it's almost like you linked to a site which is intended as counter-propaganda which itself employs propaganda?
You can see the actual test here, and you will see the patient places the nozzle on themselves and then removes it when they are done:
https://www.scmp.com/video/china/3117816/robotic-arm-conducts-covid-19-tests-china-fights-coronavirus-flare
I was being hyperbolic
No, you're just switching what you're saying.Yes, that's literally what I said. I know it's hard to remember everything you just quoted, but remember where I said "you put your mouth on the plastic dildo"? Surprise, surprise it's a reference to the part you put in your mouth. The "you" should have given it away.War spending produces nothing of value.
In unrelated news, China admitted there are covid-19 outbreaks in at least 15 cities. Which of course means the real outbreak is much, much bigger.
One of the cities is Wuhan, where they want to test 12 million people for sars2. How are they doing it?
Automated testing stations! Where you put your mouth on the plastic dildo and a robot shoves a cotton swab down your throat! And it's completely contact free, except for the part you and the next person and the next person all put your mouths on!
Who would've thought China would come up with something even more fun than anal probing diplomats!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eX4oy_5E8s
Nope. The part you put your mouth on is attached to it by you, and removed by you when you leave. I mean, it's almost like you linked to a site which is intended as counter-propaganda which itself employs propaganda?
You can see the actual test here, and you will see the patient places the nozzle on themselves and then removes it when they are done:
https://www.scmp.com/video/china/3117816/robotic-arm-conducts-covid-19-tests-china-fights-coronavirus-flare
No you said it was the opposite. "except for the part you and the next person and the next person all put your mouths on!" No, that part you put your mouth on is replaced each time.
You (now) say you were being hyperbolic, I say you are (as is usual for you) using weasel words when called on your bullshit.Without bogging down on details, CMS does do audits, and they expect participants to self-audit too. Their own audits get much more involved if the self-audits are not up to par (solid self-audits with disclosed fallouts won't get you scrutinized nearly so much as half-assed self-audits that come up "clean"). It's a feedback loop to get participants to honestly self-report for fear of drawing the eyes of the inquisition.It should be obvious, but in case it wasn't, I was being hyperbolic when I said they don't investigate fraud. They do, but the amount they spent on fraud prevention is tiny, compared to say a credit card company. In general, they've used that to claim their administrative costs are low, even though it's a bad trade off, because each additional dollar they spend on fraud prevention would reduce fraud by a multiple of that. Medicaid is even worse. The reason this happens is purely political; waste is just a number, but if you make life slightly inconvenient for even a single family, that's a sob story your enemies can run forever.
To your initial point, compliance costs are another big source of waste. It's not just the byzantine requirements, but how subjective many of them are. It's really hard to properly CYA, and that uncertainty adds to costs. That's why even modest doctors' offices often have half a dozen or more staff in the basement or a back office somewhere just to deal with medical billing.
You (now) say you were being hyperbolic, I say you are (as is usual for you) using weasel words when called on your bullshit.Without bogging down on details, CMS does do audits, and they expect participants to self-audit too. Their own audits get much more involved if the self-audits are not up to par (solid self-audits with disclosed fallouts won't get you scrutinized nearly so much as half-assed self-audits that come up "clean"). It's a feedback loop to get participants to honestly self-report for fear of drawing the eyes of the inquisition.It should be obvious, but in case it wasn't, I was being hyperbolic when I said they don't investigate fraud. They do, but the amount they spent on fraud prevention is tiny, compared to say a credit card company. In general, they've used that to claim their administrative costs are low, even though it's a bad trade off, because each additional dollar they spend on fraud prevention would reduce fraud by a multiple of that. Medicaid is even worse. The reason this happens is purely political; waste is just a number, but if you make life slightly inconvenient for even a single family, that's a sob story your enemies can run forever.
To your initial point, compliance costs are another big source of waste. It's not just the byzantine requirements, but how subjective many of them are. It's really hard to properly CYA, and that uncertainty adds to costs. That's why even modest doctors' offices often have half a dozen or more staff in the basement or a back office somewhere just to deal with medical billing.
I made a one-line, throw away assertion, without any qualifiers. Short, general statements like that can't account for every possible case. They're either tautologies, or truisms, or hyperbole. The fact that I stated that a government agency with a budget of hundreds of trillions ignored fraud would indicate, to any reasonable person, that it was exaggeration for effect.You (now) say you were being hyperbolic, I say you are (as is usual for you) using weasel words when called on your bullshit.Without bogging down on details, CMS does do audits, and they expect participants to self-audit too. Their own audits get much more involved if the self-audits are not up to par (solid self-audits with disclosed fallouts won't get you scrutinized nearly so much as half-assed self-audits that come up "clean"). It's a feedback loop to get participants to honestly self-report for fear of drawing the eyes of the inquisition.It should be obvious, but in case it wasn't, I was being hyperbolic when I said they don't investigate fraud. They do, but the amount they spent on fraud prevention is tiny, compared to say a credit card company. In general, they've used that to claim their administrative costs are low, even though it's a bad trade off, because each additional dollar they spend on fraud prevention would reduce fraud by a multiple of that. Medicaid is even worse. The reason this happens is purely political; waste is just a number, but if you make life slightly inconvenient for even a single family, that's a sob story your enemies can run forever.
To your initial point, compliance costs are another big source of waste. It's not just the byzantine requirements, but how subjective many of them are. It's really hard to properly CYA, and that uncertainty adds to costs. That's why even modest doctors' offices often have half a dozen or more staff in the basement or a back office somewhere just to deal with medical billing.
The lawyer in me recognizes and admires Pat's skill in this :)And you're being a douchebag.
And you're being a douchebag.
You quoted HappyDaze saying I used weasel words to support my bullshit, agreeing with and saying I was good at it. There's no sarcasm there, just a flat-out insult.And you're being a douchebag.
HA! No I was being serious but you took it as sarcasm.
Only you would take me saying I admire you as douchebaggery.
It's almost like some people would prefer the pandemic to continue for some reason....
I am the parent of a 14, 10 and 6 year-old.
I personally am looking forward to the approval for my younger children. My wife, my oldest child, and I have all had the vaccine. We did not get sick as a result of it. We have not gotten sicker or died from a Covid infection. As far as we know, we haven't had Covid.
I know how vaccines work. My children have had all the vaccines that they're supposed to have, including optional ones like HVP.
Vaccines save ~20 Million people per decade. Vaccines were critical in defeating Smallpox, which killed between 300-500 million people in the 20th century (all before the certification of its global eradication in 1979).
Most school districts and universities require that you have required vaccines in order to participate in activities with other young people. We recognize that individuals must take certain actions to protect those around them, in part because we ALL have the incentive to let everyone else take the action so we can contain the benefit. I would have just as much protection if everyone ELSE had all the vaccines and I had none (assuming the disease isn't spread environmentally), but not everyone can. Therefore, the socially responsible thing is for those who can to get the vaccines generally - for their protection and the protection of those around them.
Those who choose not to take those actions are restricted in what types of activities they can do.
Of course, the validity of these arguments was well-documented BEFORE COVID.
We've had the COVID vaccines for months. The efficacy has been demonstrated. They're not perfect, but they clearly help. If our rate of vaccination was closer to 100%, I don't think we'd be seeing the same kind of spread now. Israeli studies indicate the break-through rate is 2.6% Unvaccinated people promote the spread and the mutation of the virus. Full vaccinations and mask wearing for 1-2 months in large gatherings would almost certainly curtail the spread of the virus. However, we have never reached that point. It's almost like some people would prefer the pandemic to continue for some reason....
And it's not the unvaccinated who cause mutations, that isn't how evolution works. In fact, forget it, you're true believer...
I don't have any sons. I have three daughters. If I had sons, yes, they would get the HPV vaccine, too.
You quoted HappyDaze saying I used weasel words to support my bullshit, agreeing with and saying I was good at it. There's no sarcasm there, just a flat-out insult.And you're being a douchebag.
HA! No I was being serious but you took it as sarcasm.
Only you would take me saying I admire you as douchebaggery.
The critical operator in your statement about not having covid is "as far as you know". Because the chances are pretty high that you have had it.
https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-nsw-restrictions-update-regional-lockdown-extended-changing-restrictions-everything-to-know-explainer/a74df2ef-f025-4a98-b4ab-fce6dc2fddb2
1 hour of exercise per day, no more. Only emergency services and healthcare workers can leave. If you live alone, you're allowed to nominate one and only one visitor, and they must be registered with the government. Masks everywhere outside the home, except when exercising.
Entertainingly, this main thrust of the article is that Australians are being given "new freedoms". (If you can demonstrate proof of vax, you're allowed to spend 2 hours exercising, and can even visit a park!)
Good thing the fascists already took away everyone's guns.
If you didn't mean it to be offensive, then I won't consider it an insult. But I do reject the basic idea. I don't try to use weasel words, or spin anything. My goal is never to win, but to explain my position clearly. Which can require some effort, because my positions are often orthogonal to the usual political axes, and rarely distill themselves nicely into soundbites. But thank you for the intent behind the attempted compliment, even if my response is heavily qualified.You quoted HappyDaze saying I used weasel words to support my bullshit, agreeing with and saying I was good at it. There's no sarcasm there, just a flat-out insult.And you're being a douchebag.
HA! No I was being serious but you took it as sarcasm.
Only you would take me saying I admire you as douchebaggery.
It really wasn't. I said the lawyer in me recognized it and I said I admired your skill. Everyone spins things sometimes Pat, and you're no stranger to spin. Being skilled at spin IS a meaningful skill. But hey, you want to be offended, go right ahead. I didn't mean it offensively.
<points to the 18 months of lockdowns and mask mandates in the US>https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-nsw-restrictions-update-regional-lockdown-extended-changing-restrictions-everything-to-know-explainer/a74df2ef-f025-4a98-b4ab-fce6dc2fddb2
1 hour of exercise per day, no more. Only emergency services and healthcare workers can leave. If you live alone, you're allowed to nominate one and only one visitor, and they must be registered with the government. Masks everywhere outside the home, except when exercising.
Entertainingly, this main thrust of the article is that Australians are being given "new freedoms". (If you can demonstrate proof of vax, you're allowed to spend 2 hours exercising, and can even visit a park!)
Good thing the fascists already took away everyone's guns.
Greetings!
I would like to think if the government tried to pull that tyrannical BS here, people would rise up and crush these people. String them the fuck up, without mercy!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-nsw-restrictions-update-regional-lockdown-extended-changing-restrictions-everything-to-know-explainer/a74df2ef-f025-4a98-b4ab-fce6dc2fddb2
1 hour of exercise per day, no more. Only emergency services and healthcare workers can leave. If you live alone, you're allowed to nominate one and only one visitor, and they must be registered with the government. Masks everywhere outside the home, except when exercising.
Entertainingly, this main thrust of the article is that Australians are being given "new freedoms". (If you can demonstrate proof of vax, you're allowed to spend 2 hours exercising, and can even visit a park!)
Good thing the fascists already took away everyone's guns.
<points to the 18 months of lockdowns and mask mandates in the US>https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-nsw-restrictions-update-regional-lockdown-extended-changing-restrictions-everything-to-know-explainer/a74df2ef-f025-4a98-b4ab-fce6dc2fddb2
1 hour of exercise per day, no more. Only emergency services and healthcare workers can leave. If you live alone, you're allowed to nominate one and only one visitor, and they must be registered with the government. Masks everywhere outside the home, except when exercising.
Entertainingly, this main thrust of the article is that Australians are being given "new freedoms". (If you can demonstrate proof of vax, you're allowed to spend 2 hours exercising, and can even visit a park!)
Good thing the fascists already took away everyone's guns.
Greetings!
I would like to think if the government tried to pull that tyrannical BS here, people would rise up and crush these people. String them the fuck up, without mercy!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
What we call a "lockdown" here is often "eat outdoors for restaurants" or "reduce store capacity". Our measures pale in comparison to what they're doing right now.<points to the 18 months of lockdowns and mask mandates in the US>https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-nsw-restrictions-update-regional-lockdown-extended-changing-restrictions-everything-to-know-explainer/a74df2ef-f025-4a98-b4ab-fce6dc2fddb2
1 hour of exercise per day, no more. Only emergency services and healthcare workers can leave. If you live alone, you're allowed to nominate one and only one visitor, and they must be registered with the government. Masks everywhere outside the home, except when exercising.
Entertainingly, this main thrust of the article is that Australians are being given "new freedoms". (If you can demonstrate proof of vax, you're allowed to spend 2 hours exercising, and can even visit a park!)
Good thing the fascists already took away everyone's guns.
Greetings!
I would like to think if the government tried to pull that tyrannical BS here, people would rise up and crush these people. String them the fuck up, without mercy!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
I don't have any sons. I have three daughters. If I had sons, yes, they would get the HPV vaccine, too.
You'd be right. My boys will be getting the HPV vaccine.
What we call a "lockdown" here is often "eat outdoors for restaurants" or "reduce store capacity". Our measures pale in comparison to what they're doing right now.They were closer to the Australian rules toward the start of the pandemic. The main difference seems to be checks at state borders never got off the ground in the US, and the Australians are really going overboard with enforcement.
You just talk out of both sides of your mouth as a matter of routine. Earlier you said having Covid provided better immunity than the vaccine. And now you're saying the chances are "pretty high" any random stranger has had Covid. So...where the fuck are all these thousands and thousands of cases coming from? Why are hospitalization rates REALLY FUCKING HIGH right now? Why are death rates increasing right now so much? Where is all this coming from if almost everyone has had it and having it makes you immune? Why are case rates the highest on average in states with the lowest rates of vaccinations right now? Why are hospitalization rates the highest right now in states with the lowest rates of vaccinations right now?
You just talk out of both sides of your mouth as a matter of routine. Earlier you said having Covid provided better immunity than the vaccine. And now you're saying the chances are "pretty high" any random stranger has had Covid. So...where the fuck are all these thousands and thousands of cases coming from? Why are hospitalization rates REALLY FUCKING HIGH right now? Why are death rates increasing right now so much? Where is all this coming from if almost everyone has had it and having it makes you immune? Why are case rates the highest on average in states with the lowest rates of vaccinations right now? Why are hospitalization rates the highest right now in states with the lowest rates of vaccinations right now?
No, you've bought into the testing con, so you're not getting it. "Cases" are not infections. In the UK we test more than anywhere on the entire fucking planet, more than every country in mainland Europe combined. Most of it is routine, multiple times a week, asymptomatic testing of healthcare staff, students and others. Combined with running PCR tests at a cycle threshold of 40-45 (anything over 25 is basically meaningless) creating a casedemic of false positive results. "Cases" are utter bullshit, easily manipulated by instructing the labs to turn the CT up or down (though they never turn it down).
It's funny, all those things you observe at the end, high cases, high hospitalisations, spiking deaths, are being observed in all the countries with the highest rates of vaccination, not just Israel, but Iceland and the UK. Along with Malta, Gibraltar and Cyprus.
And pre-vaccination we weren't getting this in the summer, when the virus traditionally recedes. Thanks to the jabs for that.
That's wishful thinking Shark. We're not that far away. Look at the bullshit happening in Oregon. No one is rising up, they're meekly complying.https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-nsw-restrictions-update-regional-lockdown-extended-changing-restrictions-everything-to-know-explainer/a74df2ef-f025-4a98-b4ab-fce6dc2fddb2
1 hour of exercise per day, no more. Only emergency services and healthcare workers can leave. If you live alone, you're allowed to nominate one and only one visitor, and they must be registered with the government. Masks everywhere outside the home, except when exercising.
Entertainingly, this main thrust of the article is that Australians are being given "new freedoms". (If you can demonstrate proof of vax, you're allowed to spend 2 hours exercising, and can even visit a park!)
Good thing the fascists already took away everyone's guns.
Greetings!
I would like to think if the government tried to pull that tyrannical BS here, people would rise up and crush these people. String them the fuck up, without mercy!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
The states with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest hospitalization and death rates right now. Why?
For example, the two states with the lowest vaccination rates are Alabama (36.79%) and Mississippi (37.25%). They also have the highest hospitalizations at 60 per 100,000 and 56 per 100,000. Meanwhile the states with the highest vaccination rates are Vermont (67.54%) and Massachusetts (65.47%). They also have the lowest hospitalizations at 4 per 100,000 and 7 per 100,000. This data holds up for death rates as well. Alabama has a current daily Covid death rate of 0.37 per 100,000, and Mississippi has a current daily Covid death rate of 1.27 per 100,000. Compare that to Vermont at 0.09 per 100,000 and Massachusetts at 0.07 per 100,000.
Why would that be, if what you believe were true?
The states with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest hospitalization and death rates right now. Why?Mississippi is the heaviest State.
High levels of testing are definitely being used to foster fear, where none would exist without it. That being said, massive testing isn't the only problem. I have no doubt there's a real spike of infections, the question is why there's such a spike of cases in countries where vaccination rates among the vulnerable 65+ population are in the 80-90% range, and probably around 60% or more overall. Vaccination doesn't seem to produce a meaningful impact on case numbers
Hospitalization numbers are also subject to reporting biases.
It's impossible to provide a non-local estimate, but I have seen sources suggesting ~25% of "hospitalizations" are patients who have been admitted for reasons other than SarsCov-2 infection.
I've also seen it suggested that ~25% of hospitalized cases are nosocomial infections, e.g. acquired during hospitalization. This makes sense since it's virtually impossible to prevent the spread of SarsCov-2 indoors. This is even more true with increased infectivity of Delta strain. If Covid patients are kept physically separated in different wings if they are on the same ventilation & AC system, the virus can easily be transmitted.
Deaths are the metric that's probably least amenable to manipulation, but we do see increases in death numbers. In the US at least, there's a big reservoir of deeply unhealthy morbidly obese people, so I feel like that plays a significant role. It's hard to pin it down really, because countries like Israel are seeing their highest ever deaths despite major vaccination. Meanwhile Sweden with much lower vaccination and seems to have basically reached herd immunity and zero deaths.
The states with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest hospitalization and death rates right now. Why?Mississippi is the heaviest State.
The states with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest hospitalization and death rates right now. Why?
For example, the two states with the lowest vaccination rates are Alabama (36.79%) and Mississippi (37.25%). They also have the highest hospitalizations at 60 per 100,000 and 56 per 100,000. Meanwhile the states with the highest vaccination rates are Vermont (67.54%) and Massachusetts (65.47%). They also have the lowest hospitalizations at 4 per 100,000 and 7 per 100,000. This data holds up for death rates as well. Alabama has a current daily Covid death rate of 0.37 per 100,000, and Mississippi has a current daily Covid death rate of 1.27 per 100,000. Compare that to Vermont at 0.09 per 100,000 and Massachusetts at 0.07 per 100,000.
Why would that be, if what you believe were true?
Seasonality & underlying health of these populations. Both Alabama and Mississippi are much less affluent than the populations of either Mass or Vermont, and have much higher proportion of African peoples, which both explains low injection rate as well as relates to the hospitalization and death rates, since African Americans are more obese on average (and other health conditions, like Vit-D deficient and generally poor nutrition). In the coming months the northern states are going to get hit hard.
I do think it's fair to point out injections tend to be correlated to lower hospitalization and deaths, but unfortunately the case isn't as clear as some make it out to be since seasonality is a big confounding factor in most of the analyses I've seen of this nature. For example, major cities in Florida have injection rates between 40% to 60%, and different local policies on masks (et al). All these are following similar trends in terms of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.
The states with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest hospitalization and death rates right now. Why?
For example, the two states with the lowest vaccination rates are Alabama (36.79%) and Mississippi (37.25%). They also have the highest hospitalizations at 60 per 100,000 and 56 per 100,000. Meanwhile the states with the highest vaccination rates are Vermont (67.54%) and Massachusetts (65.47%). They also have the lowest hospitalizations at 4 per 100,000 and 7 per 100,000. This data holds up for death rates as well. Alabama has a current daily Covid death rate of 0.37 per 100,000, and Mississippi has a current daily Covid death rate of 1.27 per 100,000. Compare that to Vermont at 0.09 per 100,000 and Massachusetts at 0.07 per 100,000.
Why would that be, if what you believe were true?
Seasonality & underlying health of these populations. Both Alabama and Mississippi are much less affluent than the populations of either Mass or Vermont, and have much higher proportion of African peoples, which both explains low injection rate as well as relates to the hospitalization and death rates, since African Americans are more obese on average (and other health conditions, like Vit-D deficient and generally poor nutrition). In the coming months the northern states are going to get hit hard.
The one most consistent factor in reducing hospitalizations and deaths from Covid is vaccination rates. If I hid the names of various factors for all 50 states and simply listed them all along with hospitalizations and death rates, y'all would not be able to pick out factors with any consistency other than the one which was vaccination rates.
High levels of testing are definitely being used to foster fear, where none would exist without it. That being said, massive testing isn't the only problem. I have no doubt there's a real spike of infections, the question is why there's such a spike of cases in countries where vaccination rates among the vulnerable 65+ population are in the 80-90% range, and probably around 60% or more overall. Vaccination doesn't seem to produce a meaningful impact on case numbersEven when Covid patients are funneled to special units, most pass through emergency department doors to get to them. EDs are seldom set up to segregate a large influx of infectious patients--only a small portion of rooms are set up for negative pressure, or with anterooms, and the lobby is always going to be mess. Too many potentially infectious patients get stuck waiting in ED rooms (or, worse, hallway beds and/or lobby) for hours before infection is confirmed and a room on a specialty unit becomes available.
Hospitalization numbers are also subject to reporting biases.
It's impossible to provide a non-local estimate, but I have seen sources suggesting ~25% of "hospitalizations" are patients who have been admitted for reasons other than SarsCov-2 infection.
I've also seen it suggested that ~25% of hospitalized cases are nosocomial infections, e.g. acquired during hospitalization. This makes sense since it's virtually impossible to prevent the spread of SarsCov-2 indoors. This is even more true with increased infectivity of Delta strain. If Covid patients are kept physically separated in different wings if they are on the same ventilation & AC system, the virus can easily be transmitted.
Deaths are the metric that's probably least amenable to manipulation, but we do see increases in death numbers. In the US at least, there's a big reservoir of deeply unhealthy morbidly obese people, so I feel like that plays a significant role. It's hard to pin it down really, because countries like Israel are seeing their highest ever deaths despite major vaccination. Meanwhile Sweden with much lower vaccination and seems to have basically reached herd immunity and zero deaths.
I thought vaccines prevent infections. So now the metric for vaccines is preventing hospitalizations or death? With a virus with a less than 1 percent death rate? I think it is great if it can save a person's life. I think the people at risk can consider if it is right for them. I do not think calling a therapeutic a vaccine is being completely honest though.Flu vaccines have a long history of reducing severity even when they cannot fully prevent infections. This is linked to the many strains of influenza that are out there and how it's impractical to vaccinate against all of them. Covid too has several variants at this point, with delta just being the most prominent (and not the one the vaccines were originally intended to fight).
I thought vaccines prevent infections. So now the metric for vaccines is preventing hospitalizations or death? With a virus with a less than 1 percent death rate? I think it is great if it can save a person's life. I think the people at risk can consider if it is right for them. I do not think calling a therapeutic a vaccine is being completely honest though.Flu vaccines have a long history of reducing severity even when they cannot fully prevent infections. This is linked to the many strains of influenza that are out there and how it's impractical to vaccinate against all of them. Covid too has several variants at this point, with delta just being the most prominent (and not the one the vaccines were originally intended to fight).
That's wishful thinking Shark. We're not that far away. Look at the bullshit happening in Oregon. No one is rising up, they're meekly complying.https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-nsw-restrictions-update-regional-lockdown-extended-changing-restrictions-everything-to-know-explainer/a74df2ef-f025-4a98-b4ab-fce6dc2fddb2
1 hour of exercise per day, no more. Only emergency services and healthcare workers can leave. If you live alone, you're allowed to nominate one and only one visitor, and they must be registered with the government. Masks everywhere outside the home, except when exercising.
Entertainingly, this main thrust of the article is that Australians are being given "new freedoms". (If you can demonstrate proof of vax, you're allowed to spend 2 hours exercising, and can even visit a park!)
Good thing the fascists already took away everyone's guns.
Greetings!
I would like to think if the government tried to pull that tyrannical BS here, people would rise up and crush these people. String them the fuck up, without mercy!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
I thought vaccines prevent infections. So now the metric for vaccines is preventing hospitalizations or death? With a virus with a less than 1 percent death rate? I think it is great if it can save a person's life. I think the people at risk can consider if it is right for them. I do not think calling a therapeutic a vaccine is being completely honest though.
I thought vaccines prevent infections. So now the metric for vaccines is preventing hospitalizations or death? With a virus with a less than 1 percent death rate? I think it is great if it can save a person's life. I think the people at risk can consider if it is right for them. I do not think calling a therapeutic a vaccine is being completely honest though.
Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections. Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) hospitalizations. Vaccinations reduce (but nearly eliminate 100%) deaths. Over time, vaccinations wear off and will need a booster. Covid also comes with risks which are beyond just the risk of death with long covid being a real thing and long term possibly lifetime damage likely being a thing. Pretending if you don't die then it is just a big nothingburger is disingenuous.
I thought vaccines prevent infections. So now the metric for vaccines is preventing hospitalizations or death? With a virus with a less than 1 percent death rate? I think it is great if it can save a person's life. I think the people at risk can consider if it is right for them. I do not think calling a therapeutic a vaccine is being completely honest though.
Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections. Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) hospitalizations. Vaccinations reduce (but nearly eliminate 100%) deaths. Over time, vaccinations wear off and will need a booster. Covid also comes with risks which are beyond just the risk of death with long covid being a real thing and long term possibly lifetime damage likely being a thing. Pretending if you don't die then it is just a big nothingburger is disingenuous.
They do recommend adults get a polio booster shot in certain circumstances. I.e. you work in a lab with polio virus samples, you work with polio patients, or you're going some place where polio is widespread.I thought vaccines prevent infections. So now the metric for vaccines is preventing hospitalizations or death? With a virus with a less than 1 percent death rate? I think it is great if it can save a person's life. I think the people at risk can consider if it is right for them. I do not think calling a therapeutic a vaccine is being completely honest though.
Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections. Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) hospitalizations. Vaccinations reduce (but nearly eliminate 100%) deaths. Over time, vaccinations wear off and will need a booster. Covid also comes with risks which are beyond just the risk of death with long covid being a real thing and long term possibly lifetime damage likely being a thing. Pretending if you don't die then it is just a big nothingburger is disingenuous.
I am still waiting for that polio booster.
Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections. Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) hospitalizations. Vaccinations reduce (but nearly eliminate 100%) deaths. Over time, vaccinations wear off and will need a booster. Covid also comes with risks which are beyond just the risk of death with long covid being a real thing and long term possibly lifetime damage likely being a thing. Pretending if you don't die then it is just a big nothingburger is disingenuous.
I thought vaccines prevent infections. So now the metric for vaccines is preventing hospitalizations or death? With a virus with a less than 1 percent death rate? I think it is great if it can save a person's life. I think the people at risk can consider if it is right for them. I do not think calling a therapeutic a vaccine is being completely honest though.
Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections. Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) hospitalizations. Vaccinations reduce (but nearly eliminate 100%) deaths. Over time, vaccinations wear off and will need a booster. Covid also comes with risks which are beyond just the risk of death with long covid being a real thing and long term possibly lifetime damage likely being a thing. Pretending if you don't die then it is just a big nothingburger is disingenuous.
How does "Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections" jibe with St Fauci's declaration that the nasal viral load of people vaccinated is the same as people unvaccinated? Or should the statement be "Vaccinations can reduce the severity of the effects of infections"?
This is rather inconvenient for the "horse dewormer, lol" crowd: https://twitter.com/brenontheroad/status/1429624844379824129
Japan's health authorities recommending Ivermectin as routine treatment for all cases of covid.
Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections. Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) hospitalizations. Vaccinations reduce (but nearly eliminate 100%) deaths. Over time, vaccinations wear off and will need a booster. Covid also comes with risks which are beyond just the risk of death with long covid being a real thing and long term possibly lifetime damage likely being a thing. Pretending if you don't die then it is just a big nothingburger is disingenuous.
Faithfully trotting out the "it's not 100%" bollocks, you are beneath contempt. They don't provide immunity, ergo they are not "vaccines".
When you get the measles jab, you can no longer contract measles. That's a real vaccine.
I thought vaccines prevent infections. So now the metric for vaccines is preventing hospitalizations or death? With a virus with a less than 1 percent death rate? I think it is great if it can save a person's life. I think the people at risk can consider if it is right for them. I do not think calling a therapeutic a vaccine is being completely honest though.
Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections. Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) hospitalizations. Vaccinations reduce (but nearly eliminate 100%) deaths. Over time, vaccinations wear off and will need a booster. Covid also comes with risks which are beyond just the risk of death with long covid being a real thing and long term possibly lifetime damage likely being a thing. Pretending if you don't die then it is just a big nothingburger is disingenuous.
How does "Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections" jibe with St Fauci's declaration that the nasal viral load of people vaccinated is the same as people unvaccinated? Or should the statement be "Vaccinations can reduce the severity of the effects of infections"?
Because (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/vaccine-benefits.html):
1) Fully vaccinated people with breakthrough infections from this variant appear to be infectious for a shorter period.
2) Vaccines continue to reduce a person’s risk of contracting the virus that cause COVID-19, including this variant.
So the odds you get the virus through a breakthrough case (mild or not) are lower with the vaccine which lowers the odds you will spread it, and the length of time you're contagious if you do end up as a breakthrough case appears to be shorter.
False (https://www.techarp.com/science/japan-ivermectin-covid-19/).
That's also false (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html#:~:text=Two%20doses%20of%20MMR%20vaccine%20are%20about%2097%25%20effective%20at,through%2012%20years%20of%20age.). Good lord you hold the record for sheer amount of complete bullshit you spew on a daily basis. "Two doses of MMR vaccine are about 97% effective at preventing measles; one dose is about 93% effective." Note that's pretty close to the effectiveness of the Covid vaccine with the 6 months after the second shot. However, the Covid vaccine is wearing off much faster than the Measles shot, so far. You also get boosters for the MMR (and I just got one last month by coincidence) but they're much MUCH further apart (many years) than the Covid vaccine.
False (https://www.techarp.com/science/japan-ivermectin-covid-19/).
Aw, you got your "fact checking" liars, paid for by Big Pharma again.That's also false (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html#:~:text=Two%20doses%20of%20MMR%20vaccine%20are%20about%2097%25%20effective%20at,through%2012%20years%20of%20age.). Good lord you hold the record for sheer amount of complete bullshit you spew on a daily basis. "Two doses of MMR vaccine are about 97% effective at preventing measles; one dose is about 93% effective." Note that's pretty close to the effectiveness of the Covid vaccine with the 6 months after the second shot. However, the Covid vaccine is wearing off much faster than the Measles shot, so far. You also get boosters for the MMR (and I just got one last month by coincidence) but they're much MUCH further apart (many years) than the Covid vaccine.
Bullshit, the efficacy of the covid jabs is currently rated at around 66% and falling - and that for the new fake measure of "efficacy".
The measles vaccine actually stops you getting measles.
Sure, you can be exposed and not get infected. This is true whether you are vaccinated or not, but the data on how much influence the various vaccines have on this outcome is hard to nail down.False (https://www.techarp.com/science/japan-ivermectin-covid-19/).
Aw, you got your "fact checking" liars, paid for by Big Pharma again.That's also false (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html#:~:text=Two%20doses%20of%20MMR%20vaccine%20are%20about%2097%25%20effective%20at,through%2012%20years%20of%20age.). Good lord you hold the record for sheer amount of complete bullshit you spew on a daily basis. "Two doses of MMR vaccine are about 97% effective at preventing measles; one dose is about 93% effective." Note that's pretty close to the effectiveness of the Covid vaccine with the 6 months after the second shot. However, the Covid vaccine is wearing off much faster than the Measles shot, so far. You also get boosters for the MMR (and I just got one last month by coincidence) but they're much MUCH further apart (many years) than the Covid vaccine.
Bullshit, the efficacy of the covid jabs is currently rated at around 66% and falling - and that for the new fake measure of "efficacy".
The measles vaccine actually stops you getting measles.
I know that in early 2021 we were told that the vaccine did not prevent you from getting covid, but that it greatly reduced the severity of symptoms. That would seem to be consistent with St Fauci saying that vaccinated and unvaccinated people carry the same nasal viral load.
So it seems that the covid vaccine, while having a positive effect, does not work like all(?) other vaccines. For example, if you are vaccinated against measles and are exposed to it, you either don't get infected (vaccine worked) or you do get infected (vaccine failed). But if you are vaccinated against covid and exposed to it, you do get infected but your symptoms are mitigated (vaccine worked) or you do get infected but your symptoms are not mitigated (vaccine failed). Or is there an event tree branch for vaccinated against covid and do not get infected (contrary to St Fauci)?
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
Sure, you can be exposed and not get infected. This is true whether you are vaccinated or not, but the data on how much influence the various vaccines have on this outcome is hard to nail down.False (https://www.techarp.com/science/japan-ivermectin-covid-19/).
Aw, you got your "fact checking" liars, paid for by Big Pharma again.That's also false (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html#:~:text=Two%20doses%20of%20MMR%20vaccine%20are%20about%2097%25%20effective%20at,through%2012%20years%20of%20age.). Good lord you hold the record for sheer amount of complete bullshit you spew on a daily basis. "Two doses of MMR vaccine are about 97% effective at preventing measles; one dose is about 93% effective." Note that's pretty close to the effectiveness of the Covid vaccine with the 6 months after the second shot. However, the Covid vaccine is wearing off much faster than the Measles shot, so far. You also get boosters for the MMR (and I just got one last month by coincidence) but they're much MUCH further apart (many years) than the Covid vaccine.
Bullshit, the efficacy of the covid jabs is currently rated at around 66% and falling - and that for the new fake measure of "efficacy".
The measles vaccine actually stops you getting measles.
I know that in early 2021 we were told that the vaccine did not prevent you from getting covid, but that it greatly reduced the severity of symptoms. That would seem to be consistent with St Fauci saying that vaccinated and unvaccinated people carry the same nasal viral load.
So it seems that the covid vaccine, while having a positive effect, does not work like all(?) other vaccines. For example, if you are vaccinated against measles and are exposed to it, you either don't get infected (vaccine worked) or you do get infected (vaccine failed). But if you are vaccinated against covid and exposed to it, you do get infected but your symptoms are mitigated (vaccine worked) or you do get infected but your symptoms are not mitigated (vaccine failed). Or is there an event tree branch for vaccinated against covid and do not get infected (contrary to St Fauci)?
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
Even with consistent PPE use, I have been in prolonged close contact with > 100 symptomatic C19 patients, and as of two days ago I'm still testing negative. Is it because I'm vaccinated? Maybe. Even if the vaccine is just a +1 on my saving throw, I'll take that bonus considering how often I'm rolling that save. I'm surprised how many gamers here aren't grabbing up that easy +1 bonus.
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
Yes. Here's the thing - defining 'infected' is hard. You have an immune system. You're exposed to 'infections' all the time. Most of the time, your immune system kills the infection before it overwhelms your systems. Sometimes it happens before it enters your body (like when mucus in your nasal passage contains and kills a virus) and sometimes it happens after (a white blood cell recognizes it as an infection and murders it before it replicates). Since there are a lot of ways for an infection to be killed, there are a lot of ways that antibodies can help you.
Ideally, if you've been vaccinated, your body does a better job of recognizing the infection BEFORE it hijacks a cell and starts replicating. The more times you're exposed, the more likely one slips through. If one slips through but your body is pretty good at recognizing them, they'll mostly stop them from hijacking other cells. It's a cascade effect.
Best option - don't get sick. Get the vaccine and wear a mask at indoor gatherings with strangers. If you do get sick, isolate to stop the spread. Hope that if you get sick, it's a relatively minor case because your immune system is up to the task of defending you (maybe with the help of the antibodies generated by the vaccine).
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
Yes. Here's the thing - defining 'infected' is hard.
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
Yes. Here's the thing - defining 'infected' is hard. You have an immune system. You're exposed to 'infections' all the time. Most of the time, your immune system kills the infection before it overwhelms your systems. Sometimes it happens before it enters your body (like when mucus in your nasal passage contains and kills a virus) and sometimes it happens after (a white blood cell recognizes it as an infection and murders it before it replicates). Since there are a lot of ways for an infection to be killed, there are a lot of ways that antibodies can help you.
Ideally, if you've been vaccinated, your body does a better job of recognizing the infection BEFORE it hijacks a cell and starts replicating. The more times you're exposed, the more likely one slips through. If one slips through but your body is pretty good at recognizing them, they'll mostly stop them from hijacking other cells. It's a cascade effect.
Best option - don't get sick. Get the vaccine and wear a mask at indoor gatherings with strangers. If you do get sick, isolate to stop the spread. Hope that if you get sick, it's a relatively minor case because your immune system is up to the task of defending you (maybe with the help of the antibodies generated by the vaccine).
You mean wear a respirator/gas mask indoors around people, otherwise you are larping.
I thought vaccines prevent infections. So now the metric for vaccines is preventing hospitalizations or death? With a virus with a less than 1 percent death rate? I think it is great if it can save a person's life. I think the people at risk can consider if it is right for them. I do not think calling a therapeutic a vaccine is being completely honest though.
Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections. Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) hospitalizations. Vaccinations reduce (but nearly eliminate 100%) deaths. Over time, vaccinations wear off and will need a booster. Covid also comes with risks which are beyond just the risk of death with long covid being a real thing and long term possibly lifetime damage likely being a thing. Pretending if you don't die then it is just a big nothingburger is disingenuous.
How does "Vaccinations reduce (but do not eliminate 100%) infections" jibe with St Fauci's declaration that the nasal viral load of people vaccinated is the same as people unvaccinated? Or should the statement be "Vaccinations can reduce the severity of the effects of infections"?
Because (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/vaccine-benefits.html):
1) Fully vaccinated people with breakthrough infections from this variant appear to be infectious for a shorter period.
2) Vaccines continue to reduce a person’s risk of contracting the virus that cause COVID-19, including this variant.
So the odds you get the virus through a breakthrough case (mild or not) are lower with the vaccine which lowers the odds you will spread it, and the length of time you're contagious if you do end up as a breakthrough case appears to be shorter.
Interesting. I had not heard any of that.
So your chances of getting covid are less, but if you get it, you are carrying the same nasal viral load as a non-vaccinated person (per St Fauci), but the duration you are carrying the same nasal viral load (as a non-vaccinated person) is shorter?
False (https://www.techarp.com/science/japan-ivermectin-covid-19/).
Aw, you got your "fact checking" liars, paid for by Big Pharma again.That's also false (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html#:~:text=Two%20doses%20of%20MMR%20vaccine%20are%20about%2097%25%20effective%20at,through%2012%20years%20of%20age.). Good lord you hold the record for sheer amount of complete bullshit you spew on a daily basis. "Two doses of MMR vaccine are about 97% effective at preventing measles; one dose is about 93% effective." Note that's pretty close to the effectiveness of the Covid vaccine with the 6 months after the second shot. However, the Covid vaccine is wearing off much faster than the Measles shot, so far. You also get boosters for the MMR (and I just got one last month by coincidence) but they're much MUCH further apart (many years) than the Covid vaccine.
Bullshit, the efficacy of the covid jabs is currently rated at around 66% and falling - and that for the new fake measure of "efficacy".
The measles vaccine actually stops you getting measles.
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
Yes. Here's the thing - defining 'infected' is hard. You have an immune system. You're exposed to 'infections' all the time. Most of the time, your immune system kills the infection before it overwhelms your systems. Sometimes it happens before it enters your body (like when mucus in your nasal passage contains and kills a virus) and sometimes it happens after (a white blood cell recognizes it as an infection and murders it before it replicates). Since there are a lot of ways for an infection to be killed, there are a lot of ways that antibodies can help you.
Ideally, if you've been vaccinated, your body does a better job of recognizing the infection BEFORE it hijacks a cell and starts replicating. The more times you're exposed, the more likely one slips through. If one slips through but your body is pretty good at recognizing them, they'll mostly stop them from hijacking other cells. It's a cascade effect.
Best option - don't get sick. Get the vaccine and wear a mask at indoor gatherings with strangers. If you do get sick, isolate to stop the spread. Hope that if you get sick, it's a relatively minor case because your immune system is up to the task of defending you (maybe with the help of the antibodies generated by the vaccine).
You mean wear a respirator/gas mask indoors around people, otherwise you are larping.
Ah yes, Liam Neeson eating a stapler.
(https://i.ibb.co/89KV29h/shot-Remember-Batman06-jpg.jpg])
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
Yes. Here's the thing - defining 'infected' is hard. You have an immune system. You're exposed to 'infections' all the time. Most of the time, your immune system kills the infection before it overwhelms your systems. Sometimes it happens before it enters your body (like when mucus in your nasal passage contains and kills a virus) and sometimes it happens after (a white blood cell recognizes it as an infection and murders it before it replicates). Since there are a lot of ways for an infection to be killed, there are a lot of ways that antibodies can help you.
Ideally, if you've been vaccinated, your body does a better job of recognizing the infection BEFORE it hijacks a cell and starts replicating. The more times you're exposed, the more likely one slips through. If one slips through but your body is pretty good at recognizing them, they'll mostly stop them from hijacking other cells. It's a cascade effect.
Best option - don't get sick. Get the vaccine and wear a mask at indoor gatherings with strangers. If you do get sick, isolate to stop the spread. Hope that if you get sick, it's a relatively minor case because your immune system is up to the task of defending you (maybe with the help of the antibodies generated by the vaccine).
You mean wear a respirator/gas mask indoors around people, otherwise you are larping.
I agree with oggsmash on this one, with some caveats.
If you are going to be cheek-to-jowl with someone (like my wife working with patients), then even a non-respirator mask will buy you something. Otherwise, while a mask will catch the large aerosols from your sneeze or cough (albeit then leaving your with a faceful of snot and/or spit), a handkerchief or a tissue would do as well.
However, if your mask does not fit air-tight (like a properly fitted, properly worn N-95) it doesn't take much bypass area for the majority of flow to bypass the filter material. And the small aerosols (virus sized) will follow the airflow. So if you are just sitting or talking (without spraying) a mask doesn't do much to protect you or protect others from you. That's why pre-covid masks were not recommended for the general public to wear to prevent the flu.
And to put a point on "air-tight", my wife would come home with bruised cheeks from her N-95 mask.
Reducing the number of people in a given volume and having high rate volume turn-over are going to be more effective at reducing the virus concentration than wearing a mask.
And I'm only partly joking. I have been going to my local gaming pub, and the mask requirement is back. So I take off my mask in-between bites or drinks, knowing full well that this is performative and if I really had Covid I should #1. Have stayed the fuck home, and #2. a paper mask being taken off and put on again while eating is completly stupid.The inside of your mask must look like the beard of one of the Duck Dynasty guys on cheetoh night.
And I'm only partly joking. I have been going to my local gaming pub, and the mask requirement is back. So I take off my mask in-between bites or drinks, knowing full well that this is performative and if I really had Covid I should #1. Have stayed the fuck home, and #2. a paper mask being taken off and put on again while eating is completly stupid.The inside of your mask must look like the beard of one of the Duck Dynasty guys on cheetoh night.
Once again, you're the dumbest guy around here. The effectiveness of the Covid vaccines IN THE SIX MONTHS AFTER THE FIRST DOSE is very similar to the effectiveness of the Measles vaccine. However, IT WEARS OFF FASTER thus the 66% number which is falling BECAUSE MORE PEOPLE ARE PASSING THE 6 MONTH POINT SINCE THEIR LAST DOSE WITHOUT A BOOSTER.
Shit my 10 year old comprehends this better than you.
And the Measles shot has the exact percentages I posted above. It is not in fact 100%. You believing it to be that effective does not change the actual effectiveness which has been proven out for decades and decades now.
Dude. Are you saying my eatin' mask won't protect me from the beer bug?!?!
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-israel-mask-idUSKBN22U1ZO
And I'm only partly joking. I have been going to my local gaming pub, and the mask requirement is back. So I take off my mask in-between bites or drinks, knowing full well that this is performative and if I really had Covid I should #1. Have stayed the fuck home, and #2. a paper mask being taken off and put on again while eating is completly stupid.
I humor them because they've got to obey the State mandates or risk getting shut down.
Well, I got a notice on my door that someone in the apartment complex got the Coronavirus. Honestly, I expected someone to have already had it by now. But what I found most interesting, and this notice is clearly dated 8/27/2021:Sounds like a notice made very early in 2020 and not updated since.
There is no vaccine for novel coronavirus. People who traveled to or from China or were in close contact with someone who was infected and developed a fever and respriatory symptoms within 14 days of their travel or exposure should seek immediate medical care.
Typed verbatim from the notice. bold emphasis is mine.
Not quite sure what to make of that.
Looks like the CDC is deciding to shift towards the pandemic of "gun violence". What exactly does a government body in charge of controlling diseases have to do with guns?
Looks like the CDC is deciding to shift towards the pandemic of "gun violence". What exactly does a government body in charge of controlling diseases have to do with guns?
Sorry, those were the old days, the CDC can decide whether or not someone can be evicted from a rental property. So they can do pretty much whatever they want now.
Official remits are so pre-covid.
Looks like the CDC is deciding to shift towards the pandemic of "gun violence". What exactly does a government body in charge of controlling diseases have to do with guns?The last year saw a lot of public health departments declaring racism a public health pandemic.
The gun stuff does goes back a couple decades at least, because the CDC tracks causes of death. While tackling social ills in general should be far beyond the remit of an agency focused on diseases, government bureaucracies never seem to to let common sense stand in the way of reinterpreting their mandate in ways that vastly expand their authority. (Cf. the eviction moratorium.)
How long did the moratorium ending up lasting? This is how government increases their power. They wait for an emergency, push past the limits in the name of doing something, and when there's finally some pushback, it's too late. They already set a precedent. The next time people will expect it, so the politicians will push even further.The gun stuff does goes back a couple decades at least, because the CDC tracks causes of death. While tackling social ills in general should be far beyond the remit of an agency focused on diseases, government bureaucracies never seem to to let common sense stand in the way of reinterpreting their mandate in ways that vastly expand their authority. (Cf. the eviction moratorium.)
It was shut down to a degree. I suspect if they are too worried about causes of death, they may want to look into 250k people dying a year from medical mistakes.
Well, they are focusing on staff infections with C19 in schools and several other places...oh, perhaps you meant staph infections.How long did the moratorium ending up lasting? This is how government increases their power. They wait for an emergency, push past the limits in the name of doing something, and when there's finally some pushback, it's too late. They already set a precedent. The next time people will expect it, so the politicians will push even further.The gun stuff does goes back a couple decades at least, because the CDC tracks causes of death. While tackling social ills in general should be far beyond the remit of an agency focused on diseases, government bureaucracies never seem to to let common sense stand in the way of reinterpreting their mandate in ways that vastly expand their authority. (Cf. the eviction moratorium.)
It was shut down to a degree. I suspect if they are too worried about causes of death, they may want to look into 250k people dying a year from medical mistakes.
The CDC does report on medical mistakes, as well. But what government agencies focus on generally is what they think the public wants. There was a study that looked at what the American public thought were the biggest environmental priorities, and another poll of what EPA scientists thought were the biggest priorities. The actual spending of the EPA almost perfectly mapped to the poll of the general public, not their own scientists. They weren't following the science, they were following the prevailing winds. (This was quite a while ago, reported in the WSJ.) So it's not at all surprising that public health has decided to focus on hot-button issues like guns, and more recently systemic racism, at the expense of less sexy issues, like staff infections or sponges left in body cavities after surgery.
Well, they are focusing on staff infections with C19 in schools and several other places...oh, perhaps you meant staph infections.Always refreshing to see you acting like a dooshbag.
When you get the measles jab, you can no longer contract measles. That's a real vaccine.The measles vaccine is 93% effective. So yes you can contract measles after getting the jab.
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
The measles vaccine is 93% effective. So yes you can contract measles after getting the jab.
The reason it is so rare to see a measles case is that the virus is now pretty rare here in the US.
On the other hand the mumps vaccine is only 78% effective and you do see localized outbreaks of mumps.
These vaccines are different in that they are weakened strains of the live virus.
The problem with all vaccines in general is they often don't work well in people who have severely compromised immune systems.
And some viruses like corona and influenza are able to mutate quite rapidly and evade attempts at creating vaccines.
The gun stuff does goes back a couple decades at least, because the CDC tracks causes of death. While tackling social ills in general should be far beyond the remit of an agency focused on diseases, government bureaucracies never seem to to let common sense stand in the way of reinterpreting their mandate in ways that vastly expand their authority. (Cf. the eviction moratorium.)
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
The flu jab is the other fake vaccine that doesn't actually give immunity.
That's a weird list. There are a couple places where it's suggesting more precision, and a few others where they're avoiding possibly offensive terms, but most of it seems to involve adding "people" to simple one-word terms for a group of people. You can't talk about the homeless, just people experiencing homelessness. I don't see the point.The gun stuff does goes back a couple decades at least, because the CDC tracks causes of death. While tackling social ills in general should be far beyond the remit of an agency focused on diseases, government bureaucracies never seem to to let common sense stand in the way of reinterpreting their mandate in ways that vastly expand their authority. (Cf. the eviction moratorium.)
Speaking of the CDC...
https://www.cdc.gov/healthcommunication/Preferred_Terms.html
I spent three months supervising the nursing department of a Florida state prison. We were told not to refer to our patients as "inmates" or "prisoners" but instead as "persons experiencing incarceration." That never caught on, but the few times someone said it, it had both the COs and the inmates laughing their asses off.That's a weird list. There are a couple places where it's suggesting more precision, and a few others where they're avoiding possibly offensive terms, but most of it seems to involve adding "people" to simple one-word terms for a group of people. You can't talk about the homeless, just people experiencing homelessness. I don't see the point.The gun stuff does goes back a couple decades at least, because the CDC tracks causes of death. While tackling social ills in general should be far beyond the remit of an agency focused on diseases, government bureaucracies never seem to to let common sense stand in the way of reinterpreting their mandate in ways that vastly expand their authority. (Cf. the eviction moratorium.)
Speaking of the CDC...
https://www.cdc.gov/healthcommunication/Preferred_Terms.html
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
The flu jab is the other fake vaccine that doesn't actually give immunity.The measles vaccine is 93% effective. So yes you can contract measles after getting the jab.
The reason it is so rare to see a measles case is that the virus is now pretty rare here in the US.
On the other hand the mumps vaccine is only 78% effective and you do see localized outbreaks of mumps.
These vaccines are different in that they are weakened strains of the live virus.
The problem with all vaccines in general is they often don't work well in people who have severely compromised immune systems.
No they're not perfect, but they provide immunity. They stop you contracting the virus.
There are always outliers, the immunocompromised, but also random individual instances of vaccines just not taking.And some viruses like corona and influenza are able to mutate quite rapidly and evade attempts at creating vaccines.
Ironic, you mention the two viruses which don't have real vaccines. Neither the flu jab, nor the 'rona jabs give immunity. Instead there's this unmeasurable, pretend measure of "reducing your symptoms".
And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
The flu jab is the other fake vaccine that doesn't actually give immunity.The measles vaccine is 93% effective. So yes you can contract measles after getting the jab.
The reason it is so rare to see a measles case is that the virus is now pretty rare here in the US.
On the other hand the mumps vaccine is only 78% effective and you do see localized outbreaks of mumps.
These vaccines are different in that they are weakened strains of the live virus.
The problem with all vaccines in general is they often don't work well in people who have severely compromised immune systems.
No they're not perfect, but they provide immunity. They stop you contracting the virus.
There are always outliers, the immunocompromised, but also random individual instances of vaccines just not taking.And some viruses like corona and influenza are able to mutate quite rapidly and evade attempts at creating vaccines.
Ironic, you mention the two viruses which don't have real vaccines. Neither the flu jab, nor the 'rona jabs give immunity. Instead there's this unmeasurable, pretend measure of "reducing your symptoms".
Except that the flu jab does work. I took ten minutes to explain how it works to my eight year olds today and they got it so mibbe you can.
You're right in that it isn't a universal cure all, the flu is a nasty bugger and on some years a variant will slip through that causes chaos and death.
Generally it works by vastly reducing deaths and hospital admissions. There are still many if both, which is terrible, but less people dying is generally seen as a good thing by sane people and less people in hospital, particularly ICU, is also generally seen as good.
The ICU thing is particularly good because hospitals like to have ICU beds free just in case somebody needs a bed. They like to run on about 80 to 90% capacity to give space for emergencies.
Now you might think that this doesn't affect you. You're a fit man in early middle age who doesn't need a flu shot. In general I agree with this, I don't bother myself. The problem is that flu season also coincides with festive stuff which means a massive rise in accidents. Those ICU beds are getting shorter in supply and everybodies risk of random accidents is going up. You're more at risk of accident by other people or just random shite like an aneurysm which doesn't give a shite about how far you ran this morning. It's all cool though because there's another ICU an hour down the road and that delay won't affect a bleed on the brain.
Essentially the flu vaccine doesn't have the fantastic shift in mortality that other vaccines do but it saves thousands of lives per year. That seems a good thing to me.
So we don't hear much about Sweden these days. It used to be pretty common to talk about how desirable the Scandinavian model was.
You're really stuck on this Tik Tok thing. How many man-hours/week are ICU nurses putting into it, and where are they located? Please show your source.And are there other vaccines that do not prevent you from getting infected, but rather mitigate your symptoms?
The flu jab is the other fake vaccine that doesn't actually give immunity.The measles vaccine is 93% effective. So yes you can contract measles after getting the jab.
The reason it is so rare to see a measles case is that the virus is now pretty rare here in the US.
On the other hand the mumps vaccine is only 78% effective and you do see localized outbreaks of mumps.
These vaccines are different in that they are weakened strains of the live virus.
The problem with all vaccines in general is they often don't work well in people who have severely compromised immune systems.
No they're not perfect, but they provide immunity. They stop you contracting the virus.
There are always outliers, the immunocompromised, but also random individual instances of vaccines just not taking.And some viruses like corona and influenza are able to mutate quite rapidly and evade attempts at creating vaccines.
Ironic, you mention the two viruses which don't have real vaccines. Neither the flu jab, nor the 'rona jabs give immunity. Instead there's this unmeasurable, pretend measure of "reducing your symptoms".
Except that the flu jab does work. I took ten minutes to explain how it works to my eight year olds today and they got it so mibbe you can.
You're right in that it isn't a universal cure all, the flu is a nasty bugger and on some years a variant will slip through that causes chaos and death.
Generally it works by vastly reducing deaths and hospital admissions. There are still many if both, which is terrible, but less people dying is generally seen as a good thing by sane people and less people in hospital, particularly ICU, is also generally seen as good.
The ICU thing is particularly good because hospitals like to have ICU beds free just in case somebody needs a bed. They like to run on about 80 to 90% capacity to give space for emergencies.
Now you might think that this doesn't affect you. You're a fit man in early middle age who doesn't need a flu shot. In general I agree with this, I don't bother myself. The problem is that flu season also coincides with festive stuff which means a massive rise in accidents. Those ICU beds are getting shorter in supply and everybodies risk of random accidents is going up. You're more at risk of accident by other people or just random shite like an aneurysm which doesn't give a shite about how far you ran this morning. It's all cool though because there's another ICU an hour down the road and that delay won't affect a bleed on the brain.
Essentially the flu vaccine doesn't have the fantastic shift in mortality that other vaccines do but it saves thousands of lives per year. That seems a good thing to me.
ICU beds is getting old. If the staff have the time to dance on Tik Tok, they have the time to manage their capacity during a pandemic. Sucks that the hospital wouldn't be ablte to squeeze another few percentages of profit out of maximizing their capacity, but hey, we're all in this together, right?
I agree that flu vaccinations are a good thing. What I don't agree with (not your argument, but the argument made) is that the deaths justify panic, authoritarian oppression and lying from the government and medical establishment.
Well, I got a notice on my door that someone in the apartment complex got the Coronavirus. Honestly, I expected someone to have already had it by now. But what I found most interesting, and this notice is clearly dated 8/27/2021:
There is no vaccine for novel coronavirus. People who traveled to or from China or were in close contact with someone who was infected and developed a fever and respriatory symptoms within 14 days of their travel or exposure should seek immediate medical care.
Typed verbatim from the notice. bold emphasis is mine.
Not quite sure what to make of that.
Once again, you're the dumbest guy around here. The effectiveness of the Covid vaccines IN THE SIX MONTHS AFTER THE FIRST DOSE is very similar to the effectiveness of the Measles vaccine. However, IT WEARS OFF FASTER thus the 66% number which is falling BECAUSE MORE PEOPLE ARE PASSING THE 6 MONTH POINT SINCE THEIR LAST DOSE WITHOUT A BOOSTER.
Shit my 10 year old comprehends this better than you.
And the Measles shot has the exact percentages I posted above. It is not in fact 100%. You believing it to be that effective does not change the actual effectiveness which has been proven out for decades and decades now.
Says the moron who doesn't understand the difference between a vaccine, which prevents infection, and not-a-vaccine, which does precisely fuck all. The measles vaccine STOPS YOU GETTING INFECTED (not quite 100% of the time). The covid jabs DO NOT PREVENT INFECTION (ever - ok maybe around 1% of the time).
I get it, though. You're 50-something, probably overweight and inactive, likely suffering from several co-morbidities already. So you're scared.
Well, I got a notice on my door that someone in the apartment complex got the Coronavirus. Honestly, I expected someone to have already had it by now. But what I found most interesting, and this notice is clearly dated 8/27/2021:
There is no vaccine for novel coronavirus. People who traveled to or from China or were in close contact with someone who was infected and developed a fever and respriatory symptoms within 14 days of their travel or exposure should seek immediate medical care.
Typed verbatim from the notice. bold emphasis is mine.
Not quite sure what to make of that.
I am guessing they are simply re-using the same notice they got somewhere else which was written in mid 2019.
Where were you when you realized the covid scandal was just an excuse for a one-world, totalitarian, socialist government?
Yeah, that's a lot of conspiracy theory nonsense.Where were you when you realized the covid scandal was just an excuse for a one-world, totalitarian, socialist government?
Oh good lord, what a heaping mound of conspiracy theory nonsense.
Where were you when you realized the covid scandal was just an excuse for a one-world, totalitarian, socialist government?
Oh good lord, what a heaping mound of conspiracy theory nonsense.
Yeah, that's a lot of conspiracy theory nonsense.Where were you when you realized the covid scandal was just an excuse for a one-world, totalitarian, socialist government?
Oh good lord, what a heaping mound of conspiracy theory nonsense.
But it's impossible to dispute that covid-19 has been used an excuse to expand government powers and curtail civil liberties to an extent that was unimaginable just two years ago. That doesn't require any conspiracy theories, just simple observation and the recognition that people in power tend to act in ways that increase their own power.
The creation of a world government was the explicit goal of people like Churchill, Kalergi and H.G. Wells, De Gaulle, Truman, the institution of Freemasonry, Messianism, New Age, Mormonism, Baha'i and even the official policy of the US after WW2, the Fabian Society, the International Socialist, Fidel Castro, Gandhi, Einstein, Ben Gurion, NATO and many others.
Yeah, that's a lot of conspiracy theory nonsense.
But it's impossible to dispute that covid-19 has been used an excuse to expand government powers and curtail civil liberties to an extent that was unimaginable just two years ago. That doesn't require any conspiracy theories, just simple observation and the recognition that people in power tend to act in ways that increase their own power.
Where were you when you realized the covid scandal was just an excuse for a one-world, totalitarian, socialist government?
Oh good lord, what a heaping mound of conspiracy theory nonsense.Yeah, that's a lot of conspiracy theory nonsense.Where were you when you realized the covid scandal was just an excuse for a one-world, totalitarian, socialist government?
Oh good lord, what a heaping mound of conspiracy theory nonsense.
But it's impossible to dispute that covid-19 has been used an excuse to expand government powers and curtail civil liberties to an extent that was unimaginable just two years ago. That doesn't require any conspiracy theories, just simple observation and the recognition that people in power tend to act in ways that increase their own power.The creation of a world government was the explicit goal of people like Churchill, Kalergi and H.G. Wells, De Gaulle, Truman, the institution of Freemasonry, Messianism, New Age, Mormonism, Baha'i and even the official policy of the US after WW2, the Fabian Society, the International Socialist, Fidel Castro, Gandhi, Einstein, Ben Gurion, NATO and many others.
Yeah, that's a lot of conspiracy theory nonsense.
But it's impossible to dispute that covid-19 has been used an excuse to expand government powers and curtail civil liberties to an extent that was unimaginable just two years ago. That doesn't require any conspiracy theories, just simple observation and the recognition that people in power tend to act in ways that increase their own power.
If you want evidence, I can offer it to you. But I reckon you won't be willing to accept it.
Never let a crisis go to waste. Said the dude right out loud. Not too conspiratorial.
If you want to see any evidence about how bad a one world government would be then just take a look at the shit show known as the EU.
Hey, SonTodoGato, could you tell me what role Israel plays in the behind-the-scenes manipulation of the creation of this planned one-world-government? And does Israel, in the form of people of the Jewish faith, have allies scattered around the nations helping achieve this plan?
The creation of a world government was the explicit goal of people like Churchill, Kalergi and H.G. Wells, De Gaulle, Truman, the institution of Freemasonry, Messianism, New Age, Mormonism, Baha'i and even the official policy of the US after WW2, the Fabian Society, the International Socialist, Fidel Castro, Gandhi, Einstein, Ben Gurion, NATO and many others.If you make 500 claims, 499 of which are false, and someone calls them nonsense, you can't just make one true statement and claim it proves everything you've said is right. That's a conspiracy theorist's argument.
If you want evidence, I can offer it to you. But I reckon you won't be willing to accept it.
I know what you're trying to do here. You argue in bad faith, you're prejudiced, close-minded and are trying to bait me.Pot, kettle.
If you want to see any evidence about how bad a one world government would be then just take a look at the shit show known as the EU.Just wait until Janet Yellin imposes a worldwide minimum income tax.
If you make 500 claims, 499 of which are false, and someone calls them nonsense, you can't just make one true statement and claim it proves everything you've said is right. That's a conspiracy theorist's argument.
The idea that a bunch of people have argued in favor of a one world government isn't controversial. That you think it is, and that you assume nobody will believe you, is more conspiracy theorist thinking.
I know what you're trying to do here. You argue in bad faith, you're prejudiced, close-minded and are trying to bait me.Pot, kettle.
If you want to see any evidence about how bad a one world government would be then just take a look at the shit show known as the EU.Just wait until Janet Yellin imposes a worldwide minimum income tax.
If you want to see any evidence about how bad a one world government would be then just take a look at the shit show known as the EU.Just wait until Janet Yellin imposes a worldwide minimum income tax.
It's a raw exercise in power, and another step in the continual erosion of national independence in favor of global "standards" dictated by and for the benefit of the most powerful actors on the world stage. The US wants more tax receipts, but they don't want to make the US more attractive to corporations by lowering taxes, so they can't allow other countries to do it either.If you want to see any evidence about how bad a one world government would be then just take a look at the shit show known as the EU.Just wait until Janet Yellin imposes a worldwide minimum income tax.
I thought when I heard her bring that up as a summit topic...what a weird fucking thing for any country to agree to. I guess the USA pays so many they can sort of dictate a bit. I suspect the digital nomads are killing the Tax man, along with the many, many, many corporations that signal their leftist virtues yet dodge every way they can to pay federal or state taxes to help get those leftist ideas paid for.
I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
Evidence of what? You haven't made your position clear. You're mostly posting quotes from other people, and reacting to any criticism by claiming victimhood and pretending to be a misunderstood genius. You clearly haven't read a word I've written, because in my first reply to you, and in more than a couple posts since, I've criticized globalism. So where exactly do you disagree with me? I have no idea, because you haven't responded to anything I've said in a way that clarifies your position vis-a-vis mine. Instead, what you've been doing is creating strawmen, even if they completely go against my actual statements.I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
Not at all, and you know it. I offered evidence in the way I could (and I have more and more); What else do you expect me to do? All you and the other guy did was mock me for "conspiracy theorist" and now you say I'm not open for a reasonable discussion?
You live in a world that is increasingly globalist and anti-nationalist, and literally heads of state stating this is their official policy. What makes it so far fetched to think the same project is still ongoing? Need I give more examples or will you ignore them?
Greetings!
Lots of Globalist slaves are eager for a one-world government. These people love the Kalergi Plan and Agenda 2030. Fuck these Globalist, Marxist scum. They need to be resisted at every opportunity.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Evidence of what? You haven't made your position clear. You're mostly posting quotes from other people, and reacting to any criticism by claiming victimhood and pretending to be a misunderstood genius. You clearly haven't read a word I've written, because in my first reply to you, and in more than a couple posts since, I've criticized globalism. So where exactly do you disagree with me? I have no idea, because you haven't responded to anything I've said in a way that clarifies your position vis-a-vis mine. Instead, what you've been doing is creating strawmen, even if they completely go against my actual statements.
What I specifically objected to in your first post as the part where you claimed that covid-19 was an excuse for a socialist, world-wide government. While I believe (and I stated in my first reply) that covid-19 has been used an excuse to trample on civil liberties while increasing governmental power, you have the cause and effect and backwards. This is exploiting a crisis, not a crisis fabricated for a specific end. It's also not aimed at world-wide government. Or, as you implied but didn't state, it's also not a planned conspiracy. This is just a bunch of individual actors, from similar schools of thought, acting independently in ways that increase their power. There's nothing secret about it, or coordinated in any real practical way, beyond set of related ideologies, intellectual traditions, and progressive theorizing.
You absolutely did not post evidence that backs you up. Where, among all those highlighted passages, is the smoking gun that proves that not only did covid-19 escape from a lab, but that it was deliberately conceived of by a cabal of world leaders, who deliberately created and released it, with the intent to generate a worldwide crisis that would usher in a global socialist government?Evidence of what? You haven't made your position clear. You're mostly posting quotes from other people, and reacting to any criticism by claiming victimhood and pretending to be a misunderstood genius. You clearly haven't read a word I've written, because in my first reply to you, and in more than a couple posts since, I've criticized globalism. So where exactly do you disagree with me? I have no idea, because you haven't responded to anything I've said in a way that clarifies your position vis-a-vis mine. Instead, what you've been doing is creating strawmen, even if they completely go against my actual statements.
What I specifically objected to in your first post as the part where you claimed that covid-19 was an excuse for a socialist, world-wide government. While I believe (and I stated in my first reply) that covid-19 has been used an excuse to trample on civil liberties while increasing governmental power, you have the cause and effect and backwards. This is exploiting a crisis, not a crisis fabricated for a specific end. It's also not aimed at world-wide government. Or, as you implied but didn't state, it's also not a planned conspiracy. This is just a bunch of individual actors, from similar schools of thought, acting independently in ways that increase their power. There's nothing secret about it, or coordinated in any real practical way, beyond set of related ideologies, intellectual traditions, and progressive theorizing.
You only stated your personal opinion; I did that and posted evidence that backs me up.
I think you're the one who's got it backwards. This is a made-up crisis. The virus is manmade, the statistics are fraudulent and the media fueled the panic. Notice how it's pushing towards international, biometric surveillance in the form of vaccine passports, increasing the authority of the WHO, and shifting the economy towards digital currencies over cash and UBI. It's the "great reset"; a virus showed us how capitalism doesn't work because the government locked you up for your own good, so we need radical reforms because of covid. It's just a coincidence that it happened shortly after we did Event 201, gain of function research on bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, ID2020, "build back better", "great reset" and "you'll own nothing and you'll be happy" by 2030; casually the UN has an Agenda 2030 to make the world "sustainable and inclusive", and it's secretary general is Antonio Guterres, head of the international socialist, which advocated for world government by strengthening the UN!
Here's my position: There is a very old agenda to unite the world under a global regime. It went by many names; the "great work", "brotherhood of man", "new world order", "new age", "great reset", "the universal reformation of man", "the age of saturn", "the messianic era", the "third age" of Joachim de Fiore, etc. The expression "new world order" has been used by people like Marx, H.G. Wells, Rosika Schwimmer and others to mean, specifically, a world government with socialist tendencies.
Here's my position: There is a very old agenda to unite the world under a global regime. It went by many names; the "great work", "brotherhood of man", "new world order", "new age", "great reset", "the universal reformation of man", "the age of saturn", "the messianic era", the "third age" of Joachim de Fiore, etc. The expression "new world order" has been used by people like Marx, H.G. Wells, Rosika Schwimmer and others to mean, specifically, a world government with socialist tendencies.
You absolutely did not post evidence that backs you up. Where, among all those highlighted passages, is the smoking gun that proves that not only did covid-19 escape from a lab, but that it was deliberately conceived of by a cabal of world leaders, who deliberately created and released it, with the intent to generate a worldwide crisis that would usher in a global socialist government?
Because that's what you actually claimed, and what Mistwell and I derided as a conspiracy theory. Of course, when I challenged you, you changed to that "some world leaders have said positive things about a world government". Which is absolutely not the claim you made.
Ironically, the things you quoted support my position a hell of lot more than yours, because I'm dealing with facts and straightforward, logical explanations that are plausible based on what we know of human behavior, and I don't feel any need to wrap them in convoluted and irrational conspiracy theories that actually end up serving the cause you profess to oppose, because critics can just point at you and say look at the kind of nonsense they believe!
Here's my position: There is a very old agenda to unite the world under a global regime. It went by many names; the "great work", "brotherhood of man", "new world order", "new age", "great reset", "the universal reformation of man", "the age of saturn", "the messianic era", the "third age" of Joachim de Fiore, etc. The expression "new world order" has been used by people like Marx, H.G. Wells, Rosika Schwimmer and others to mean, specifically, a world government with socialist tendencies.
This might be more appropriate to another thread - but a world government isn't just a vision of H.G. Wells and Gene Roddenberry. We also see that as the vision in more conservative works like Heinlein's Starship Troopers, Buck Rogers, and others. Obviously, individual authors will picture the world government that fits more with their political leanings - but that there is a world government is very common.
I think the vision of a world government is pretty simple. As organization advances and communication improves, it pictures that humans get past their differences and no longer make war on each other, but instead learn to cooperate.
That fits with the general trend of history. In hunter-gatherer times, the highest level of organization was not much larger than the extended family. Over the course of history, larger and larger societies became possible and proved advantageous. It's a reasonable extrapolation that as communication and travel get even more advanced that we'll eventually get a world government.
I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
Not at all, and you know it. I offered evidence in the way I could (and I have more and more); What else do you expect me to do? All you and the other guy did was mock me for "conspiracy theorist" and now you say I'm not open for a reasonable discussion?
You live in a world that is increasingly globalist and anti-nationalist, and literally heads of state stating this is their official policy. What makes it so far fetched to think the same project is still ongoing? Need I give more examples or will you ignore them?
I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
Not at all, and you know it. I offered evidence in the way I could (and I have more and more); What else do you expect me to do? All you and the other guy did was mock me for "conspiracy theorist" and now you say I'm not open for a reasonable discussion?
You live in a world that is increasingly globalist and anti-nationalist, and literally heads of state stating this is their official policy. What makes it so far fetched to think the same project is still ongoing? Need I give more examples or will you ignore them?
The scorpion does not need to invent a virus to have an excuse to sting you.
It could be a day ending in y.
You're just blatantly lying now.
You absolutely did not post evidence that backs you up. Where, among all those highlighted passages, is the smoking gun that proves that not only did covid-19 escape from a lab, but that it was deliberately conceived of by a cabal of world leaders, who deliberately created and released it, with the intent to generate a worldwide crisis that would usher in a global socialist government?
Because that's what you actually claimed, and what Mistwell and I derided as a conspiracy theory. Of course, when I challenged you, you changed to that "some world leaders have said positive things about a world government". Which is absolutely not the claim you made.
Ironically, the things you quoted support my position a hell of lot more than yours, because I'm dealing with facts and straightforward, logical explanations that are plausible based on what we know of human behavior, and I don't feel any need to wrap them in convoluted and irrational conspiracy theories that actually end up serving the cause you profess to oppose, because critics can just point at you and say look at the kind of nonsense they believe!
You're not dealing with anything other than your own comments. You did not post anything other than derision and personal opinions, and seek validation from others by mocking me. I showed you documents from the US government and the founders of the EU that explicitely say their goal is world government as official policy. It wasn't just opinions, as you insist.
Nothing I posted supports your position because you didn't say anything. You just stem from the assumption that it has to be irrational and delusional; It just cannot be true! And don't like when I show evidence, which you choose to ignore. Sit down and take some time to think about this and tell me why you're so sure they're not trying to create a world government.
You're right about this though: I cannot prove definitely that covid was manmade; nobody can. What I can point out to is the staggering coincidences that were fulfilled by covid, which you ignored because it's a lot easier to just go with what the media says than to actually question them.
Event 201, ID2020, Quantum dot tattoos, promotion of wearables and cybernetic implants by the WEF, Great reset, gain of function research on bat coronas in a Wuhan lab, biometrics and digital currencies. It happened very conveniently and you're seeing the results of the agenda, which falls in line with previous WEF and UN goals; transition to digital economy, ID2020, strengthening of globalism, biometric surveillance, UBI, etc. Need I post the articles about this which predate covid? It's up to you whether you think this is all a coincidence or whether governments are willing to lie to people.
But it's impossible to dispute that covid-19 has been used an excuse to expand government powers and curtail civil liberties to an extent that was unimaginable just two years ago. That doesn't require any conspiracy theories, just simple observation and the recognition that people in power tend to act in ways that increase their own power.This is the second post where I replied to you:
The idea that a bunch of people have argued in favor of a one world government isn't controversial.This wasn't addressed at you, but it was in between all these posts:
It's a raw exercise in power, and another step in the continual erosion of national independence in favor of global "standards" dictated by and for the benefit of the most powerful actors on the world stage. The US wants more tax receipts, but they don't want to make the US more attractive to corporations by lowering taxes, so they can't allow other countries to do it either.In other words, I've repeatedly stated that I believe there's a move toward centralization of power, and even explicitly agreed with you that a lot of people have suggested a world government. You've ignored literally everything I said, in order to claim I was saying the exact opposite of the words of mine that you were quoting.
I think the vision of a world government is pretty simple. As organization advances and communication improves, it pictures that humans get past their differences and no longer make war on each other, but instead learn to cooperate.That's incredibly superficial thinking.
That fits with the general trend of history. In hunter-gatherer times, the highest level of organization was not much larger than the extended family. Over the course of history, larger and larger societies became possible and proved advantageous. It's a reasonable extrapolation that as communication and travel get even more advanced that we'll eventually get a world government.
Have you considered making and selling your own line of pillows?I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
Not at all, and you know it. I offered evidence in the way I could (and I have more and more); What else do you expect me to do? All you and the other guy did was mock me for "conspiracy theorist" and now you say I'm not open for a reasonable discussion?
You live in a world that is increasingly globalist and anti-nationalist, and literally heads of state stating this is their official policy. What makes it so far fetched to think the same project is still ongoing? Need I give more examples or will you ignore them?
The scorpion does not need to invent a virus to have an excuse to sting you.
It could be a day ending in y.
They don't need it but there is no guarantee they wouldn't.
You're just blatantly lying now.
You're lying about that. You're also making up shit about my motives, which isn't so much a lie as a desperate attempt at projection. Even a cursory examination of my posts would show that I'm certainly not seeking validation from others, because I'm not exactly shy about taking contrary positions, and I oppose everyone on the board at one time or another. You're also lying when you said I didn't state my positions -- I have, repeatedly. Let's start with this specific claim of yours:
"Sit down and take some time to think about this and tell me why you're so sure they're not trying to create a world government."
This is my first reply to you:But it's impossible to dispute that covid-19 has been used an excuse to expand government powers and curtail civil liberties to an extent that was unimaginable just two years ago. That doesn't require any conspiracy theories, just simple observation and the recognition that people in power tend to act in ways that increase their own power.This is the second post where I replied to you:The idea that a bunch of people have argued in favor of a one world government isn't controversial.This wasn't addressed at you, but it was in between all these posts:It's a raw exercise in power, and another step in the continual erosion of national independence in favor of global "standards" dictated by and for the benefit of the most powerful actors on the world stage. The US wants more tax receipts, but they don't want to make the US more attractive to corporations by lowering taxes, so they can't allow other countries to do it either.In other words, I've repeatedly stated that I believe there's a move toward centralization of power, and even explicitly agreed with you that a lot of people have suggested a world government. You've ignored literally everything I said, in order to claim I was saying the exact opposite of the words of mine that you were quoting.
You're feeling derided? You've earned it.
And you're wrong about covid, too. There's quite a bit of evidence that it was man-made. Not created from scratch, but augmented by gain of function. It's not just the unlikely "coincidence" of its origin next to one of the world's top 3 biolabs, or the cover-up, or the proof that the Fauci was indirectly funding gain of function at the lab. There are also suspicious markers in the genome that led a number of prominent virologists, shortly after the sequence was released, to say it was extremely unlikely to have occurred naturally. That's not definitive proof, but there's quite a bit of circumstantial evidence. But that doesn't mean there was some plot to release it. Hubris and carelessness is inordinately more likely.
As I've said before, that's why I think the greatest x-risk the human race faces isn't some cosmic catastrophe or even the development of AI, but the emergence of a one world government with surveillance powers that make those in 1984 look childish. I don't see any way back from it.
In general outline, yes. Which is why I've been pointing out that you haven't been reading what I said, because I've been very consistent on this point. But in specifics, no. You seem to be grasping at the most outlandish theories when simple explanations suffice. This isn't a carefully coordinated conspiracy with a concrete end result. It's a general ideology with a set of beliefs, backed up by a set of intellectual traditions, that are pushing a certain direction; along with people opportunistically taking advantage of the immediate situation to their immediate benefit.As I've said before, that's why I think the greatest x-risk the human race faces isn't some cosmic catastrophe or even the development of AI, but the emergence of a one world government with surveillance powers that make those in 1984 look childish. I don't see any way back from it.
So you pretty much agree with me?
The question you should be asking is: If there are evidences that point to it being augmented... then why isn't China being blamed for being "careless" with the virus? Why is the media and the international community silent on that? All of them complied with quarantines and put their economies and lives at risk because of this... and nobody demands an explanation? Nobody is asking China for compensations because of their mistake?They aren't silent. The political winds shifted a few months ago from "China did nothing wrong" to "the lab leak is one of two possible origins". That was a remarkable shift, because just a couple days before they were banning people who even broached the idea that that it might have been a lab leak.
That being said, if you do believe people work to centralize their power against the people's best interests and would take advantage of a crisis to increase their power... What's stopping them from wanting to install a world government to extend their influence worldwide? What's stopping them from releasing a virus to induce such a crisis? Absolutely nothing. What is so irrational about thinking the same people who pulled MKUltra, the Great Leap Forward, Holodomor, Operation Sea Spray, forced sterilizations and abortions, WMD in Iraq, KGB, CIA sting ops, lying media, 9/11, WW2, etc. would release a mostly harmless virus for political gain? No way, surely they wouldn't lie...You know what all those things have in common? Incompetence and self-serving behavior. There's no need for conspiracy theories.
So you didn't directly respond to a single argument I made, but instead gave me a homework project where I'm supposed to research and then give you an answer to 7 questions, each of which has massive implications that would require an entirely lengthy essay to unpack, yet are highly specific and esoteric, and have, at best, a weak connection to the topic on hand?
That's not engaging in conversation. That's trying to distract away from the conversation.
You're like Ken Hite, except you're not just having fun. You believe.
The past 15 years of my life have been devoted almost exclusively to studying the problem of world peace and, especially, the relation of the United States to these problems. These studies led me, 10 years ago, to the conclusion that the great question of our time is not whether or not one world can be achieved, but whether or not one world can be achieved by peaceful means.
We shall have world government, whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government will be achieved by consent or by conquest.
--------------
Mr. Chairman, I am here to testify in favor of Senate Resolution 56, which, if concurrently enacted with the House, would make the peaceful transformation of the United Nations into a world federation the avowed aim of United States policy. The passage of this resolution seems to me the first prerequisite toward the development of an affirmative American policy which would lead us out of the valley of death and despair.
--------------
First: Senate Resolution 56 goes to the root of the evil in the present state of international anarchy. It recognizes that there is no cure for this evil short of making the United Nations into a universal organization capable of enacting, interpreting, and enforcing world law to the degree necessary to outlaw force, or the threat of force, as an instrument of foreign policy. It states the objective in unequivocal terms.
Not at all what happened. You can't tell me I didn't offer any arguments or evidence.It's exactly what happened. I made a lengthy post, and you didn't directly respond to a single argument I made in it. Instead, you gave me a homework project on minutia that exemplifies deflection and missing the forest for the trees.
yet you still think ... that the globalist trend is purely spontaneous and unintentional.That's literally almost the opposite of what I said, which demonstrates you're still not reading what I have to say. While it finally sunk in that I do believe there's been a general trend toward more centralized government, there are a lot of other things I've said that you're completely missing.
This is the denial of conspiracies because of feelings; you feel it is irrational and don't like it so it must be false.Okay, let's talk about feelings. As I've pointed out before, your quotes tend to support my position, but not yours, because my position is based on simple, logical extensions of what we know about events and human behavior. But you can't accept that, because you need a grand conspiracy to fill some emotional need. You feel it must be true. So you go with irrational conclusions based on reading far too much into a based on a web of isolated statements.
It's exactly what happened. I made a lengthy post, and you didn't directly respond to a single argument I made in it. Instead, you gave me a homework project on minutia that exemplifies deflection and missing the forest for the trees.
And if you think you avoided ad hominems, what exactly would you call all the times where you told me what I was thinking and feeling, including in this very post?
yet you still think ... that the globalist trend is purely spontaneous and unintentional.
That's literally almost the opposite of what I said.
This isn't a carefully coordinated conspiracy with a concrete end result. It's a general ideology with a set of beliefs, backed up by a set of intellectual traditions, that are pushing a certain direction; along with people opportunistically taking advantage of the immediate situation to their immediate benefit
Okay, let's talk about feelings. As I've pointed out before, your quotes tend to support my position, but not yours, because my position is based on simple, logical extensions of what we know about events and human behavior. But you can't accept that, because you need a grand conspiracy to fill some emotional need. You feel it must be true. So you go with irrational conclusions based on reading far too much into a based on a web of isolated statements.
See?
Can we get a separate thread for the bigger socio-political agendas at play and keep talk about SarsCov-2 & Covid to this thread?I too would like to see the moronic conspiracy theories moved into their own thread.
Can we get a separate thread for the bigger socio-political agendas at play and keep talk about SarsCov-2 & Covid to this thread?I too would like to see the moronic conspiracy theories moved into their own thread.
Today Australia realized they can’t continue implementing draconian lockdowns. I still want to see the idiots who shot the dogs persecuted, hopefully for life.
As I pointed out, that's exactly what you've been doing by saying I'm emotional and irrational.
It's exactly what happened. I made a lengthy post, and you didn't directly respond to a single argument I made in it. Instead, you gave me a homework project on minutia that exemplifies deflection and missing the forest for the trees.
And if you think you avoided ad hominems, what exactly would you call all the times where you told me what I was thinking and feeling, including in this very post?
I pointed out a typical behavior I come across; usually people who resort to personal attacks, which is what you did from the beginning. Saw it with wokes as well; they evade the point and try to insult you as a person, shifting the conversation to other topics.
I didn't give you "homework on minutia"; I asked you questions on official statements which you still didn't even answer; all you had to do is give your opinion. I guess you just think all of those statements are meaningless and irrelevant, but I think they were published for a reason and reflect an intended course of action.Your questions are loaded with assumptions, which I'd have to unpack and dismiss in order to fairly address them. They also miss the point, because, as I've repeatedly noted, they all support my position. Since my position is based on simple extrapolation of what's known and standard human behavior, and your position is based on the same evidence, but requires belief in an inhuman degree of coordination and consistency, Occam's razor favors my position.
I don't believe there's a conspiracy.yet you still think ... that the globalist trend is purely spontaneous and unintentional.
That's literally almost the opposite of what I said.
Here's what you wrote.QuoteThis isn't a carefully coordinated conspiracy with a concrete end result. It's a general ideology with a set of beliefs, backed up by a set of intellectual traditions, that are pushing a certain direction; along with people opportunistically taking advantage of the immediate situation to their immediate benefit
If you do think there is a general, intentional trend towards world government... What do you disagree with me on, exactly?
Today Australia realized they can’t continue implementing draconian lockdowns. I still want to see the idiots who shot the dogs persecuted, hopefully for life.
why would they do that?
You're getting the treatment you deserve. Sadly, you've become so accustomed to the mockery that it's become "as usual" for you. Your "blatant evidence" doesn't show what you so desperately want/need it to, and nobody wants to waste time explaining it to you.Can we get a separate thread for the bigger socio-political agendas at play and keep talk about SarsCov-2 & Covid to this thread?I too would like to see the moronic conspiracy theories moved into their own thread.
As usual, only personal attacks and ignoring the blatant evidence. No different from an average woke
One interesting point being made in libertarian circles is the lockdowns have been good for the idea of decentralization and even succession. Because despite the dictates of the CDC, and several attempts to push toward a unified world response, each state and each nation went their own way, and there was a wide diversity of response. A consequence of that is people began to think of themselves as Californians or Floridians again, and not just Americans.
I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
Not at all, and you know it. I offered evidence in the way I could (and I have more and more); What else do you expect me to do? All you and the other guy did was mock me for "conspiracy theorist" and now you say I'm not open for a reasonable discussion?
You live in a world that is increasingly globalist and anti-nationalist, and literally heads of state stating this is their official policy. What makes it so far fetched to think the same project is still ongoing? Need I give more examples or will you ignore them?
I know what you're trying to do here. You argue in bad faith, you're prejudiced, close-minded and are trying to bait me.
I know what you're trying to do here. You argue in bad faith, you're prejudiced, close-minded and are trying to bait me.
That's unfair. I am asking you honest questions which you refuse to answer. I will ask again: what role do you think Israel plays in the behind-the-scenes manipulation of the creation of this planned one-world-government? And does Israel, in the form of people of the Jewish faith, have allies scattered around the nations helping achieve this plan in your opinion?
You're getting the treatment you deserve. Sadly, you've become so accustomed to the mockery that it's become "as usual" for you. Your "blatant evidence" doesn't show what you so desperately want/need it to, and nobody wants to waste time explaining it to you.
Let's begin with the basics. Please stop spamming the board with a series of huge image files. It's fucking the sub-forum up. If you have a LINK you want people to read, please post that. If you have a single ordinary image file then post that. But cut this string of huge image file stuff out. It's super annoying and destructive to the forum.
That's unfair. I am asking you honest questions which you refuse to answer. I will ask again: what role do you think Israel plays in the behind-the-scenes manipulation of the creation of this planned one-world-government? And does Israel, in the form of people of the Jewish faith, have allies scattered around the nations helping achieve this plan in your opinion?
I gave you arguments, and you ignored them to post more images of texts with highlighted passages, without realizing they supported what I was saying more than they supported anything you said. People refusing to engage with you at that point isn't proof you're right, it's proof they don't think you're worth engaging with.You're getting the treatment you deserve. Sadly, you've become so accustomed to the mockery that it's become "as usual" for you. Your "blatant evidence" doesn't show what you so desperately want/need it to, and nobody wants to waste time explaining it to you.
Your getting ticked off, insults and lack of arguments do nothing but prove me right; this is the behavior of people who don't want to accept something, they get offended and resort to insults and derision because you thought outside of what they feel comfortable with.
I've seen this from the woke crowd and from the so-called "rational skeptics" who actually boil down to trusting media, government and turning a blind eye to all evidence to the contrary.
Added: one of the ladies who trained with us said she was Jewish, and meant ethnically as her parents and grandparents were Jewish, and she is a triplet. Her brother was baptized catholic (as an adult in his 20's) did he achieve total joke immunity?
You're getting the treatment you deserve. Sadly, you've become so accustomed to the mockery that it's become "as usual" for you. Your "blatant evidence" doesn't show what you so desperately want/need it to, and nobody wants to waste time explaining it to you.
Your getting ticked off, insults and lack of arguments do nothing but prove me right; this is the behavior of people who don't want to accept something, they get offended and resort to insults and derision because you thought outside of what they feel comfortable with.
I've seen this from the woke crowd and from the so-called "rational skeptics" who actually boil down to trusting media, government and turning a blind eye to all evidence to the contrary.Let's begin with the basics. Please stop spamming the board with a series of huge image files. It's fucking the sub-forum up. If you have a LINK you want people to read, please post that. If you have a single ordinary image file then post that. But cut this string of huge image file stuff out. It's super annoying and destructive to the forum.
If it is, I will gladly edit my posts. I didn't know it was harmful.That's unfair. I am asking you honest questions which you refuse to answer. I will ask again: what role do you think Israel plays in the behind-the-scenes manipulation of the creation of this planned one-world-government? And does Israel, in the form of people of the Jewish faith, have allies scattered around the nations helping achieve this plan in your opinion?
I think everybody knows what you're doing and you're not fooling anyone. Either way, I will give you an answer. Some jews have openly spoken about a messianic and jewish supremacist world government out of extremist religious convictions and a national sentiment; I can show you evidence of this.
Do all jews take part in this delusion? Definitely not. Is the conspiracy jewish? Nope.
YOU mentioned "messianic" and so that's why I asked you. What is it you "think I am doing" by asking you about it? It's not like "messianic" meant something like Buddhists, right?
YOU mentioned "messianic" and so that's why I asked you. What is it you "think I am doing" by asking you about it? It's not like "messianic" meant something like Buddhists, right?
Nah, you just tried to pin me down as "anti-semitic", as if that meant my arguments are necessarily invalid because of that alone. Guess what, you can criticize a jewish person without being an irrational fanatic.
Added: one of the ladies who trained with us said she was Jewish, and meant ethnically as her parents and grandparents were Jewish, and she is a triplet. Her brother was baptized catholic (as an adult in his 20's) did he achieve total joke immunity?
As both Catholics and Jews love to make jokes about themselves I doubt it.
I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
Not at all, and you know it. I offered evidence in the way I could (and I have more and more); What else do you expect me to do? All you and the other guy did was mock me for "conspiracy theorist" and now you say I'm not open for a reasonable discussion?
You live in a world that is increasingly globalist and anti-nationalist, and literally heads of state stating this is their official policy. What makes it so far fetched to think the same project is still ongoing? Need I give more examples or will you ignore them?
Let's begin with the basics. Please stop spamming the board with a series of huge image files. It's fucking the sub-forum up.
Greetings!
Who the fuck cares if there are Jews involved with Globalism?
I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
Not at all, and you know it. I offered evidence in the way I could (and I have more and more); What else do you expect me to do? All you and the other guy did was mock me for "conspiracy theorist" and now you say I'm not open for a reasonable discussion?
You live in a world that is increasingly globalist and anti-nationalist, and literally heads of state stating this is their official policy. What makes it so far fetched to think the same project is still ongoing? Need I give more examples or will you ignore them?
Let's begin with the basics. Please stop spamming the board with a series of huge image files. It's fucking the sub-forum up.
How is it "fucking the sub-forum up"? I was able to see the post just fine.
Greetings!
Who the fuck cares if there are Jews involved with Globalism?
Oh just like 700+ years of history of conspiracy theories of secret cabals trying to take over the world under one unified order by strategically placing people in influential financial and entertainment and political positions focused on Jews? You know, hundreds and hundreds of years of that theme popping up in different societies, used as an excuse to oppress imprison and murder people of that religion? I mean come on man, you have got to have seen this pattern of conspiracy theories before right? Surely you can't be new to this game.
I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.You're also not interested in a discussion. All you're doing is throwing up a smorgasbord of statements in other people's words, rather than making a coherent argument yourself.
Not at all, and you know it. I offered evidence in the way I could (and I have more and more); What else do you expect me to do? All you and the other guy did was mock me for "conspiracy theorist" and now you say I'm not open for a reasonable discussion?
You live in a world that is increasingly globalist and anti-nationalist, and literally heads of state stating this is their official policy. What makes it so far fetched to think the same project is still ongoing? Need I give more examples or will you ignore them?
Let's begin with the basics. Please stop spamming the board with a series of huge image files. It's fucking the sub-forum up.
How is it "fucking the sub-forum up"? I was able to see the post just fine.
Yes because everyone always accesses the forum in the same manner you access it, right? Try using your cell phone to look at this thread.
Glad there's more of us around here. Agenda 2030 is nothing but the process towards international socialism. The UN was founded by socialists (Churchill and Roosevelt were closeted socialists and I can offer some evidence) and the Kalergi Plan is nothing other than the elimination of ethnic and national identity through "diversity". This has been the explicit goal of Freemasonry, and I can prove it.
But the Kalergi Plan is a 100% fraud, a myth invented 15 years ago by a neo-nazi, which promotes anti-semitic conspiracy theories. It's basically just a rewriting of the equally fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which originally started out as an anti-Masonic fraud before being re-written as an anti-Jewish fraud.Don't want to drag it further off topic, but you seem to have some knowledge on the subject. Do know of an easily digestible summary? It's something I know nothing about, and while I'd normally do some research on my own, it's the type of topic where simple searches tend to return a lot of absolute garbage, and where delving into primary sources tends to be excruciating. So a pointer in the right direction would be appreciated.
IIRC, the Protocols were a whole-cloth invention by the Tsarist Okhrana (the secret police of the old Russian Empire, pre-USSR).
Glad there's more of us around here. Agenda 2030 is nothing but the process towards international socialism. The UN was founded by socialists (Churchill and Roosevelt were closeted socialists and I can offer some evidence) and the Kalergi Plan is nothing other than the elimination of ethnic and national identity through "diversity". This has been the explicit goal of Freemasonry, and I can prove it.
I'm as anti-globalist as it gets. But the Kalergi Plan is a 100% fraud, a myth invented 15 years ago by a neo-nazi, which promotes anti-semitic conspiracy theories. It's basically just a rewriting of the equally fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which originally started out as an anti-Masonic fraud before being re-written as an anti-Jewish fraud.
And with that, you're gone from this site.
But the Kalergi Plan is a 100% fraud, a myth invented 15 years ago by a neo-nazi, which promotes anti-semitic conspiracy theories. It's basically just a rewriting of the equally fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which originally started out as an anti-Masonic fraud before being re-written as an anti-Jewish fraud.Don't want to drag it further off topic, but you seem to have some knowledge on the subject. Do know of an easily digestible summary? It's something I know nothing about, and while I'd normally do some research on my own, it's the type of topic where simple searches tend to return a lot of absolute garbage, and where delving into primary sources tends to be excruciating. So a pointer in the right direction would be appreciated.
And he was practically forgotten; until 2005, when an Austrian Neo-Nazi named Gerd Honsik, on the run from the law in Spain, published a book called "The Kalergi Plan", in which he combined actual quotes from Kalergi's own books about pan-europeanism with material written by the Nazis in the 1930s and 40s and with parts taken right out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, to formulate the claim that Kalergi was the mastermind of an organized conspiracy with a big mix of political and intellectual leaders to institute a long-term project to exterminate the "white race" by a mix of socialism and mass-immigration to produce a servile society that would be ruled in authoritarian fashion by a "Judeo-Masonic Elite".Thanks for the summary. This is why I know so little about the Protocols or modern neo-Nazism -- it's just this contorted awful mess that's painful to untangle.
It was total bullshit of course, there was no such plan, but it touched on all kinds of narratives of modern Neo-Nazism and made the perfect storm for a less besmirched replacement for the Protocols. Pretty much everyone knows that the Protocols are bullshit now, but you could still try to fools some people with legitimate concerns about things like immigration or socialism into thinking the Kalergi Plan was real.
IIRC, the Protocols were a whole-cloth invention by the Tsarist Okhrana (the secret police of the old Russian Empire, pre-USSR).
Glad there's more of us around here. Agenda 2030 is nothing but the process towards international socialism. The UN was founded by socialists (Churchill and Roosevelt were closeted socialists and I can offer some evidence) and the Kalergi Plan is nothing other than the elimination of ethnic and national identity through "diversity". This has been the explicit goal of Freemasonry, and I can prove it.
I'm as anti-globalist as it gets. But the Kalergi Plan is a 100% fraud, a myth invented 15 years ago by a neo-nazi, which promotes anti-semitic conspiracy theories. It's basically just a rewriting of the equally fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which originally started out as an anti-Masonic fraud before being re-written as an anti-Jewish fraud.
And with that, you're gone from this site.
But hey, to-may-to, to-mah-to, it's still a fraud and you're still right :)
Interesting. So Taxil basically tried to make his bones on taking advantage of Catholicisim by using Masonry as a club. What an asshole.IIRC, the Protocols were a whole-cloth invention by the Tsarist Okhrana (the secret police of the old Russian Empire, pre-USSR).
Glad there's more of us around here. Agenda 2030 is nothing but the process towards international socialism. The UN was founded by socialists (Churchill and Roosevelt were closeted socialists and I can offer some evidence) and the Kalergi Plan is nothing other than the elimination of ethnic and national identity through "diversity". This has been the explicit goal of Freemasonry, and I can prove it.
I'm as anti-globalist as it gets. But the Kalergi Plan is a 100% fraud, a myth invented 15 years ago by a neo-nazi, which promotes anti-semitic conspiracy theories. It's basically just a rewriting of the equally fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which originally started out as an anti-Masonic fraud before being re-written as an anti-Jewish fraud.
And with that, you're gone from this site.
But hey, to-may-to, to-mah-to, it's still a fraud and you're still right :)
Nope, not "whole cloth" at all. In fact it was a very sloppy cut-and-paste of the hoax writings of Leo Taxil and some other authors. Taxil, who was initially famous as an anti-Catholic writer, claimed in the 1880s to have had a miraculous conversion. He claimed to have found his way to the church, and was so famous as an Anti-Catholic that (after careful examination of his claims) he was carted out by the Church of the example of the triumph of Catholicism over atheism. He even got an audience with the pope.
And then, he started to write a series of books "exposing" Freemasonry. These Anti-Masonic books were racy accounts of overt and terrible satanic rituals allegedly informed to him by people who were insiders, and they sold like wildfire throughout Catholic Europe.
In sequels, he covered the 'higher degrees' of Masonry, and when he ran out of degrees, he just invented new ones from thin air; every book being more outrageous than the last, until he came up with the Palladist Order, the highest and most secret degrees, which met in secret congresses with the Devil present in physical form there instructing them on how to destroy the Church and take over the world.
He took some of the material he wrote from earlier anti-masonic texts, and threw in a couple of connections to Jews there too.
But eventually, after even many rational catholics thought his writings and the claims of his alleged witnesses to incredible to be true, he called for a huge conference in England where he would provide proof in the form of his witness. Instead, with all the European Press there present, he admitted the whole thing was a huge hoax, to prove the stupidity of the Church and the virulence of their ridiculous anti-masonic fervor. Taxil, by the way, was never a mason.
Anyways, the Protocols are a textual cut-and-paste job of a combination of sources: Taxil's anti-masonic 'Palladist' accounts, the writings of another French satirist named Joly, the text of a couple of earlier anti-Masonic writers who Taxil also plagiarized, and the writings of a Prussian Anti-Semite.
It was total bullshit of course, there was no such plan, but it touched on all kinds of narratives of modern Neo-Nazism and made the perfect storm for a less besmirched replacement for the Protocols. Pretty much everyone knows that the Protocols are bullshit now, but you could still try to fools some people with legitimate concerns about things like immigration or socialism into thinking the Kalergi Plan was real.
that was before SonTodoGato was banned.
But the Kalergi Plan is a 100% fraud, a myth invented 15 years ago by a neo-nazi, which promotes anti-semitic conspiracy theories. It's basically just a rewriting of the equally fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which originally started out as an anti-Masonic fraud before being re-written as an anti-Jewish fraud.Don't want to drag it further off topic, but you seem to have some knowledge on the subject. Do know of an easily digestible summary? It's something I know nothing about, and while I'd normally do some research on my own, it's the type of topic where simple searches tend to return a lot of absolute garbage, and where delving into primary sources tends to be excruciating. So a pointer in the right direction would be appreciated.
There was a real dude, Ricard Kalergi, who was an early-20th Century promoter of the Pan-european movement (essentially, the movement to create a European Union). He was extremely liberal for his age. He was the son of an Austro-Hungarian Count and a Japanese heiress, which obviously made him quite unusual. He was not Jewish (as many of the Neo-Nazis who push the "Kalergi Plan" conspiracy theory sometimes claim), though he did marry a Jewish actress.
He was a Freemason, but only from 1922 to 1926.
He was deeply horrified by WWI, and inspired by Wilson's ideas of the League of Nations. He wrote several books in the 1920s where he promoted the idea of Pan-Europeanism. He came up with the idea that Beethoven's Ode to Joy should be the "national anthem of Europe", which is really likely his most lasting influence on the modern world.
Though the Neo-Nazis present him as if he was a communist, but in fact in his writings he pleaded the case for a European Union as the only possible protection against Soviet takeover. He was an anti-Communist. His ideas were very socially progressive but fundamentally conservative, and his closest political ties were to Austrian archconservative parties.
He was moderately well-known in European intellectual circles by the early 1930s. Obviously, Hitler absolutely despised him, once calling Kalergi a "nasty mongrel" and "agent of International Jewry and Freemasonry".
Anyways, Kalergi escaped Europe during WWII, and later returned after the war was over, and was certainly influential in some of the early stages of the creation of what would become the European Union. He died in 1972.
And he was practically forgotten; until 2005, when an Austrian Neo-Nazi named Gerd Honsik, on the run from the law in Spain, published a book called "The Kalergi Plan", in which he combined actual quotes from Kalergi's own books about pan-europeanism with material written by the Nazis in the 1930s and 40s and with parts taken right out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, to formulate the claim that Kalergi was the mastermind of an organized conspiracy with a big mix of political and intellectual leaders to institute a long-term project to exterminate the "white race" by a mix of socialism and mass-immigration to produce a servile society that would be ruled in authoritarian fashion by a "Judeo-Masonic Elite".
It was total bullshit of course, there was no such plan, but it touched on all kinds of narratives of modern Neo-Nazism and made the perfect storm for a less besmirched replacement for the Protocols. Pretty much everyone knows that the Protocols are bullshit now, but you could still try to fools some people with legitimate concerns about things like immigration or socialism into thinking the Kalergi Plan was real.
It was total bullshit of course, there was no such plan, but it touched on all kinds of narratives of modern Neo-Nazism and made the perfect storm for a less besmirched replacement for the Protocols. Pretty much everyone knows that the Protocols are bullshit now, but you could still try to fools some people with legitimate concerns about things like immigration or socialism into thinking the Kalergi Plan was real.
Pundit - I had been composing a new thread on the trend towards world government, but that was before SonTodoGato was banned. Would the topic be of interest to you - including debunking of stuff like the Kalergi Plan?
Stumbled upon this article just now. It’s kinda odd, sad, and funny at the same time.Darwin hates people who can not do math
Oklahoma ERs can’t treat gunshot victims because too many people are ODing on horse hormones? https://www.insider.com/oklahomas-emergency-rooms-are-clogged-with-people-overdosing-on-ivermectin-2021-9?amp
So this is what prolonged lockdowns do to people, huh!?
Stumbled upon this article just now. It’s kinda odd, sad, and funny at the same time.Darwin hates people who can not do math
Oklahoma ERs can’t treat gunshot victims because too many people are ODing on horse hormones? https://www.insider.com/oklahomas-emergency-rooms-are-clogged-with-people-overdosing-on-ivermectin-2021-9?amp
So this is what prolonged lockdowns do to people, huh!?
Stumbled upon this article just now. It’s kinda odd, sad, and funny at the same time.Darwin hates people who can not do math
Oklahoma ERs can’t treat gunshot victims because too many people are ODing on horse hormones? https://www.insider.com/oklahomas-emergency-rooms-are-clogged-with-people-overdosing-on-ivermectin-2021-9?amp
So this is what prolonged lockdowns do to people, huh!?
Imagine now that Math was replaced by CRT. These are scary times indeed.
Stumbled upon this article just now. It’s kinda odd, sad, and funny at the same time.
Oklahoma ERs can’t treat gunshot victims because too many people are ODing on horse hormones? https://www.insider.com/oklahomas-emergency-rooms-are-clogged-with-people-overdosing-on-ivermectin-2021-9?amp
So this is what prolonged lockdowns do to people, huh!?
Remember, half the media reported that Joe Rogan took horse paste.
Even though he didn't.
I have a high degree of confidence that reporting on Ivermectin is using the "horse paste / dewormer" lie/smear not only because of its propaganda value, but because the censorship algorithms can't distinguish adequately between usage contexts, and therefore the state-controlled propaganda outlets are using alternative wording to escape the censorship algorithms implemented by their colleagues.What do you base that confidence upon? The "fact" that you want it to be so?
I have a high degree of confidence that reporting on Ivermectin is using the "horse paste / dewormer" lie/smear not only because of its propaganda value, but because the censorship algorithms can't distinguish adequately between usage contexts, and therefore the state-controlled propaganda outlets are using alternative wording to escape the censorship algorithms implemented by their colleagues.What do you base that confidence upon? The "fact" that you want it to be so?
I have a high degree of confidence that reporting on Ivermectin is using the "horse paste / dewormer" lie/smear not only because of its propaganda value, but because the censorship algorithms can't distinguish adequately between usage contexts, and therefore the state-controlled propaganda outlets are using alternative wording to escape the censorship algorithms implemented by their colleagues.What do you base that confidence upon? The "fact" that you want it to be so?
Watching them dance around saying the banned words, while not conclusive, is a line of evidence appears to support Zelen's contention.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWWDGmg1fS4
That said, I would agree with the contention that the need to lie/smear Rogan is sufficient to explain their behavior.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/02/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
(Scroll down to the survey section.)
The CDC worked with 17 blood collection organizations in all 50 states plus DC and Puerto Rico, and tested 1.4 million blood samples covering 74% of the population. In other words, it's a damn good sample size.
The percentage of the samples that had antibodies for sars2:
3.5% July 2020
11.5% December 2020
83.3% May 2021
Yes, a more than sevenfold jump in 6 months. That's a lot of antibody protection in the wild. While most of the 83.3% is due to vaccinations, it also indicates the number of people who had the infection and recovered is about twice the number of reported cases (39 million x 2). And since it's measuring antibodies, it won't catch people who have lost their antibodies but still have the T-cells that can be used to generate antibodies. On the negative side, they didn't cover children under 16, and it's pre-Delta.
Neither Tucker Carlson nor Ben Shapiro are reporters; they are entertainers/commentators. It's a huge difference.I have a high degree of confidence that reporting on Ivermectin is using the "horse paste / dewormer" lie/smear not only because of its propaganda value, but because the censorship algorithms can't distinguish adequately between usage contexts, and therefore the state-controlled propaganda outlets are using alternative wording to escape the censorship algorithms implemented by their colleagues.What do you base that confidence upon? The "fact" that you want it to be so?
Watching them dance around saying the banned words, while not conclusive, is a line of evidence appears to support Zelen's contention.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWWDGmg1fS4
That said, I would agree with the contention that the need to lie/smear Rogan is sufficient to explain their behavior.
Unfortunately we live in a world of multiple parallel realities. There’s no such thing as a singular truth or honest media. We listen to the news that echo our beliefs. Very few reporters remain old school truthful. I’ll normally stick with Tucker Carlson and Ben Shapiro, since the pair still share many old school values.
Commentators, because there’s no such thing as a reporter on cable tv.Neither Tucker Carlson nor Ben Shapiro are reporters; they are entertainers/commentators. It's a huge difference.I have a high degree of confidence that reporting on Ivermectin is using the "horse paste / dewormer" lie/smear not only because of its propaganda value, but because the censorship algorithms can't distinguish adequately between usage contexts, and therefore the state-controlled propaganda outlets are using alternative wording to escape the censorship algorithms implemented by their colleagues.What do you base that confidence upon? The "fact" that you want it to be so?
Watching them dance around saying the banned words, while not conclusive, is a line of evidence appears to support Zelen's contention.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWWDGmg1fS4
That said, I would agree with the contention that the need to lie/smear Rogan is sufficient to explain their behavior.
Unfortunately we live in a world of multiple parallel realities. There’s no such thing as a singular truth or honest media. We listen to the news that echo our beliefs. Very few reporters remain old school truthful. I’ll normally stick with Tucker Carlson and Ben Shapiro, since the pair still share many old school values.
“[Seventy-eight percent] of hospitalizations due to COVID are Obese and Overweight people. Is there an underlying problem that perhaps we have not given enough attention to?” he wrote, appearing to cite March Centers for Disease Control and Prevention covid-19 hospitalization data.Source (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sweetgreen-ceo-criticized-after-connecting-the-pandemic-to-unhealthy-eating-incredibly-fat-phobic/ar-AAO1p1S)
Neman concluded that covid will be around for the foreseeable future and therefore people have to find a way to coexist with the virus.
“We cannot run away from it and no vaccine nor mask will save us (in full disclosure I am vaccinated and support others to get vaccinated),” the Georgetown University graduate wrote. “Our best bet is to learn how to best live with it and focus on overall health [vs.] preventing infection.”
Quote“[Seventy-eight percent] of hospitalizations due to COVID are Obese and Overweight people. Is there an underlying problem that perhaps we have not given enough attention to?” he wrote, appearing to cite March Centers for Disease Control and Prevention covid-19 hospitalization data.Source (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sweetgreen-ceo-criticized-after-connecting-the-pandemic-to-unhealthy-eating-incredibly-fat-phobic/ar-AAO1p1S)
Neman concluded that covid will be around for the foreseeable future and therefore people have to find a way to coexist with the virus.
“We cannot run away from it and no vaccine nor mask will save us (in full disclosure I am vaccinated and support others to get vaccinated),” the Georgetown University graduate wrote. “Our best bet is to learn how to best live with it and focus on overall health [vs.] preventing infection.”
This guy went and goofed by bringing up the fact that almost all of these health problems are self-inflicted over many years. Stop being fatasses.
"Perfectly healthy 16 year old fighting Covid in both lungs in ICU. It could happen to any totally healthy kid at all"
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.Not true. Those that die of Covid (or with Covid or without Covid) have an effective 100% immunity to reinfection (unless resuscitated). It's the ultimate in naturally acquired immunity for all non z-viruses.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.Not true. Those that die of Covid (or with Covid or without Covid) have an effective 100% immunity to reinfection (unless resuscitated). It's the ultimate in naturally acquired immunity for all non z-viruses.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Oscar has been hit in the head a ton, was way undersized to fight Belfort, and has had a shitload of booger sugar during his life. I would not be too certain of his excellent physical condition to be honest, and I would not be so certain his condition is dire, as media tends to exaggerate one way or the other.
He might be in dire condition and might have been in excellent condition, but past Oscar, his closest of kin, and his doctor no one else really knows.
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Oscar has been hit in the head a ton, was way undersized to fight Belfort, and has had a shitload of booger sugar during his life. I would not be too certain of his excellent physical condition to be honest, and I would not be so certain his condition is dire, as media tends to exaggerate one way or the other.
He might be in dire condition and might have been in excellent condition, but past Oscar, his closest of kin, and his doctor no one else really knows.
Oh for fucks sake NONE of those are known risk factors for Covid. He was however in excellent physical condition, and it's Oscar himself tweeting FROM THE HOSPITAL.
The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/wdrb.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/a/ad/aadf8938-02af-11ec-b065-0be3d84a912b/6121494d176d1.image.jpg)
The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.Who exactly is arguing that people without co-morbidities are completely immune to becoming seriously ill or dying from covid?
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.Who exactly is arguing that people without co-morbidities are completely immune to becoming seriously ill or dying from covid?
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
Nobody. What they're actually arguing is the risk is small. You're strawmanning your opponents and then acting outraged when they don't accept your strawman as representative of their position.
You seem to live in backwards world.The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.Who exactly is arguing that people without co-morbidities are completely immune to becoming seriously ill or dying from covid?
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
Nobody. What they're actually arguing is the risk is small. You're strawmanning your opponents and then acting outraged when they don't accept your strawman as representative of their position.
The risk is only as small as one interprets it to be. A small scratch on a new car is a big deal. Are we dismissive of Covid because it’s no longer new?
You seem to live in backwards world.The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.Who exactly is arguing that people without co-morbidities are completely immune to becoming seriously ill or dying from covid?
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
Nobody. What they're actually arguing is the risk is small. You're strawmanning your opponents and then acting outraged when they don't accept your strawman as representative of their position.
The risk is only as small as one interprets it to be. A small scratch on a new car is a big deal. Are we dismissive of Covid because it’s no longer new?
When covid first gained attention, we didn't have a good idea how dangerous it was. We have actual numbers now, and the risk is very low for the working age population without serious health problems, and almost non-existent for children. Why is the world still in panic?
Why is the world still in panic?
Actually, panic is a understatement. Covid will trigger mass extinction if left unchecked. 10 million job openings, no workers.
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Oscar has been hit in the head a ton, was way undersized to fight Belfort, and has had a shitload of booger sugar during his life. I would not be too certain of his excellent physical condition to be honest, and I would not be so certain his condition is dire, as media tends to exaggerate one way or the other.
He might be in dire condition and might have been in excellent condition, but past Oscar, his closest of kin, and his doctor no one else really knows.
Oh for fucks sake NONE of those are known risk factors for Covid. He was however in excellent physical condition, and it's Oscar himself tweeting FROM THE HOSPITAL.
The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/wdrb.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/a/ad/aadf8938-02af-11ec-b065-0be3d84a912b/6121494d176d1.image.jpg)
We can (and have) dug up "black swan" cases of vaccinated people dying of Covid. If you look, you'll find edge cases to "support" any position.
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Oscar has been hit in the head a ton, was way undersized to fight Belfort, and has had a shitload of booger sugar during his life. I would not be too certain of his excellent physical condition to be honest, and I would not be so certain his condition is dire, as media tends to exaggerate one way or the other.
He might be in dire condition and might have been in excellent condition, but past Oscar, his closest of kin, and his doctor no one else really knows.
Oh for fucks sake NONE of those are known risk factors for Covid. He was however in excellent physical condition, and it's Oscar himself tweeting FROM THE HOSPITAL.
The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/wdrb.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/a/ad/aadf8938-02af-11ec-b065-0be3d84a912b/6121494d176d1.image.jpg)
We can (and have) dug up "black swan" cases of vaccinated people dying of Covid. If you look, you'll find edge cases to "support" any position.
Yes I know, I just posted the boxer who is in the hospital with covid despite being fully vaccinated. Again, I am not arguing everyone is at equal risk. I am simply arguing being young and healthy isn't itself enough to ensure no real risk of hospitalization or death. It just increases your odds in a meaningful way. Much like the vaccine also increases your odds in a meaningful way.
I agree with you there. I can't speak for everyone else on the board, but for myself, all I'm standing by, is the right to decide for myself how to asses those odds and risks in the face of rhetoric and, in some cases, downright misrepresentation and blatant mistruths.
It certainly doesn't help that on this forum, discussion is a brawl, with people jumping in, getting their punches in, and then jumping out.
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Oscar has been hit in the head a ton, was way undersized to fight Belfort, and has had a shitload of booger sugar during his life. I would not be too certain of his excellent physical condition to be honest, and I would not be so certain his condition is dire, as media tends to exaggerate one way or the other.
He might be in dire condition and might have been in excellent condition, but past Oscar, his closest of kin, and his doctor no one else really knows.
Oh for fucks sake NONE of those are known risk factors for Covid. He was however in excellent physical condition, and it's Oscar himself tweeting FROM THE HOSPITAL.
The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/wdrb.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/a/ad/aadf8938-02af-11ec-b065-0be3d84a912b/6121494d176d1.image.jpg)
I wonder if you could find 1 person in a country of 330 million that has died of the CCP Wuhan virus without any other pre existing conditions?It's about a 1 in 10,000 chance, so I'm guessing that means it's impossible and you'll never find an example. And if you do find an example, I'm sure the media will help the public put in context, and not sensationalize it.
I wonder if you could find 1 person in a country of 330 million that has died of the CCP Wuhan virus without any other pre existing conditions?Want to firm up the foundations of those goalposts? What pre-existing conditions to you want to consider? Any/all medical conditioins? If you go that route, damn near all of them will have suffered from at least a bout of tooth decay or adolescent acne that obviously was the true cause of death, right?
I wonder if you could find 1 person in a country of 330 million that has died of the CCP Wuhan virus without any other pre existing conditions?Want to firm up the foundations of those goalposts? What pre-existing conditions to you want to consider? Any/all medical conditioins? If you go that route, damn near all of them will have suffered from at least a bout of tooth decay or adolescent acne that obviously was the true cause of death, right?
How would suggest doing that?I wonder if you could find 1 person in a country of 330 million that has died of the CCP Wuhan virus without any other pre existing conditions?Want to firm up the foundations of those goalposts? What pre-existing conditions to you want to consider? Any/all medical conditioins? If you go that route, damn near all of them will have suffered from at least a bout of tooth decay or adolescent acne that obviously was the true cause of death, right?
Even if its a 1 in a million chance then it has to have happened at least 330 times, so someone must be able to find one of those people.
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Oscar has been hit in the head a ton, was way undersized to fight Belfort, and has had a shitload of booger sugar during his life. I would not be too certain of his excellent physical condition to be honest, and I would not be so certain his condition is dire, as media tends to exaggerate one way or the other.
He might be in dire condition and might have been in excellent condition, but past Oscar, his closest of kin, and his doctor no one else really knows.
Oh for fucks sake NONE of those are known risk factors for Covid. He was however in excellent physical condition, and it's Oscar himself tweeting FROM THE HOSPITAL.
The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/wdrb.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/a/ad/aadf8938-02af-11ec-b065-0be3d84a912b/6121494d176d1.image.jpg)
We can (and have) dug up "black swan" cases of vaccinated people dying of Covid. If you look, you'll find edge cases to "support" any position.
Yes I know, I just posted the boxer who is in the hospital with covid despite being fully vaccinated. Again, I am not arguing everyone is at equal risk. I am simply arguing being young and healthy isn't itself enough to ensure no real risk of hospitalization or death. It just increases your odds in a meaningful way. Much like the vaccine also increases your odds in a meaningful way.
I agree with you there. I can't speak for everyone else on the board, but for myself, all I'm standing by, is the right to decide for myself how to asses those odds and risks in the face of rhetoric and, in some cases, downright misrepresentation and blatant mistruths.
It certainly doesn't help that on this forum, discussion is a brawl, with people jumping in, getting their punches in, and then jumping out.
I wonder if you could find 1 person in a country of 330 million that has died of the CCP Wuhan virus without any other pre existing conditions?
How would suggest doing that?I wonder if you could find 1 person in a country of 330 million that has died of the CCP Wuhan virus without any other pre existing conditions?Want to firm up the foundations of those goalposts? What pre-existing conditions to you want to consider? Any/all medical conditioins? If you go that route, damn near all of them will have suffered from at least a bout of tooth decay or adolescent acne that obviously was the true cause of death, right?
Even if its a 1 in a million chance then it has to have happened at least 330 times, so someone must be able to find one of those people.
Boxer Oscar de la Hoya (48) is in the hospital fighting for his life right now with Covid. Not only was he not overweight or obese but he was in training for his next fight against UFC champion Vitor Belfort, scheduled for Sept. 11 at Staples Center, and had been training for months, and was in peak physical condition. He's also fully vaccinated.
This virus hits people in different ways. Being of a healthy BMI decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. Being vaccinated decreases your chances of harm, but it's not determinative. You can better your odds by watching your weight and being vaccinated. But nothing is a sure thing.
Oscar has been hit in the head a ton, was way undersized to fight Belfort, and has had a shitload of booger sugar during his life. I would not be too certain of his excellent physical condition to be honest, and I would not be so certain his condition is dire, as media tends to exaggerate one way or the other.
He might be in dire condition and might have been in excellent condition, but past Oscar, his closest of kin, and his doctor no one else really knows.
Oh for fucks sake NONE of those are known risk factors for Covid. He was however in excellent physical condition, and it's Oscar himself tweeting FROM THE HOSPITAL.
The lengths you guys will go to, to pretend nobody healthy has ever been made seriously ill or died from Covid, are truly amazing. I am not arguing everyone is equally at risk from covid, but you still are unwilling to admit to apparently ANY risk for healthy people from Covid. Which is just sad denial.
Here, this is Josh Tidmore. Dead from Covid (https://www.kktv.com/2021/08/23/though-young-healthy-unvaccinated-father-dies-covid/). Healthy, 36, not overweight or obese, non-smoker, physically active. No underlying conditions. I am not arguing this is a "typical" case. I am however saying it's happening to some. You're not immune just because you're healthy and of an appropriate weight and active and younger:
We can (and have) dug up "black swan" cases of vaccinated people dying of Covid. If you look, you'll find edge cases to "support" any position.
Yes I know, I just posted the boxer who is in the hospital with covid despite being fully vaccinated. Again, I am not arguing everyone is at equal risk. I am simply arguing being young and healthy isn't itself enough to ensure no real risk of hospitalization or death. It just increases your odds in a meaningful way. Much like the vaccine also increases your odds in a meaningful way.
I agree with you there. I can't speak for everyone else on the board, but for myself, all I'm standing by, is the right to decide for myself how to asses those odds and risks in the face of rhetoric and, in some cases, downright misrepresentation and blatant mistruths.
It certainly doesn't help that on this forum, discussion is a brawl, with people jumping in, getting their punches in, and then jumping out.
I don't appreciate you being logical and reasonable in this response. It's really throwing off my assumptions and making me reconsider what I think about it. Not cool mang!
Of course a perfectly healthy person under 40 could die of complications from Covid.I'll avoid telling the family of the next one that dies that it was "statistically improbable" that it happened, and that they should look beyond their personal "anecdotal evidencr" when thinking about Covid.
A perfectly healthy person under 40 could also die of complications from a paper cut, or the common cold.
The important thing to look at is not the anecdotal evidence which gets emphasized specifically because of how unusual it is, but at the statistics and probabilities.
Of course a perfectly healthy person under 40 could die of complications from Covid.I'll avoid telling the family of the next one that dies that it was "statistically improbable" that it happened, and that they should look beyond their personal "anecdotal evidencr" when thinking about Covid.
A perfectly healthy person under 40 could also die of complications from a paper cut, or the common cold.
The important thing to look at is not the anecdotal evidence which gets emphasized specifically because of how unusual it is, but at the statistics and probabilities.
I hope we can both agree that one person's view of what the "important thing" is can be dramatically different from another's.
It's important to not trivialize the very real losses people suffer, regardless of their rarity. But you're not doing the living a service by letting them remain terrified of something that's much less likely to kill them than any number of other causes they don't consider particularly high risk. Not to mention, we're not talking about bedside manner but statistics and general policy, and that should be based on data not emotionally manipulative anecdotes.Of course a perfectly healthy person under 40 could die of complications from Covid.I'll avoid telling the family of the next one that dies that it was "statistically improbable" that it happened, and that they should look beyond their personal "anecdotal evidencr" when thinking about Covid.
A perfectly healthy person under 40 could also die of complications from a paper cut, or the common cold.
The important thing to look at is not the anecdotal evidence which gets emphasized specifically because of how unusual it is, but at the statistics and probabilities.
I hope we can both agree that one person's view of what the "important thing" is can be dramatically different from another's.
No the chap was married. That's a serious health condition for men. ;-)I wonder if you could find 1 person in a country of 330 million that has died of the CCP Wuhan virus without any other pre existing conditions?
I just did, and posted about it.
Stumbled upon this article just now. It’s kinda odd, sad, and funny at the same time.Considering this turned out to be false, bullshit, fake news, etc, do you plan to retract it?
Oklahoma ERs can’t treat gunshot victims because too many people are ODing on horse hormones? https://www.insider.com/oklahomas-emergency-rooms-are-clogged-with-people-overdosing-on-ivermectin-2021-9?amp
So this is what prolonged lockdowns do to people, huh!?
Stumbled upon this article just now. It’s kinda odd, sad, and funny at the same time.Considering this turned out to be false, bullshit, fake news, etc, do you plan to retract it?
Oklahoma ERs can’t treat gunshot victims because too many people are ODing on horse hormones? https://www.insider.com/oklahomas-emergency-rooms-are-clogged-with-people-overdosing-on-ivermectin-2021-9?amp
So this is what prolonged lockdowns do to people, huh!?
Of course a perfectly healthy person under 40 could die of complications from Covid.I'll avoid telling the family of the next one that dies that it was "statistically improbable" that it happened, and that they should look beyond their personal "anecdotal evidencr" when thinking about Covid.
A perfectly healthy person under 40 could also die of complications from a paper cut, or the common cold.
The important thing to look at is not the anecdotal evidence which gets emphasized specifically because of how unusual it is, but at the statistics and probabilities.
I hope we can both agree that one person's view of what the "important thing" is can be dramatically different from another's.
Except that's a ridiculous way to look at this. Obviously, anyone's death is tragic in a sense (except maybe death through old age, and even that's sad for those they leave behind). The death of someone from having a piano fall on them is tragic. The guy who dies from slipping off his toilet seat is tragic. Someone who dies by being hit on the head with a soccer ball is tragic.
But you don't make policy, especially policy FORCING people to do things to their bodies, based on the tragedy of individual deaths that buck all the probabilities.
Based on my age range and health, the odds of me dying from Covid are very very small. Of course, it could happen in theory. But anyone can die at any time, in theory. It's not a measure by which to live one's own life in fear, much less a measure by which to implement authoritarian police-state policy.
The people arguing to the contrary are either terrified ignoramuses or actively malicious people who get hard at the thought of the implementation of authoritarian police-state policy being implemented so that they get to be little commissars informing on their neighbours.
Ergo, the biggest proponents of isolation, lockdowns, etc, could also be easily viewed as anti-Semites.The lockdowns have also disproportionately affected the poor, including much larger percentages of minority groups like blacks and hispanics.
https://www.wsmv.com/news/new-vanderbilt-health-data-shows-difference-in-hospitalizations-between-vaccinated-unvaccinated/article_8d6a8464-0fe0-11ec-aad5-5302ae60b1dd.html
Oops.
Take your mask mandate and shove it up your ass.
Maybe that's why he put "Oops" on the next line?https://www.wsmv.com/news/new-vanderbilt-health-data-shows-difference-in-hospitalizations-between-vaccinated-unvaccinated/article_8d6a8464-0fe0-11ec-aad5-5302ae60b1dd.html
Oops.
Take your mask mandate and shove it up your ass.
What is it you think that link is showing? It appears to be showing the vaccine works really well.
Bernie Sanders agrees with you that class issues subsume racial and other minority and identity issues.He's right on that specific issue, but wrong about nearly everything else. I picked up a copy of his Guide to Political Revolution at a dollar store, and I've been reading it. It has a clever design, with that pseudo-indie or artsy look to make it feel a bit like a revolutionary pamphlet. And it's remarkable how much of the content has been imitated, online. Nearly everything in the book has become part of the default internet talking points of the left.
Poor Happydaze. He's not very bright.Keep doubling down on your mistake. Your failure amuses me little one.
My point was that a mask mandate is stupid if the vaccine works.
But then, he is a potato.
I defer to your greater experience with being a failure.Poor Happydaze. He's not very bright.Keep doubling down on your mistake. Your failure amuses me little one.
My point was that a mask mandate is stupid if the vaccine works.
But then, he is a potato.
Poor Happydaze. He's not very bright.
My point was that a mask mandate is stupid if the vaccine works.
But then, he is a potato.
Poor Happydaze. He's not very bright.
My point was that a mask mandate is stupid if the vaccine works.
But then, he is a potato.
Here's how it works:
1) Vaccine is pretty good;
2) Being unvaccinated is pretty bad;
3) Masks help those unvaccinated;
4) The unvaccinated tend to not wear a mask if the vaccinated go around unmasked;
5) To get the unvaccinated to wear a mask we need the vaccinated to wear one too, even though it's not directly helping them much.
We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days.
Some places other than hospitals are making it mandatory, consistently enforcing it, and making sure the staff generally understand the why's and how's of it. Despite this, some still choose to show their asses (i.e., noses/mouths) is misplaced defiance.Poor Happydaze. He's not very bright.
My point was that a mask mandate is stupid if the vaccine works.
But then, he is a potato.
Here's how it works:
1) Vaccine is pretty good;
2) Being unvaccinated is pretty bad;
3) Masks help those unvaccinated;
4) The unvaccinated tend to not wear a mask if the vaccinated go around unmasked;
5) To get the unvaccinated to wear a mask we need the vaccinated to wear one too, even though it's not directly helping them much.
We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days.
These days? People have always been this way. That's why masks were doomed to failure. Even at "best" participation, people wore their masks poorly, touched their faces, etc, etc. Now, it's all security theater with people wearing masks off their nose, around their neck, etc, etc. People can't stay vigilant forever. Eventually they fatigue and get sloppy.
The only place this can work is in a hospital where it's mandatory for the job, consistently enforced by the workplace, and the staff generally understand the whys and hows of it.
Poor Happydaze. He's not very bright.
My point was that a mask mandate is stupid if the vaccine works.
But then, he is a potato.
Here's how it works:
1) Vaccine is pretty good;
2) Being unvaccinated is pretty bad;
3) Masks help those unvaccinated;
4) The unvaccinated tend to not wear a mask if the vaccinated go around unmasked;
5) To get the unvaccinated to wear a mask we need the vaccinated to wear one too, even though it's not directly helping them much.
We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days. So here we are, with the vaccinated having to wear masks because the unvaccinated won't unless everyone has to.
Poor Happydaze. He's not very bright.
My point was that a mask mandate is stupid if the vaccine works.
But then, he is a potato.
Here's how it works:
1) Vaccine is pretty good;
2) Being unvaccinated is pretty bad;
3) Masks help those unvaccinated;
4) The unvaccinated tend to not wear a mask if the vaccinated go around unmasked;
5) To get the unvaccinated to wear a mask we need the vaccinated to wear one too, even though it's not directly helping them much.
We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days.
These days? People have always been this way. That's why masks were doomed to failure. Even at "best" participation, people wore their masks poorly, touched their faces, etc, etc. Now, it's all security theater with people wearing masks off their nose, around their neck, etc, etc. People can't stay vigilant forever. Eventually they fatigue and get sloppy.
The only place this can work is in a hospital where it's mandatory for the job, consistently enforced by the workplace, and the staff generally understand the whys and hows of it.
Poor Happydaze. He's not very bright.
My point was that a mask mandate is stupid if the vaccine works.
But then, he is a potato.
Here's how it works:
1) Vaccine is pretty good;
2) Being unvaccinated is pretty bad;
3) Masks help those unvaccinated;
4) The unvaccinated tend to not wear a mask if the vaccinated go around unmasked;
5) To get the unvaccinated to wear a mask we need the vaccinated to wear one too, even though it's not directly helping them much.
We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days. So here we are, with the vaccinated having to wear masks because the unvaccinated won't unless everyone has to.
More like:
1a) If you are older and/or have comorbidities, being vaccinated provides a high relative degree of protection vs. the immune system response from original covid, and to a lesser extent from variants.
1b) As you reduce age and comorbidities, the relative degree of protection provided by the vaccine vs. immune system response is less.
1c) Nobody knows what, if any, long term negative effects there are from the vaccine. More of a concern for younger rather than older.
1d) Nobody knows what, if any, are the long-term effects of having covid. Also more of a concern for younger rather than older.
2a) Being unvaccinated is bad if you are older and/or have comorbidities.
2b) The degree of unvaccinated "bad" reduces with age and comorbidities. In the limit, this is seen in children, where deaths from flu are greater than deaths from covid.
3a) Wearing a mask provides little reduction in virus release or uptake, unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask. Don't forget that pre-covid CDC mask guidance for the general public for the flu was to not wear a mask.
3b) As you increase people packing density, reduce ventilation rate, reduce distancing, and add in talking, coughing, and sneezing, non N-95 masks increase somewhat in effectiveness, although I wonder how many people continue to wear a mask full of snot/spit, and how may carry extra masks for such instances. Note that if you have a chronic cough or sneeze, staying home provides provides better protection than a mask.
3c) Masking guidance in many places is crap (technical term). For example, in the Land of Enchantment, you have to wear a mask indoors, unless you are sitting at table in a restaurant. Apparently restaurant tables magically protect you from covid. Conversely, in my office (six 8'x8' cubicles with 5' high walls and 10'+ high ceilings, average #people actually in the office ~4) I have to wear a mask, unless I am eating or drinking. Apparently eating or drinking magically protects me from my office-mates and and my office-mates from me with respect to covid.
3d) When the issued guidance is so blatantly illogical, it leads me to believe those handing it down are stupid and/or have an unspoken/ulterior motives.
5) This contradicts the current Fauci gospel that, in terms of the delta variant, vaccinated people are to wear masks as they have the same nasal viral load as unvaccinated people.
6) My prediction is that, like the flu, covid is going to be with us forever. Hence it will have periodic cycles (currently looking like summer and winter). Its degree of spread will increase, but in general its negative impacts (e.g., hospitalizations, deaths) will decrease (and on a running yearly average) regress towards a mean, although, like the flu, there will be variation over time (i.e., this year so far, hospitalizations are up but deaths are down compared to last year).
Regards.
The Wuhan flu is not going away. It's best to resign yourself that .2% of y'all will die each year from it.
Instead of wearing masks and social distancing like cowardly pussies, I recommend you get your ass
outside, exercise and lose some weight, take your vitamins D and Zinc, and kiss a lot of strange girls.
The whole China virus hysteria and totalitarianism has really inspired me to increasingly embrace a kind of "Fuck It" attitude. The fucking virus is here forever. There is no cure, and never will be. Might as well get on with living life to the fullest. This goddamn virus does not warrant a fucking hysterical power-grab by jackasses throughout society. It is high past time more people everywhere in society to put their foot down and demand enough is enough. Shut up and fucking live life, and let everyone else live life, too. If you get it and die, oh well. At any given day, there's likely a dozen ways anyone of us could die. The China virus is just another method to add to the stack.That's what I've been arguing for a while. Once we had community spread in the US -- which we knew by March of last year, though it's now clear it was already happening late 2019 -- there was no way to contain it. It's become part of the background of diseases, like the various viruses that cause the flu.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Poor Happydaze. He's not very bright.
My point was that a mask mandate is stupid if the vaccine works.
But then, he is a potato.
Here's how it works:
1) Vaccine is pretty good;
2) Being unvaccinated is pretty bad;
3) Masks help those unvaccinated;
4) The unvaccinated tend to not wear a mask if the vaccinated go around unmasked;
5) To get the unvaccinated to wear a mask we need the vaccinated to wear one too, even though it's not directly helping them much.
We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days. So here we are, with the vaccinated having to wear masks because the unvaccinated won't unless everyone has to.
More like:
1a) If you are older and/or have comorbidities, being vaccinated provides a high relative degree of protection vs. the immune system response from original covid, and to a lesser extent from variants.
1b) As you reduce age and comorbidities, the relative degree of protection provided by the vaccine vs. immune system response is less.
1c) Nobody knows what, if any, long term negative effects there are from the vaccine. More of a concern for younger rather than older.
1d) Nobody knows what, if any, are the long-term effects of having covid. Also more of a concern for younger rather than older.
2a) Being unvaccinated is bad if you are older and/or have comorbidities.
2b) The degree of unvaccinated "bad" reduces with age and comorbidities. In the limit, this is seen in children, where deaths from flu are greater than deaths from covid.
Look man I am just using the link HE posted. You want to play moving target, that's fine. But I was responding to what he posted, which pretty clearly showed the vaccines are working pretty well.Quote3a) Wearing a mask provides little reduction in virus release or uptake, unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask. Don't forget that pre-covid CDC mask guidance for the general public for the flu was to not wear a mask.
This was debunked long ago, and I know you're aware of the debunking. You are aware it's not about a single microscopic particle of covid infecting you but is instead highly dependent on the quantity of large particle dosage you receive and even a poorly fitted masks frequently will reduce the amount of large particles you can spread in a wide radius. The radius you spread those particles reduces with a mask (even one not tightly fitted) and the quantity of particles you spread reduces (even one not tightly fitted). The original mask guidelines were based on thinking you had to stop ever microscopic particle and were changed as we learned more about how this virus spreads.Quote3b) As you increase people packing density, reduce ventilation rate, reduce distancing, and add in talking, coughing, and sneezing, non N-95 masks increase somewhat in effectiveness, although I wonder how many people continue to wear a mask full of snot/spit, and how may carry extra masks for such instances. Note that if you have a chronic cough or sneeze, staying home provides provides better protection than a mask.
The primary purpose of the mask is to protect others from you when you are not aware you're contagious, not to protect you from others. Which I know you also knew.
Quote3c) Masking guidance in many places is crap (technical term). For example, in the Land of Enchantment, you have to wear a mask indoors, unless you are sitting at table in a restaurant. Apparently restaurant tables magically protect you from covid. Conversely, in my office (six 8'x8' cubicles with 5' high walls and 10'+ high ceilings, average #people actually in the office ~4) I have to wear a mask, unless I am eating or drinking. Apparently eating or drinking magically protects me from my office-mates and and my office-mates from me with respect to covid.
3d) When the issued guidance is so blatantly illogical, it leads me to believe those handing it down are stupid and/or have an unspoken/ulterior motives.
This is again back to the quantity issue. Obviously you cannot wear a mask while eating and drinking. But wearing a mask when you can reduces the quantity of particles you spread.Quote5) This contradicts the current Fauci gospel that, in terms of the delta variant, vaccinated people are to wear masks as they have the same nasal viral load as unvaccinated people.
Right except they're contagious apparently for a much shorter period of time. The load peaks at the same quantity, but it reduces much more rapidly. Also, you show less symptoms on average if you're vaccinated, and some of those symptoms help spread the virus in a wider radius like sneezing and coughing.Quote6) My prediction is that, like the flu, covid is going to be with us forever. Hence it will have periodic cycles (currently looking like summer and winter). Its degree of spread will increase, but in general its negative impacts (e.g., hospitalizations, deaths) will decrease (and on a running yearly average) regress towards a mean, although, like the flu, there will be variation over time (i.e., this year so far, hospitalizations are up but deaths are down compared to last year).
Regards.
Sounds right to me.
We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days. So here we are, with the vaccinated having to wear masks because the unvaccinated won't unless everyone has to.Ah yes, identify and blame some Other. It's their fault.
Stumbled upon this article just now. It’s kinda odd, sad, and funny at the same time.Considering this turned out to be false, bullshit, fake news, etc, do you plan to retract it?
Oklahoma ERs can’t treat gunshot victims because too many people are ODing on horse hormones? https://www.insider.com/oklahomas-emergency-rooms-are-clogged-with-people-overdosing-on-ivermectin-2021-9?amp
So this is what prolonged lockdowns do to people, huh!?
The Wuhan flu is not going away. It's best to resign yourself that .2% of y'all will die each year from it.
Instead of wearing masks and social distancing like cowardly pussies, I recommend you get your ass
outside, exercise and lose some weight, take your vitamins D and Zinc, and kiss a lot of strange girls.
We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days. So here we are, with the vaccinated having to wear masks because the unvaccinated won't unless everyone has to.Ah yes, identify and blame some Other. It's their fault.
I'm currently reading Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism. The parallels are striking.
The whole China virus hysteria and totalitarianism has really inspired me to increasingly embrace a kind of "Fuck It" attitude. The fucking virus is here forever. There is no cure, and never will be. Might as well get on with living life to the fullest. This goddamn virus does not warrant a fucking hysterical power-grab by jackasses throughout society. It is high past time more people everywhere in society to put their foot down and demand enough is enough. Shut up and fucking live life, and let everyone else live life, too. If you get it and die, oh well. At any given day, there's likely a dozen ways anyone of us could die. The China virus is just another method to add to the stack.That's what I've been arguing for a while. Once we had community spread in the US -- which we knew by March of last year, though it's now clear it was already happening late 2019 -- there was no way to contain it. It's become part of the background of diseases, like the various viruses that cause the flu.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
That said, we don't have to take every risk in the book. There are still some legitimate questions about the long term effects of the vaccines, but they do seem to ameliorate the worst effects, so there's a strong argument in favor of vaccinating the most vulnerable, like the elderly and frontline healthcare workers. But it should be 100% uncoerced. We need to stop taking cues from Mengele (https://thoughtcatalog.com/jeremy-london/2019/05/josef-mengele/) and the US Public Health Service. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study)
And if there was a major new outbreak, you could make an argument in favor of shutting down large indoor events, because we know that the effects of superspreaders are disproportionate. But again, it should be voluntary. Get a cute little color code like the Department of Homeland Security uses to warn of terrorist events or something.
I don't think masks work. The studies have been very conclusive that the effect is minimal to non-existent, and the last one you cited with a positive effect has a number of methodological problems.We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days. So here we are, with the vaccinated having to wear masks because the unvaccinated won't unless everyone has to.Ah yes, identify and blame some Other. It's their fault.
I'm currently reading Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism. The parallels are striking.
Cut the crap. Do you think the unvaccinated wear a mask when they see many other people not wearing a mask? Do you think the honor system was working or not?
ICUs being full is an issue for everyone. You too, internet badass, if you get in a car accident or fall off a ladder.ICU’s are almost always near capacity at normal times because the bean counters don’t want a bunch of beds sitting empty and costing them money. There are whole studies done before hospitals even break ground to figure out what a normal number of patients at any one time will be. If a Hospital is at 90-95% capacity; that’s NORMAL.
You should factor in that hospitals have often expanded their ICUs into other care areas and then are still at/near capacity. One campus I work started with a 20-bed ICU that took over another 20 beds from an adjacent surgical unit and had an average daily census of 36 (with roughly 2/3 being Covid patients) in August. You can view that as being at 90% capacity, but compared to the hospital's standard it's really 180% capacity.Quote from: Mistwell link=topic=42126.msg1187162#msg1187162ICUs being full is an issue for everyone. You too, internet badass, if you get in a car accident or fall off a ladder.ICU’s are almost always near capacity at normal times because the bean counters don’t want a bunch of beds sitting empty and costing them money. There are whole studies done before hospitals even break ground to figure out what a normal number of patients at any one time will be. If a Hospital is at 90-95% capacity; that’s NORMAL.
According to the numbers from the undertakers, the number of deaths was actually LOWER in 2020 than it was in 2019.
Meanwhile in Israel where 90+% are double vaxxed, a large percentage has had the booster and some even a fourth booster, the majority hospitalized and dying with Covid are vaxxed and even the experts say the new mutations creaked by the leaky vax (actually gene therapy and not a vax) have made the vax and first two boosters useless at stopping it (just like the guy who invented the mRNA process said would happen).
Meanwhile multiple studies show natural immunity (to a virus with a 99.9+% survival rate) is 7-20 times more effective than the jab and provides lasting resistance/immunity and the places that didn’t lock down and the African countries who HCQ and Ivermectin are regularly taken as anti-malarial prophylaxis are having no problems with the virus at all.
The LAST thing we should be doing is jamming endless gene therapy treatments with zero long term risk studies completed on them into children.
You should factor in that hospitals have often expanded their ICUs into other care areas and then are still at/near capacity. One campus I work started with a 20-bed ICU that took over another 20 beds from an adjacent surgical unit and had an average daily census of 36 (with roughly 2/3 being Covid patients) in August. You can view that as being at 90% capacity, but compared to the hospital's standard it's really 180% capacity.It's not an area where I've dived deep, but I've ended up reading a lot of articles that touch on ICU capacity, and they were uniformly terrible. They either gave numbers that sound large without providing context (i.e. compared to the normal/expected rates) or focused on a single case while suggesting it's the norm, even when it's clearly a rare exception. I'm sure the raw data is out there, but it would be nice if we had trustworthy news organizations, instead of having to assemble all the parts ourselves.
You know what I do not see mentioned, ever? How we are letting hordes of people into the country with no idea as to how vaccinated they are.The how isn't the question. The question is the why.
Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?You know what I do not see mentioned, ever? How we are letting hordes of people into the country with no idea as to how vaccinated they are.The how isn't the question. The question is the why.
Particularly as there's been implication that such people have been deliberately exposed to Covid and then dumped in, how shall we say, more fractious states that aren't inclined to bow their heads to D.C.
All hospitals in central Florida have expanded ICUs, but the degree varies from hospital to hospital. In general, the more space the hospital had for post-op recovery (inpatient surgical floors), the more they could convert. Other areas of elective services are much harder to utilize in this manner. Even after converting non-ICU spaces, you still need to find ICU-level staff, and uptraining the med-surg nurses that previously worked those areas is not nearly as quick as converting rooms (nor is it always successful), so even as total ICU beds increase, staffed ICU beds can still lag behind.You should factor in that hospitals have often expanded their ICUs into other care areas and then are still at/near capacity. One campus I work started with a 20-bed ICU that took over another 20 beds from an adjacent surgical unit and had an average daily census of 36 (with roughly 2/3 being Covid patients) in August. You can view that as being at 90% capacity, but compared to the hospital's standard it's really 180% capacity.It's not an area where I've dived deep, but I've ended up reading a lot of articles that touch on ICU capacity, and they were uniformly terrible. They either gave numbers that sound large without providing context (i.e. compared to the normal/expected rates) or focused on a single case while suggesting it's the norm, even when it's clearly a rare exception. I'm sure the raw data is out there, but it would be nice if we had trustworthy news organizations, instead of having to assemble all the parts ourselves.
It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?You know what I do not see mentioned, ever? How we are letting hordes of people into the country with no idea as to how vaccinated they are.The how isn't the question. The question is the why.
Particularly as there's been implication that such people have been deliberately exposed to Covid and then dumped in, how shall we say, more fractious states that aren't inclined to bow their heads to D.C.
Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?You know what I do not see mentioned, ever? How we are letting hordes of people into the country with no idea as to how vaccinated they are.The how isn't the question. The question is the why.
Particularly as there's been implication that such people have been deliberately exposed to Covid and then dumped in, how shall we say, more fractious states that aren't inclined to bow their heads to D.C.
The U.S. federal authorities are not quarantining, isolating, or otherwise handling the ridiculous surge of illegal aliens coming across the southern border with any kind of skill. In fact, most are being held in conditions worse than the ones the left castigated Trump over (despite those 'cages' being established during the Obama years. Oops).
Rather, such persons are being loaded onto transports -- in close quarters -- and shipped to various areas. Pretty certain being confined within a vehicle with a Covid-positive would be an easy way to be exposed. Doesn't matter if they're shipped an hour away or across country (there have been some interesting spikes in Covid though).
And if you say 'they couldn't know', then just shoot yourself now, you moron, because you'd be more useful as an organ donor than a taxpayer. This isn't rocket science.
*shrug*Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?You know what I do not see mentioned, ever? How we are letting hordes of people into the country with no idea as to how vaccinated they are.The how isn't the question. The question is the why.
Particularly as there's been implication that such people have been deliberately exposed to Covid and then dumped in, how shall we say, more fractious states that aren't inclined to bow their heads to D.C.
The U.S. federal authorities are not quarantining, isolating, or otherwise handling the ridiculous surge of illegal aliens coming across the southern border with any kind of skill. In fact, most are being held in conditions worse than the ones the left castigated Trump over (despite those 'cages' being established during the Obama years. Oops).
Rather, such persons are being loaded onto transports -- in close quarters -- and shipped to various areas. Pretty certain being confined within a vehicle with a Covid-positive would be an easy way to be exposed. Doesn't matter if they're shipped an hour away or across country (there have been some interesting spikes in Covid though).
And if you say 'they couldn't know', then just shoot yourself now, you moron, because you'd be more useful as an organ donor than a taxpayer. This isn't rocket science.
There's a border crisis they want to pretend doesn't exist, so they're trying to disguise the number of immigrants by dispersing them quickly and widely. Sure it, could spread covid. But that's incidental, and the most it proves is they don't care that much about spreading covid, not that there was some kind of plot.
I have literally, no shit, seen people say, 'I have the right to live in a virus free world.'
Just wrap your mind around that level of stupid.
Expecting a ban on air travel for uninjected people tomorrow. Lets see what happens. Hope a judge in Hawaii is ready to strike it down.
I don't think masks work. The studies have been very conclusive that the effect is minimal to non-existent, and the last one you cited with a positive effect has a number of methodological problems.We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days. So here we are, with the vaccinated having to wear masks because the unvaccinated won't unless everyone has to.Ah yes, identify and blame some Other. It's their fault.
I'm currently reading Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism. The parallels are striking.
Cut the crap. Do you think the unvaccinated wear a mask when they see many other people not wearing a mask? Do you think the honor system was working or not?
The only reason for the masks is to exert control by creating a climate of fear, and providing an enemy to blame. Which is why I'm bringing up parallels in the writing of authors like Arendt and Hoffer, who dissected the nature of fanatical mass movements and the rise of totalitarianism, because these the techniques used.
Expecting a ban on air travel for uninjected people tomorrow. Lets see what happens. Hope a judge in Hawaii is ready to strike it down.
I went to Hawaii recently. It's either vaccinated or tested in the couple days prior to travel. I had to log my vaccine card at a special line before flying, and provide proof of my kid's testing.
Quote from: Mistwell link=topic=42126.msg1187162#msg1187162ICUs being full is an issue for everyone. You too, internet badass, if you get in a car accident or fall off a ladder.ICU’s are almost always near capacity at normal times because the bean counters don’t want a bunch of beds sitting empty and costing them money. There are whole studies done before hospitals even break ground to figure out what a normal number of patients at any one time will be. If a Hospital is at 90-95% capacity; that’s NORMAL.
According to the numbers from the undertakers, the number of deaths was actually LOWER in 2020 than it was in 2019.
Meanwhile in Israel where 90+% are double vaxxed
a large percentage has had the booster and some even a fourth booster, the majority hospitalized and dying with Covid are vaxxed
Expecting a ban on air travel for uninjected people tomorrow. Lets see what happens. Hope a judge in Hawaii is ready to strike it down.
I went to Hawaii recently. It's either vaccinated or tested in the couple days prior to travel. I had to log my vaccine card at a special line before flying, and provide proof of my kid's testing.
Since people with the vax can get covid...wouldnt it make more sense to test everyone?
Do you think the unvaccinated wear a mask when they see many other people not wearing a mask? Do you think the honor system was working or not?Why do you think the unvaccinated aren't wearing masks, even in spite of orders telling them too.
Do you think the unvaccinated wear a mask when they see many other people not wearing a mask? Do you think the honor system was working or not?Why do you think the unvaccinated aren't wearing masks, even in spite of orders telling them too.
You used the word "deliberately" but now say that's unimportant, yet your entire argument then falls apart just like all the other conspiracy theories you peddle.*shrug*Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?You know what I do not see mentioned, ever? How we are letting hordes of people into the country with no idea as to how vaccinated they are.The how isn't the question. The question is the why.
Particularly as there's been implication that such people have been deliberately exposed to Covid and then dumped in, how shall we say, more fractious states that aren't inclined to bow their heads to D.C.
The U.S. federal authorities are not quarantining, isolating, or otherwise handling the ridiculous surge of illegal aliens coming across the southern border with any kind of skill. In fact, most are being held in conditions worse than the ones the left castigated Trump over (despite those 'cages' being established during the Obama years. Oops).
Rather, such persons are being loaded onto transports -- in close quarters -- and shipped to various areas. Pretty certain being confined within a vehicle with a Covid-positive would be an easy way to be exposed. Doesn't matter if they're shipped an hour away or across country (there have been some interesting spikes in Covid though).
And if you say 'they couldn't know', then just shoot yourself now, you moron, because you'd be more useful as an organ donor than a taxpayer. This isn't rocket science.
There's a border crisis they want to pretend doesn't exist, so they're trying to disguise the number of immigrants by dispersing them quickly and widely. Sure it, could spread covid. But that's incidental, and the most it proves is they don't care that much about spreading covid, not that there was some kind of plot.
Whether it's malice or incompetence is irrelevant.
The damage is still being done.
When everyone is wearing a mask the unvaccinated also tend to wear a mask. I think it's like everything else in life. If peer pressure is applied, most people do that thing.So, why does peer pressure work on wearing a mask, but fails on vaccines?
Ultimately, the results are what matter. I may think it's deliberate; Pat disagrees. I don't think it's worth getting into a verbal fistfight with Pat over.You used the word "deliberately" but now say that's unimportant, yet your entire argument then falls apart just like all the other conspiracy theories you peddle.*shrug*Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?You know what I do not see mentioned, ever? How we are letting hordes of people into the country with no idea as to how vaccinated they are.The how isn't the question. The question is the why.
Particularly as there's been implication that such people have been deliberately exposed to Covid and then dumped in, how shall we say, more fractious states that aren't inclined to bow their heads to D.C.
The U.S. federal authorities are not quarantining, isolating, or otherwise handling the ridiculous surge of illegal aliens coming across the southern border with any kind of skill. In fact, most are being held in conditions worse than the ones the left castigated Trump over (despite those 'cages' being established during the Obama years. Oops).
Rather, such persons are being loaded onto transports -- in close quarters -- and shipped to various areas. Pretty certain being confined within a vehicle with a Covid-positive would be an easy way to be exposed. Doesn't matter if they're shipped an hour away or across country (there have been some interesting spikes in Covid though).
And if you say 'they couldn't know', then just shoot yourself now, you moron, because you'd be more useful as an organ donor than a taxpayer. This isn't rocket science.
There's a border crisis they want to pretend doesn't exist, so they're trying to disguise the number of immigrants by dispersing them quickly and widely. Sure it, could spread covid. But that's incidental, and the most it proves is they don't care that much about spreading covid, not that there was some kind of plot.
Whether it's malice or incompetence is irrelevant.
The damage is still being done.
In other news, the junta declares 'fuck your freedoms'.
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-coronavirus-pandemic-executive-branch-18fb12993f05be13bf760946a6fb89be
I guess the economy crashing is due to those dirtywreckerskulaksunvaccinated, right?
DOL and OSHA, as well as other federal agencies, are working diligently to encourage COVID-19 vaccinations. OSHA does not wish to have any appearance of discouraging workers from receiving COVID-19 vaccination, and also does not wish to disincentivize employers' vaccination efforts. As a result, OSHA will not enforce 29 CFR 1904's recording requirements to require any employers to record worker side effects from COVID-19 vaccination at least through May 2022. We will reevaluate the agency’s position at that time to determine the best course of action moving forward.https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/faqs
In other news, the junta declares 'fuck your freedoms'.Remember when the Khmer Rouge was going around killing people with glasses? Man, that was kind of silly... Not sure why I thought of that...
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-coronavirus-pandemic-executive-branch-18fb12993f05be13bf760946a6fb89be
I guess the economy crashing is due to those dirtywreckerskulaksunvaccinated, right?
I would like to remind all Bidenharris cocksuckers present that back in July, Jen 'Raggedy Ann' Psaki stated 'a vaccine mandate is not the government's role'. And that back in December, Biden insisted that vaccination would not be mandatory.A quote I've always liked is, "if they didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all".
You should factor in that hospitals have often expanded their ICUs into other care areas and then are still at/near capacity. One campus I work started with a 20-bed ICU that took over another 20 beds from an adjacent surgical unit and had an average daily census of 36 (with roughly 2/3 being Covid patients) in August. You can view that as being at 90% capacity, but compared to the hospital's standard it's really 180% capacity.
Oh look, a TOTALLY FABRICATED STAT. Israel is at 61% fully vaccinated you fucking tool (though they say it's 58% and some triple doses were being counted as unique individuals). They were doing great, and then it leveled off as the Orthodox and the Palestinian populations declined the vaccine in high numbers, and have stagnated just over 60% for a while now. WHICH IS WHY THEY ARE SPIKING. They used to be one of the most vaccinated nations, but now they're very middle of the road. Germany, France, Netherlands, Italy, UK, Canada, Ireland, Belgium, Uruguay, Iceland, Denmark, Spain, etc. are all ahead of them now.
Oh look, a TOTALLY FABRICATED STAT. Israel is at 61% fully vaccinated you fucking tool (though they say it's 58% and some triple doses were being counted as unique individuals). They were doing great, and then it leveled off as the Orthodox and the Palestinian populations declined the vaccine in high numbers, and have stagnated just over 60% for a while now. WHICH IS WHY THEY ARE SPIKING. They used to be one of the most vaccinated nations, but now they're very middle of the road. Germany, France, Netherlands, Italy, UK, Canada, Ireland, Belgium, Uruguay, Iceland, Denmark, Spain, etc. are all ahead of them now.
60% figure is misleading. It's over 80% of their adult population. Generally speaking the adult population figures are used since younger people are at such a statistically miniscule risk from SarsCov-2.
It's unclear whether the 80% figure is including naturally immune people. Israel's "Green Pass" system reportedly does recognize natural immunity, although it's not clear how that aligns with ongoing efforts at 3rd, 4th... Xth boosters. Honestly the failure to recognize natural immunity is probably one of the biggest red flags about the US's own failure-in-progress.
You're not going to get your wish.Ultimately, the results are what matter. I may think it's deliberate; Pat disagrees. I don't think it's worth getting into a verbal fistfight with Pat over.You used the word "deliberately" but now say that's unimportant, yet your entire argument then falls apart just like all the other conspiracy theories you peddle.*shrug*Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?You know what I do not see mentioned, ever? How we are letting hordes of people into the country with no idea as to how vaccinated they are.The how isn't the question. The question is the why.
Particularly as there's been implication that such people have been deliberately exposed to Covid and then dumped in, how shall we say, more fractious states that aren't inclined to bow their heads to D.C.
The U.S. federal authorities are not quarantining, isolating, or otherwise handling the ridiculous surge of illegal aliens coming across the southern border with any kind of skill. In fact, most are being held in conditions worse than the ones the left castigated Trump over (despite those 'cages' being established during the Obama years. Oops).
Rather, such persons are being loaded onto transports -- in close quarters -- and shipped to various areas. Pretty certain being confined within a vehicle with a Covid-positive would be an easy way to be exposed. Doesn't matter if they're shipped an hour away or across country (there have been some interesting spikes in Covid though).
And if you say 'they couldn't know', then just shoot yourself now, you moron, because you'd be more useful as an organ donor than a taxpayer. This isn't rocket science.
There's a border crisis they want to pretend doesn't exist, so they're trying to disguise the number of immigrants by dispersing them quickly and widely. Sure it, could spread covid. But that's incidental, and the most it proves is they don't care that much about spreading covid, not that there was some kind of plot.
Whether it's malice or incompetence is irrelevant.
The damage is still being done.
You, on the other hand, should kill yourself. Immediately.
In other news, the junta declares 'fuck your freedoms'.
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-coronavirus-pandemic-executive-branch-18fb12993f05be13bf760946a6fb89be
I guess the economy crashing is due to those dirtywreckerskulaksunvaccinated, right?
I don't think masks work.I don't think masks work. The studies have been very conclusive that the effect is minimal to non-existent, and the last one you cited with a positive effect has a number of methodological problems.We've kinda proven those points out over time. We did the whole "You can go unmasked if you're vaccinated as long as the unvaccinated wear masks" based on the honors system and it was a total train wreck with everyone going maskless because that's how our society works these days. So here we are, with the vaccinated having to wear masks because the unvaccinated won't unless everyone has to.Ah yes, identify and blame some Other. It's their fault.
I'm currently reading Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism. The parallels are striking.
Cut the crap. Do you think the unvaccinated wear a mask when they see many other people not wearing a mask? Do you think the honor system was working or not?
The only reason for the masks is to exert control by creating a climate of fear, and providing an enemy to blame. Which is why I'm bringing up parallels in the writing of authors like Arendt and Hoffer, who dissected the nature of fanatical mass movements and the rise of totalitarianism, because these the techniques used.
Do you think the unvaccinated wear a mask when they see many other people not wearing a mask? Do you think the honor system was working or not?
[citation needed]Quote from: Mistwell link=topic=42126.msg1187162#msg1187162ICUs being full is an issue for everyone. You too, internet badass, if you get in a car accident or fall off a ladder.ICU’s are almost always near capacity at normal times because the bean counters don’t want a bunch of beds sitting empty and costing them money. There are whole studies done before hospitals even break ground to figure out what a normal number of patients at any one time will be. If a Hospital is at 90-95% capacity; that’s NORMAL.
ICU capacity hasn't been running anything close to "normal" for the entire pandemic. There are many places right now which have locked down non-essential surgeries, which has a cascade effect of course because non-essential doesn't mean "increased risk of death if I don't get this done" it just means "not dying right this moment if you don't get it". If you have evidence the ICUs are not running at much worse capacity during the pandemic let's see it. I strongly suspect it's just some bullshit spin put on something to justify your world view.
I would like to remind all Bidenharris cocksuckers present that back in July, Jen 'Raggedy Ann' Psaki stated 'a vaccine mandate is not the government's role'. And that back in December, Biden insisted that vaccination would not be mandatory.To be fair, literally everyone knew they were lying.
And yet, here we are. You wanted this.
Healthcare furloughs are focused on non-essential personnel. This includes a lot of different roles, but not ICU nurses. It might include ancillary staff on ICUs (with the nurses expected to pick up extra duties).[citation needed]Quote from: Mistwell link=topic=42126.msg1187162#msg1187162ICUs being full is an issue for everyone. You too, internet badass, if you get in a car accident or fall off a ladder.ICU’s are almost always near capacity at normal times because the bean counters don’t want a bunch of beds sitting empty and costing them money. There are whole studies done before hospitals even break ground to figure out what a normal number of patients at any one time will be. If a Hospital is at 90-95% capacity; that’s NORMAL.
ICU capacity hasn't been running anything close to "normal" for the entire pandemic. There are many places right now which have locked down non-essential surgeries, which has a cascade effect of course because non-essential doesn't mean "increased risk of death if I don't get this done" it just means "not dying right this moment if you don't get it". If you have evidence the ICUs are not running at much worse capacity during the pandemic let's see it. I strongly suspect it's just some bullshit spin put on something to justify your world view.
All the hospitals near me were furloughing medical workers during the lockdowns because the hospitals were empty. There was some activity at the peak and now, but overall they were struggling.
This is just through June 2020:
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/49-hospitals-furloughing-workers-in-response-to-covid-19.html
It doesn't breakdown ICU vs. non-ICU, but the number of covid patients being hospitalized was low for most of the period, as well. So you're making an outrageous assertion and demanding citations while not providing any sources supporting your wild claims.
When everyone is wearing a mask the unvaccinated also tend to wear a mask. I think it's like everything else in life. If peer pressure is applied, most people do that thing.So, why does peer pressure work on wearing a mask, but fails on vaccines?
When everyone is wearing a mask the unvaccinated also tend to wear a mask. I think it's like everything else in life. If peer pressure is applied, most people do that thing.So, why does peer pressure work on wearing a mask, but fails on vaccines?
I don't think it does? Peers are not applying peer pressure in a lot of places I assume is the issue. Democrats appear to be pressuring Democrats to get vaccinated, and Republicans appear to be pressuring Republicans to be suspect of the vaccine.
Wearing a mask certainly has perks.It makes it harder for the police to identify you when you start throwing Molotov's!
Honestly hate the fact wearing masks was politicized by the left and ridiculed by the right... Wearing a mask certainly has perks.Unfortunately, none of those perks involve being effective against COVID. That's why it is politicized. There's no actual studies, evidence, or data suggesting that masks work (actually the exact opposite). So if they don't work, how can the choice to force people to wear them be anything but political?
Vaccines are absolutely a visible thing here, even in Florida. Because people who have gotten the vaccine won't shut up about it. I'm in a blue county here and I've had this conversation multiple times:So, why does peer pressure work on wearing a mask, but fails on vaccines?I don't think it does? Peers are not applying peer pressure in a lot of places I assume is the issue. Democrats appear to be pressuring Democrats to get vaccinated, and Republicans appear to be pressuring Republicans to be suspect of the vaccine. Democrats are mocking Republicans about vaccinations, which entrenches their position to be suspicious. Republicans are mocking Democrats about being slaves to the Government which just entrenches their position. As long as vaccinations are no a visible thing which everyone seems to have around you (like a mask) the peer pressure is from your political peers and not general public peers.
Biden: "All companies with over 100 employees will have to do X or face OSHA fines in the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars."Sweating is OK...just don't cough.
Employee #102 of 102 on the seniority list: *starts sweating*
(https://i.imgur.com/Lj8SBQo.png)If I remember correctly, the guy in that case still didn't have to take the vaccination. He just had to pay a $5 fine. Also, this was at the time that the Supreme Court allowed forced sterilization of the mentally handicapped, so...
Interesting context to the discussion about the constitutionality of vaccine mandates. Do we also want to bring back sterilization of people deemed unfit by the state?
Honestly hate the fact wearing masks was politicized by the left and ridiculed by the right... Wearing a mask certainly has perks.Unfortunately, none of those perks involve being effective against COVID. That's why it is politicized. There's no actual studies, evidence, or data suggesting that masks work (actually the exact opposite). So if they don't work, how can the choice to force people to wear them be anything but political?
Vaccines are absolutely a visible thing here, even in Florida. Because people who have gotten the vaccine won't shut up about it. I'm in a blue county here and I've had this conversation multiple times:So, why does peer pressure work on wearing a mask, but fails on vaccines?I don't think it does? Peers are not applying peer pressure in a lot of places I assume is the issue. Democrats appear to be pressuring Democrats to get vaccinated, and Republicans appear to be pressuring Republicans to be suspect of the vaccine. Democrats are mocking Republicans about vaccinations, which entrenches their position to be suspicious. Republicans are mocking Democrats about being slaves to the Government which just entrenches their position. As long as vaccinations are no a visible thing which everyone seems to have around you (like a mask) the peer pressure is from your political peers and not general public peers.
"Hey man, what's up with those anti-vaxxers? What a bunch of idiots."
"I'm not vaccinated."
Dumbstruck silence, then "Well anyway, those anti-vaxxers sure are stupid, huh?"
"I said, I'm an 'anti-vaxxer'."
... "Doesn't look like anything to me."
It's like their brains can't process it. In their head, the only people who would choose not to get these vaccines is some inbred hillbilly Trump supporter, waving the American flag from the giant smokestack on the back of their pick-up truck. I've only been a Republican for about a year now. My pick-up truck hasn't been delivered yet.
I admit that when my county had a mask mandate, I tolerated it for a while. Through this entire thing, I've gone out to eat every single day. Literally, there has not been a single day in which I stayed home, even during lockdown. I'd get my takeout and just sit in front the store and eat it on the ground (I'm pretty sure that I single handedly kept my local Five Guys in business). I'm a regular everywhere I go, and I know the staff. I didn't want to start any shit because I know they aren't responsible for corporate's decisions (or the idiots on the corrupt city council). They don't deserve to be the front line of a battle they don't want to even be in.
But as of Biden's edict today... well, as the kids like to say, I shall "become ungovernable".
I do love how people clamor there will be no mandates from government, but a private business can of course require medical procedures. Here we are now, with a mandate from government. What will it be now? You do not have to get the vaccine, you can just take a test weekly.... which makes fuck all sense, if you can STILL get Covid and spread it with a vax, shouldnt EVERYONE have to get a weekly test?
Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.I do love how people clamor there will be no mandates from government, but a private business can of course require medical procedures. Here we are now, with a mandate from government. What will it be now? You do not have to get the vaccine, you can just take a test weekly.... which makes fuck all sense, if you can STILL get Covid and spread it with a vax, shouldnt EVERYONE have to get a weekly test?
We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.
As usual, you are mistaken.Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.I do love how people clamor there will be no mandates from government, but a private business can of course require medical procedures. Here we are now, with a mandate from government. What will it be now? You do not have to get the vaccine, you can just take a test weekly.... which makes fuck all sense, if you can STILL get Covid and spread it with a vax, shouldnt EVERYONE have to get a weekly test?
We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.
Over and over again, you've claimed that masks work.Honestly hate the fact wearing masks was politicized by the left and ridiculed by the right... Wearing a mask certainly has perks.Unfortunately, none of those perks involve being effective against COVID. That's why it is politicized. There's no actual studies, evidence, or data suggesting that masks work (actually the exact opposite). So if they don't work, how can the choice to force people to wear them be anything but political?
Over and over again studies show masks work. And over and over again you try to re-write history and act like they have not shown they work.
Here is the latest:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/09/masks-randomized-study-bangladesh-covid/
I do love how people clamor there will be no mandates from government, but a private business can of course require medical procedures. Here we are now, with a mandate from government. What will it be now? You do not have to get the vaccine, you can just take a test weekly.... which makes fuck all sense, if you can STILL get Covid and spread it with a vax, shouldnt EVERYONE have to get a weekly test?
We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.
Yes, they do. Even the measles vaccine doesn't provide 100% immunity. The covid vaccines aren't nearly as effective as many of the traditional childhood vaccines, but they're still vaccines.We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?Yes, they do. Even the measles vaccine doesn't provide 100% immunity. The covid vaccines aren't nearly as effective as many of the traditional childhood vaccines, but they're still vaccines.We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.
Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.I do love how people clamor there will be no mandates from government, but a private business can of course require medical procedures. Here we are now, with a mandate from government. What will it be now? You do not have to get the vaccine, you can just take a test weekly.... which makes fuck all sense, if you can STILL get Covid and spread it with a vax, shouldnt EVERYONE have to get a weekly test?
We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?Yes, they do. Even the measles vaccine doesn't provide 100% immunity. The covid vaccines aren't nearly as effective as many of the traditional childhood vaccines, but they're still vaccines.We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.
Just because they call it something doesn't necessarily make it so.
One dose of MMR vaccine is 93% effective against measles, 78% effective against mumps, and 97% effective against rubella.That's not 100%. Are you arguing that the MMR shot everyone had as a kid isn't a vaccine?
Two doses of MMR vaccine are 97% effective against measles and 88% effective against mumps.
Over and over again, you've claimed that masks work.Honestly hate the fact wearing masks was politicized by the left and ridiculed by the right... Wearing a mask certainly has perks.Unfortunately, none of those perks involve being effective against COVID. That's why it is politicized. There's no actual studies, evidence, or data suggesting that masks work (actually the exact opposite). So if they don't work, how can the choice to force people to wear them be anything but political?
Over and over again studies show masks work. And over and over again you try to re-write history and act like they have not shown they work.
Here is the latest:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/09/masks-randomized-study-bangladesh-covid/
And over and over, we've pointed out that the studies overwhelmingly show masks had no or minimal effect, and that the studies that showed even a tiny effect were very low quality, with a minuscule number of subjects or very poor controls. The only solid study on the subject (Danmask) clearly shows no effect. We've explain the theories why masks don't work, covering things like particle size and aerosolization. And the last time you posted the Bangladesh study, we went over all the numerous methodological problems that invalidate its conclusions.
You never replied to any of these concerns. You keep popping up again and again to make the same claims, but every time we point out the problems with those claims, you vanish like a thief in the night.
I do love how people clamor there will be no mandates from government, but a private business can of course require medical procedures. Here we are now, with a mandate from government. What will it be now? You do not have to get the vaccine, you can just take a test weekly.... which makes fuck all sense, if you can STILL get Covid and spread it with a vax, shouldnt EVERYONE have to get a weekly test?
We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.
until the vaxed people are spreading it all about. A better solution is if You are at risk, wear a respirator or gas mask.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?Yes, they do. Even the measles vaccine doesn't provide 100% immunity. The covid vaccines aren't nearly as effective as many of the traditional childhood vaccines, but they're still vaccines.We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.
Just because they call it something doesn't necessarily make it so.
How can it be whack a mole, when you've literally never addressed any of the citations or arguments I've made? You make the claim, and vanish.Over and over again, you've claimed that masks work.Honestly hate the fact wearing masks was politicized by the left and ridiculed by the right... Wearing a mask certainly has perks.Unfortunately, none of those perks involve being effective against COVID. That's why it is politicized. There's no actual studies, evidence, or data suggesting that masks work (actually the exact opposite). So if they don't work, how can the choice to force people to wear them be anything but political?
Over and over again studies show masks work. And over and over again you try to re-write history and act like they have not shown they work.
Here is the latest:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/09/masks-randomized-study-bangladesh-covid/
And over and over, we've pointed out that the studies overwhelmingly show masks had no or minimal effect, and that the studies that showed even a tiny effect were very low quality, with a minuscule number of subjects or very poor controls. The only solid study on the subject (Danmask) clearly shows no effect. We've explain the theories why masks don't work, covering things like particle size and aerosolization. And the last time you posted the Bangladesh study, we went over all the numerous methodological problems that invalidate its conclusions.
You never replied to any of these concerns. You keep popping up again and again to make the same claims, but every time we point out the problems with those claims, you vanish like a thief in the night.
It's whack a mole for you. The studies show efficacy in reducing the spread of larger particles. You then do things like spin it as "doesn't prevent you from getting the virus" when the study was focusing on spreading it, or you switch to "it's not effective at preventing all dosages" when you know covid doesn't work with "one particle and you're infected" like some viruses but requires a larger quantity. And then when all else fails you do that "it's not a perfect study so it must be entirely ignored" bullshit which is not a standard you'd apply to any topic which isn't politicized.
I do love how people clamor there will be no mandates from government, but a private business can of course require medical procedures. Here we are now, with a mandate from government. What will it be now? You do not have to get the vaccine, you can just take a test weekly.... which makes fuck all sense, if you can STILL get Covid and spread it with a vax, shouldnt EVERYONE have to get a weekly test?
We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.
until the vaxed people are spreading it all about. A better solution is if You are at risk, wear a respirator or gas mask.
Except it's an ongoing lie that "Age and Pre-existing Conditions are the only factors for risk" that you keep asserting. Healthy younger people are ending up in the hospital. Long Covid is a real thing which healthy younger people are getting. The vaccine and masks do help with both of these things.
Nobody cares what bootlicking fascists like you think.Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?Yes, they do. Even the measles vaccine doesn't provide 100% immunity. The covid vaccines aren't nearly as effective as many of the traditional childhood vaccines, but they're still vaccines.We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.
Just because they call it something doesn't necessarily make it so.
Dude, your hot take was debunked. You repeating it without ever bothering to address the problem with your claim is persuading nobody anymore. You were wrong to think vaccines always stopped the virus they target. All of them had rates of effectiveness which were less than 100% and all of them had effectiveness decrease over time. It's true that the Covid vaccines have their rate of effectiveness decrease faster than many other vaccines, but that doesn't make them "not a vaccine".
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?Yes, they do. Even the measles vaccine doesn't provide 100% immunity. The covid vaccines aren't nearly as effective as many of the traditional childhood vaccines, but they're still vaccines.We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.
Just because they call it something doesn't necessarily make it so.
Dude, your hot take was debunked. You repeating it without ever bothering to address the problem with your claim is persuading nobody anymore. You were wrong to think vaccines always stopped the virus they target. All of them had rates of effectiveness which were less than 100% and all of them had effectiveness decrease over time. It's true that the Covid vaccines have their rate of effectiveness decrease faster than many other vaccines, but that doesn't make them "not a vaccine".
Dude, your hot take was debunked. You repeating it without ever bothering to address the problem with your claim is persuading nobody anymore. You were wrong to think vaccines always stopped the virus they target. All of them had rates of effectiveness which were less than 100% and all of them had effectiveness decrease over time. It's true that the Covid vaccines have their rate of effectiveness decrease faster than many other vaccines, but that doesn't make them "not a vaccine".Traditionally, vaccines caused inoculation by introducing into the immune system a weakened version of a disease, causing an immune response to that disease. These mRNA injections do not do that.
Who are the "they" that are using different testing between vaccinated and unvaccinated people? Is it specific to one study, one region, or is this a general statement?Dude, your hot take was debunked. You repeating it without ever bothering to address the problem with your claim is persuading nobody anymore. You were wrong to think vaccines always stopped the virus they target. All of them had rates of effectiveness which were less than 100% and all of them had effectiveness decrease over time. It's true that the Covid vaccines have their rate of effectiveness decrease faster than many other vaccines, but that doesn't make them "not a vaccine".Traditionally, vaccines caused inoculation by introducing into the immune system a weakened version of a disease, causing an immune response to that disease. These mRNA injections do not do that.
Also, I think you'd be hard pressed to offer any evidence that they ever worked in the first place. The original trials only had a difference in deaths from the control group to the mRNA group of 1 person - and then they gave the control group the vaccine anyway, so we can't even compare the two groups over a period of time to see if that protection lasts (such that it is) lasted beyond the few weeks looked at in the trial.
To make matters worse, they immediately changed how they test for COVID in vaccinated individuals (they are tested less and at lower cycle thresholds, so fewer false positives - which number in the hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, when you consider the base rate fallacy/false positive paradox). Having two different testing requirements makes it literally impossible to make a direct apples to apples comparison between the effectiveness of vaccinated vs unvaccinated in real world situations. They also don't count you as vaccinated until after 14 days after your second shot, so if you get sick and die of COVID 3 days after your second shot (which happens more than they want to admit), you are counted as an unvaccinated death.
So, how are they finding that the vaccines are becoming less effective? They are simply comparing data now with data before, then normalizing it to account for the difference in the number of vaccinations. But the problem with that approach is that COVID happens in waves which hits in different territories at different times, and if you normalize data over multiple months, you are comparing very different circumstances as if they were equal. In some cases, there is a very noticeable improvement early on, but it is generally only slightly statistically significant, and can easily be explain by the placebo effect (just like long COVID can largely be explained by the nocebo effect).
So, I could easily argue that the COVID shots never made a difference at all (ignoring all the negative side effects like heart attacks, blood clots, and deaths - almost all counted as unvaccinated because they generally happen within two weeks of getting a shot).
So, if you get a shot that literally makes no difference at all, does that still count as a vaccine?
Who are the "they" that are using different testing between vaccinated and unvaccinated people? Is it specific to one study, one region, or is this a general statement?That is specifically a change in CDC guidelines for testing the vaccinated with PCR tests. Apparently, they changed back it last month (https://chicago.suntimes.com/coronavirus/2021/8/3/22607520/covid-testing-vaccinated-cdc-guidelines-delta-variant) to recommend that the vaccinated get tested even if not presenting symptoms after coming into contact with a COVID-positive person.
That change comes after the federal health agency, in May, eased its initial testing guidance, saying vaccinated people face very little risk of serious illness and don’t need to be tested in most cases even if exposed to someone who was sick. The thinking then was that vaccinated people also weren’t likely to spread it to others.
But that’s changed. The agency says it’s reversing that guidance because of the more contagious delta variant, which now accounts for most coronavirus infections.
The idea of 100% effective vaccines is silly, because the human immune system isn't 100% effective.Actually, natural exposure to measles will give you lifelong immunity that you can transfer to infants through breast feeding, and which has been shown to defend against certain types of cancer. Immunity gains from the MMR is only about 70% effective and wanes after about 7 years (also lacks the other benefits of natural immunity - yay, cancer!) So, the human immune system can be 100% effective, but the way that we do vaccinations (using adjuvants to inspire a stronger immune response from an inactivated virus) is considerably less effective.
Nevertheless, most vaccines are pretty good at what they do -- help people's immune systems fight off illness.Generally speaking, they aren't nearly as good as we think they are, and in every case, natural immunity is absolutely superior. Take the chicken pox vaccine. If you get the chicken pox as a kid, you get lifelong immunity. Chicken pox is also not a particularly dangerous disease to children, just uncomfortable. However, if you get the chicken pox as an adult, it becomes shingles and can be more dangerous with a greater chance for serious injury or even death. The chicken pox vaccine, like the MMR vaccine, wanes as you get older, meaning that you could be setting yourself up for a case of shingles to avoid a case of chicken pox.
I will say that most vaccines that are widely accepted are demonstrated to be safer & better than the current crop of injections being offered for SarsCov-2. It's utterly mind-boggling that the huge spike in adverse events has been completely ignored. The current injections don't even meet the guidelines set forth by the FDA, namely >50% efficacy and providing more than 6 months of protection.If you look into the polio epidemic, you'll find that they used similarly creative accounting methods to make it appear as if the vaccine was eradicating polio (it was actually the opposite, and the Salk vaccine gave hundreds of thousands of kids polio). But what they did was change how they measured a positive polio case. It was any case of paralytic polio was counted as polio, but they changed it to any case of paralytic polio that lasted more than 30 days. Since most cases cleared up in that time, especially thanks to the invention of physical therapy from Nurse Kenny (a very interesting story if anyone bothers to look it up), this dropped the number of cases down to almost nothing. Yay, the vaccine worked!
The idea of 100% effective vaccines is silly, because the human immune system isn't 100% effective. Nevertheless, most vaccines are pretty good at what they do -- help people's immune systems fight off illness.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?Yes, they do. Even the measles vaccine doesn't provide 100% immunity. The covid vaccines aren't nearly as effective as many of the traditional childhood vaccines, but they're still vaccines.We're looking for a better situation and not a perfect situation. If you are vaccinated, you are 1) less likely to get the virus, and 2) infectious for a shorter period of time if you do get it. Since we don't have the testing resources to test everyone every week, applying those testing resources to those who are more likely to get the virus and more likely to be contagious with the virus for a longer period of time is a smart application of limited resources.Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.
Just because they call it something doesn't necessarily make it so.
Dude, your hot take was debunked. You repeating it without ever bothering to address the problem with your claim is persuading nobody anymore. You were wrong to think vaccines always stopped the virus they target. All of them had rates of effectiveness which were less than 100% and all of them had effectiveness decrease over time. It's true that the Covid vaccines have their rate of effectiveness decrease faster than many other vaccines, but that doesn't make them "not a vaccine".
So, what is it? An ineffective vaccine?
Traditionally, vaccines caused inoculation by introducing into the immune system a weakened version of a disease, causing an immune response to that disease. These mRNA injections do not do that.
Also, I think you'd be hard pressed to offer any evidence that they ever worked in the first place. The original trials only had a difference in deaths from the control group to the mRNA group of 1 person - and then they gave the control group the vaccine anyway, so we can't even compare the two groups over a period of time to see if that protection lasts (such that it is) lasted beyond the few weeks looked at in the trial.
It does seem more effective than a flu vaccine though.The do some creative math to calculate vaccine effectiveness. Basically, they take unvaccinated people who get a disease, subtract the vaccinated that get the disease, then divide by the unvaccinated people who get the disease.
Since people with the vax can get covid...wouldnt it make more sense to test everyone?
Honestly hate the fact wearing masks was politicized by the left and ridiculed by the right. Common sense, remains common sense. Wearing a mask certainly has perks. They may not be what they’re all cracked up to be, still. In a time where we are supposed to be united we are divided and distracted by things that shouldn’t be a distraction in the first place. First world problems, I guess.
Boys aged 12-15 have 1/6200 chance of cardiac AE after injection
(https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866v1.full.pdf+html)
Risk of this one type of side effect is statistically greater than the risk of hospitalization from SarsCov-2.
When everyone is wearing a mask the unvaccinated also tend to wear a mask. I think it's like everything else in life. If peer pressure is applied, most people do that thing.
All of this is a part of my hesitancy and why I'm waiting on Novavax.
Went to dinner last night.How many grandmas did you kill?
Fucking clown shoes.
Went to dinner last night. Total time in the restaurant = ~90 minutes. Total time wearing a mask = ~20 s (the time to get from the door to the table, and from the table to the door). By the time we left, every table was seated. Nobody (except for the wait-staff) was wearing a mask regardless of whether they were eating/drinking or not. The tables were spaced about 6' table-center to table-center.
If you buy the argument that masks matter (which is what is being pushed by my state's Dear Leader), then everyone should have been wearing masks except when putting food/drink into their mouth. But here is the real irony, when standing outside waiting to get into the restaurant, everyone (but me) was wearing a mask. But as soon as everyone reached their magical anti-covid table the masks immediately came off -- because SCIENCE!(tm).
Fucking clown shoes.
My friend's mother just died last week. Not from covid.Well, that explains how you transitioned from 'no one is forcing you to make that choice' to 'obey the mandate'.
Even with her heart rate nearly zero, and barely breathing, and coding, the ambulance had to wait over 2 hours to get into the hospital. They were rendering emergency life saving compressions on her waiting in the parking lot to get in during that time. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for our hospitals here. Pre-covid that didn't happen.
She unfortunately died. And the funeral cannot be until October because of the massive backlog of burials. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for cemeteries here. Pre-covid you'd be buried within a week or less.
But yes, please continue to pretend the number of people dying is all some conspiracy of manufactured statistics.
My friend's mother just died last week. Not from covid.I know this is a personal issue for you, so I don't want you to take offense at this. This whole COVID thing has been a bunch of misinformation and, frankly, medical malpractice, and trying to find the truth of a situation requires asking questions in a dispassionate and objective manner.
Even with her heart rate nearly zero, and barely breathing, and coding, the ambulance had to wait over 2 hours to get into the hospital. They were rendering emergency life saving compressions on her waiting in the parking lot to get in during that time. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for our hospitals here. Pre-covid that didn't happen.
She unfortunately died. And the funeral cannot be until October because of the massive backlog of burials. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for cemeteries here. Pre-covid you'd be buried within a week or less.
But yes, please continue to pretend the number of people dying is all some conspiracy of manufactured statistics.
But in many cases the wait for burial services is compounded by the COVID-19 protocols in place leading up to a death. Rose Hills officials say many victims had already been separated from their families for weeks, even months.
My friend's mother just died last week. Not from covid.
Even with her heart rate nearly zero, and barely breathing, and coding, the ambulance had to wait over 2 hours to get into the hospital. They were rendering emergency life saving compressions on her waiting in the parking lot to get in during that time. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for our hospitals here. Pre-covid that didn't happen.
She unfortunately died. And the funeral cannot be until October because of the massive backlog of burials. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for cemeteries here. Pre-covid you'd be buried within a week or less.
But yes, please continue to pretend the number of people dying is all some conspiracy of manufactured statistics.
My friend's mother just died last week. Not from covid.Well, that explains how you transitioned from 'no one is forcing you to make that choice' to 'obey the mandate'.
Even with her heart rate nearly zero, and barely breathing, and coding, the ambulance had to wait over 2 hours to get into the hospital. They were rendering emergency life saving compressions on her waiting in the parking lot to get in during that time. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for our hospitals here. Pre-covid that didn't happen.
She unfortunately died. And the funeral cannot be until October because of the massive backlog of burials. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for cemeteries here. Pre-covid you'd be buried within a week or less.
But yes, please continue to pretend the number of people dying is all some conspiracy of manufactured statistics.
Because people dying is a great way to justify fascism, after all.
My friend's mother just died last week. Not from covid.I know this is a personal issue for you, so I don't want you to take offense at this. This whole COVID thing has been a bunch of misinformation and, frankly, medical malpractice, and trying to find the truth of a situation requires asking questions in a dispassionate and objective manner.
Even with her heart rate nearly zero, and barely breathing, and coding, the ambulance had to wait over 2 hours to get into the hospital. They were rendering emergency life saving compressions on her waiting in the parking lot to get in during that time. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for our hospitals here. Pre-covid that didn't happen.
She unfortunately died. And the funeral cannot be until October because of the massive backlog of burials. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for cemeteries here. Pre-covid you'd be buried within a week or less.
But yes, please continue to pretend the number of people dying is all some conspiracy of manufactured statistics.
But it seems to me, the hospital was more likely to be understaffed than overbooked.
If somebody is coding in the ambulance, the doctors and nurses will generally give them priority over non-emergency cases - generally speaking, COVID is not an emergency because it is not a sudden and dangerous killer. It takes days, and even weeks.
There's two potential explanations that I can think of. The first is that, yeah, they are losing nurses due to vaccine mandates.
The second potential explanation is that they are converting ER rooms into ICU beds. This is possible, even likely, and would result in a reduced ER capacity. If this was the case, it would make sense to keep a person in an ambulance (which has much of the same equipment an ICU unit has) to keep them stable until an operating room (or specialist or whatever) was available. Even if they turn ER beds into ICU beds, intubated patients don't require emergency attention and so would not generally affect ER response times except by soaking up rooms. They could probably fix it easily by just not intubating COVID patients, especially when that is what is actually killing people and not COVID.
The other weird thing is that ambulances typically radio an emergency dispatch officer which will then route them to an appropriate facility. If one hospital can not take on additional emergencies, the ambulance will be routed to a different hospital (even one in a different city). It would be weird for an ambulance to arrive at a hospital that couldn't take a new patient unless there was just the one hospital.
As for the cemeteries, early on in COVID, when they were saying that bodies were being stacked up in the hallways - that was because they changed the procedures for body handling due to the disease. As such, funeral homes were unable to process the bodies in their normal manner, which greatly slowed down the process. This applied to burials as well.
Googling "burial backlog", I've found several articles on it. One of them said this:QuoteBut in many cases the wait for burial services is compounded by the COVID-19 protocols in place leading up to a death. Rose Hills officials say many victims had already been separated from their families for weeks, even months.
They also said that they provided expedited burials, but most families were willing to wait for a full funeral service. So, they can get the bodies in the ground just fine. It's the COVID protocols which are limiting the funerals themselves.
Just to point out that this is the new normal, this article was written in January 2021. Found another one from July 2021. It seems like burial backlogs have been a problem for a while now.
Is it inhumane? Yes. But it isn't because there is a giant influx of deaths. It's because of the bureaucracy surrounding COVID that has limited what funeral homes, and bereaved families, are allowed to do. COVID protocols are to blame, not COVID.
My friend's mother just died last week. Not from covid.
Even with her heart rate nearly zero, and barely breathing, and coding, the ambulance had to wait over 2 hours to get into the hospital. They were rendering emergency life saving compressions on her waiting in the parking lot to get in during that time. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for our hospitals here. Pre-covid that didn't happen.
She unfortunately died. And the funeral cannot be until October because of the massive backlog of burials. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for cemeteries here. Pre-covid you'd be buried within a week or less.
But yes, please continue to pretend the number of people dying is all some conspiracy of manufactured statistics.
I have seen far too many "news" reports trying to push the "overcapacity" narrative with holes in the stories to take an anecdotal story from a poster with a clear investment in the narrative to take this seriously.
My friend's mother just died last week. Not from covid.
Even with her heart rate nearly zero, and barely breathing, and coding, the ambulance had to wait over 2 hours to get into the hospital. They were rendering emergency life saving compressions on her waiting in the parking lot to get in during that time. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for our hospitals here. Pre-covid that didn't happen.
She unfortunately died. And the funeral cannot be until October because of the massive backlog of burials. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for cemeteries here. Pre-covid you'd be buried within a week or less.
But yes, please continue to pretend the number of people dying is all some conspiracy of manufactured statistics.
I have seen far too many "news" reports trying to push the "overcapacity" narrative with holes in the stories to take an anecdotal story from a poster with a clear investment in the narrative to take this seriously.
LOL OK. I am sure my coworker will feel comforted by your ongoing internet badassery. It's fine if you don't want to take me seriously, but then don't fucking respond to things you're not actually giving a fair shake to. Just move on if you're going to be a dick. I am sure it's what you'd prefer I do rather than just be dismissive of your posts, particularly when it's about a personal issue.
Over and over again, you've claimed that masks work.Honestly hate the fact wearing masks was politicized by the left and ridiculed by the right... Wearing a mask certainly has perks.Unfortunately, none of those perks involve being effective against COVID. That's why it is politicized. There's no actual studies, evidence, or data suggesting that masks work (actually the exact opposite). So if they don't work, how can the choice to force people to wear them be anything but political?
Over and over again studies show masks work. And over and over again you try to re-write history and act like they have not shown they work.
Here is the latest:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/09/masks-randomized-study-bangladesh-covid/
And over and over, we've pointed out that the studies overwhelmingly show masks had no or minimal effect, and that the studies that showed even a tiny effect were very low quality, with a minuscule number of subjects or very poor controls. The only solid study on the subject (Danmask) clearly shows no effect. We've explain the theories why masks don't work, covering things like particle size and aerosolization. And the last time you posted the Bangladesh study, we went over all the numerous methodological problems that invalidate its conclusions.
You never replied to any of these concerns. You keep popping up again and again to make the same claims, but every time we point out the problems with those claims, you vanish like a thief in the night.
My friend's mother just died last week. Not from covid.
Even with her heart rate nearly zero, and barely breathing, and coding, the ambulance had to wait over 2 hours to get into the hospital. They were rendering emergency life saving compressions on her waiting in the parking lot to get in during that time. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for our hospitals here. Pre-covid that didn't happen.
She unfortunately died. And the funeral cannot be until October because of the massive backlog of burials. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for cemeteries here. Pre-covid you'd be buried within a week or less.
But yes, please continue to pretend the number of people dying is all some conspiracy of manufactured statistics.
I have seen far too many "news" reports trying to push the "overcapacity" narrative with holes in the stories to take an anecdotal story from a poster with a clear investment in the narrative to take this seriously.
LOL OK. I am sure my coworker will feel comforted by your ongoing internet badassery. It's fine if you don't want to take me seriously, but then don't fucking respond to things you're not actually giving a fair shake to. Just move on if you're going to be a dick. I am sure it's what you'd prefer I do rather than just be dismissive of your posts, particularly when it's about a personal issue.
That's exactly why I'm skeptical about your post. You lean into how I'm supposedly being a dick, claim I'm not giving you a fair shake (I never said you were lying), and then claim it's a personal issue.
Maybe you're lying, maybe you're omitting details that don't support your narrative, maybe you're telling the unvarnished truth. There's no way to tell.
I do find it covenient that your narrative is in line with the current media's narrative. A very fashionable post.
My friend's mother just died last week. Not from covid.
Even with her heart rate nearly zero, and barely breathing, and coding, the ambulance had to wait over 2 hours to get into the hospital. They were rendering emergency life saving compressions on her waiting in the parking lot to get in during that time. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for our hospitals here. Pre-covid that didn't happen.
She unfortunately died. And the funeral cannot be until October because of the massive backlog of burials. And no, that is NOT NORMAL for cemeteries here. Pre-covid you'd be buried within a week or less.
But yes, please continue to pretend the number of people dying is all some conspiracy of manufactured statistics.
I have seen far too many "news" reports trying to push the "overcapacity" narrative with holes in the stories to take an anecdotal story from a poster with a clear investment in the narrative to take this seriously.
LOL OK. I am sure my coworker will feel comforted by your ongoing internet badassery. It's fine if you don't want to take me seriously, but then don't fucking respond to things you're not actually giving a fair shake to. Just move on if you're going to be a dick. I am sure it's what you'd prefer I do rather than just be dismissive of your posts, particularly when it's about a personal issue.
That's exactly why I'm skeptical about your post. You lean into how I'm supposedly being a dick, claim I'm not giving you a fair shake (I never said you were lying), and then claim it's a personal issue.
Maybe you're lying, maybe you're omitting details that don't support your narrative, maybe you're telling the unvarnished truth. There's no way to tell.
I do find it covenient that your narrative is in line with the current media's narrative. A very fashionable post.
Media: X is happening a lot
Me: This happened to my coworker last week
You: Oh how convenient this thing that is happening a lot happened to you!
WTF is wrong with your brain dude. Why else did you think I'd mention it here? It's been discussed here and it came up so I mentioned it. Obviously.
And of course you called me a liar. You just did it again. We all know what you mean by "I do find it convenient."
It doesn't fit with your narrative so you won't even consider it's possibly true. You dismiss it regardless because it's inconvenient to take it seriously. But you spend time responding to it, repeatedly, demonstrating just how much you "don't take it seriously" right?
And the "personal" part wasn't you by the way - what happened is personal. I knew his mom. She used to dogsit our dog when we'd go out of town. She was a lovely person. And again, she didn't die of covid. She almost certainly would have died anyway had she gotten a hospital bed, because she was quite ill. I am not claiming "but for covid she'd be alive today" I am relating what my coworker (whose mom this was) told me happened. And he has no agenda either. He's pretty apolitical in fact.
And to be clear, I AM calling YOU a liar. When you lied about this, "Well, that explains how you transitioned from 'no one is forcing you to make that choice' to 'obey the mandate'. Because people dying is a great way to justify fascism, after all." Still waiting for where you claim I said "obey the mandate." Oh right...I never said that and you made it up and continue to squirm and try and pretend that didn't happen.
Im not gonna play the doubt game, but personal cases make for TERRIBLE policy.Yep.
...
Personal emotional appeals when it comes to large scale policy is a really, REALLY shitty thing to do.
It's a hospital I've used before. They've never had this issue, pre-covid. Their staffing levels have not been magically cut. They just have too many patients relative to the number of patients they had pre-covid, because of covid patients.Not necessarily. Due to COVID, they changed how they allocate patients. Many hospitals have an entire COVID wing, where each person gets their own room (rather than two or even four patients per room). They also have fewer patients per nurse (rather than seven patients per nurse, it might only be two). The staff have so much protective gear that to even go to the bathroom requires a 30 minute sequence of disinfecting, disrobing, pooping, robing, and infecting (or something thereabouts). So while a hospital may have had X capacity before COVID, due to the special nature of COVID patients, the capacity has dropped to well below X.
There was no vaccine mandate at the time.From what I understand, most large hospitals have had one - typically to have both shots by October 1st. Also, a lot of nurses have been quitting due to burn out. Apparently, it is kind of soul crushing to be a nurse right now.
But it's ridiculous for you to claim it's the intubating which is killing people rather than the Covid. Intubation is a last case scenario. It happens at the point where but-for intubation your likelihood of death is nearly 100%. What a fucking absurd take from you.I feel fairly confident that this is what is happened. Before the pandemic started, I became aware of an organization of doctors that were working to get intubation out of hospitals because of the absurdly high fatality rate. To be intubated, you need a cocktail of extremely dangerous drugs to be put into a coma. You are almost assured to get pneumonia from bacteria that grows on the tubing. Improperly calibrated devices can actually do permanent damage to the lungs. And at the time, it was suggested that 1 in 4 people who become intubated did not survive. These doctors believed that intubation was extremely dangerous and life threatening, and there were other options in many cases (such as negative pressure ventilation).
She didn't die of Covid dude. There is no covid protocol for her burial, it's just a backlog of bodies.There's still a line. The backlog is due to COVID policies.
There IS a giant influx of deaths. We count this. We've always counted this. The number of deaths is up enormously. There is no getting around that fact. I've seen people try to argue it's the lockdowns themselves which caused the increase in deaths but there is no escaping the 100% true fact we do have more deaths right now. Period. ANY objective standard which measures death rates is in fact showing more people dying.We do have more deaths now, but not everywhere equally. Many states have lower mortality this year than last. Minnesota, for example, is basically at 0% excess mortality in 2021. New York is on track for no excess mortality so far.
There is so much misinformed bullshit in this post that it almost surprised me...but this is theRPGsite.It's a hospital I've used before. They've never had this issue, pre-covid. Their staffing levels have not been magically cut. They just have too many patients relative to the number of patients they had pre-covid, because of covid patients.Not necessarily. Due to COVID, they changed how they allocate patients. Many hospitals have an entire COVID wing, where each person gets their own room (rather than two or even four patients per room). They also have fewer patients per nurse (rather than seven patients per nurse, it might only be two). The staff have so much protective gear that to even go to the bathroom requires a 30 minute sequence of disinfecting, disrobing, pooping, robing, and infecting (or something thereabouts). So while a hospital may have had X capacity before COVID, due to the special nature of COVID patients, the capacity has dropped to well below X.QuoteThere was no vaccine mandate at the time.From what I understand, most large hospitals have had one - typically to have both shots by October 1st. Also, a lot of nurses have been quitting due to burn out. Apparently, it is kind of soul crushing to be a nurse right now.QuoteBut it's ridiculous for you to claim it's the intubating which is killing people rather than the Covid. Intubation is a last case scenario. It happens at the point where but-for intubation your likelihood of death is nearly 100%. What a fucking absurd take from you.I feel fairly confident that this is what is happened. Before the pandemic started, I became aware of an organization of doctors that were working to get intubation out of hospitals because of the absurdly high fatality rate. To be intubated, you need a cocktail of extremely dangerous drugs to be put into a coma. You are almost assured to get pneumonia from bacteria that grows on the tubing. Improperly calibrated devices can actually do permanent damage to the lungs. And at the time, it was suggested that 1 in 4 people who become intubated did not survive. These doctors believed that intubation was extremely dangerous and life threatening, and there were other options in many cases (such as negative pressure ventilation).
Mind you, this was before the COVID thing ever started. When I heard that they needed ventilators, I kept thinking back to this article I read. Then it turns out that everything they suggested happened and more - for COVID patients, 90% will not survive intubation. The worst part is that intubation isn't even called for with COVID, since it is a failure for the hemoglobin to bind with oxygen that is the problem. The lungs are fine. That's why doctors were suggesting that COVID more resembled high altitude sickness than the flu.
Now, you say that it only people knocking on death's door that are being intubated, but that's not true. I've seen people who have been awake and talking on their phones, even tweeting before intubation. You don't usually intubate people who can operate a phone. Instead, hospital policy is to intubate when the blood oxygen level reaches a specific point - but again, these people have working lungs. They are conscious and operating phones. It's not a problem with their lungs. There was one guy who was screaming and had to be held down to be intubated - explain to me why they need to intubate a guy who's lungs work enough to scream.
No, intubation is actually killing people. It is being misused and it is what is causing the spike in deaths, not COVID. If they stopped intubations tomorrow, COVID deaths would all but disappear. This may shock you to find out, but people are only dying in hospitals. Nobody is finding dead bodies in homes. They are dying in hospitals. They are dying in elder care facilities. The places where they intubate. You are 37 times more likely to be diagnosed with COVID in a hospital than at a general practitioners office. The early spike in deaths last year was entirely due to New York City's practice intubating early (two-thirds of all COVID deaths in the first half of 2020 was in NYC and the surround area) where most of the rest of the country still didn't have that many ventilators.QuoteShe didn't die of Covid dude. There is no covid protocol for her burial, it's just a backlog of bodies.There's still a line. The backlog is due to COVID policies.QuoteThere IS a giant influx of deaths. We count this. We've always counted this. The number of deaths is up enormously. There is no getting around that fact. I've seen people try to argue it's the lockdowns themselves which caused the increase in deaths but there is no escaping the 100% true fact we do have more deaths right now. Period. ANY objective standard which measures death rates is in fact showing more people dying.We do have more deaths now, but not everywhere equally. Many states have lower mortality this year than last. Minnesota, for example, is basically at 0% excess mortality in 2021. New York is on track for no excess mortality so far.
Florida is probably the worst one, with expected mortality for 2021 being 145,513 and the reported deaths being 170,937 - an increase of 25,424 deaths. Seems like a lot, but Florida has 25 million people in it. 25k deaths represents 0.1% of our population. Texas is similar. 29k deaths but a population of 29 million, so the absolute increase in deaths still hovers around 0.1% of the population. Basically it means that 1 extra person per 1000 is dying.
And these are not the healthy individuals. I know because every time someone under the age of 50 dies, they write an article about it - they try to hide it with Facebook angles, but when you see pictures of the people dying, none of them have necks. That's because they are so fat that their heads looks like it is growing out of their shoulders like a pimple. Number one indicator that COVID will get you? Being intubated (which all these articles mention). Number two? Not having a neck.
I don't know about the rest of Florida, but my local hospital has been bragging in the newspaper about how many people they've intubated/murdered. "Oh, it's so bad here. Yesterday, we had to intubate three people." At this point, the best way to survive COVID is to literally not go to a hospital.
And we have to assume that some of the increase in deaths is due to vaccine-caused ADE. The people in the hospitals right now, according to multiple nurse whistleblowers, are all vaccinated. They don't have COVID. They have blood clots. When they tell you that 95% of the people hospitalized have been unvaccinated, that was using data from a time span starting in January, when literally nobody had vaccinations. Even with the way they message the numbers (you count as unvaccinated until two weeks after your second shot, so many hospitalized that are vaccinated are counted as unvaccinated), if you look only at recent data, the vaccinated are outnumbering the unvaccinated. Israel is a place that is quite vocal about this happening.
Man, it sure would be ironic if the increase in deaths were due to this rushed vaccine using untested new technology... did I say ironic? I mean predictable.
Squidi is right in some elements, but I agree that post has a lot of bad information. There is a saying that people who have recovered from a ventilator suffer from a disease called "being on a ventilator". Recovery can be a long painful process, and people may suffer from permanent impairments. But it's not a death sentence, it's a last resort. The death rate is high because it's the final option for people in dire straits; not because it's used to kill otherwise healthy people. And while there's certainly a very good argument that ventilators were overused at the start of the pandemic, and in many cases covid patients responded well to positive pressure (not negative pressure) devices like c-pap machines that didn't involve intubation and mechanical breathing, it is about oxygen levels.Negative pressure ventilators do exist, but they are not commonly used for various reasons. Covid is encouraging development in this area, but to believe that NPVs are going to just appear everywhere (along with staff trained in their use) is not reality.
Squidi is right in some elements, but I agree that post has a lot of bad information.I consider every post I make to be the beginning of a conversation, not the end of one. If you feel anything I've said is wrong, by all means, I'll go track down my sources (if they still exist, Reddit killing /r/NoNewNormal nuked a lot of links) - my memory isn't 100% and it's been sometimes months (or even years) since I read some of this stuff. I always allow that I could be wrong about something... but I'll try my hardest to prove that I am not.
But it's not a death sentence, it's a last resort.Well, it should be. I'm not sure that it is. For one thing, hospitals get paid, I think, $39,000 per patient put on a vent through the CARES Act. That's a powerful incentive right there, and incentives DO change behavior (recommended reading: Freakonomics).
... in many cases covid patients responded well to positive pressure (not negative pressure) devices like c-pap machines that didn't involve intubation and mechanical breathing, it is about oxygen levels.Right, but it is about oxygen in the blood, not in the lungs. Using "mechanical lungs" when the lungs are working doesn't really accomplish much.
No, dumbass, it is the lungs. Have you looked at the x-ray images showing lung opacities from infiltrates and scarring? Are you aware that ventilation can occur without adequate respiration, especially in damaged lungs? Do you understand the reasons for PEEP?Squidi is right in some elements, but I agree that post has a lot of bad information.I consider every post I make to be the beginning of a conversation, not the end of one. If you feel anything I've said is wrong, by all means, I'll go track down my sources (if they still exist, Reddit killing /r/NoNewNormal nuked a lot of links) - my memory isn't 100% and it's been sometimes months (or even years) since I read some of this stuff. I always allow that I could be wrong about something... but I'll try my hardest to prove that I am not.QuoteBut it's not a death sentence, it's a last resort.Well, it should be. I'm not sure that it is. For one thing, hospitals get paid, I think, $39,000 per patient put on a vent through the CARES Act. That's a powerful incentive right there, and incentives DO change behavior (recommended reading: Freakonomics).
But I'm not that cynical. I think doctors actually think ventilators work, even as they watch patient after patient die on them. It must be the COVID, not the life saving ventilators that I am personally responsible for putting dozens and even hundreds of people on! Of course, it'd be better if they didn't give them Remdesivir first, which apparently causes organ shutdown. Also, I believe some of the drugs they give to people being intubated cause some trouble - I forget what it was, but it was something like causing a vitamin C deficiency. I'll see if I can find that article.
Doctors really need to revaluate early treatment, especially ivermectin.... but people are going around saying "Ivermectin is for horses" - it's been the weirdest thing I've seen on the internet since the day Reddit changed during the 2016 Democratic National Convention. Australia just outlawed it, pharmacies won't fulfill it, and doctors are getting fired for prescribing it. All for a drug which over 70 studies have shown reduces mortality, is effectively being used in India (remember when Delta was called the Indian variant?) and Japan. I'm starting to think there's a lot of pressure coming from somewhere to make sure nobody uses this cheap, generic drug which, if proven effective, would remove emergency use authorization from the vaccines.
And if that pressure exists (it obviously does), wouldn't that mean they are intentionally giving people ineffective and dangerous treatments on purpose? Is the reason so many people are ending up on ventilators in the first place because of bad medical treatment by hospitals?Quote... in many cases covid patients responded well to positive pressure (not negative pressure) devices like c-pap machines that didn't involve intubation and mechanical breathing, it is about oxygen levels.Right, but it is about oxygen in the blood, not in the lungs. Using "mechanical lungs" when the lungs are working doesn't really accomplish much.
No, dumbass, it is the lungs. Have you looked at the x-ray images showing lung opacities from infiltrates and scarring? Are you aware that ventilation can occur without adequate respiration, especially in damaged lungs? Do you understand the reasons for PEEP?Look, fucktard, if you want to have a discussion about this, stop with the name calling or else fuck off. The adults are talking.
When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.No, dumbass, it is the lungs. Have you looked at the x-ray images showing lung opacities from infiltrates and scarring? Are you aware that ventilation can occur without adequate respiration, especially in damaged lungs? Do you understand the reasons for PEEP?Look, fucktard, if you want to have a discussion about this, stop with the name calling or else fuck off. The adults are talking.
Yes, the spike protein is causing damage to the lungs (and other organs). No, it is not something found in every (or even most) ICU COVID case. No, it is not something found in every ventilated COVID case.
And hey, why don't you explain PEEP to me - in your own words?
'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.No, dumbass, it is the lungs. Have you looked at the x-ray images showing lung opacities from infiltrates and scarring? Are you aware that ventilation can occur without adequate respiration, especially in damaged lungs? Do you understand the reasons for PEEP?Look, fucktard, if you want to have a discussion about this, stop with the name calling or else fuck off. The adults are talking.
Yes, the spike protein is causing damage to the lungs (and other organs). No, it is not something found in every (or even most) ICU COVID case. No, it is not something found in every ventilated COVID case.
And hey, why don't you explain PEEP to me - in your own words?
It's not my responsibility to educate you, and besides, conspiracy theory loving dumbasses here (and all over these days) systematically reject reality, so what's the point? No, my little dumbass NPC, you exist here merely for my enjoyment, so keep on dancing and thinking you're the 'adult' in the room.
I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.No, dumbass, it is the lungs. Have you looked at the x-ray images showing lung opacities from infiltrates and scarring? Are you aware that ventilation can occur without adequate respiration, especially in damaged lungs? Do you understand the reasons for PEEP?Look, fucktard, if you want to have a discussion about this, stop with the name calling or else fuck off. The adults are talking.
Yes, the spike protein is causing damage to the lungs (and other organs). No, it is not something found in every (or even most) ICU COVID case. No, it is not something found in every ventilated COVID case.
And hey, why don't you explain PEEP to me - in your own words?
It's not my responsibility to educate you, and besides, conspiracy theory loving dumbasses here (and all over these days) systematically reject reality, so what's the point? No, my little dumbass NPC, you exist here merely for my enjoyment, so keep on dancing and thinking you're the 'adult' in the room.
I feel fairly confident that this is what is happened. Before the pandemic started, I became aware of an organization of doctors that were working to get intubation out of hospitals because of the absurdly high fatality rate. To be intubated, you need a cocktail of extremely dangerous drugs to be put into a coma. You are almost assured to get pneumonia from bacteria that grows on the tubing. Improperly calibrated devices can actually do permanent damage to the lungs. And at the time, it was suggested that 1 in 4 people who become intubated did not survive. These doctors believed that intubation was extremely dangerous and life threatening, and there were other options in many cases (such as negative pressure ventilation).
Mind you, this was before the COVID thing ever started. When I heard that they needed ventilators, I kept thinking back to this article I read. Then it turns out that everything they suggested happened and more - for COVID patients, 90% will not survive intubation. The worst part is that intubation isn't even called for with COVID, since it is a failure for the hemoglobin to bind with oxygen that is the problem. The lungs are fine. That's why doctors were suggesting that COVID more resembled high altitude sickness than the flu.
Now, you say that it only people knocking on death's door that are being intubated, but that's not true. I've seen people who have been awake and talking on their phones, even tweeting before intubation. You don't usually intubate people who can operate a phone. Instead, hospital policy is to intubate when the blood oxygen level reaches a specific point - but again, these people have working lungs. They are conscious and operating phones. It's not a problem with their lungs. There was one guy who was screaming and had to be held down to be intubated - explain to me why they need to intubate a guy who's lungs work enough to scream.
No, intubation is actually killing people. It is being misused and it is what is causing the spike in deaths, not COVID. If they stopped intubations tomorrow, COVID deaths would all but disappear. This may shock you to find out, but people are only dying in hospitals. Nobody is finding dead bodies in homes. They are dying in hospitals. They are dying in elder care facilities. The places where they intubate. You are 37 times more likely to be diagnosed with COVID in a hospital than at a general practitioners office. The early spike in deaths last year was entirely due to New York City's practice intubating early (two-thirds of all COVID deaths in the first half of 2020 was in NYC and the surround area) where most of the rest of the country still didn't have that many ventilators.
Fascist patient killer says what?I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.No, dumbass, it is the lungs. Have you looked at the x-ray images showing lung opacities from infiltrates and scarring? Are you aware that ventilation can occur without adequate respiration, especially in damaged lungs? Do you understand the reasons for PEEP?Look, fucktard, if you want to have a discussion about this, stop with the name calling or else fuck off. The adults are talking.
Yes, the spike protein is causing damage to the lungs (and other organs). No, it is not something found in every (or even most) ICU COVID case. No, it is not something found in every ventilated COVID case.
And hey, why don't you explain PEEP to me - in your own words?
It's not my responsibility to educate you, and besides, conspiracy theory loving dumbasses here (and all over these days) systematically reject reality, so what's the point? No, my little dumbass NPC, you exist here merely for my enjoyment, so keep on dancing and thinking you're the 'adult' in the room.
Look folks, it just T-poses and recites the same tired catchphrases over and over. It may have started as a human, but now it's just a bot.Fascist patient killer says what?I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.No, dumbass, it is the lungs. Have you looked at the x-ray images showing lung opacities from infiltrates and scarring? Are you aware that ventilation can occur without adequate respiration, especially in damaged lungs? Do you understand the reasons for PEEP?Look, fucktard, if you want to have a discussion about this, stop with the name calling or else fuck off. The adults are talking.
Yes, the spike protein is causing damage to the lungs (and other organs). No, it is not something found in every (or even most) ICU COVID case. No, it is not something found in every ventilated COVID case.
And hey, why don't you explain PEEP to me - in your own words?
It's not my responsibility to educate you, and besides, conspiracy theory loving dumbasses here (and all over these days) systematically reject reality, so what's the point? No, my little dumbass NPC, you exist here merely for my enjoyment, so keep on dancing and thinking you're the 'adult' in the room.
Behold, a miracle of modern medicine: a human with neither a brain nor a spine. Are we not awestruck?Look folks, it just T-poses and recites the same tired catchphrases over and over. It may have started as a human, but now it's just a bot.Fascist patient killer says what?I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.No, dumbass, it is the lungs. Have you looked at the x-ray images showing lung opacities from infiltrates and scarring? Are you aware that ventilation can occur without adequate respiration, especially in damaged lungs? Do you understand the reasons for PEEP?Look, fucktard, if you want to have a discussion about this, stop with the name calling or else fuck off. The adults are talking.
Yes, the spike protein is causing damage to the lungs (and other organs). No, it is not something found in every (or even most) ICU COVID case. No, it is not something found in every ventilated COVID case.
And hey, why don't you explain PEEP to me - in your own words?
It's not my responsibility to educate you, and besides, conspiracy theory loving dumbasses here (and all over these days) systematically reject reality, so what's the point? No, my little dumbass NPC, you exist here merely for my enjoyment, so keep on dancing and thinking you're the 'adult' in the room.
Shoddy programming with this one. Likely scrap code that fell out of CP2077.Behold, a miracle of modern medicine: a human with neither a brain nor a spine. Are we not awestruck?Look folks, it just T-poses and recites the same tired catchphrases over and over. It may have started as a human, but now it's just a bot.Fascist patient killer says what?I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.No, dumbass, it is the lungs. Have you looked at the x-ray images showing lung opacities from infiltrates and scarring? Are you aware that ventilation can occur without adequate respiration, especially in damaged lungs? Do you understand the reasons for PEEP?Look, fucktard, if you want to have a discussion about this, stop with the name calling or else fuck off. The adults are talking.
Yes, the spike protein is causing damage to the lungs (and other organs). No, it is not something found in every (or even most) ICU COVID case. No, it is not something found in every ventilated COVID case.
And hey, why don't you explain PEEP to me - in your own words?
It's not my responsibility to educate you, and besides, conspiracy theory loving dumbasses here (and all over these days) systematically reject reality, so what's the point? No, my little dumbass NPC, you exist here merely for my enjoyment, so keep on dancing and thinking you're the 'adult' in the room.
No, intubation is actually killing people. It is being misused and it is what is causing the spike in deaths, not COVID. If they stopped intubations tomorrow, COVID deaths would all but disappear. This may shock you to find out, but people are only dying in hospitals. Nobody is finding dead bodies in homes. They are dying in hospitals. They are dying in elder care facilities. The places where they intubate.
One thing that we can say for sure, Hospitals cause TiktoksThe CDC should declare it a public health emergency.
And racism, and guns. We have a pandemic of racism and guns. I guess Pandemic is the new terrorism. We are at war with Pandemics.One thing that we can say for sure, Hospitals cause TiktoksThe CDC should declare it a public health emergency.
Doctors wear masks so they do not sneeze or blow spit in your open wounds during surgery. It has jack shit to do with viruses, it is for bacterial infections from getting a wound sneezed into or spit flying into, for which masks are great. For the last time, if you are worried about who wears a mask, wear a respirator or a gas mask when you go out, then YOU ARE protected from viruses.
smallpox pictureAnother lesson to learn from that is just like small pox, those vaccinated for the Wuhan flu can also spread the Wuhan flu.
smallpox pictureAnother lesson to learn from that is just like small pox, those vaccinated for the Wuhan flu can also spread the Wuhan flu.
Then let's go to "Neither Wendell nor Eskew had any underlying health conditions, Eskew said." Obviously neither Eskew or the writer recognized that she was obese and/or that obesity is an underlying health condition that exacerbates covid.I saw on twitter a picture of a 16-year old girl on a respirator that her mom tweeted and said that she had no preexisting conditions.
Stop fact shaming!Then let's go to "Neither Wendell nor Eskew had any underlying health conditions, Eskew said." Obviously neither Eskew or the writer recognized that she was obese and/or that obesity is an underlying health condition that exacerbates covid.I saw on twitter a picture of a 16-year old girl on a respirator that her mom tweeted and said that she had no preexisting conditions.
However what I saw was an obese girl that had to be somewhere in the range of 250 to 300 pounds.
Stop fact shaming!Then let's go to "Neither Wendell nor Eskew had any underlying health conditions, Eskew said." Obviously neither Eskew or the writer recognized that she was obese and/or that obesity is an underlying health condition that exacerbates covid.I saw on twitter a picture of a 16-year old girl on a respirator that her mom tweeted and said that she had no preexisting conditions.
However what I saw was an obese girl that had to be somewhere in the range of 250 to 300 pounds.
(https://i.ibb.co/gZYztnw/vax.jpg)
On a serious note though, I don’t think vaccines fuck all, but what worked in the beginning doesn’t look like it’s working as good against the delta, lambda, Mu variants.
The solution for now is wait and see, imo.
On a serious note though, I don’t think vaccines fuck all, but what worked in the beginning doesn’t look like it’s working as good against the delta, lambda, Mu variants.
The solution for now is wait and see, imo.
They're not vaccines, they don't provide immunity.
(https://i.ibb.co/gZYztnw/vax.jpg)
I feel they’re more like a steroid treatment than a vaccine. The data suggests only the unvaccinated are getting deadly sick. If they don’t stop you from catching covid, at least they’ll boost your defenses.
I feel they’re more like a steroid treatment than a vaccine. The data suggests only the unvaccinated are getting deadly sick. If they don’t stop you from catching covid, at least they’ll boost your defenses.
I couldn't give a fuck what you "feel" about them. And I just showed you actual data from an actual hospital - vaccinated people are dying. It's making sod all difference.
Nope, doesn't stop you catching it or spreading it, little evidence it does anything else either.
I feel they’re more like a steroid treatment than a vaccine. The data suggests only the unvaccinated are getting deadly sick. If they don’t stop you from catching covid, at least they’ll boost your defenses.
I couldn't give a fuck what you "feel" about them. And I just showed you actual data from an actual hospital - vaccinated people are dying. It's making sod all difference.
Nope, doesn't stop you catching it or spreading it, little evidence it does anything else either.
So because ONE hospital provided data, you believe that accounts for the rest of the country or world. Just say you’re scared of the needle.
The vaccine acts like armor. It reduces the chances of a blow landing soundly and softens some of the blows, but no armor provides total immunity from injury.On a serious note though, I don’t think vaccines fuck all, but what worked in the beginning doesn’t look like it’s working as good against the delta, lambda, Mu variants.
The solution for now is wait and see, imo.
They're not vaccines, they don't provide immunity.
I feel they’re more like a steroid treatment than a vaccine. The data suggests only the unvaccinated are getting deadly sick. If they don’t stop you from catching covid, at least they’ll boost your defenses.
It's a lingering phobia of his from when his parents tried to get him to stop masturbating.I feel they’re more like a steroid treatment than a vaccine. The data suggests only the unvaccinated are getting deadly sick. If they don’t stop you from catching covid, at least they’ll boost your defenses.
I couldn't give a fuck what you "feel" about them. And I just showed you actual data from an actual hospital - vaccinated people are dying. It's making sod all difference.
Nope, doesn't stop you catching it or spreading it, little evidence it does anything else either.
So because ONE hospital provided data, you believe that accounts for the rest of the country or world. Just say you’re scared of the needle.
The vaccine acts like armor. It reduces the chances of a blow landing soundly and softens some of the blows, but no armor provides total immunity from injury.On a serious note though, I don’t think vaccines fuck all, but what worked in the beginning doesn’t look like it’s working as good against the delta, lambda, Mu variants.
The solution for now is wait and see, imo.
They're not vaccines, they don't provide immunity.
I feel they’re more like a steroid treatment than a vaccine. The data suggests only the unvaccinated are getting deadly sick. If they don’t stop you from catching covid, at least they’ll boost your defenses.
So because ONE hospital provided data, you believe that accounts for the rest of the country or world. Just say you’re scared of the needle.
Perhaps, but an armor that fades quickly (~1 year) and is quickly obsolete. (~1). And there is a small possibility that the armor will fuck you up or kill you.
On that last point, I would suspicion that more peoples' hesitancy would be overcome if the government took on the lability of the vaccine. If I have to take the vaccine to protect others, then those "others" should compensate me and/or my estate if the vaccine makes me sick, disabled, or kills me.
Doctors wear masks so they do not sneeze or blow spit in your open wounds during surgery. It has jack shit to do with viruses, it is for bacterial infections from getting a wound sneezed into or spit flying into, for which masks are great. For the last time, if you are worried about who wears a mask, wear a respirator or a gas mask when you go out, then YOU ARE protected from viruses.
On a serious note though, I don’t think vaccines fuck all, but what worked in the beginning doesn’t look like it’s working as good against the delta, lambda, Mu variants.
The solution for now is wait and see, imo.
They're not vaccines, they don't provide immunity.
(https://i.ibb.co/gZYztnw/vax.jpg)
Ah yes, the left highlighting the suffering of children to make an asinine point. Because after all we think a doctor might sniff a broken bone during surgery and break his own bone.
I'll tell you what. When I get a normal vaccine, one where they inoculate with a little bit of the virus so I can develop immunity, I will do that. I am not getting gene therapy. Also, smallpox killed children. It also disfigured the survivors. Coronavirus does not.
Doctors wear masks so they do not sneeze or blow spit in your open wounds during surgery. It has jack shit to do with viruses, it is for bacterial infections from getting a wound sneezed into or spit flying into, for which masks are great. For the last time, if you are worried about who wears a mask, wear a respirator or a gas mask when you go out, then YOU ARE protected from viruses.
I love how you just make shit up and assume nobody will call you on it. Directly from the Surgical Theater rules from the CDC face mask guidelines (and this is well before Covid-19), "Surgical face masks are worn by theatre staff to protect the surgical site from airborne contamination and the wearer from bodily fluid splash." The guidelines list both protection from splash from patient, and protection of patient from contamination from the surgeons, for a host of things including specifically viruses.
And these are not "respirator" masks they are surgical masks.
So how about you stop just making shit up about things so easily checked by others and do at least a quick Google search before you spout off again you lazy doof.
Doctors wear masks so they do not sneeze or blow spit in your open wounds during surgery. It has jack shit to do with viruses, it is for bacterial infections from getting a wound sneezed into or spit flying into, for which masks are great. For the last time, if you are worried about who wears a mask, wear a respirator or a gas mask when you go out, then YOU ARE protected from viruses.
I love how you just make shit up and assume nobody will call you on it. Directly from the Surgical Theater rules from the CDC face mask guidelines (and this is well before Covid-19), "Surgical face masks are worn by theatre staff to protect the surgical site from airborne contamination and the wearer from bodily fluid splash." The guidelines list both protection from splash from patient, and protection of patient from contamination from the surgeons, for a host of things including specifically viruses.
And these are not "respirator" masks they are surgical masks.
So how about you stop just making shit up about things so easily checked by others and do at least a quick Google search before you spout off again you lazy doof.
Dumbass...the droplets you cough or sneeze are full of contaminants, and bacteria and viruses. Those masks are more for those contaminants going into a wound (from surgery) than into a patient's lungs during surgery. YOUR OWN DAMN QUOTE SAYS THE SURGICAL SITE YOU GOOFBALL.
Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
It's to stop you from spread it to others.
How are you still this ignorant? I KNOW you've been told that, and shown studies about that, and read the recommendations focus on that. Why do you still persist in thinking masks are about protecting you from others as opposed to protecting others from you?
Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
It's to stop you from spread it to others.
How are you still this ignorant? I KNOW you've been told that, and shown studies about that, and read the recommendations focus on that. Why do you still persist in thinking masks are about protecting you from others as opposed to protecting others from you?
Begs the question of why the pre-covid CDC mask guidance for the flu was for the general public to not wear masks, as well as St. Fauci's statements correspondence and in his 60 Minutes interview.
Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
It's to stop you from spread it to others.
How are you still this ignorant? I KNOW you've been told that, and shown studies about that, and read the recommendations focus on that. Why do you still persist in thinking masks are about protecting you from others as opposed to protecting others from you?
Begs the question of why the pre-covid CDC mask guidance for the flu was for the general public to not wear masks, as well as St. Fauci's statements correspondence and in his 60 Minutes interview.
Because it's not the flu? Because at the earlier time Fauci thought it spread like the flu only to find out later, like we all did, that it spread differently?
WE ALL COVERED THIS MONTHS AGO, INCLUDING YOU. Fuck, most of your "allies" here already acknowledged this. Is this how it's going to go, where we hack through a discussion only to later just repeat the same shit as if we hadn't discussed it and force the same discussion again and again even on things which eventually are agreed to at the time? Damn dude I think you're just trolling me at this point. Which OK, it's this particular sub-forum on this message board so no great sin, but damn...
You know what’s odd in all of this Covid nonsense? Everyone blamed China! But what if Covid originated in space? Remember the intergalactic federation been displeased with humanity for quite some time.
News from Project Veritas.Glad I watched before it gets removed by yt. Veritas cause is a arguably a decent and honest objective. Just sucks they all look so goofy, not any different then the average ufo nut. Extending 2 minutes of footage into a 13 minute long video full of repeats doesn’t help their cause. Hopefully they don’t get banned coz I think they’re 2/3 at this moment. This would fall onto vax misinformation according to the beast.
Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Unless the mask is air-tight (e.g., properly fitted, properly worn N-95 mask), a portion of the aerosols will bypass the filter material. The degree of bypass is dependent on the mask and bypass flow areas and their respective pressure drops. A surgical mask (not air-tight, with relatively large gaps and low pressure drops) will not filter small aerosols, as they will follow the flow streamlines through the bypass area. The larger aerosols with enough mass (inertia) to "break out" from flow streamlines and follow the flow through the filter material. Ironically, if the mask isn't air-tight, then then a mask with "tighter" filter material (i.e., with a higher pressure drop across it) will have higher bypass flow and hence more bypass release.
Something else to consider is that what makes an N-95 so effective is that its filter material is specifically designed and manufactured to use electrostatic potential to cause aerosols passing through it to deposit on it. Not something you are going to get from t-shirt or (to the best of my knowledge) surgical mask material. As an aside, I have a colleague who participated in experiments to sterilize N-95 masks with radiation. Turns out that the degree of radiation needed for sterilization also damages the filter material such that it loses it electrostatic potential.
My ED provides North respirators, but they are the half-face models that require separate goggles rather than having a fully sealed faceplate. replacement filters are provided too. Anyone that wants to can purchase their own full-face model, but they can be mighty expensive. Either one takes a lot of discipline to wear for an extended period.Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Unless the mask is air-tight (e.g., properly fitted, properly worn N-95 mask), a portion of the aerosols will bypass the filter material. The degree of bypass is dependent on the mask and bypass flow areas and their respective pressure drops. A surgical mask (not air-tight, with relatively large gaps and low pressure drops) will not filter small aerosols, as they will follow the flow streamlines through the bypass area. The larger aerosols with enough mass (inertia) to "break out" from flow streamlines and follow the flow through the filter material. Ironically, if the mask isn't air-tight, then then a mask with "tighter" filter material (i.e., with a higher pressure drop across it) will have higher bypass flow and hence more bypass release.
Something else to consider is that what makes an N-95 so effective is that its filter material is specifically designed and manufactured to use electrostatic potential to cause aerosols passing through it to deposit on it. Not something you are going to get from t-shirt or (to the best of my knowledge) surgical mask material. As an aside, I have a colleague who participated in experiments to sterilize N-95 masks with radiation. Turns out that the degree of radiation needed for sterilization also damages the filter material such that it loses it electrostatic potential.
I am not talking about an N-95, I mean an industrial respirator you wear to spray paint, or a full gas mask. With removable filters and all. That is as good as you can get to be safe from anything in the air, and IMO if you blame others for getting you sick and you are not wearing that, you are just a dumbass.
My ED provides North respirators, but they are the half-face models that require separate goggles rather than having a fully sealed faceplate. replacement filters are provided too. Anyone that wants to can purchase their own full-face model, but they can be mighty expensive. Either one takes a lot of discipline to wear for an extended period.Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Unless the mask is air-tight (e.g., properly fitted, properly worn N-95 mask), a portion of the aerosols will bypass the filter material. The degree of bypass is dependent on the mask and bypass flow areas and their respective pressure drops. A surgical mask (not air-tight, with relatively large gaps and low pressure drops) will not filter small aerosols, as they will follow the flow streamlines through the bypass area. The larger aerosols with enough mass (inertia) to "break out" from flow streamlines and follow the flow through the filter material. Ironically, if the mask isn't air-tight, then then a mask with "tighter" filter material (i.e., with a higher pressure drop across it) will have higher bypass flow and hence more bypass release.
Something else to consider is that what makes an N-95 so effective is that its filter material is specifically designed and manufactured to use electrostatic potential to cause aerosols passing through it to deposit on it. Not something you are going to get from t-shirt or (to the best of my knowledge) surgical mask material. As an aside, I have a colleague who participated in experiments to sterilize N-95 masks with radiation. Turns out that the degree of radiation needed for sterilization also damages the filter material such that it loses it electrostatic potential.
I am not talking about an N-95, I mean an industrial respirator you wear to spray paint, or a full gas mask. With removable filters and all. That is as good as you can get to be safe from anything in the air, and IMO if you blame others for getting you sick and you are not wearing that, you are just a dumbass.
Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Unless the mask is air-tight (e.g., properly fitted, properly worn N-95 mask), a portion of the aerosols will bypass the filter material. The degree of bypass is dependent on the mask and bypass flow areas and their respective pressure drops. A surgical mask (not air-tight, with relatively large gaps and low pressure drops) will not filter small aerosols, as they will follow the flow streamlines through the bypass area. The larger aerosols with enough mass (inertia) to "break out" from flow streamlines and follow the flow through the filter material. Ironically, if the mask isn't air-tight, then then a mask with "tighter" filter material (i.e., with a higher pressure drop across it) will have higher bypass flow and hence more bypass release.
Something else to consider is that what makes an N-95 so effective is that its filter material is specifically designed and manufactured to use electrostatic potential to cause aerosols passing through it to deposit on it. Not something you are going to get from t-shirt or (to the best of my knowledge) surgical mask material. As an aside, I have a colleague who participated in experiments to sterilize N-95 masks with radiation. Turns out that the degree of radiation needed for sterilization also damages the filter material such that it loses it electrostatic potential.
I am not talking about an N-95, I mean an industrial respirator you wear to spray paint, or a full gas mask. With removable filters and all. That is as good as you can get to be safe from anything in the air, and IMO if you blame others for getting you sick and you are not wearing that, you are just a dumbass.
My ED provides North respirators, but they are the half-face models that require separate goggles rather than having a fully sealed faceplate. replacement filters are provided too. Anyone that wants to can purchase their own full-face model, but they can be mighty expensive. Either one takes a lot of discipline to wear for an extended period.Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Unless the mask is air-tight (e.g., properly fitted, properly worn N-95 mask), a portion of the aerosols will bypass the filter material. The degree of bypass is dependent on the mask and bypass flow areas and their respective pressure drops. A surgical mask (not air-tight, with relatively large gaps and low pressure drops) will not filter small aerosols, as they will follow the flow streamlines through the bypass area. The larger aerosols with enough mass (inertia) to "break out" from flow streamlines and follow the flow through the filter material. Ironically, if the mask isn't air-tight, then then a mask with "tighter" filter material (i.e., with a higher pressure drop across it) will have higher bypass flow and hence more bypass release.
Something else to consider is that what makes an N-95 so effective is that its filter material is specifically designed and manufactured to use electrostatic potential to cause aerosols passing through it to deposit on it. Not something you are going to get from t-shirt or (to the best of my knowledge) surgical mask material. As an aside, I have a colleague who participated in experiments to sterilize N-95 masks with radiation. Turns out that the degree of radiation needed for sterilization also damages the filter material such that it loses it electrostatic potential.
I am not talking about an N-95, I mean an industrial respirator you wear to spray paint, or a full gas mask. With removable filters and all. That is as good as you can get to be safe from anything in the air, and IMO if you blame others for getting you sick and you are not wearing that, you are just a dumbass.
Oh I agree with that. A respirator is a bitch to wear, it is hot and not comfortable, at least mine isnt, as rubber does not breathe. But respirators and some sweet goggles like kids used to wear in wood shop and you are set, hardware stores carry respirators, and you can get a gas mask for a couple hundred bucks. Wearing a gas mask is no fun either, and I remember after 3-4 hours I was not loving it. The really nice full face respirators (read, comfortable to wear..and comfort being on a relative scale) are fairly expensive. My point though, is anyone who really feels there is an issue where their health is at risk, they should get one because even an expensive one is worth a lot less than their lives...if they really believe that they could die from other people not wearing a mask or not being vaxxed.
My ED provides North respirators, but they are the half-face models that require separate goggles rather than having a fully sealed faceplate. replacement filters are provided too. Anyone that wants to can purchase their own full-face model, but they can be mighty expensive. Either one takes a lot of discipline to wear for an extended period.Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Unless the mask is air-tight (e.g., properly fitted, properly worn N-95 mask), a portion of the aerosols will bypass the filter material. The degree of bypass is dependent on the mask and bypass flow areas and their respective pressure drops. A surgical mask (not air-tight, with relatively large gaps and low pressure drops) will not filter small aerosols, as they will follow the flow streamlines through the bypass area. The larger aerosols with enough mass (inertia) to "break out" from flow streamlines and follow the flow through the filter material. Ironically, if the mask isn't air-tight, then then a mask with "tighter" filter material (i.e., with a higher pressure drop across it) will have higher bypass flow and hence more bypass release.
Something else to consider is that what makes an N-95 so effective is that its filter material is specifically designed and manufactured to use electrostatic potential to cause aerosols passing through it to deposit on it. Not something you are going to get from t-shirt or (to the best of my knowledge) surgical mask material. As an aside, I have a colleague who participated in experiments to sterilize N-95 masks with radiation. Turns out that the degree of radiation needed for sterilization also damages the filter material such that it loses it electrostatic potential.
I am not talking about an N-95, I mean an industrial respirator you wear to spray paint, or a full gas mask. With removable filters and all. That is as good as you can get to be safe from anything in the air, and IMO if you blame others for getting you sick and you are not wearing that, you are just a dumbass.
Oh I agree with that. A respirator is a bitch to wear, it is hot and not comfortable, at least mine isnt, as rubber does not breathe. But respirators and some sweet goggles like kids used to wear in wood shop and you are set, hardware stores carry respirators, and you can get a gas mask for a couple hundred bucks. Wearing a gas mask is no fun either, and I remember after 3-4 hours I was not loving it. The really nice full face respirators (read, comfortable to wear..and comfort being on a relative scale) are fairly expensive. My point though, is anyone who really feels there is an issue where their health is at risk, they should get one because even an expensive one is worth a lot less than their lives...if they really believe that they could die from other people not wearing a mask or not being vaxxed.
Can confirm. When I toured the Fukushima Daiichi Unit 5 containment building we had to wear respirators as part of the radiation environment PPE. Not only was it hot and uncomfortable, but if you breathed hard, you would easily fog the faceplate.
And Circle-Back Psaki insists that the southern invasion of illegal aliens doesn't require vaccination because 'they're not intending to stay here for a lengthy period of time'.
::)
Jesus Christ. Combine this with the Afghanis coming in who have measles, tuberculosis, and malaria, and we're gearing up for a medical nightmare that'll make HappyDerp's bad dreams look like a walk in the park.
And Circle-Back Psaki insists that the southern invasion of illegal aliens doesn't require vaccination because 'they're not intending to stay here for a lengthy period of time'.
::)
Jesus Christ. Combine this with the Afghanis coming in who have measles, tuberculosis, and malaria, and we're gearing up for a medical nightmare that'll make HappyDerp's bad dreams look like a walk in the park.
My ED provides North respirators, but they are the half-face models that require separate goggles rather than having a fully sealed faceplate. replacement filters are provided too. Anyone that wants to can purchase their own full-face model, but they can be mighty expensive. Either one takes a lot of discipline to wear for an extended period.Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Unless the mask is air-tight (e.g., properly fitted, properly worn N-95 mask), a portion of the aerosols will bypass the filter material. The degree of bypass is dependent on the mask and bypass flow areas and their respective pressure drops. A surgical mask (not air-tight, with relatively large gaps and low pressure drops) will not filter small aerosols, as they will follow the flow streamlines through the bypass area. The larger aerosols with enough mass (inertia) to "break out" from flow streamlines and follow the flow through the filter material. Ironically, if the mask isn't air-tight, then then a mask with "tighter" filter material (i.e., with a higher pressure drop across it) will have higher bypass flow and hence more bypass release.
Something else to consider is that what makes an N-95 so effective is that its filter material is specifically designed and manufactured to use electrostatic potential to cause aerosols passing through it to deposit on it. Not something you are going to get from t-shirt or (to the best of my knowledge) surgical mask material. As an aside, I have a colleague who participated in experiments to sterilize N-95 masks with radiation. Turns out that the degree of radiation needed for sterilization also damages the filter material such that it loses it electrostatic potential.
I am not talking about an N-95, I mean an industrial respirator you wear to spray paint, or a full gas mask. With removable filters and all. That is as good as you can get to be safe from anything in the air, and IMO if you blame others for getting you sick and you are not wearing that, you are just a dumbass.
Oh I agree with that. A respirator is a bitch to wear, it is hot and not comfortable, at least mine isnt, as rubber does not breathe. But respirators and some sweet goggles like kids used to wear in wood shop and you are set, hardware stores carry respirators, and you can get a gas mask for a couple hundred bucks. Wearing a gas mask is no fun either, and I remember after 3-4 hours I was not loving it. The really nice full face respirators (read, comfortable to wear..and comfort being on a relative scale) are fairly expensive. My point though, is anyone who really feels there is an issue where their health is at risk, they should get one because even an expensive one is worth a lot less than their lives...if they really believe that they could die from other people not wearing a mask or not being vaxxed.
Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
My ED provides North respirators, but they are the half-face models that require separate goggles rather than having a fully sealed faceplate. replacement filters are provided too. Anyone that wants to can purchase their own full-face model, but they can be mighty expensive. Either one takes a lot of discipline to wear for an extended period.Regarding respirators, they are for people like Mistwell, who feels it is other people's concern to protect his safety with porous cloth. Wear a respirator when you go out, and you will not be inhaling anyone's contaminants, even the tiny little ones that pass right through that porous mask.
Unless the mask is air-tight (e.g., properly fitted, properly worn N-95 mask), a portion of the aerosols will bypass the filter material. The degree of bypass is dependent on the mask and bypass flow areas and their respective pressure drops. A surgical mask (not air-tight, with relatively large gaps and low pressure drops) will not filter small aerosols, as they will follow the flow streamlines through the bypass area. The larger aerosols with enough mass (inertia) to "break out" from flow streamlines and follow the flow through the filter material. Ironically, if the mask isn't air-tight, then then a mask with "tighter" filter material (i.e., with a higher pressure drop across it) will have higher bypass flow and hence more bypass release.
Something else to consider is that what makes an N-95 so effective is that its filter material is specifically designed and manufactured to use electrostatic potential to cause aerosols passing through it to deposit on it. Not something you are going to get from t-shirt or (to the best of my knowledge) surgical mask material. As an aside, I have a colleague who participated in experiments to sterilize N-95 masks with radiation. Turns out that the degree of radiation needed for sterilization also damages the filter material such that it loses it electrostatic potential.
I am not talking about an N-95, I mean an industrial respirator you wear to spray paint, or a full gas mask. With removable filters and all. That is as good as you can get to be safe from anything in the air, and IMO if you blame others for getting you sick and you are not wearing that, you are just a dumbass.
Oh I agree with that. A respirator is a bitch to wear, it is hot and not comfortable, at least mine isnt, as rubber does not breathe. But respirators and some sweet goggles like kids used to wear in wood shop and you are set, hardware stores carry respirators, and you can get a gas mask for a couple hundred bucks. Wearing a gas mask is no fun either, and I remember after 3-4 hours I was not loving it. The really nice full face respirators (read, comfortable to wear..and comfort being on a relative scale) are fairly expensive. My point though, is anyone who really feels there is an issue where their health is at risk, they should get one because even an expensive one is worth a lot less than their lives...if they really believe that they could die from other people not wearing a mask or not being vaxxed.
Yeah I wear a respirator when working in our attic, and I hate it. I mean it's fine for the first 10 mins, but damn those things get hot, and it takes a lot more energy to breath through one.
I'm wondering that too. Is it because he likes FG but not the message, or because he doesn't like FG, or something else?Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
It doesn't show Chris Griffin getting the jab, suffering heart inflammation and dying a few days later.Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
It doesn't show Chris Griffin getting the jab, suffering heart inflammation and dying a few days later.Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
I can see what you mean about objecting to entertainers putting in their views on health issues, whether that entertainer is Seth MacFarlane or Tucker Carlson.Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
The idea that entertainment personalities and cartoon dogs are dispensing medical advice and information.
The problem isn't that people don't understand how vaccines work. The problem is the government and media have intentionally lied and misled the public on the topic.
Seth MacFarlane should stick to rape jokes. Giggity.
Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
The idea that entertainment personalities and cartoon dogs are dispensing medical advice and information.
The problem isn't that people don't understand how vaccines work. The problem is the government and media have intentionally lied and misled the public on the topic.
Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
The idea that entertainment personalities and cartoon dogs are dispensing medical advice and information.
The problem isn't that people don't understand how vaccines work. The problem is the government and media have intentionally lied and misled the public on the topic.
Did you hear that from some alt-right entertainment personality who is selling ads on YouTube with your clicks?
I can see what you mean about objecting to entertainers putting in their views on health issues, whether that entertainer is Seth MacFarlane or Tucker Carlson.Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
The idea that entertainment personalities and cartoon dogs are dispensing medical advice and information.
The problem isn't that people don't understand how vaccines work. The problem is the government and media have intentionally lied and misled the public on the topic.
Seth MacFarlane should stick to rape jokes. Giggity.
That's not what FOX itself says about him. They specifically call him an entertainer, and that no reasonable person should take what he says seriously.I can see what you mean about objecting to entertainers putting in their views on health issues, whether that entertainer is Seth MacFarlane or Tucker Carlson.Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
The idea that entertainment personalities and cartoon dogs are dispensing medical advice and information.
The problem isn't that people don't understand how vaccines work. The problem is the government and media have intentionally lied and misled the public on the topic.
Seth MacFarlane should stick to rape jokes. Giggity.
Tucker Carlson isn’t an entertainer, he’s a journalist. For entertainment I’ll go to CNN.
That's not what FOX itself says about him. They specifically call him an entertainer, and that no reasonable person should take what he says seriously.I can see what you mean about objecting to entertainers putting in their views on health issues, whether that entertainer is Seth MacFarlane or Tucker Carlson.Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
The idea that entertainment personalities and cartoon dogs are dispensing medical advice and information.
The problem isn't that people don't understand how vaccines work. The problem is the government and media have intentionally lied and misled the public on the topic.
Seth MacFarlane should stick to rape jokes. Giggity.
Tucker Carlson isn’t an entertainer, he’s a journalist. For entertainment I’ll go to CNN.
In sum, ruled the court, Rachel Maddow is among those “speakers whose statements cannot reasonably be interpreted as allegations of fact.” Despite Maddow's use of the word "literally” to accuse OAN of being a "paid Russian propaganda” outlet, the court dismissed the lawsuit on the ground that, given Maddow's conduct and her audience's awareness of who she is and what she does, “the Court finds that the contested statement is an opinion that cannot serve as the basis for a defamation claim."
I'm not using it as a zinger and I havent argued that Maddow is any different from Carlson. Neither of them should be considered any more seriously than McFarland cartoons.That's not what FOX itself says about him. They specifically call him an entertainer, and that no reasonable person should take what he says seriously.I can see what you mean about objecting to entertainers putting in their views on health issues, whether that entertainer is Seth MacFarlane or Tucker Carlson.Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
The idea that entertainment personalities and cartoon dogs are dispensing medical advice and information.
The problem isn't that people don't understand how vaccines work. The problem is the government and media have intentionally lied and misled the public on the topic.
Seth MacFarlane should stick to rape jokes. Giggity.
Tucker Carlson isn’t an entertainer, he’s a journalist. For entertainment I’ll go to CNN.
Lol Rachel Maddow made the same case. You guys need to update your talking points its not the zinger you seem to think is.
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/a-court-ruled-rachel-maddows-viewersQuoteIn sum, ruled the court, Rachel Maddow is among those “speakers whose statements cannot reasonably be interpreted as allegations of fact.” Despite Maddow's use of the word "literally” to accuse OAN of being a "paid Russian propaganda” outlet, the court dismissed the lawsuit on the ground that, given Maddow's conduct and her audience's awareness of who she is and what she does, “the Court finds that the contested statement is an opinion that cannot serve as the basis for a defamation claim."
I'm not using it as a zinger and I havent argued that Maddow is any different from Carlson. Neither of them should be considered any more seriously than McFarland cartoons.That's not what FOX itself says about him. They specifically call him an entertainer, and that no reasonable person should take what he says seriously.I can see what you mean about objecting to entertainers putting in their views on health issues, whether that entertainer is Seth MacFarlane or Tucker Carlson.Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
The idea that entertainment personalities and cartoon dogs are dispensing medical advice and information.
The problem isn't that people don't understand how vaccines work. The problem is the government and media have intentionally lied and misled the public on the topic.
Seth MacFarlane should stick to rape jokes. Giggity.
Tucker Carlson isn’t an entertainer, he’s a journalist. For entertainment I’ll go to CNN.
Lol Rachel Maddow made the same case. You guys need to update your talking points its not the zinger you seem to think is.
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/a-court-ruled-rachel-maddows-viewersQuoteIn sum, ruled the court, Rachel Maddow is among those “speakers whose statements cannot reasonably be interpreted as allegations of fact.” Despite Maddow's use of the word "literally” to accuse OAN of being a "paid Russian propaganda” outlet, the court dismissed the lawsuit on the ground that, given Maddow's conduct and her audience's awareness of who she is and what she does, “the Court finds that the contested statement is an opinion that cannot serve as the basis for a defamation claim."
Study indicates rate of 1 / 1000 chance of developing Myocarditis after each injection: Link (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.13.21262182v1.full)
Yeah, the "in-hospital course" section tells the story in terms that anyone with any clinical knowledge can clearly see are generally unremarkable.Study indicates rate of 1 / 1000 chance of developing Myocarditis after each injection: Link (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.13.21262182v1.full)
So 32 people total, "Symptoms settled quickly with standard therapy and patients were discharged within a few days. No major adverse cardiac events and no significant arrythmias were noted during inpatient stay." OK then.
That's not what FOX itself says about him. They specifically call him an entertainer, and that no reasonable person should take what he says seriously.I can see what you mean about objecting to entertainers putting in their views on health issues, whether that entertainer is Seth MacFarlane or Tucker Carlson.Kill me.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
What is your objection to that video?
The idea that entertainment personalities and cartoon dogs are dispensing medical advice and information.
The problem isn't that people don't understand how vaccines work. The problem is the government and media have intentionally lied and misled the public on the topic.
Seth MacFarlane should stick to rape jokes. Giggity.
Tucker Carlson isn’t an entertainer, he’s a journalist. For entertainment I’ll go to CNN.
Study indicates rate of 1 / 1000 chance of developing Myocarditis after each injection: Link (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.13.21262182v1.full)
So 32 people total, "Symptoms settled quickly with standard therapy and patients were discharged within a few days. No major adverse cardiac events and no significant arrythmias were noted during inpatient stay." OK then.
He issues forth project blow dart and I will issue project beatdown on his weak ass.
For many of these patients 1/1000 is significantly greater than the risk of severe outcome from SarsCov-2 infection. Contextualizing & balancing risk is key.
This also is a good demonstration to the evergreen discussion of "How reliable is VAERS data?" A lot of people who are reflexively pro-vaccine without any consideration of risk repeatedly trot out the claim that VAERS data is unreliable since "anyone" can enter a VAERS claim. (At last count more than 80% of VAERS entries were entered by healthcare providers or vaccine manufacturers, so that's a rather bogus claim, but it's frequently made.)
The information we can ascertain from studies such as this is: VAERS is very unreliable, and it's vastly understating AE prevalence by orders of magnitude.
Fuck any guy abusing the holocaust yellow star of david for their idiotic modern political cause.
For many of these patients 1/1000 is significantly greater than the risk of severe outcome from SarsCov-2 infection. Contextualizing & balancing risk is key.
This also is a good demonstration to the evergreen discussion of "How reliable is VAERS data?" A lot of people who are reflexively pro-vaccine without any consideration of risk repeatedly trot out the claim that VAERS data is unreliable since "anyone" can enter a VAERS claim. (At last count more than 80% of VAERS entries were entered by healthcare providers or vaccine manufacturers, so that's a rather bogus claim, but it's frequently made.)
The information we can ascertain from studies such as this is: VAERS is very unreliable, and it's vastly understating AE prevalence by orders of magnitude.
It isn't a uniform risk across all ages, either. The under-25s are much more likely to suffer from heart damage than the elderly, which will also impact them for much longer.
Reason enough for me to refuse this for my children, they can get fucked if they think they're ever being jabbed with this shit.
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
I am greedy. I place my child's life above the value of other people's lives, or other people's kid's lives. I am so greedy regarding that issue, I am quit willing to trade A LOT to protect them. 5 years from now, I will consider this vaccine when the standard length of time for a clinical trial has passed.
I am greedy. I place my child's life above the value of other people's lives, or other people's kid's lives. I am so greedy regarding that issue, I am quit willing to trade A LOT to protect them. 5 years from now, I will consider this vaccine when the standard length of time for a clinical trial has passed.
I won't consider it 5 years from now. It is as irrelevant to my children as the flu jab.
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Meanwhile:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-administration-opposes-honorable-discharge-coronavirus-vaccine-refusal
Wow, that'll show those dirty deplorables in the ranks. Stick 'em with a dishonorable discharge, which is equivalent to a fucking felony. No, I can't imagine how this could possibly go wrong!
More on the national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals to lie for some strange reason about how they are out of ICU beds (https://khn.org/news/article/montana-icu-overrun-with-covid-patients-staffing-shortage/).
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Guys, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.This is certainly not true in regards to a great variety of health conditions.
Guys, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.This is certainly not true in regards to a great variety of health conditions.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/v.comb.io/qtLwT7Ke/xw35ND.mp4?1520720278213 (https://s3.amazonaws.com/v.comb.io/qtLwT7Ke/xw35ND.mp4?1520720278213)
Except that I wouldn't trust the current junta to not go full retard and demand dishonorable discharges from objectors.Meanwhile:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-administration-opposes-honorable-discharge-coronavirus-vaccine-refusal
Wow, that'll show those dirty deplorables in the ranks. Stick 'em with a dishonorable discharge, which is equivalent to a fucking felony. No, I can't imagine how this could possibly go wrong!
They are pushing for an other than honorable, which is a long ways from a dishonorable. It is not good, but it is not a dishonorable, and honestly probably an over reach for forcing the ingestion of a still very new vaccine. But if you sign the line, they own you. So...dunno what happens there.
My meaning is, I think the route the military would go is to discharge with an OTH. It is pretty hard to get a dishonorable discharge. I saw dudes commit crimes who still got a BCD (Bad conduct discharge, which is bad, but still not dishonorable, the only people I know of who got DD's were guilty of fairly serious felonies). It is not good, and would prevent them from getting VA benefits. I have a very, very strong feeling no one will get booted for refusal without at least a year going by, with frequent counseling, NJP, etc first. Basically making it long enough and painful enough that a short timer might be willing to endure, but anyone at the mid point of 4 is going to go along to get along. If lifers refuse the jab, that is where it could get interesting. But unless a whole lot has changed, waivers can pop out as needed and where needed (as in rules for some, but not for all).
If they make it where people refusing can get only honorable discharges, as that senator is pushing for, get ready to lose 50-60 percent of the military.
More on the national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals to lie for some strange reason about how they are out of ICU beds (https://khn.org/news/article/montana-icu-overrun-with-covid-patients-staffing-shortage/).
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Why are you suddenly changing the subject to blood clots...which isn't the same thing we were discussing? Oh right, because you have no response to what we were actually talking about so decided to play the moving target game.
Except that I wouldn't trust the current junta to not go full retard and demand dishonorable discharges from objectors.Meanwhile:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-administration-opposes-honorable-discharge-coronavirus-vaccine-refusal
Wow, that'll show those dirty deplorables in the ranks. Stick 'em with a dishonorable discharge, which is equivalent to a fucking felony. No, I can't imagine how this could possibly go wrong!
They are pushing for an other than honorable, which is a long ways from a dishonorable. It is not good, but it is not a dishonorable, and honestly probably an over reach for forcing the ingestion of a still very new vaccine. But if you sign the line, they own you. So...dunno what happens there.
My meaning is, I think the route the military would go is to discharge with an OTH. It is pretty hard to get a dishonorable discharge. I saw dudes commit crimes who still got a BCD (Bad conduct discharge, which is bad, but still not dishonorable, the only people I know of who got DD's were guilty of fairly serious felonies). It is not good, and would prevent them from getting VA benefits. I have a very, very strong feeling no one will get booted for refusal without at least a year going by, with frequent counseling, NJP, etc first. Basically making it long enough and painful enough that a short timer might be willing to endure, but anyone at the mid point of 4 is going to go along to get along. If lifers refuse the jab, that is where it could get interesting. But unless a whole lot has changed, waivers can pop out as needed and where needed (as in rules for some, but not for all).
If they make it where people refusing can get only honorable discharges, as that senator is pushing for, get ready to lose 50-60 percent of the military.
Remember, dissent cannot be tolerated.
Do not post blind links. Consider this a warning.
In case you missed it we ARE in clown world. Remember, you had members of the JCS talking about 'purging white supremacists' from the ranks, and China Milley blathering about 'white rage' instead of tending to real military business.Except that I wouldn't trust the current junta to not go full retard and demand dishonorable discharges from objectors.Meanwhile:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-administration-opposes-honorable-discharge-coronavirus-vaccine-refusal
Wow, that'll show those dirty deplorables in the ranks. Stick 'em with a dishonorable discharge, which is equivalent to a fucking felony. No, I can't imagine how this could possibly go wrong!
They are pushing for an other than honorable, which is a long ways from a dishonorable. It is not good, but it is not a dishonorable, and honestly probably an over reach for forcing the ingestion of a still very new vaccine. But if you sign the line, they own you. So...dunno what happens there.
My meaning is, I think the route the military would go is to discharge with an OTH. It is pretty hard to get a dishonorable discharge. I saw dudes commit crimes who still got a BCD (Bad conduct discharge, which is bad, but still not dishonorable, the only people I know of who got DD's were guilty of fairly serious felonies). It is not good, and would prevent them from getting VA benefits. I have a very, very strong feeling no one will get booted for refusal without at least a year going by, with frequent counseling, NJP, etc first. Basically making it long enough and painful enough that a short timer might be willing to endure, but anyone at the mid point of 4 is going to go along to get along. If lifers refuse the jab, that is where it could get interesting. But unless a whole lot has changed, waivers can pop out as needed and where needed (as in rules for some, but not for all).
If they make it where people refusing can get only honorable discharges, as that senator is pushing for, get ready to lose 50-60 percent of the military.
Remember, dissent cannot be tolerated.
I have no doubt Biden in his diminished condition might rant something like that, but no way in hell the federal government or military moves forward with it. Talk about being cancelled, your prospects are better with a felony conviction than a DD. It would start an actual civil war. I foresee general discharges if any, and for the most part a bunch of creating a sort of pain to get people to take the shot. MAYBE they get them out fairly fast with a general, but that is more to shit test the people who have all they want of the new modern military.
I guess in crazy land it *could* happen, but it is so serious, I do think it triggers a point of no return. Extreme doubt in my mind it happens.
However, this high rate is unlikely to continue. People are getting vaccinated at a higher rate as they become more alarmed by conditions.
I know several people who are in intensive care who had not chosen to get the vaccine. Most of them are parents with young children. I know most of them will make a full recovery, but I can't understand risking your health when so many people depend on you.
I got a flu vaccine this last week, too. But I'm not afraid of needles.What is it with you loons always thinking this is about "fear of a needle"? I'm not a child, pain doesn't bother me, especially something as trivial as a needle stick.
What is it with you loons always thinking this is about "fear of a needle"? I'm not a child, pain doesn't bother me, especially something as trivial as a needle stick.Remember it's the same people who think that being hesitant about the safety of a new and highly experimental vaccine that blew up VAERS and hasn't been around long enough to know anything about the long term effects means you're opposed to all vaccines.
Remember it's the same people who think that being hesitant about the safety of a new and highly experimental vaccine that blew up VAERS and hasn't been around long enough to know anything about the long term effects means you're opposed to all vaccines.
It doesn't suppress the immune system, you lying fucktard.Remember it's the same people who think that being hesitant about the safety of a new and highly experimental vaccine that blew up VAERS and hasn't been around long enough to know anything about the long term effects means you're opposed to all vaccines.
I even got a vaccine voluntarily a few years ago, for hep B. No interest whatsoever in one for the sniffles that doesn't even work.
It's doing a good job of suppressing the immune systems of the jabbed, though. Going to get nasty when the winter respiratory bugs do the rounds.
More on the national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals to lie for some strange reason about how they are out of ICU beds (https://khn.org/news/article/montana-icu-overrun-with-covid-patients-staffing-shortage/).
Reminder that the government and media have consistently lied to us "for the greater good" over the course of the pandemic response. (https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-mask-advice-was-because-doctors-shortages-from-the-start-2020-6)
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Why is it always some rich white guy who wants to sacrifice everyone elses kids to protect themselves?
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Why are you suddenly changing the subject to blood clots...which isn't the same thing we were discussing? Oh right, because you have no response to what we were actually talking about so decided to play the moving target game.
You were saying side effects of the vaccine are transitory. Blood clots are an example of something that isn't transitory.
However, this high rate is unlikely to continue. People are getting vaccinated at a higher rate as they become more alarmed by conditions.
Unfortunately for your assumption there, "vaccination" doesn't do anything of the sort. We in the UK have more "cases", hospitalisations and deaths now than at the same time last year, when hardly anyone was vaccinated.I know several people who are in intensive care who had not chosen to get the vaccine. Most of them are parents with young children. I know most of them will make a full recovery, but I can't understand risking your health when so many people depend on you.
I can't understand risking your health with an unknown range of side effects (some of them permanent) when the virus is trivial. The overwhelming majority of people never see the inside of a hospital as a result, they get poorly then get better. The jab is much riskier than the virus for most people.I got a flu vaccine this last week, too. But I'm not afraid of needles.What is it with you loons always thinking this is about "fear of a needle"? I'm not a child, pain doesn't bother me, especially something as trivial as a needle stick.
I didn't mention the Government. This is hospitals saying it. Directly. Nurses and doctors, with a picture of them setting up ICU beds in hallways.Funny, I seem to remember a recent story carried by many major media outlets, about how Oklahoma was overrun with people who ODed on ivermectin. Or all the journalists who claimed that Rogan took horse paste. Except those turned out to to be a big fucking lies, didn't they? Or how about earlier in the pandemic when the newspapers were running stories about bodies being stacked up in NYC, yet all the photos were from Italy?
But tell me how there is a national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals across the national, all coincidentally in the hotspots for Covid, reporting how they are out of ICU beds when you claim they're not for...reasons I guess?
I didn't mention the Government. This is hospitals saying it. Directly. Nurses and doctors, with a picture of them setting up ICU beds in hallways.Funny, I seem to remember a recent story carried by many major media outlets, about how Oklahoma was overrun with people who ODed on ivermectin. Or all the journalists who claimed that Rogan took horse paste. Except those turned out to to be a big fucking lies, didn't they? Or how about earlier in the pandemic when the newspapers were running stories about bodies being stacked up in NYC, yet all the photos were from Italy?
But tell me how there is a national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals across the national, all coincidentally in the hotspots for Covid, reporting how they are out of ICU beds when you claim they're not for...reasons I guess?
There's no need for a conspiracy, when so many people live in a world of alternate facts generated by the sycophantic media.
What is it with you loons always thinking this is about "fear of a needle"? I'm not a child, pain doesn't bother me, especially something as trivial as a needle stick.
It wasn't the doctors and nurses who said it was incorrect, they weren't even asked. There was no attempt to verify the claims of Doctor Liesabouthorsepaste. It wasn't until the bureaucrats running the hospital put out a press release saying nah that didn't happen that all the news outlets stealth edited the completely false articles they had written to make it look like they were always right.I didn't mention the Government. This is hospitals saying it. Directly. Nurses and doctors, with a picture of them setting up ICU beds in hallways.Funny, I seem to remember a recent story carried by many major media outlets, about how Oklahoma was overrun with people who ODed on ivermectin. Or all the journalists who claimed that Rogan took horse paste. Except those turned out to to be a big fucking lies, didn't they? Or how about earlier in the pandemic when the newspapers were running stories about bodies being stacked up in NYC, yet all the photos were from Italy?
But tell me how there is a national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals across the national, all coincidentally in the hotspots for Covid, reporting how they are out of ICU beds when you claim they're not for...reasons I guess?
There's no need for a conspiracy, when so many people live in a world of alternate facts generated by the sycophantic media.
Yes the ivermectin stories were not correct.
Are you arguing that means the ICU beds are not overflowing because you found a different story about a different topic to be incorrect? The reason you know those stories were incorrect is DOCTORS AND NURSES SAID IT WAS INCORRECT. THIS IS DOCTORS AND NURSES SAYING THEIR ICUs ARE OVERFULL.
So yes, you're positing a grand secret conspiracy of doctors and nurses across the nation, coincidentally in covid hotspots, to tell the truth about ivermectin but then lie about their icu status.
Its absurd Pat.
What is it with you loons always thinking this is about "fear of a needle"? I'm not a child, pain doesn't bother me, especially something as trivial as a needle stick.Remember it's the same people who think that being hesitant about the safety of a new and highly experimental vaccine that blew up VAERS and hasn't been around long enough to know anything about the long term effects means you're opposed to all vaccines.
Wait... Trump was behind the vaccines?What is it with you loons always thinking this is about "fear of a needle"? I'm not a child, pain doesn't bother me, especially something as trivial as a needle stick.Remember it's the same people who think that being hesitant about the safety of a new and highly experimental vaccine that blew up VAERS and hasn't been around long enough to know anything about the long term effects means you're opposed to all vaccines.
Come on Pat, there is no “thinking” involved. They just love the Trump vaccine and want everyone to have it too.
More on the national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals to lie for some strange reason about how they are out of ICU beds (https://khn.org/news/article/montana-icu-overrun-with-covid-patients-staffing-shortage/).
Reminder that the government and media have consistently lied to us "for the greater good" over the course of the pandemic response. (https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-mask-advice-was-because-doctors-shortages-from-the-start-2020-6)
I didn't mention the Government. This is hospitals saying it. Directly. Nurses and doctors, with a picture of them setting up ICU beds in hallways.
But tell me how there is a national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals across the national, all coincidentally in the hotspots for Covid, reporting how they are out of ICU beds when you claim they're not for...reasons I guess?
I didn't mention the Government. This is hospitals saying it. Directly. Nurses and doctors, with a picture of them setting up ICU beds in hallways.Funny, I seem to remember a recent story carried by many major media outlets, about how Oklahoma was overrun with people who ODed on ivermectin. Or all the journalists who claimed that Rogan took horse paste. Except those turned out to to be a big fucking lies, didn't they? Or how about earlier in the pandemic when the newspapers were running stories about bodies being stacked up in NYC, yet all the photos were from Italy?
But tell me how there is a national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals across the national, all coincidentally in the hotspots for Covid, reporting how they are out of ICU beds when you claim they're not for...reasons I guess?
There's no need for a conspiracy, when so many people live in a world of alternate facts generated by the sycophantic media.
Yes the ivermectin stories were not correct.
Oh my! Your bravery is legendary.
Yes the ivermectin stories were not correct.
It wasn't the doctors and nurses who said it was incorrect, they weren't even asked.I didn't mention the Government. This is hospitals saying it. Directly. Nurses and doctors, with a picture of them setting up ICU beds in hallways.Funny, I seem to remember a recent story carried by many major media outlets, about how Oklahoma was overrun with people who ODed on ivermectin. Or all the journalists who claimed that Rogan took horse paste. Except those turned out to to be a big fucking lies, didn't they? Or how about earlier in the pandemic when the newspapers were running stories about bodies being stacked up in NYC, yet all the photos were from Italy?
But tell me how there is a national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals across the national, all coincidentally in the hotspots for Covid, reporting how they are out of ICU beds when you claim they're not for...reasons I guess?
There's no need for a conspiracy, when so many people live in a world of alternate facts generated by the sycophantic media.
Yes the ivermectin stories were not correct.
Are you arguing that means the ICU beds are not overflowing because you found a different story about a different topic to be incorrect? The reason you know those stories were incorrect is DOCTORS AND NURSES SAID IT WAS INCORRECT. THIS IS DOCTORS AND NURSES SAYING THEIR ICUs ARE OVERFULL.
So yes, you're positing a grand secret conspiracy of doctors and nurses across the nation, coincidentally in covid hotspots, to tell the truth about ivermectin but then lie about their icu status.
Its absurd Pat.
There was no attempt to verify the claims of Doctor Liesabouthorsepaste. It wasn't until the bureaucrats running the hospital put out a press release saying nah that didn't happen that all the news outlets stealth edited the completely false articles they had written to make it look like they were always right.
And yes, when the media regularly lies and fabricates stories on a topic, never even engages in the most minimal fact checking (how hard would it have been to call a few emergency rooms and ask?), and don't even have the decency to print formal retractions, it's perfectly reasonable to be skeptical about about the latest ragebait.
Greetings!
Interesting how some medical bureaucrats and media people are hysterical about Ivermectin currently--though apparently it has been a safe and reliable medicine used now for many years--including against other viruses in the SARS family, just like Covid.
But Ivermectin is somehow bad now.
You realize that Ivermectin is readily available, and very affordable?
Of course, if the government and medical establishment came out with the stamp that Ivermectin was just fine to treat Covid--that would fuck up the emergency authorization required that allows the Pharmaceutical companies to produce their super-duper so-very-effective-and expensive VACCINES.
That would mean that the Pharmaceutical companies would lose their special emergency authorization to produce and market Covid vaccines. That would result in the loss of BILLIONS and BILLIONS in profit for those Pharmaceutical companies.
Yes, that's right. Keep on believing what the government and the medical establishment says.
I wonder how much lobbying money the Pharmaceutical companies give to the government and also to the medical establishment? Doctors, hospitals, and medical clinics--they don't get hot sales girls fucking them silly and bags of funding from the Pharmaceutical companies, right?
That wouldn't be ethical! We can trust gigantic Pharmaceutical companies to have the public's best interests at heart, right?
There couldn't possibly be any corruption going on between the gigantic Pharmaceutical companies, the medical establishment, and the government during this Covid pandemic, right?
Right right. I just relax with a mug of coffee and smoke a good cigar, and think about this stuff.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
More on the national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals to lie for some strange reason about how they are out of ICU beds (https://khn.org/news/article/montana-icu-overrun-with-covid-patients-staffing-shortage/).
Reminder that the government and media have consistently lied to us "for the greater good" over the course of the pandemic response. (https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-mask-advice-was-because-doctors-shortages-from-the-start-2020-6)
I didn't mention the Government. This is hospitals saying it. Directly. Nurses and doctors, with a picture of them setting up ICU beds in hallways.
But tell me how there is a national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals across the national, all coincidentally in the hotspots for Covid, reporting how they are out of ICU beds when you claim they're not for...reasons I guess?
Since I don't think there is a grand secret conspiracy, I don't think I'd be very convincing in telling you it exists.
I think there's a narrative and people go along with it. Like OSHA refusing to enforce 29 CFR 1904 because they don't want to participate in discouraging people from the vaccinations.
Not what happened. The lies were posted KFOR channel 4 in Oklahoma, and picked up by national news like Rolling Stone and news personalities like Rachel Maddow, without any attempt at verification. The lie wasn't exposed until the Northeastern Health System published a press release, stating they never had to turn away anybody and Doctor LiesThroughHisHorseTeeth never treated a single patient for problems with ivermectin. It wasn't doctors, it wasn't nurses. It was the media, and then a press release that led to their going oops.It wasn't the doctors and nurses who said it was incorrect, they weren't even asked.
Yes, it was. First the media falsely reported about those cases. Then other media (some of it right-wing) asked the nurses and doctors and it was the nurses and doctors who said it was not true.QuoteThere was no attempt to verify the claims of Doctor Liesabouthorsepaste. It wasn't until the bureaucrats running the hospital put out a press release saying nah that didn't happen that all the news outlets stealth edited the completely false articles they had written to make it look like they were always right.
It was not "bureaucrats" it was nurses and doctors. Some of the same ones saying their ICUs are in fact overflowing right now. You know, the ones you want us to believe when it suits your world view and then call liars when it disagrees with your world view.
I didn't mention the Government. This is hospitals saying it. Directly. Nurses and doctors, with a picture of them setting up ICU beds in hallways.Funny, I seem to remember a recent story carried by many major media outlets, about how Oklahoma was overrun with people who ODed on ivermectin. Or all the journalists who claimed that Rogan took horse paste. Except those turned out to to be a big fucking lies, didn't they? Or how about earlier in the pandemic when the newspapers were running stories about bodies being stacked up in NYC, yet all the photos were from Italy?
But tell me how there is a national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals across the national, all coincidentally in the hotspots for Covid, reporting how they are out of ICU beds when you claim they're not for...reasons I guess?
There's no need for a conspiracy, when so many people live in a world of alternate facts generated by the sycophantic media.
Yes the ivermectin stories were not correct.
The ivermectin stories were not correct.
The Oklahomoa overcapacity story was not correct.
Fauci has been incorrect multiple times over the course of the pandemic, has admitted he lied, and is still the government spokesman for Covid policy.
I'm sure there's more I've missed. I need to go over all the Covid craziness and do a summary.
It's the pushing of a narrative, not a super duper conspiracy. It means that media and government will run with any story that seems pro-vaxx, and downplay anything vaxx-critical.
Not what happened. The lies were posted KFOR channel 4 in Oklahoma, and picked up by national news like Rolling Stone and news personalities like Rachel Maddow, without any attempt at verification. The lie wasn't exposed until the Northeastern Health System published a press release, stating they never had to turn away anybody and Doctor LiesThroughHisHorseTeeth never treated a single patient for problems with ivermectin. It wasn't doctors, it wasn't nurses. It was the media, and then a press release that led to their going oops.It wasn't the doctors and nurses who said it was incorrect, they weren't even asked.
Yes, it was. First the media falsely reported about those cases. Then other media (some of it right-wing) asked the nurses and doctors and it was the nurses and doctors who said it was not true.QuoteThere was no attempt to verify the claims of Doctor Liesabouthorsepaste. It wasn't until the bureaucrats running the hospital put out a press release saying nah that didn't happen that all the news outlets stealth edited the completely false articles they had written to make it look like they were always right.
It was not "bureaucrats" it was nurses and doctors. Some of the same ones saying their ICUs are in fact overflowing right now. You know, the ones you want us to believe when it suits your world view and then call liars when it disagrees with your world view.
The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems? (Hint: One of them was LA.) That was the same period when most hospitals were worrying about their finances because elective surgeries were canceled and patients were staying away, and there were widespread reports of hospitals furloughing workers, and some even closed down?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
The media ignored all that, until the press release forced them to... well, not recant. Recanting admitting they were wrong. But it did make them change their stories, including the ones that had already been published.Not what happened. The lies were posted KFOR channel 4 in Oklahoma, and picked up by national news like Rolling Stone and news personalities like Rachel Maddow, without any attempt at verification. The lie wasn't exposed until the Northeastern Health System published a press release, stating they never had to turn away anybody and Doctor LiesThroughHisHorseTeeth never treated a single patient for problems with ivermectin. It wasn't doctors, it wasn't nurses. It was the media, and then a press release that led to their going oops.It wasn't the doctors and nurses who said it was incorrect, they weren't even asked.
Yes, it was. First the media falsely reported about those cases. Then other media (some of it right-wing) asked the nurses and doctors and it was the nurses and doctors who said it was not true.QuoteThere was no attempt to verify the claims of Doctor Liesabouthorsepaste. It wasn't until the bureaucrats running the hospital put out a press release saying nah that didn't happen that all the news outlets stealth edited the completely false articles they had written to make it look like they were always right.
It was not "bureaucrats" it was nurses and doctors. Some of the same ones saying their ICUs are in fact overflowing right now. You know, the ones you want us to believe when it suits your world view and then call liars when it disagrees with your world view.
The press release was in response to THEIR DOCTORS AND NURSES SAYING IT'S NOT CORRECT. And it was prompted by SOME INTERVIEWS WITH DOCTORS AND NURSES THERE. How convenient for you Pat that you somehow missed those salient details. Almost like you never even fucking read the articles you are spewing about.
If a hospital is reporting that they are overcapacity then it's unlikely they will be open for casually inquisitive visitors.I didn't mention the Government. This is hospitals saying it. Directly. Nurses and doctors, with a picture of them setting up ICU beds in hallways.Funny, I seem to remember a recent story carried by many major media outlets, about how Oklahoma was overrun with people who ODed on ivermectin. Or all the journalists who claimed that Rogan took horse paste. Except those turned out to to be a big fucking lies, didn't they? Or how about earlier in the pandemic when the newspapers were running stories about bodies being stacked up in NYC, yet all the photos were from Italy?
But tell me how there is a national grand secret conspiracy of hospitals across the national, all coincidentally in the hotspots for Covid, reporting how they are out of ICU beds when you claim they're not for...reasons I guess?
There's no need for a conspiracy, when so many people live in a world of alternate facts generated by the sycophantic media.
Yes the ivermectin stories were not correct.
The ivermectin stories were not correct.
The Oklahomoa overcapacity story was not correct.
Fauci has been incorrect multiple times over the course of the pandemic, has admitted he lied, and is still the government spokesman for Covid policy.
I'm sure there's more I've missed. I need to go over all the Covid craziness and do a summary.
It's the pushing of a narrative, not a super duper conspiracy. It means that media and government will run with any story that seems pro-vaxx, and downplay anything vaxx-critical.
This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Last couple of weeks have been much better for EDs & ICUs in central Florida. Late July, all of August, and the first week of September were ugly.The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems? (Hint: One of them was LA.) That was the same period when most hospitals were worrying about their finances because elective surgeries were canceled and patients were staying away, and there were widespread reports of hospitals furloughing workers, and some even closed down?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Yes you were. So why should we trust your statements? You have a history of taking isolated problems and claiming they're endemic.
Now last I checked (weeks ago), this latest surge was causing capacity problems across much of the south. But you're not a credible source.
You on the other hand are a reasonably credible source on this topic.Last couple of weeks have been much better for EDs & ICUs in central Florida. Late July, all of August, and the first week of September were ugly.The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems? (Hint: One of them was LA.) That was the same period when most hospitals were worrying about their finances because elective surgeries were canceled and patients were staying away, and there were widespread reports of hospitals furloughing workers, and some even closed down?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Yes you were. So why should we trust your statements? You have a history of taking isolated problems and claiming they're endemic.
Now last I checked (weeks ago), this latest surge was causing capacity problems across much of the south. But you're not a credible source.
The double-wheeze in this country with the reporting of hospital capacity is that they arbitrarily reduced capacity at the start of the pandemic to facilitate "social distancing" and regularly report only on what's happening in "covid beds". So a hospital which has 8 out of 8 beds full, even with plenty of space elsewhere is reported as "full".
And no they're not creating completely separate, sterile environments with airlocks and the like, they're often just across the hallway from regular intensive care wards.
Every ICU room is single-occupancy, but unfortunately not all are set up with negative pressure capacity nor anterooms for donning/doffing PPE. However, I have noticed that dedicated Covid wards (often PCU level) are rarely set up any better and often crammed Covid patients into double-occupancy rooms. The only thing this did that was positive was to move Covid patients away from non-Covid patients. Unfortunately the set up of many Covid dedicated units actually increased the exposure risk for healthcare workers assigned to them.The double-wheeze in this country with the reporting of hospital capacity is that they arbitrarily reduced capacity at the start of the pandemic to facilitate "social distancing" and regularly report only on what's happening in "covid beds". So a hospital which has 8 out of 8 beds full, even with plenty of space elsewhere is reported as "full".
And no they're not creating completely separate, sterile environments with airlocks and the like, they're often just across the hallway from regular intensive care wards.
So you don't believe seriously ill people are at risk from covid at all and everybody should just be mixed together in ICU? Some may see the decisions as clinical rather than arbitrary but as you don't can you explain what you think their motives were?
Every ICU room is single-occupancy, but unfortunately not all are set up with negative pressure capacity nor anterooms for donning/doffing PPE. However, I have noticed that dedicated Covid wards (often PCU level) are rarely set up any better and often crammed Covid patients into double-occupancy rooms. The only thing this did that was positive was to move Covid patients away from non-Covid patients. Unfortunately the set up of many Covid dedicated units actually increased the exposure risk for healthcare workers assigned to them.The double-wheeze in this country with the reporting of hospital capacity is that they arbitrarily reduced capacity at the start of the pandemic to facilitate "social distancing" and regularly report only on what's happening in "covid beds". So a hospital which has 8 out of 8 beds full, even with plenty of space elsewhere is reported as "full".
And no they're not creating completely separate, sterile environments with airlocks and the like, they're often just across the hallway from regular intensive care wards.
So you don't believe seriously ill people are at risk from covid at all and everybody should just be mixed together in ICU? Some may see the decisions as clinical rather than arbitrary but as you don't can you explain what you think their motives were?
The really ugly part of it was the first line of access--the EDs. There it is highly impractical to separate out the Covid patients before they have already been in close proximity of others (other patients and healthcare workers) for > 15 minutes (and often >30 minutes). So they can test everyone as suspected positive, but that then gums up the system terribly, especially for ED patients that need access to imaging bays (x-ray, CT, etc.) and that all goes to shit if you have a stroke alert come in and have to bump access regardless of Covid status.
Savages.Every ICU room is single-occupancy, but unfortunately not all are set up with negative pressure capacity nor anterooms for donning/doffing PPE. However, I have noticed that dedicated Covid wards (often PCU level) are rarely set up any better and often crammed Covid patients into double-occupancy rooms. The only thing this did that was positive was to move Covid patients away from non-Covid patients. Unfortunately the set up of many Covid dedicated units actually increased the exposure risk for healthcare workers assigned to them.The double-wheeze in this country with the reporting of hospital capacity is that they arbitrarily reduced capacity at the start of the pandemic to facilitate "social distancing" and regularly report only on what's happening in "covid beds". So a hospital which has 8 out of 8 beds full, even with plenty of space elsewhere is reported as "full".
And no they're not creating completely separate, sterile environments with airlocks and the like, they're often just across the hallway from regular intensive care wards.
So you don't believe seriously ill people are at risk from covid at all and everybody should just be mixed together in ICU? Some may see the decisions as clinical rather than arbitrary but as you don't can you explain what you think their motives were?
The really ugly part of it was the first line of access--the EDs. There it is highly impractical to separate out the Covid patients before they have already been in close proximity of others (other patients and healthcare workers) for > 15 minutes (and often >30 minutes). So they can test everyone as suspected positive, but that then gums up the system terribly, especially for ED patients that need access to imaging bays (x-ray, CT, etc.) and that all goes to shit if you have a stroke alert come in and have to bump access regardless of Covid status.
UK ICU wards aren't single occupancy rooms they're wards.
You just insulted their national religion.Savages.Every ICU room is single-occupancy, but unfortunately not all are set up with negative pressure capacity nor anterooms for donning/doffing PPE. However, I have noticed that dedicated Covid wards (often PCU level) are rarely set up any better and often crammed Covid patients into double-occupancy rooms. The only thing this did that was positive was to move Covid patients away from non-Covid patients. Unfortunately the set up of many Covid dedicated units actually increased the exposure risk for healthcare workers assigned to them.The double-wheeze in this country with the reporting of hospital capacity is that they arbitrarily reduced capacity at the start of the pandemic to facilitate "social distancing" and regularly report only on what's happening in "covid beds". So a hospital which has 8 out of 8 beds full, even with plenty of space elsewhere is reported as "full".
And no they're not creating completely separate, sterile environments with airlocks and the like, they're often just across the hallway from regular intensive care wards.
So you don't believe seriously ill people are at risk from covid at all and everybody should just be mixed together in ICU? Some may see the decisions as clinical rather than arbitrary but as you don't can you explain what you think their motives were?
The really ugly part of it was the first line of access--the EDs. There it is highly impractical to separate out the Covid patients before they have already been in close proximity of others (other patients and healthcare workers) for > 15 minutes (and often >30 minutes). So they can test everyone as suspected positive, but that then gums up the system terribly, especially for ED patients that need access to imaging bays (x-ray, CT, etc.) and that all goes to shit if you have a stroke alert come in and have to bump access regardless of Covid status.
UK ICU wards aren't single occupancy rooms they're wards.
Savages.Every ICU room is single-occupancy, but unfortunately not all are set up with negative pressure capacity nor anterooms for donning/doffing PPE. However, I have noticed that dedicated Covid wards (often PCU level) are rarely set up any better and often crammed Covid patients into double-occupancy rooms. The only thing this did that was positive was to move Covid patients away from non-Covid patients. Unfortunately the set up of many Covid dedicated units actually increased the exposure risk for healthcare workers assigned to them.The double-wheeze in this country with the reporting of hospital capacity is that they arbitrarily reduced capacity at the start of the pandemic to facilitate "social distancing" and regularly report only on what's happening in "covid beds". So a hospital which has 8 out of 8 beds full, even with plenty of space elsewhere is reported as "full".
And no they're not creating completely separate, sterile environments with airlocks and the like, they're often just across the hallway from regular intensive care wards.
So you don't believe seriously ill people are at risk from covid at all and everybody should just be mixed together in ICU? Some may see the decisions as clinical rather than arbitrary but as you don't can you explain what you think their motives were?
The really ugly part of it was the first line of access--the EDs. There it is highly impractical to separate out the Covid patients before they have already been in close proximity of others (other patients and healthcare workers) for > 15 minutes (and often >30 minutes). So they can test everyone as suspected positive, but that then gums up the system terribly, especially for ED patients that need access to imaging bays (x-ray, CT, etc.) and that all goes to shit if you have a stroke alert come in and have to bump access regardless of Covid status.
UK ICU wards aren't single occupancy rooms they're wards.
I didn't call it soccer...You just insulted their national religion.Savages.Every ICU room is single-occupancy, but unfortunately not all are set up with negative pressure capacity nor anterooms for donning/doffing PPE. However, I have noticed that dedicated Covid wards (often PCU level) are rarely set up any better and often crammed Covid patients into double-occupancy rooms. The only thing this did that was positive was to move Covid patients away from non-Covid patients. Unfortunately the set up of many Covid dedicated units actually increased the exposure risk for healthcare workers assigned to them.The double-wheeze in this country with the reporting of hospital capacity is that they arbitrarily reduced capacity at the start of the pandemic to facilitate "social distancing" and regularly report only on what's happening in "covid beds". So a hospital which has 8 out of 8 beds full, even with plenty of space elsewhere is reported as "full".
And no they're not creating completely separate, sterile environments with airlocks and the like, they're often just across the hallway from regular intensive care wards.
So you don't believe seriously ill people are at risk from covid at all and everybody should just be mixed together in ICU? Some may see the decisions as clinical rather than arbitrary but as you don't can you explain what you think their motives were?
The really ugly part of it was the first line of access--the EDs. There it is highly impractical to separate out the Covid patients before they have already been in close proximity of others (other patients and healthcare workers) for > 15 minutes (and often >30 minutes). So they can test everyone as suspected positive, but that then gums up the system terribly, especially for ED patients that need access to imaging bays (x-ray, CT, etc.) and that all goes to shit if you have a stroke alert come in and have to bump access regardless of Covid status.
UK ICU wards aren't single occupancy rooms they're wards.
You just insulted their national religion.Savages.Every ICU room is single-occupancy, but unfortunately not all are set up with negative pressure capacity nor anterooms for donning/doffing PPE. However, I have noticed that dedicated Covid wards (often PCU level) are rarely set up any better and often crammed Covid patients into double-occupancy rooms. The only thing this did that was positive was to move Covid patients away from non-Covid patients. Unfortunately the set up of many Covid dedicated units actually increased the exposure risk for healthcare workers assigned to them.The double-wheeze in this country with the reporting of hospital capacity is that they arbitrarily reduced capacity at the start of the pandemic to facilitate "social distancing" and regularly report only on what's happening in "covid beds". So a hospital which has 8 out of 8 beds full, even with plenty of space elsewhere is reported as "full".
And no they're not creating completely separate, sterile environments with airlocks and the like, they're often just across the hallway from regular intensive care wards.
So you don't believe seriously ill people are at risk from covid at all and everybody should just be mixed together in ICU? Some may see the decisions as clinical rather than arbitrary but as you don't can you explain what you think their motives were?
The really ugly part of it was the first line of access--the EDs. There it is highly impractical to separate out the Covid patients before they have already been in close proximity of others (other patients and healthcare workers) for > 15 minutes (and often >30 minutes). So they can test everyone as suspected positive, but that then gums up the system terribly, especially for ED patients that need access to imaging bays (x-ray, CT, etc.) and that all goes to shit if you have a stroke alert come in and have to bump access regardless of Covid status.
UK ICU wards aren't single occupancy rooms they're wards.
The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
You have no credibility complaining about lying, since you have lied about what I have said in the past. Pot, meet kettle.The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Oh look, Pat once again lying like a little fucking punk shithead about me, once again
I used to think you were a good guy around here Pat. This is like the third time now you've fabricated something I said.
Knock it the fuck off. If you don't have a legit reply to something I said, lying about what I said is not a reasonable option to distract from that.
Just block him. He's not worth your time and energy.You have no credibility complaining about lying, since you have lied about what I have said in the past. Pot, meet kettle.The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Oh look, Pat once again lying like a little fucking punk shithead about me, once again
I used to think you were a good guy around here Pat. This is like the third time now you've fabricated something I said.
Knock it the fuck off. If you don't have a legit reply to something I said, lying about what I said is not a reasonable option to distract from that.
You have no credibility complaining about lying, since you have lied about what I have said in the past. Pot, meet kettle.The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Oh look, Pat once again lying like a little fucking punk shithead about me, once again
I used to think you were a good guy around here Pat. This is like the third time now you've fabricated something I said.
Knock it the fuck off. If you don't have a legit reply to something I said, lying about what I said is not a reasonable option to distract from that.
Just block him. He's not worth your time and energy.You have no credibility complaining about lying, since you have lied about what I have said in the past. Pot, meet kettle.The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Oh look, Pat once again lying like a little fucking punk shithead about me, once again
I used to think you were a good guy around here Pat. This is like the third time now you've fabricated something I said.
Knock it the fuck off. If you don't have a legit reply to something I said, lying about what I said is not a reasonable option to distract from that.
I unblocked a number of the 'tards to see what kind of reactions were coming out around the time Biden shit his pants (metaphorically, though you never know) over Afghanistan. It's clear I didn't miss anything.
You claimed that I said something that another poster said, then asserted that I agreed with said poster because I never responded to his post. Check with the "Mistwell" that works the morning shifts; he'll remember it...You have no credibility complaining about lying, since you have lied about what I have said in the past. Pot, meet kettle.The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Oh look, Pat once again lying like a little fucking punk shithead about me, once again
I used to think you were a good guy around here Pat. This is like the third time now you've fabricated something I said.
Knock it the fuck off. If you don't have a legit reply to something I said, lying about what I said is not a reasonable option to distract from that.
Where have I ever lied about what you said?
The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Oh look, Pat once again lying like a little fucking punk shithead about me, once again
I used to think you were a good guy around here Pat. This is like the third time now you've fabricated something I said.
Knock it the fuck off. If you don't have a legit reply to something I said, lying about what I said is not a reasonable option to distract from that.
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Why are you suddenly changing the subject to blood clots...which isn't the same thing we were discussing? Oh right, because you have no response to what we were actually talking about so decided to play the moving target game.
You were saying side effects of the vaccine are transitory. Blood clots are an example of something that isn't transitory.
I was responding to something specific. You changed the topic to something entirely else and then acted like that meant my response was false.
You want to show me how the vaccine is causing widespread bloodclots, be my guest. But as it stands you jumped into the middle of a conversation which wasn't about bloodclots.
You claimed that I said something that another poster said, then asserted that I agreed with said poster because I never responded to his post. Check with the "Mistwell" that works the morning shifts; he'll remember it...You have no credibility complaining about lying, since you have lied about what I have said in the past. Pot, meet kettle.The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Oh look, Pat once again lying like a little fucking punk shithead about me, once again
I used to think you were a good guy around here Pat. This is like the third time now you've fabricated something I said.
Knock it the fuck off. If you don't have a legit reply to something I said, lying about what I said is not a reasonable option to distract from that.
Where have I ever lied about what you said?
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Why are you suddenly changing the subject to blood clots...which isn't the same thing we were discussing? Oh right, because you have no response to what we were actually talking about so decided to play the moving target game.
You were saying side effects of the vaccine are transitory. Blood clots are an example of something that isn't transitory.
I was responding to something specific. You changed the topic to something entirely else and then acted like that meant my response was false.
You want to show me how the vaccine is causing widespread bloodclots, be my guest. But as it stands you jumped into the middle of a conversation which wasn't about bloodclots.
So when discussing side effects, certain side effects are off limits? I have a close family member who has spent a month in the hospital after getting the vaccine, then catching coronavirus, then had a heart attack from blood clots whilst in hospital care. He had zero health problems before any of this.
You're going to call this an anecdote though.
The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Oh look, Pat once again lying like a little fucking punk shithead about me, once again
I used to think you were a good guy around here Pat. This is like the third time now you've fabricated something I said.
Knock it the fuck off. If you don't have a legit reply to something I said, lying about what I said is not a reasonable option to distract from that.
So where are these three posts where I fabricated something you said?
My last post doesn't count, because I fabricated nothing. During the last peak, you were claiming the nation's hospital systems were overwhelmed, when it was only Los Angeles and maybe one other city. This is a consistent pattern for you. You make broad generalizations based on extreme, isolated cases.
That's rich, because you're the one who repeatedly changes the topic or drops the issue when I call you out on the bullshit you keep spouting. You just go away for a while, and then come back and post the same nonsense, like your endlessly repeated statement that masks don't prevent you from getting the disease, they prevent you from spreading it to others. Which at best is a triviality and a distraction, because masks have been proven, repeatedly, to have little or no significant effect. The only study of any note that says otherwise is riddled with methodological problems. So by making that claim, you're ignoring the disease's primary method of transmission, which is highly aerosolized particles that ignore masks like they aren't even there. You never even acknowledged those points. You just ignore them, and hope everyone will forget before you post the same thing again.The Oklahoma overcapacity story WAS correct though. This isn't coming from the media or Fauci, the hospitals themselves are in fact reporting their ICUs are overfull.Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?
I mean if you are so convinced they're all lying (but in some way not coordinating that lie across the nation coincidentally only in the hotspot areas) why don't you visit a hospital in those areas and ask them?
Oh right, easier to just pretend it's all fine, we're all fine here, nothing to see, move along citizen.
Oh look, Pat once again lying like a little fucking punk shithead about me, once again
I used to think you were a good guy around here Pat. This is like the third time now you've fabricated something I said.
Knock it the fuck off. If you don't have a legit reply to something I said, lying about what I said is not a reasonable option to distract from that.
So where are these three posts where I fabricated something you said?
Let's talk about the one you just made, shall we? I am tired of your bullshit, I am calling you out on a lie you just made. I never said what you claimed I said. You took my comment about some relatively few hospitals having their ICUs being full, claimed I said every hospital in the nation's ICUs were full, and that is a lie. If you claim it's not, show me where I said what you claimed I said. Otherwise, stop being a little pussy punk.QuoteMy last post doesn't count, because I fabricated nothing. During the last peak, you were claiming the nation's hospital systems were overwhelmed, when it was only Los Angeles and maybe one other city. This is a consistent pattern for you. You make broad generalizations based on extreme, isolated cases.
I never said that. You're just doubling down on your lie. Back it up or shut the fuck up you lying little punk ass bitch. I never said the entire nation's hospital systems were overwhelmed, I always said many, I always was specific to the hot spots, it was never a generalized statement about the nation, and you're lying because I made you uncomfortable with my line of questioning (which we are going to get back to after you fail to back up your lie) and so decided to change the topic to me as a distraction.
It's not going to work. I am going to embarrass you for lying and then we will get right back to the topic and you will be even more stuck than you are right now, which will put your back against the wall and you're going to try to make it about me again because it's what you do when you're desperate and unwilling to confront a difficult topic where you know you might be wrong.
If you have any evidence the vaccine causes bloodclots OK let's talk about it. "I heard my cousin got bloodclots after getting both the vaccine and covid and being in the hospital for a month" isn't it though. In fact "laying down in a hospital bed for a month" is a cause of bloodclots so come on now.Your failure to keep up with the news is nobody's responsibility except your own. Blood clots, along with strokes and pulmonary embolisms, show up repeatedly as adverse events after vaccination, especially with the adenovector vaccines (J&J and AstraZeneca). High profile people affected include a German professional basketball player, an American runner, and a BBC moderator. Italy and other countries have stopped using the adenovector vaccines on younger people, because of this.
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Why are you suddenly changing the subject to blood clots...which isn't the same thing we were discussing? Oh right, because you have no response to what we were actually talking about so decided to play the moving target game.
You were saying side effects of the vaccine are transitory. Blood clots are an example of something that isn't transitory.
I was responding to something specific. You changed the topic to something entirely else and then acted like that meant my response was false.
You want to show me how the vaccine is causing widespread bloodclots, be my guest. But as it stands you jumped into the middle of a conversation which wasn't about bloodclots.
So when discussing side effects, certain side effects are off limits? I have a close family member who has spent a month in the hospital after getting the vaccine, then catching coronavirus, then had a heart attack from blood clots whilst in hospital care. He had zero health problems before any of this.
You're going to call this an anecdote though.
If you have any evidence the vaccine causes bloodclots OK let's talk about it. "I heard my cousin got bloodclots after getting both the vaccine and covid and being in the hospital for a month" isn't it though. In fact "laying down in a hospital bed for a month" is a cause of bloodclots so come on now.
Please, tell me what kind of people get blood clots after two days in a hospital. I want to hear it in your words.No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Why are you suddenly changing the subject to blood clots...which isn't the same thing we were discussing? Oh right, because you have no response to what we were actually talking about so decided to play the moving target game.
You were saying side effects of the vaccine are transitory. Blood clots are an example of something that isn't transitory.
I was responding to something specific. You changed the topic to something entirely else and then acted like that meant my response was false.
You want to show me how the vaccine is causing widespread bloodclots, be my guest. But as it stands you jumped into the middle of a conversation which wasn't about bloodclots.
So when discussing side effects, certain side effects are off limits? I have a close family member who has spent a month in the hospital after getting the vaccine, then catching coronavirus, then had a heart attack from blood clots whilst in hospital care. He had zero health problems before any of this.
You're going to call this an anecdote though.
If you have any evidence the vaccine causes bloodclots OK let's talk about it. "I heard my cousin got bloodclots after getting both the vaccine and covid and being in the hospital for a month" isn't it though. In fact "laying down in a hospital bed for a month" is a cause of bloodclots so come on now.
Normal people do not get goddamn blood clots after two days in the hospital, you absolute brainlet. And it wasn't my cousin, you piece of maggot ridden shit.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-and-blood-clotting/covid-19-vaccination-and-blood-clotting (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-and-blood-clotting/covid-19-vaccination-and-blood-clotting)
The AZ vaccine in particular has had the blood clot side effect as mentioned in the UK government website above. It's rare but does happen and the risk analysis veers towards a not giving it it to younger people.
There's a lot of shite in this conversation but if we're talking about people's lives it helps to accept stuff that's happened.
No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Why are you suddenly changing the subject to blood clots...which isn't the same thing we were discussing? Oh right, because you have no response to what we were actually talking about so decided to play the moving target game.
You were saying side effects of the vaccine are transitory. Blood clots are an example of something that isn't transitory.
I was responding to something specific. You changed the topic to something entirely else and then acted like that meant my response was false.
You want to show me how the vaccine is causing widespread bloodclots, be my guest. But as it stands you jumped into the middle of a conversation which wasn't about bloodclots.
So when discussing side effects, certain side effects are off limits? I have a close family member who has spent a month in the hospital after getting the vaccine, then catching coronavirus, then had a heart attack from blood clots whilst in hospital care. He had zero health problems before any of this.
You're going to call this an anecdote though.
If you have any evidence the vaccine causes bloodclots OK let's talk about it. "I heard my cousin got bloodclots after getting both the vaccine and covid and being in the hospital for a month" isn't it though. In fact "laying down in a hospital bed for a month" is a cause of bloodclots so come on now.
Normal people do not get goddamn blood clots after two days in the hospital, you absolute brainlet. And it wasn't my cousin, you piece of maggot ridden shit.
You're on the right track: VTE prophylaxis is a big thing for hospitals, with both pharmaceutical and mechanical measures employed depending on risk. This is done on "normal" people, and despite these measures, some "normal" people still develop VTE (which includes PE, and yes, some of these "normal" people do die from them).No evidence of "heart damage". It's inflammation which goes away.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are lifelong (and life-limiting). What the fuck are you talking about?
And why would I take any risk of that side effect, when the virus is a trivial risk for my children?
WTF are YOU talking about. They are not lifelong. You are thinking of "Chronic Myocarditis" which this isn't. It's just inflammation which goes away.
And in order to reduce Covid-19 in society as a whole we're going to have to get kids vaxed too. As always, much like masks, you're doing it to protect society in general you greedy motherfucker.
If someone suffers a heart attack from the blood clots that just so happened to appear after getting vaccinated, is that life long enough for you?
Why are you suddenly changing the subject to blood clots...which isn't the same thing we were discussing? Oh right, because you have no response to what we were actually talking about so decided to play the moving target game.
You were saying side effects of the vaccine are transitory. Blood clots are an example of something that isn't transitory.
I was responding to something specific. You changed the topic to something entirely else and then acted like that meant my response was false.
You want to show me how the vaccine is causing widespread bloodclots, be my guest. But as it stands you jumped into the middle of a conversation which wasn't about bloodclots.
So when discussing side effects, certain side effects are off limits? I have a close family member who has spent a month in the hospital after getting the vaccine, then catching coronavirus, then had a heart attack from blood clots whilst in hospital care. He had zero health problems before any of this.
You're going to call this an anecdote though.
If you have any evidence the vaccine causes bloodclots OK let's talk about it. "I heard my cousin got bloodclots after getting both the vaccine and covid and being in the hospital for a month" isn't it though. In fact "laying down in a hospital bed for a month" is a cause of bloodclots so come on now.
Normal people do not get goddamn blood clots after two days in the hospital, you absolute brainlet. And it wasn't my cousin, you piece of maggot ridden shit.
You said family without specifying which so don't get your panties in a bunch of me applying a family member to your silence. Not sure why that would offend you as it doesn't change anything meaningful about your post.
As for "two days" you said "months" in the hospital. But yes, you can get blood clots from 2 days in the hospital if you are laying down and not moving around. You can even get blood clots from a single long airplane flight if you don't move around. From the CDC, "Roughly 1 out of 10 hospital deaths are related to blood clots in the lungs." (they're calling out hospitals for not training well enough to prevent them). One of the three primary types they mention are "Immobility: Confined to a bed or wheelchair for long periods of time due to a hospital stay, injury, or illness." They also say, "Many of these blood clots can be safely prevented; Nearly half of all hospital patients do not receive proper prevention measures."
I have no idea if your family members blood clots were from a vaccine, Covid itself, or the hospital stay. But I do know hospital stays on their own can cause blood clots. As can Covid. Did the doctors say it was the vaccine which caused the clots, or is that you guys assuming it was the vaccine and not the Covid or the hospital stay?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-and-blood-clotting/covid-19-vaccination-and-blood-clotting (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-and-blood-clotting/covid-19-vaccination-and-blood-clotting)
The AZ vaccine in particular has had the blood clot side effect as mentioned in the UK government website above. It's rare but does happen and the risk analysis veers towards a not giving it it to younger people.
There's a lot of shite in this conversation but if we're talking about people's lives it helps to accept stuff that's happened.
Here is another video.
Starting to have serious doubts about goofy stuff at Veritas. So these two are smart enough to engineer vaccines but go out on dinner with reporters, spilling their beans without a single worry of being recorded?
Smart at one thing doesn't mean smart at everything. Recently met a 40-something who is a smarty-pants with a tech-related college degree, can't change his own tire.
Starting to have serious doubts about goofy stuff at Veritas. So these two are smart enough to engineer vaccines but go out on dinner with reporters, spilling their beans without a single worry of being recorded?
They also say that none of this would have happened if it were not for the fact that so many people remain unvaccinated against Covid. Even in NM, with a decent vaccination rate, the system is overrun.
Please get vaccinated. Wear a mask. You never know how it will affect you.
They also say that none of this would have happened if it were not for the fact that so many people remain unvaccinated against Covid. Even in NM, with a decent vaccination rate, the system is overrun.
Please get vaccinated. Wear a mask. You never know how it will affect you.
They also say that none of this would have happened if it were not for the fact that so many people remain unvaccinated against Covid. Even in NM, with a decent vaccination rate, the system is overrun.
Please get vaccinated. Wear a mask. You never know how it will affect you.
Bullshit, they have no way of knowing that. Evidence from highly vaccinated countries like my own suggest the "vaccine" does nothing at best.
I know exactly how it affected me: barely. So go fuck yourself.
They also say that none of this would have happened if it were not for the fact that so many people remain unvaccinated against Covid. Even in NM, with a decent vaccination rate, the system is overrun.
Please get vaccinated. Wear a mask. You never know how it will affect you.
No, it's not. As of last week (so we have a full 7 days of data) the state is at 84% capacity. There are 77 beds out of a total of 466 still open. Of the ICU beds occupied, only 134 of them are with COVID cases. The other 256 are non-COVID cases.
The percentage of unvaccinated people who end up in the hospital compared to the percentage of vaccinated people who end up in the hospital disproves your claim the vaccine does nothing.
It must be hard for you, to ignore facts because they make you uncomfortable. It must seem like a very lonely world for you right now. I am sorry for that.
The percentage of unvaccinated people who end up in the hospital compared to the percentage of vaccinated people who end up in the hospital disproves your claim the vaccine does nothing.
It must be hard for you, to ignore facts because they make you uncomfortable. It must seem like a very lonely world for you right now. I am sorry for that.
Uh, no, the facts support my position. The majority of people being hospitalised for covid in the UK are double-jabbed. That's even aside from their wheeze of calling anyone who was jabbed within the last 14 days "unvaccinated".
I'm not lonely at all, being a lemming driven along by the herd must be a poor comfort.
"Oh look, a monkey!" is not a cogent response.
You and I were directly talking about the US which, among other things, uses a different set of vaccines than the UK. We were specifically talking about US ICUs, so it's not like you can pretend you didn't know what topic we were discussing. When you do that, when you blatantly strawman the topic, it shows you know you don't have a legit response to what was said.
The question is why you are so unwilling to talk about difficult concepts like this. Is it you imagine you will lose face if you admit the vaccines in the US are doing some good? If so, honestly nobody gives a crap if you soften your stance on that. It's not like you will be ridiculed for slightly changing your position.
(https://i.ibb.co/yPQWpzn/Vax-Hsopitalized.jpg)
False cause fallacy. Your worst performing states are doing so because so many of their population are overweight.
But I like the current far-right theory. Democrats are only telling Republicans to get vaccinated because they KNOW that they won't do it if they're told to by a Democrat. It's actually a monstrous Democratic plot to ensure they win the next several elections by ensuring that Republican voters die faster - that, combined with favorable democratic trends will turn Wyoming into a Democratic stronghold. :)That sounds more like an alt-left theory.
"Oh look, a monkey!" is not a cogent response.
You and I were directly talking about the US which, among other things, uses a different set of vaccines than the UK. We were specifically talking about US ICUs, so it's not like you can pretend you didn't know what topic we were discussing. When you do that, when you blatantly strawman the topic, it shows you know you don't have a legit response to what was said.
The question is why you are so unwilling to talk about difficult concepts like this. Is it you imagine you will lose face if you admit the vaccines in the US are doing some good? If so, honestly nobody gives a crap if you soften your stance on that. It's not like you will be ridiculed for slightly changing your position.
(https://i.ibb.co/yPQWpzn/Vax-Hsopitalized.jpg)
False cause fallacy. Your worst performing states are doing so because so many of their population are overweight.
But yes, if you act like a complete asshole while demanding someone else do something, there's a good chance they'll resist what you're trying to shove down your throat. At least that part is accurate.
But I like the current far-right theory. Democrats are only telling Republicans to get vaccinated because they KNOW that they won't do it if they're told to by a Democrat. It's actually a monstrous Democratic plot to ensure they win the next several elections by ensuring that Republican voters die faster - that, combined with favorable democratic trends will turn Wyoming into a Democratic stronghold. :)That sounds more like an alt-left theory.
But yes, if you act like a complete asshole while demanding someone else do something, there's a good chance they'll resist what you're trying to shove down your throat. At least that part is accurate.
Sorry about your dad, Mistwell.
But yes, if you act like a complete asshole while demanding someone else do something, there's a good chance they'll resist what you're trying to shove down your throat. At least that part is accurate.
Agreed. It's why in a lot of places where I see people being aggressive about vaccines, I try to tone them down and point out they're entrenching views and making things worse.
People still locked down? LolAustralia has turned into a giant prison with drop bears.
People still locked down? LolAustralia has turned into a giant prison with drop bears.
Sorry about your dad, Mistwell.
But yes, if you act like a complete asshole while demanding someone else do something, there's a good chance they'll resist what you're trying to shove down your throat. At least that part is accurate.
Agreed. It's why in a lot of places where I see people being aggressive about vaccines, I try to tone them down and point out they're entrenching views and making things worse.
Sorry about your dad, Mistwell.
But yes, if you act like a complete asshole while demanding someone else do something, there's a good chance they'll resist what you're trying to shove down your throat. At least that part is accurate.
Agreed. It's why in a lot of places where I see people being aggressive about vaccines, I try to tone them down and point out they're entrenching views and making things worse.
Say what now?
Sorry about your dad, Mistwell.
But yes, if you act like a complete asshole while demanding someone else do something, there's a good chance they'll resist what you're trying to shove down your throat. At least that part is accurate.
Agreed. It's why in a lot of places where I see people being aggressive about vaccines, I try to tone them down and point out they're entrenching views and making things worse.
Say what now?
I think when you copied and pasted the lady's story about her father, he may have missed the top line and thought it was a story about your father.
I would love for you guys to tell me how Summer Brennan is simply lying about all of this concerning her father. How she is part of some grand liberal conspiracy or something:
Link to Summer Brennan's Twitter Account of Hospital ICUs being Full (https://twitter.com/summerbrennan/status/1442806675325476867)
What happened was that while in the hospital, my dad caught viral pneumonia that went unnoticed. The whole state was in lockdown, and every hospital ICU was filling up with unvaccinated Covid patients. There weren't enough resources. The governor begged people to get vaxxed.
Please get vaccinated. Wear a mask. You never know how it will affect you.
I think that some of the anti-vax side are just as stupid as the forced-vax side.to what degree was the vax/anti-vax divide politicized in Uraguay?
The idea that the vaccine "doesn't work" is idiotic. Again, look at stats for Uruguay, where vaccination (which was entirely voluntary, encouraged but in no way forced by the government) was a huge success and cases plummeted. Yes, they don't provide absolute protection, but they greatly reduce chances of infection, and if infected greatly reduce chances of hospitalization or death.
The real "health" argument, if you want to make one, is that in a huge percentage of the population (basically, anyone under 60 without comorbidities) the risk of infection, hospitalization or death is already miniscule.
Even when you look at statistics for the over-60 crowd, the 'average' death rate is misleading, because someone over 60 without comorbidities is 90 times less likely of dying from Covid than someone over 60 with comorbidities.
So given that, the fundamental argument shouldn't be "vaccines don't work" (much less some of the other conspiracy theories out there). It should be "the Police State notion of forcing hard or soft Mandatory Vaccination policies is a violation of civil liberties".
I think that some of the anti-vax side are just as stupid as the forced-vax side.
The idea that the vaccine "doesn't work" is idiotic. Again, look at stats for Uruguay, where vaccination (which was entirely voluntary, encouraged but in no way forced by the government) was a huge success and cases plummeted. Yes, they don't provide absolute protection, but they greatly reduce chances of infection, and if infected greatly reduce chances of hospitalization or death.
The real "health" argument, if you want to make one, is that in a huge percentage of the population (basically, anyone under 60 without comorbidities) the risk of infection, hospitalization or death is already miniscule.
Even when you look at statistics for the over-60 crowd, the 'average' death rate is misleading, because someone over 60 without comorbidities is 90 times less likely of dying from Covid than someone over 60 with comorbidities.
So given that, the fundamental argument shouldn't be "vaccines don't work" (much less some of the other conspiracy theories out there). It should be "the Police State notion of forcing hard or soft Mandatory Vaccination policies is a violation of civil liberties".
- The school shutdowns were never justified
- The lockdowns were never justified
Except by the time the school shutdowns were implemented, we knew children weren't at high risk, and didn't seem to be spreading the disease to each other or adults, in any real numbers. We didn't know how utter and complete a failure remote schooling was going to end up, but we did know it was probably going to be bad. And regarding the economic lockdowns, they could have been just as a effective if they were voluntary. In fact, they were effectively voluntary because they hadn't really worked out enforcement mechanisms except for a few municipalities that went after bars. On top of that, they never looked at the economic consequences. They had all kinds of medical officials who had never even had a job in the private sector talking about "saving the economy", when they should have been talking to economists and assessing how many people the lockdowns would kill through delayed treatment, reduced innovations, reduced lifetime pay and thus reduced health outcomes (which has fallout effects into the next generation), and dozens of other factors. At the very least, they should have followed their own guidance, which was clear that lockdowns weren't justified.
- The school shutdowns were never justified
- The lockdowns were never justified
I agree with all that, except these two points.
When the pandemic first started, information was sparse. I remember seeing pictures of people in China literally collapsing on the street. In the face of a huge unknown infection, I think a two week lockdown, mask wearing and shutdowns were justified.
On the other hand, once we went there, we opened that door, now mandates are easier to implement, a year later when we have much more information.
Fun anecdote, I went to the store tonight to pick up some things. The store requires everyone, vaxxed and unvaxxed to wear a mask. On the way out, I saw an employee chatting with a customer, both with their masks down on their necks, off their faces.
Except by the time the school shutdowns were implemented, we knew children weren't at high risk, and didn't seem to be spreading the disease to each other or adults, in any real numbers. We didn't know how utter and complete a failure remote schooling was going to end up, but we did know it was probably going to be bad. And regarding the economic lockdowns, they could have been just as a effective if they were voluntary. In fact, they were effectively voluntary because they hadn't really worked out enforcement mechanisms except for a few municipalities that went after bars. On top of that, they never looked at the economic consequences. They had all kinds of medical officials who had never even had a job in the private sector talking about "saving the economy", when they should have been talking to economists and assessing how many people the lockdowns would kill through delayed treatment, reduced innovations, reduced lifetime pay and thus reduced health outcomes (which has fallout effects into the next generation), and dozens of other factors. At the very least, they should have followed their own guidance, which was clear that lockdowns weren't justified.
- The school shutdowns were never justified
- The lockdowns were never justified
I agree with all that, except these two points.
When the pandemic first started, information was sparse. I remember seeing pictures of people in China literally collapsing on the street. In the face of a huge unknown infection, I think a two week lockdown, mask wearing and shutdowns were justified.
On the other hand, once we went there, we opened that door, now mandates are easier to implement, a year later when we have much more information.
Fun anecdote, I went to the store tonight to pick up some things. The store requires everyone, vaxxed and unvaxxed to wear a mask. On the way out, I saw an employee chatting with a customer, both with their masks down on their necks, off their faces.
Masks were a reasonable precaution, until it became clear the disease was highly aerosolized. But even though the CDC finally admitted that was the case (over a year late), they're still largely ignoring that, and things like ventilation are buried on the back page instead of being an above the crease story like masks masks masks.
I have no problem with people acting based on limited knowledge, and being wrong. In fact, I've argued that point myself to justify the initial response. But I've changed my mind. I no longer think the first two weeks were justified.Except by the time the school shutdowns were implemented, we knew children weren't at high risk, and didn't seem to be spreading the disease to each other or adults, in any real numbers. We didn't know how utter and complete a failure remote schooling was going to end up, but we did know it was probably going to be bad. And regarding the economic lockdowns, they could have been just as a effective if they were voluntary. In fact, they were effectively voluntary because they hadn't really worked out enforcement mechanisms except for a few municipalities that went after bars. On top of that, they never looked at the economic consequences. They had all kinds of medical officials who had never even had a job in the private sector talking about "saving the economy", when they should have been talking to economists and assessing how many people the lockdowns would kill through delayed treatment, reduced innovations, reduced lifetime pay and thus reduced health outcomes (which has fallout effects into the next generation), and dozens of other factors. At the very least, they should have followed their own guidance, which was clear that lockdowns weren't justified.
- The school shutdowns were never justified
- The lockdowns were never justified
I agree with all that, except these two points.
When the pandemic first started, information was sparse. I remember seeing pictures of people in China literally collapsing on the street. In the face of a huge unknown infection, I think a two week lockdown, mask wearing and shutdowns were justified.
On the other hand, once we went there, we opened that door, now mandates are easier to implement, a year later when we have much more information.
Fun anecdote, I went to the store tonight to pick up some things. The store requires everyone, vaxxed and unvaxxed to wear a mask. On the way out, I saw an employee chatting with a customer, both with their masks down on their necks, off their faces.
Masks were a reasonable precaution, until it became clear the disease was highly aerosolized. But even though the CDC finally admitted that was the case (over a year late), they're still largely ignoring that, and things like ventilation are buried on the back page instead of being an above the crease story like masks masks masks.
That's why I stipulated two weeks. After that, we could have implemented sane policies. Except we didn't. Everyone went goddamn crazy.
The vaccines aren't very good at preventing infection, but they do substantially reduce the chance of serious effects like hospitalization or death
I think every reasonable person can agree:There's a bit of coflict in these two points because the list of "certain co-morbidities" is pretty broad, and much of the working age population may have one or more--even if they are unaware (a lot of people are less informed of their own health condition than you might think) or are in denial (particulalry common for overweight/obese).
- Covid is dangerous for the elderly and those with certain co-morbidities
- But for most of the working age population, it's less dangerous than any number of other background threats
The "vaccine" is nothing of the sort and does fuck all. You need only look at Israel, the most vaccinated country on the planet, for the proof there. The jab is so effective they're now mandating fourth doses and are locked down again.You ignorantly attribute this to the vaccine rather than the changing charactersitics of viral variants. You truly live in a different world from realtiy.
My country is one of the most vaccinated larger countries, the majority of people in hospital and dying have had two doses. More people are in hospital and dying with covid now, than was the case this time last year when hardly anyone was jabbed.
The idea that the vaccine "doesn't work" is idiotic. Again, look at stats for Uruguay, where vaccination (which was entirely voluntary, encouraged but in no way forced by the government) was a huge success and cases plummeted. Yes, they don't provide absolute protection, but they greatly reduce chances of infection, and if infected greatly reduce chances of hospitalization or death.
I think every reasonable person can agree:There's a bit of coflict in these two points because the list of "certain co-morbidities" is pretty broad, and much of the working age population may have one or more--even if they are unaware (a lot of people are less informed of their own health condition than you might think) or are in denial (particularly common for overweight/obese).
- Covid is dangerous for the elderly and those with certain co-morbidities
- But for most of the working age population, it's less dangerous than any number of other background threats
Sebelius said, “I think what President Biden has done is balance between what the science says and trying to cajole, encourage, make it easy for people to follow the science. When that turned out not to be as effective, then he turned to more hardened mandates. But what people don’t have a right to do is make other people sick, put other people in jeopardy, risk other people’s lives, risk children’s lives. So I think the president has been walking a line of balancing science and safety and security at every step along the way. Hoping that the mass majority of the American public would follow that lead.”
She added, “It’s a lot like secondhand smoke. You have a right to be a smoker. The science is very clear what smoking will do to you, what cancer will be caused, what kinds of health conditions. You have a right to be a smoker. You don’t have a right to smoke next to my desk, to blow smoke on people, on my children, to force me to live in a housing facility where I am subjected to more smoke. That is a line that we have in this country, which delineates what your individual rights are. I think we’re looking at very much the same situation. OSHA, you’re absolutely right, has always provided guidance and mandates about safety in a workplace. This is not a safe workplace if I’m working with a person that may make me and my family sick. That’s not acceptable.”
The messaging about Covid and the vaccine has been flat fucking schizophrenic, if not plain stupid.
The 'experts' can't seem to make up their minds whether the vaccine protects you or not. The stories keep changing, based upon (I suppose) what will support the latest grab for power.QuoteSebelius said, “I think what President Biden has done is balance between what the science says and trying to cajole, encourage, make it easy for people to follow the science. When that turned out not to be as effective, then he turned to more hardened mandates. But what people don’t have a right to do is make other people sick, put other people in jeopardy, risk other people’s lives, risk children’s lives. So I think the president has been walking a line of balancing science and safety and security at every step along the way. Hoping that the mass majority of the American public would follow that lead.”
She added, “It’s a lot like secondhand smoke. You have a right to be a smoker. The science is very clear what smoking will do to you, what cancer will be caused, what kinds of health conditions. You have a right to be a smoker. You don’t have a right to smoke next to my desk, to blow smoke on people, on my children, to force me to live in a housing facility where I am subjected to more smoke. That is a line that we have in this country, which delineates what your individual rights are. I think we’re looking at very much the same situation. OSHA, you’re absolutely right, has always provided guidance and mandates about safety in a workplace. This is not a safe workplace if I’m working with a person that may make me and my family sick. That’s not acceptable.”
For those of you wondering, this is former Obama HHS apparatchik Kathleen Sebelius.
DOES THE FUCKING VACCINE WORK OR NOT?
You ignorantly attribute this to the vaccine rather than the changing charactersitics of viral variants. You truly live in a different world from realtiy.
It's not a conflict. The primary factor is age, but co-morbidities do amplify the risk, relative to age. It's true that the young are at little risk overall, but it's also true that the among the small number of young who are affected, those with co-morbidities will be massively overrepresented. That's why so many of the young people who die of the disease while "perfectly healthy" are clearly obese.I think every reasonable person can agree:There's a bit of coflict in these two points because the list of "certain co-morbidities" is pretty broad, and much of the working age population may have one or more--even if they are unaware (a lot of people are less informed of their own health condition than you might think) or are in denial (particularly common for overweight/obese).
- Covid is dangerous for the elderly and those with certain co-morbidities
- But for most of the working age population, it's less dangerous than any number of other background threats
In the US...
~42% of adults are obese
~47% of adults have hypertension
~13% of adults have diabetes
~10% of adults have hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol)
But even with that, the death numbers clearly indicate that age is the dominant parameter
~28% of covid deaths are 85+
~55% of covid deaths are 75+
~77% of covid deaths are 65+
~94% of covid deaths are 50+
It's not the usual season. Due to in/voluntary isolation and distancing, many infectious diseases like the common cold, influenza, RSV, enteroviruses, and noroviruses have been suppressed for at least a year and a half. It's been long enough that immunity in the population has diminished, so it's going to be a bad fall and winter for sniffles, vomiting, and other fun stuff. And it seems like the new coronavirus has displaced flus.You ignorantly attribute this to the vaccine rather than the changing charactersitics of viral variants. You truly live in a different world from realtiy.
You're delusional if you think a concoction that doesn't prevent infection or transmission is having any effect whatsoever. Viruses become more infectious and less deadly as time goes on. That's why the last time I had covid was much less severe than the time before (even then neither required medical attention of any kind).
I live in the reality of being exposed all the fucking time, and seeing no impact whatsoever. Lots of people are complaining about bad colds right now as the usual sniffles season comes in - I've had nothing more than a sniff a few times.
It's not the usual season. Due to in/voluntary isolation and distancing, many infectious diseases like the common cold, influenza, RSV, enteroviruses, and noroviruses have been suppressed for at least a year and a half. It's been long enough that immunity in the population has diminished, so it's going to be a bad fall and winter for sniffles, vomiting, and other fun stuff. And it seems like the new coronavirus has displaced flus.Whilst it is unprecedented having the sniffles carrying right through the summer, now is the change in seasons when all the colds and flus come out in the UK.
I believe that the answer to your question is that the vaccine reduces your risk of catching covid, spreading covid,
Please clarify: Are you arguing for or against the fallacy?I believe that the answer to your question is that the vaccine reduces your risk of catching covid, spreading covid,
It doesn't do these two things. It does reduce the symptoms so you can catch it and carry it and spread it but not get as severely affected.
Also it's a massive slippery slope as I've posted either in this thread or another here. Well lets force people to lose weight. Lets force people to stop smoking/drinking. Lets force people to abort Down Syndrome diagnosed pregnancies. Let's force people to abort/kill any children born with any defect we don't like. Well lets just get rid of all the half breeds and non-WASPs.
It's not a conflict. The primary factor is age, but co-morbidities do amplify the risk, relative to age. It's true that the young are at little risk overall, but it's also true that the among the small number of young who are affected, those with co-morbidities will be massively overrepresented. That's why so many of the young people who die of the disease while "perfectly healthy" are clearly obese.I think every reasonable person can agree:There's a bit of coflict in these two points because the list of "certain co-morbidities" is pretty broad, and much of the working age population may have one or more--even if they are unaware (a lot of people are less informed of their own health condition than you might think) or are in denial (particularly common for overweight/obese).
- Covid is dangerous for the elderly and those with certain co-morbidities
- But for most of the working age population, it's less dangerous than any number of other background threats
In the US...
~42% of adults are obese
~47% of adults have hypertension
~13% of adults have diabetes
~10% of adults have hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol)
But even with that, the death numbers clearly indicate that age is the dominant parameter
~28% of covid deaths are 85+
~55% of covid deaths are 75+
~77% of covid deaths are 65+
~94% of covid deaths are 50+
I think that some of the anti-vax side are just as stupid as the forced-vax side.to what degree was the vax/anti-vax divide politicized in Uraguay?
The idea that the vaccine "doesn't work" is idiotic. Again, look at stats for Uruguay, where vaccination (which was entirely voluntary, encouraged but in no way forced by the government) was a huge success and cases plummeted. Yes, they don't provide absolute protection, but they greatly reduce chances of infection, and if infected greatly reduce chances of hospitalization or death.
The real "health" argument, if you want to make one, is that in a huge percentage of the population (basically, anyone under 60 without comorbidities) the risk of infection, hospitalization or death is already miniscule.
Even when you look at statistics for the over-60 crowd, the 'average' death rate is misleading, because someone over 60 without comorbidities is 90 times less likely of dying from Covid than someone over 60 with comorbidities.
So given that, the fundamental argument shouldn't be "vaccines don't work" (much less some of the other conspiracy theories out there). It should be "the Police State notion of forcing hard or soft Mandatory Vaccination policies is a violation of civil liberties".
I think every reasonable person can agree:
- Covid is dangerous for the elderly and those with certain co-morbidities
- But for most of the working age population, it's less dangerous than any number of other background threats
- And for children, it's even less dangerous
- On top of that, children don't spread the disease as much as adults
- Remote schooling is a disaster piled upon a catastrophe poked by the pitchforks of the teacher's unions
- The school shutdowns were never justified
- The lockdowns were never justified
- The damage to the economies of the world caused by the lockdowns is incalculable
- The damage to the health of the people of the world caused by the lockdowns is incalculable, but worse than the disease
- The virus has almost completely bypassed all counter measures, except strict and early border controls by island nations
- The best evidence suggests masks don't work
- Covid-19 has become endemic, and we need to learn to live with it
- ... and with hindsight, this was inevitable in late 2019
- The vaccines aren't very good at preventing infection, but they do substantially reduce the chance of serious effects like hospitalization or death
- Side effects are common, and severe side effects are rare, but given the risk profile of the disease, vaccines are questionable for those who aren't in the highest risk categories
- The long term effects of the vaccines are completely unknown, because not enough time has passed
- There is nothing about covid that hasn't been turned into a political weapon
- This is a blatant power grab by central governments i.e. never let a crisis go to waste
- The lockdowns are totalitarianism
- The mandates are totalitarianism
- The world is trending strongly towards totalitarianism
- ... and most people don't seem to mind
- Public health has destroyed all their credibility by lying and generating FUD
- The mainstream news media have destroyed all their credibility by lying and generating FUD
- ... and most people have bought into the fear
- Alternative news media is flaky as hell and not a good replacement
- Anybody who talks about "the Science" is roughly as credible as a Creationist
- They lied about the lab origin possibility
- Cuomo, Whitmer, Murphy, Newsom, and Wolf committed crimes against humanity
- No politicians or public officials will suffer any real consequences from their actions
- The school shutdowns were never justified
- The lockdowns were never justified
I agree with all that, except these two points.
When the pandemic first started, information was sparse. I remember seeing pictures of people in China literally collapsing on the street.
The idea that the vaccine "doesn't work" is idiotic. Again, look at stats for Uruguay, where vaccination (which was entirely voluntary, encouraged but in no way forced by the government) was a huge success and cases plummeted. Yes, they don't provide absolute protection, but they greatly reduce chances of infection, and if infected greatly reduce chances of hospitalization or death.
Yea man, life in South America is healthier in general. Climate probably helps too. The base everyday stress in the US alone knocks your immune system down significantly. Add that to all the fake soy stuff we eat, and Covid is far more deadlier.
Think I got the covid 2 weeks ago. Feels like breathing through a straw. Could’ve been the change of seasons dunno, still here.
- The school shutdowns were never justified
- The lockdowns were never justified
I agree with all that, except these two points.
When the pandemic first started, information was sparse. I remember seeing pictures of people in China literally collapsing on the street.
Yeah, except, how did that happen? Why did that happen? Why did it not happen anywhere else? We were shown, by China, a lot of footage that made Covid seem like something out of Stephen King's The Stand: people just dropping dead in the sidewalk, medical staff in full containment suits, the government entombing people in a frantic attempt to stop the spread.
Kind of funny how nothing like that happened after, right? Just in China?
- The school shutdowns were never justified
- The lockdowns were never justified
I agree with all that, except these two points.
When the pandemic first started, information was sparse. I remember seeing pictures of people in China literally collapsing on the street.
Yeah, except, how did that happen? Why did that happen? Why did it not happen anywhere else? We were shown, by China, a lot of footage that made Covid seem like something out of Stephen King's The Stand: people just dropping dead in the sidewalk, medical staff in full containment suits, the government entombing people in a frantic attempt to stop the spread.
Kind of funny how nothing like that happened after, right? Just in China?
Whatever it was, it worked. China's had zero cases.
- The school shutdowns were never justified
- The lockdowns were never justified
I agree with all that, except these two points.
When the pandemic first started, information was sparse. I remember seeing pictures of people in China literally collapsing on the street.
Yeah, except, how did that happen? Why did that happen? Why did it not happen anywhere else? We were shown, by China, a lot of footage that made Covid seem like something out of Stephen King's The Stand: people just dropping dead in the sidewalk, medical staff in full containment suits, the government entombing people in a frantic attempt to stop the spread.
Kind of funny how nothing like that happened after, right? Just in China?
My favourite was the trucks driving along and spraying gawd knows what onto the street.
The "vaccine" is nothing of the sort and does fuck all. You need only look at Israel, the most vaccinated country on the planet, for the proof there. The jab is so effective they're now mandating fourth doses and are locked down again.
My country is one of the most vaccinated larger countries, the majority of people in hospital and dying have had two doses. More people are in hospital and dying with covid now, than was the case this time last year when hardly anyone was jabbed.
The "vaccine" is nothing of the sort and does fuck all. You need only look at Israel, the most vaccinated country on the planet, for the proof there. The jab is so effective they're now mandating fourth doses and are locked down again.
My country is one of the most vaccinated larger countries, the majority of people in hospital and dying have had two doses. More people are in hospital and dying with covid now, than was the case this time last year when hardly anyone was jabbed.
Literally everything you wrote is wrong.
Israel is not the most vaccinated country on the planet. It's not even vaguely close to that. They stalled out quite a while ago and are not even in the top 30. In fact most of Europe is ahead of them at this point. They stalled at 67% vaccinated (62% fully vaccinated). That's 2% and 1% ahead of the U.S., respectively. For reference, Pundit's Uruguay is WELL ahead of Israel at 79% and 74% respectively (putting them in the top 10).
The vast majority of those seriously ill from Covid in Israel are unvaccinated. (https://www.timesofisrael.com/vast-majority-of-serious-covid-19-cases-are-unvaccinated-says-health-official/)
Israel has not mandated a fourth jab.
You're in Mexico I believe. 97% of hospitalizations in Mexico from Covid are the unvaccinated. (https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/coronavirus/97-of-hospitalized-covid-patients-havent-been-vaccinated/)
So yeah, literally everything you said is wrong.
Time to update the talking points guys, Israel's adult population is no longer 88% vaccinated, they are now 52% vaccinated.
Lets pray to god Sweden / Norway / Denmark are able to embarass enough of this bullshit to pull us out of the tailspin into perpetual medical tyranny.
Is that 52% (total pop? eligible pop?) have had the booster?
Is that 52% (total pop? eligible pop?) have had the booster?
Link (https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/covid-vaccination-pass-israel-about-to-expire-here-s-how-to-get-a-new-one-1.10255927)because it's complicated.
1.6 million Israelis who had prior infection or prior 2-dose injection now must report for a mandatory booster or will be locked out from society.
Time to update the talking points guys, Israel's adult population is no longer 88% vaccinated, they are now 52% vaccinated.
Lets pray to god Sweden / Norway / Denmark are able to embarass enough of this bullshit to pull us out of the tailspin into perpetual medical tyranny.
Time to update the talking points guys, Israel's adult population is no longer 88% vaccinated, they are now 52% vaccinated.
Lets pray to god Sweden / Norway / Denmark are able to embarass enough of this bullshit to pull us out of the tailspin into perpetual medical tyranny.
Once again with feeling: ISRAEL WAS NEVER 88% VACCINATED. ISRAEL WAS NOT EVEN IN THE TOP 30 NATIONS FOR PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION VACCINATED. IT IS A MYTH THAT ISRAEL IS AHEAD OF MOST NATIONS IN GETTING PEOPLE VACCINATED. THAT MYTH CAME FROM EARLY ON WHEN VACCINES FIRST CAME OUT WHERE ISRAEL WAS VACCINATING PEOPLE FAST. THAT SLOWED DOWN HOWEVER, AND FELL WELL BEHIND EVENTUALLY.
Wherever that stupid 88% number came from, it's a lie. Israel hasn't even hit 70% of the population with a single dose of the vaccine. I think the numbers being passed around are things like "percentage of the population ELIGIBLE TO BE VACCINATED" or some nonsense like that. But Israel is a particularly young nation, with a lot of people not eligible to be vaccinated. They also are seeing a lot of younger people who are eligible to get the vaccine not getting it. And the Orthodox and Arab population is fairly hesitant to get it. This has led to Israel falling behind most of Europe.
Time to update the talking points guys, Israel's adult population is no longer 88% vaccinated, they are now 52% vaccinated.
Lets pray to god Sweden / Norway / Denmark are able to embarass enough of this bullshit to pull us out of the tailspin into perpetual medical tyranny.
Once again with feeling: ISRAEL WAS NEVER 88% VACCINATED. ISRAEL WAS NOT EVEN IN THE TOP 30 NATIONS FOR PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION VACCINATED. IT IS A MYTH THAT ISRAEL IS AHEAD OF MOST NATIONS IN GETTING PEOPLE VACCINATED. THAT MYTH CAME FROM EARLY ON WHEN VACCINES FIRST CAME OUT WHERE ISRAEL WAS VACCINATING PEOPLE FAST. THAT SLOWED DOWN HOWEVER, AND FELL WELL BEHIND EVENTUALLY.
Wherever that stupid 88% number came from, it's a lie. Israel hasn't even hit 70% of the population with a single dose of the vaccine. I think the numbers being passed around are things like "percentage of the population ELIGIBLE TO BE VACCINATED" or some nonsense like that. But Israel is a particularly young nation, with a lot of people not eligible to be vaccinated. They also are seeing a lot of younger people who are eligible to get the vaccine not getting it. And the Orthodox and Arab population is fairly hesitant to get it. This has led to Israel falling behind most of Europe.
"One more time with feeling, one more time with style..." :D
https://youtu.be/L3sdxYol8NM
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=ISR
2-dose = 64% of total pop
1-dose = 5.4% of total pop
Almost 27% of Israel's population is 0-14 years old. To the best of my knowledge, there is not an EUA vaccine for that age group.
https://www.indexmundi.com/israel/demographics_profile.html
You are correct, Israel has not hit 70% total pop vaccination -- they reached 69.72%.
And given that:
0.64 (% of pop w/ 2 shots) / 0.73 (% of pop eligible to be vaccinated) = 0.88
it looks like 88% is the percentage of eligible pop 2-shot vaccinated.
Is there a data set out there that contradicts these values? If so, can you post the link?
Regards.
NZ just realized getting rid of covid isn’t a choice. Oh my! Took them long enough. Wonder if AU will get the hint. Probably not?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Health/wireStory/zealand-admits-longer-rid-coronavirus-80389176
Time to update the talking points guys, Israel's adult population is no longer 88% vaccinated, they are now 52% vaccinated.
Lets pray to god Sweden / Norway / Denmark are able to embarass enough of this bullshit to pull us out of the tailspin into perpetual medical tyranny.
Once again with feeling: ISRAEL WAS NEVER 88% VACCINATED. ISRAEL WAS NOT EVEN IN THE TOP 30 NATIONS FOR PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION VACCINATED. IT IS A MYTH THAT ISRAEL IS AHEAD OF MOST NATIONS IN GETTING PEOPLE VACCINATED. THAT MYTH CAME FROM EARLY ON WHEN VACCINES FIRST CAME OUT WHERE ISRAEL WAS VACCINATING PEOPLE FAST. THAT SLOWED DOWN HOWEVER, AND FELL WELL BEHIND EVENTUALLY.
Wherever that stupid 88% number came from, it's a lie. Israel hasn't even hit 70% of the population with a single dose of the vaccine. I think the numbers being passed around are things like "percentage of the population ELIGIBLE TO BE VACCINATED" or some nonsense like that. But Israel is a particularly young nation, with a lot of people not eligible to be vaccinated. They also are seeing a lot of younger people who are eligible to get the vaccine not getting it. And the Orthodox and Arab population is fairly hesitant to get it. This has led to Israel falling behind most of Europe.
"One more time with feeling, one more time with style..." :D
https://youtu.be/L3sdxYol8NM
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=ISR
2-dose = 64% of total pop
1-dose = 5.4% of total pop
Almost 27% of Israel's population is 0-14 years old. To the best of my knowledge, there is not an EUA vaccine for that age group.
https://www.indexmundi.com/israel/demographics_profile.html
You are correct, Israel has not hit 70% total pop vaccination -- they reached 69.72%.
And given that:
0.64 (% of pop w/ 2 shots) / 0.73 (% of pop eligible to be vaccinated) = 0.88
it looks like 88% is the percentage of eligible pop 2-shot vaccinated.
Is there a data set out there that contradicts these values? If so, can you post the link?
Regards.
I believe OurWorldInData counts total doses and then divides that by two to get number of people fully vaxxed in Israel. Which is a workable method for most locations, but given Israel went to three doses for some people it breaks down for Israel in particular.
NYT Tracker shows Israel at 62% vaccinated (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/world/covid-vaccinations-tracker.html). They carve out "additional dose" beyond the first two doses. If you sort by fully vaccinated you'll see Israel is sort of middle of the pack. They are not doing "bad" but they are far from the "best in the world" they used to be.
Literally everything you wrote is wrong.
Israel is not the most vaccinated country on the planet. It's not even vaguely close to that. They stalled out quite a while ago and are not even in the top 30. In fact most of Europe is ahead of them at this point. They stalled at 67% vaccinated (62% fully vaccinated). That's 2% and 1% ahead of the U.S., respectively. For reference, Pundit's Uruguay is WELL ahead of Israel at 79% and 74% respectively (putting them in the top 10).
The vast majority of those seriously ill from Covid in Israel are unvaccinated. (https://www.timesofisrael.com/vast-majority-of-serious-covid-19-cases-are-unvaccinated-says-health-official/)
Israel has not mandated a fourth jab.
You're in Mexico I believe. 97% of hospitalizations in Mexico from Covid are the unvaccinated. (https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/coronavirus/97-of-hospitalized-covid-patients-havent-been-vaccinated/)
So yeah, literally everything you said is wrong.
NZ just realized getting rid of covid isn’t a choice. Oh my! Took them long enough. Wonder if AU will get the hint. Probably not?I dunno. Looks like Dom Perrotet (the guy who succeeded the NSW premier after she resigned just ahead of a corruption investigation) seems to have a slightly more rational outlook. He's evidently very conservative by Australian standards.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Health/wireStory/zealand-admits-longer-rid-coronavirus-80389176
Francis Collins, director of the NIH, just quit.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/francis-collins-step-down-director-national-institutes-health
This is coming on the heels of an FOIA document dump by the Intercept that implicates both Fauci and Peter Daszak in gain-of-function research, and that Collins straight up lied about NIH involvement in such.
But hey, it's all a big conspiracy theory, right?
Francis Collins, director of the NIH, just quit.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/francis-collins-step-down-director-national-institutes-health
This is coming on the heels of an FOIA document dump by the Intercept that implicates both Fauci and Peter Daszak in gain-of-function research, and that Collins straight up lied about NIH involvement in such.
But hey, it's all a big conspiracy theory, right?
As the canard goes, a "conspiracy theory" is just the "breaking news" six months from now.
Oh look, a student of the Mike Lindell school.Francis Collins, director of the NIH, just quit.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/francis-collins-step-down-director-national-institutes-health
This is coming on the heels of an FOIA document dump by the Intercept that implicates both Fauci and Peter Daszak in gain-of-function research, and that Collins straight up lied about NIH involvement in such.
But hey, it's all a big conspiracy theory, right?
As the canard goes, a "conspiracy theory" is just the "breaking news" six months from now.
Does the conspiracy involve Boris, Bernie, and Trump exchanging hair styling tips?Francis Collins, director of the NIH, just quit.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/francis-collins-step-down-director-national-institutes-health
This is coming on the heels of an FOIA document dump by the Intercept that implicates both Fauci and Peter Daszak in gain-of-function research, and that Collins straight up lied about NIH involvement in such.
But hey, it's all a big conspiracy theory, right?
As the canard goes, a "conspiracy theory" is just the "breaking news" six months from now.
Cool beans, now if you can just explain the conspiracy and as a Brit tell me Boris Johnsons role.
Cool beans, now if you can just explain the conspiracy and as a Brit tell me Boris Johnsons role.
Cool beans, now if you can just explain the conspiracy and as a Brit tell me Boris Johnsons role.
What's that stupid, fat cunt got to do with anything? You think he's really in control? It all happened while he was pre-occupied with how "poor" he feels paying maintenance for all his children whilst siring even more.
the jab does nothing. More people are being hospitalised and are dying of covid now, than a year ago when hardly anyone was jabbed.
Meanwhile, some start to sniff that in May, 2019 they were already testing for the pandemic in Hubei. The source is WION, a sort of Indian CNN in English language.Unsurprising. Remember: cha bu duo, as applied to lab protocols.
Does the conspiracy involve Boris, Bernie, and Trump exchanging hair styling tips?Francis Collins, director of the NIH, just quit.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/francis-collins-step-down-director-national-institutes-health
This is coming on the heels of an FOIA document dump by the Intercept that implicates both Fauci and Peter Daszak in gain-of-function research, and that Collins straight up lied about NIH involvement in such.
But hey, it's all a big conspiracy theory, right?
As the canard goes, a "conspiracy theory" is just the "breaking news" six months from now.
Cool beans, now if you can just explain the conspiracy and as a Brit tell me Boris Johnsons role.
the jab does nothing. More people are being hospitalised and are dying of covid now, than a year ago when hardly anyone was jabbed.
That you could write a sentence like that, without seeing the flaw in that logic, is baffling.
How are you an RPG player and unable to see how idiotic what you wrote sounds?
Here is another video.
Starting to have serious doubts about goofy stuff at Veritas. So these two are smart enough to engineer vaccines but go out on dinner with reporters, spilling their beans without a single worry of being recorded?
the jab does nothing. More people are being hospitalised and are dying of covid now, than a year ago when hardly anyone was jabbed.
That you could write a sentence like that, without seeing the flaw in that logic, is baffling.
How are you an RPG player and unable to see how idiotic what you wrote sounds?
There are a lot of moving pieces when dealing with a global pandemic, and no player gets to move all of them (not even all of the ones on their own board). Yes, there are experts. Yes, they've been wrong to varying degrees at times. Yes, they continue to adapt to the situation. No, we shouldn't have expected this to be gone by now.the jab does nothing. More people are being hospitalised and are dying of covid now, than a year ago when hardly anyone was jabbed.
That you could write a sentence like that, without seeing the flaw in that logic, is baffling.
How are you an RPG player and unable to see how idiotic what you wrote sounds?
That’s a flawed logic as well. How can all these experts we supposedly depend on for knowledge about the virus fuck up so badly? Is there such a thing as an expert? Because if there were, we wouldn’t still be dealing with this pandemic nearly 2 years later, would we?
the jab does nothing. More people are being hospitalised and are dying of covid now, than a year ago when hardly anyone was jabbed.
That you could write a sentence like that, without seeing the flaw in that logic, is baffling.
How are you an RPG player and unable to see how idiotic what you wrote sounds?
That’s a flawed logic as well. How can all these experts we supposedly depend on for knowledge about the virus fuck up so badly? Is there such a thing as an expert? Because if there were, we wouldn’t still be dealing with this pandemic nearly 2 years later, would we?
Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!That’s a flawed logic as well. How can all these experts we supposedly depend on for knowledge about the virus fuck up so badly? Is there such a thing as an expert? Because if there were, we wouldn’t still be dealing with this pandemic nearly 2 years later, would we?
How did they fuck up exactly? Fastest vaccine ever, massively reduced the number of hospitalizations and deaths from the virus, moving into boosters in year two, distributing as fast as reasonably expected but hard to distribute in some third world nations. What exactly did you think they could do to make this be done faster? Certainly some policies were fucked up, and the scientists were not omniscient in predicting everything perfectly, but I would not say the scientists have "fucked this up so badly".
That you could write a sentence like that, without seeing the flaw in that logic, is baffling.
How are you an RPG player and unable to see how idiotic what you wrote sounds?
That you could write a sentence like that, without seeing the flaw in that logic, is baffling.
How are you an RPG player and unable to see how idiotic what you wrote sounds?
Viruses evolve naturally to become more contagious, but less deadly.
The only way the opposite happens is when we're doing something wrong (ie trying to jab your way out of a "pandemic" with a leaky "vaccine").
Delta is not more deadly, but it is far more infectious. The reason we are seeing an overall increase in hospitalizations and deaths is not because the virus has become more deadly, it is because far more people have been infected by it.That you could write a sentence like that, without seeing the flaw in that logic, is baffling.
How are you an RPG player and unable to see how idiotic what you wrote sounds?
Viruses evolve naturally to become more contagious, but less deadly.
The only way the opposite happens is when we're doing something wrong (ie trying to jab your way out of a "pandemic" with a leaky "vaccine").
Delta is not more deadly, but it is far more infectious.
The reason we are seeing an overall increase in hospitalizations and deaths is not because the virus has become more deadly, it is because far more people have been infected by it.
That uptick corresponded with Delta, not the vaccinations you moron.Delta is not more deadly, but it is far more infectious.
Which I just said.The reason we are seeing an overall increase in hospitalizations and deaths is not because the virus has become more deadly, it is because far more people have been infected by it.
Bollocks. Plenty of people were infected by earlier strains too. Every uptick in infections and deaths accompanied the jabbination programme.
Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!That’s a flawed logic as well. How can all these experts we supposedly depend on for knowledge about the virus fuck up so badly? Is there such a thing as an expert? Because if there were, we wouldn’t still be dealing with this pandemic nearly 2 years later, would we?
How did they fuck up exactly? Fastest vaccine ever, massively reduced the number of hospitalizations and deaths from the virus, moving into boosters in year two, distributing as fast as reasonably expected but hard to distribute in some third world nations. What exactly did you think they could do to make this be done faster? Certainly some policies were fucked up, and the scientists were not omniscient in predicting everything perfectly, but I would not say the scientists have "fucked this up so badly".
That's because I'm not being an asshole. I'm using an analogy to point out the gaping hole in your argument. Even if the apocryphal story that Mussolini's government was so efficient the trains always ran on time was true (it's not), it can't be considered a success because of the horrendous cost to personal liberty. The same applies to the vaccines, and the mandates they've used to force them on everyone. This isn't even an Italian Godwinning, because they're literally using totalitarian methods.Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!That’s a flawed logic as well. How can all these experts we supposedly depend on for knowledge about the virus fuck up so badly? Is there such a thing as an expert? Because if there were, we wouldn’t still be dealing with this pandemic nearly 2 years later, would we?
How did they fuck up exactly? Fastest vaccine ever, massively reduced the number of hospitalizations and deaths from the virus, moving into boosters in year two, distributing as fast as reasonably expected but hard to distribute in some third world nations. What exactly did you think they could do to make this be done faster? Certainly some policies were fucked up, and the scientists were not omniscient in predicting everything perfectly, but I would not say the scientists have "fucked this up so badly".
You suck at this asshole schtick.
That uptick corresponded with Delta, not the vaccinations you moron.
Shut up and die, they explained.Judges don't have the power to order medications or treatments unless they themselves are licensed as doctors (and if they are, they still cannot dictate how another provider operates so long as it is within the standards). I don't work there, but I can understand why the court order was unenforceable.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/report-man-dies-from-covid-19-after-hospital-rejects-court-order-for-ivermectin
Guess we know where HappyDerp works now...
If you read the original article, you will find that the guy's primary care doctor prescribed ivermectin, not the judge.Shut up and die, they explained.Judges don't have the power to order medications or treatments unless they themselves are licensed as doctors (and if they are, they still cannot dictate how another provider operates so long as it is within the standards). I don't work there, but I can understand why the court order was unenforceable.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/report-man-dies-from-covid-19-after-hospital-rejects-court-order-for-ivermectin
Guess we know where HappyDerp works now...
Did the prescribing doctor have privileges at the hospital in question? If not, his orders/scripts mean nothing in that hospital.If you read the original article, you will find that the guy's primary care doctor prescribed ivermectin, not the judge.Shut up and die, they explained.Judges don't have the power to order medications or treatments unless they themselves are licensed as doctors (and if they are, they still cannot dictate how another provider operates so long as it is within the standards). I don't work there, but I can understand why the court order was unenforceable.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/report-man-dies-from-covid-19-after-hospital-rejects-court-order-for-ivermectin
Guess we know where HappyDerp works now...
"Alvarado spoke with Carter’s Primary Care provider who wrote him a prescription for Ivermectin but the hospital refused to administer it."
This is similar to the Ohio case. In that case the hospital followed the court order and the patient lived.
There is no evidence that they did not have privileges.Did the prescribing doctor have privileges at the hospital in question? If not, his orders/scripts mean nothing in that hospital.If you read the original article, you will find that the guy's primary care doctor prescribed ivermectin, not the judge.Shut up and die, they explained.Judges don't have the power to order medications or treatments unless they themselves are licensed as doctors (and if they are, they still cannot dictate how another provider operates so long as it is within the standards). I don't work there, but I can understand why the court order was unenforceable.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/report-man-dies-from-covid-19-after-hospital-rejects-court-order-for-ivermectin
Guess we know where HappyDerp works now...
"Alvarado spoke with Carter’s Primary Care provider who wrote him a prescription for Ivermectin but the hospital refused to administer it."
This is similar to the Ohio case. In that case the hospital followed the court order and the patient lived.
Did the prescribing doctor have privileges at the hospital in question? If not, his orders/scripts mean nothing in that hospital.
That's because I'm not being an asshole.Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!That’s a flawed logic as well. How can all these experts we supposedly depend on for knowledge about the virus fuck up so badly? Is there such a thing as an expert? Because if there were, we wouldn’t still be dealing with this pandemic nearly 2 years later, would we?
How did they fuck up exactly? Fastest vaccine ever, massively reduced the number of hospitalizations and deaths from the virus, moving into boosters in year two, distributing as fast as reasonably expected but hard to distribute in some third world nations. What exactly did you think they could do to make this be done faster? Certainly some policies were fucked up, and the scientists were not omniscient in predicting everything perfectly, but I would not say the scientists have "fucked this up so badly".
You suck at this asshole schtick.
That uptick corresponded with Delta, not the vaccinations you moron.
Nope, the "Indian variant" they now call Delta appeared with India's jab rollout (and the withdrawal of Ivermectin, which was banned by many states at the same time).
Funny that India's largest state has all but eradicated covid through widespread application of Ivermectin (or rather the resumption of it's use).
You're talking approvingly about a government that used totalitarian measures against its own citizens, and you think someone is being an asshole when they point out it's the same rationale used by fascist governments?That's because I'm not being an asshole.Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!That’s a flawed logic as well. How can all these experts we supposedly depend on for knowledge about the virus fuck up so badly? Is there such a thing as an expert? Because if there were, we wouldn’t still be dealing with this pandemic nearly 2 years later, would we?
How did they fuck up exactly? Fastest vaccine ever, massively reduced the number of hospitalizations and deaths from the virus, moving into boosters in year two, distributing as fast as reasonably expected but hard to distribute in some third world nations. What exactly did you think they could do to make this be done faster? Certainly some policies were fucked up, and the scientists were not omniscient in predicting everything perfectly, but I would not say the scientists have "fucked this up so badly".
You suck at this asshole schtick.
"Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!"
If it was unclear, that's something an asshole says in a conversation like this. Now you know. Self assessment time.
Worth keeping in mind that US Congressmen, their staff, and their families, are treated using an early treatment regimen featuring Ivermectin, similar to the FLCCC (https://covid19criticalcare.com/)recommendations.Have you forgotten Obamacare, and how completely and utterly they shot down the suggestion that all of Congress would have to get their insurance on the exchanges?
Why one standard of care for Congress, and another one for everyone else?
As I keep saying, the "vaccines" cause the variants. They've proliferated, mutating at a faster rate since the jabbing began:Your inability to differentiate correlation from causation along with totally ignoring other correlations shows willful misrepresentation...or total stupidity...on your part. Might be a mix of the two.
Chart (http://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/66d0bffa6f67a7a16c9088a6434cc8c9c224b9056c92c2342fb269dd8cfb311d.jpg)
This is discussed at 02:11:00 here (https://www.twitch.tv/gigaohmbiological/video/1166770916), a lecture given by someone who knows what they're talking about. He also covers why the "immunity" provided by the jabs is essentially worthless compared to natural immunity from exposure and recovery.
Course the reality is the only people who get immunity from the jabs are the manufacturers of them.
Your inability to differentiate correlation from causation along with totally ignoring other correlations shows willful misrepresentation...or total stupidity...on your part. Might be a mix of the two.
Ok, let's start with "what does your vaccine date" represent? How much of the population had it ar that time in the places where the variants appeared? Why do the variants supposedly caused by the vaccine often seem to have begun prior to that line?Your inability to differentiate correlation from causation along with totally ignoring other correlations shows willful misrepresentation...or total stupidity...on your part. Might be a mix of the two.
Bless, look who doesn't have a rebuttal to actual science (not paid-for Big Pharma propaganda).
Ok, let's start with "what does your vaccine date" represent? How much of the population had it ar that time in the places where the variants appeared? Why do the variants supposedly caused by the vaccine often seem to have begun prior to that line?
You're using statistics in a misreprestative way as the worst kind of lie.
I don't usually look at any of your nonsense. Can you answers my questions, or not?Ok, let's start with "what does your vaccine date" represent? How much of the population had it ar that time in the places where the variants appeared? Why do the variants supposedly caused by the vaccine often seem to have begun prior to that line?
You're using statistics in a misreprestative way as the worst kind of lie.
Guess who only looked at the diagram, and didn't bother listening to any part of the lecture explaining the mechanism by which the jabs cause variation...
These data are derived from a rushed, non-FDA-approved, ongoing investigational product roll-out, and our conclusions are thus limited by the information at hand. In addition to the 12-15-year-old age group data being very early, it is vital to acknowledge that these reports represent a fraction of the actual total. Thus, due to both the problems of under-reporting and the known lag in report processing, this analysis reveals a strong signal from the VAERS data that the risk of suffering CIRM – especially males is unacceptably high. Again, children are not a high-risk group for COVID-19 respiratory illness, and yet they are the high-risk group for CIRM.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146280621002267 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146280621002267)
Efficacy of these products needs to be assessed by immunological assays and long-term studies are required, while safety needs to be evaluated by rigorous clinical, laboratory and imaging assessments of severe reported adverse events such as CIRM. Autopsies should be done in cases of cardiovascular-related deaths temporally associated with COVID-19 injectables. It is reasonable to use the precautionary principle in this particular setting since an alarming number of reports are coming from young males between the ages of 12 and 15. Boys of these ages should be carefully monitored for warning signs of myocarditis which many may pass off such as pallor, chest pain, shortness of breath or lethargy, following dose 1 with the aim of seeking prompt evaluation and avoiding dose 2.
As I keep saying, the "vaccines" cause the variants.
So that study that 0.1% of vaccine recipients got endocarditis was retracted when it was found that the actual rate is closer to 0.004%. This is why I shake my head when people are quick to point to preliminary non-peer-reviewed sources.
So peer review is a flawed process, full of easily identified defects with little evidence that it works. Nevertheless, it is likely to remain central to science and journals because there is no obvious alternative, and scientists and editors have a continuing belief in peer review. How odd that science should be rooted in belief.
Opening up peer review
At this point we at the BMJ thought that we would change direction dramatically and begin to open up the process. We hoped that increasing the accountability would improve the quality of review. We began by conducting a randomized trial of open review (meaning that the authors but not readers knew the identity of the reviewers) against traditional review.13 It had no effect on the quality of reviewers' opinions. They were neither better nor worse. We went ahead and introduced the system routinely on ethical grounds: such important judgements should be open and acountable unless there were compelling reasons why they could not be—and there were not.
Our next step was to conduct a trial of our current open system against a system whereby every document associated with peer review, together with the names of everybody involved, was posted on the BMJ's website when the paper was published. Once again this intervention had no effect on the quality of the opinion. We thus planned to make posting peer review documents the next stage in opening up our peer review process, but that has not yet happened—partly because the results of the trial have not yet been published and partly because this step required various technical developments.
The final step was, in my mind, to open up the whole process and conduct it in real time on the web in front of the eyes of anybody interested. Peer review would then be transformed from a black box into an open scientific discourse. Often I found the discourse around a study was a lot more interesting than the study itself. Now that I have left I am not sure if this system will be introduced.
We evaluated relationships between exhaled aerosol particle number and sex, age, and body mass index (BMI). No correlation was found with sex, while significant correlations were observed between exhaled aerosol, age, and BMI—and particularly BMI-years. We characterized each of the 146 individuals for whom we obtained age and BMI information by their age multiplied by their BMI, or by their BMI-years. We noted that half of the group (73 individuals) with lowest BMI-years (less than 650 BMI-years) exhaled significantly less aerosol than the half of the group (73 individuals) with highest BMI-years (above 650 BMI-years) (P < 0.015). The BMI-year results are shown in Fig. 2. We note that all volunteers of <26 y of age and all subjects under 22 BMI were low spreaders of exhaled bioaerosol.
it's best to regard peer review as something like a sniff test. It can be biased and superficial, but at least a couple people who should know better gave it a passing grade. It's not so much a filter for qualify, but a gate to prevent pure garbage from getting through.
I'm not sure opening it up really helps. It's just going to lead to journalists jumping to conclusions even sooner.
On October 4, Southwest announced that its workforce of 56,000 must be vaccinated by December 8 to continue their employment with the airline. Southwest executives claimed they had no choice because the airline acts as a federal contractor, flying Afghan evacuees and such, and Biden's rules for such contractors are stricter than the 100-employee mandate.
In the latest instance of natural immunity from infection vastly superior to the anemic "immunity" the jabs give you: https://www.cell.com/cell-reports/fulltext/S2211-1247(21)01287-0The vaccine provides meaningful benefits even if exposure provides greater benefits (if survived and at risk of long-term effects). Even the exposed benefit further from the getting the vaccine, even if not as much. Your antivax rant are pathetic. What would you suggest, going for widespread total infection and to hell with those that don't survive?
The vaccine provides meaningful benefits even if exposure provides greater benefits (if survived and at risk of long-term effects). Even the exposed benefit further from the getting the vaccine, even if not as much. Your antivax rant are pathetic. What would you suggest, going for widespread total infection and to hell with those that don't survive?
Funny, my own experiences directly show that is working. If it's not working, then what explanation do you propose to explain that the vast majority of symptomatic patients I've seen have been unvaccinated?The vaccine provides meaningful benefits even if exposure provides greater benefits (if survived and at risk of long-term effects). Even the exposed benefit further from the getting the vaccine, even if not as much. Your antivax rant are pathetic. What would you suggest, going for widespread total infection and to hell with those that don't survive?
Let's see how well the jabbed do this winter flu season, before pronouncing "greater benefits".
Uh, yes, which is what happened in every single year before 2020. What's pathetic is the cognitive dissonance you have to engage in to tell you that you did the right thing by subjecting yourself to an experimental treatment (that doesn't even work).
Funny, my own experiences directly show that is working. If it's not working, then what explanation do you propose to explain that the vast majority of symptomatic patients I've seen have been unvaccinated?
In the latest instance of natural immunity from infection vastly superior to the anemic "immunity" the jabs give you: https://www.cell.com/cell-reports/fulltext/S2211-1247(21)01287-0
Funny, my own experiences directly show that is working. If it's not working, then what explanation do you propose to explain that the vast majority of symptomatic patients I've seen have been unvaccinated?
Funny, that's the opposite to the official statistics in the UK.
In Irish news:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBm8bUUWYAA569m?format=jpg&name=large)
Gosh, what a mysterious coincidence...
Yes, natural immunity is superior to vaccination immunity.
However, once you answer "immunity to what" if you're not doing a double take you're a fucking idiot.
Which we've established you are.
It's like saying you can reduce your chances of being struck by a second bolt of lightening if you just go out and get struck by a bolt of lightening to begin with. As if lightening strikes are harmless.
Surge is greatest among those who are not vaccinated there. It's funny how you left that out. Almost as if it were a critical fact which goes against your world view so you intentionally misrepresented it for spin purposes. "70% of people being treated in ICU recently have not been fully vaccinated."
In the latest instance of natural immunity from infection vastly superior to the anemic "immunity" the jabs give you: https://www.cell.com/cell-reports/fulltext/S2211-1247(21)01287-0
Yes, natural immunity is superior to vaccination immunity.
However, once you answer "immunity to what" if you're not doing a double take you're a fucking idiot.
Which we've established you are.
It's like saying you can reduce your chances of being struck by a second bolt of lightening if you just go out and get struck by a bolt of lightening to begin with. As if lightening strikes are harmless.
Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%Got one showing hospitalization and death rate comparisons? Those are far more meaningful.
UK Data showing that Covid (or Covid-like-illness) is more common in fully-injected individuals for most age groups.
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBJjlWAVQAQTkY-.png%3Fname%3Dorig)
Got one showing hospitalization and death rate comparisons? Those are far more meaningful.
Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%OMG this is an off-label use!
Our congresspersons have probably bought more Monsanto stock 2 days before this went public.Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%OMG this is an off-label use!
We can't just have people taking willow tree bark willy nilly.
It could kill them.
Need to censor this information on social media.
Don't confuse a non-preferred treatment with an off-label use.Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%OMG this is an off-label use!
We can't just have people taking willow tree bark willy nilly.
It could kill them.
Need to censor this information on social media.
Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%OMG this is an off-label use!
We can't just have people taking willow tree bark willy nilly.
It could kill them.
Need to censor this information on social media.
Veterinarians prescribe aspirin for dogs, like they prescribe Ivermectin for horses.Don't confuse a non-preferred treatment with an off-label use.Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%OMG this is an off-label use!
We can't just have people taking willow tree bark willy nilly.
It could kill them.
Need to censor this information on social media.
Veterinarians prescribe aspirin for dogs, like they prescribe Ivermectin for horses.Don't confuse a non-preferred treatment with an off-label use.Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%OMG this is an off-label use!
We can't just have people taking willow tree bark willy nilly.
It could kill them.
Need to censor this information on social media.
Latest FDA tweet on using aspirin to treat Covid: 'You Are Not a Dog. Seriously, y'all. Stop it.'
Is that a real tweet? I don't use Twitter, but I think you're lying.Veterinarians prescribe aspirin for dogs, like they prescribe Ivermectin for horses.Don't confuse a non-preferred treatment with an off-label use.Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%OMG this is an off-label use!
We can't just have people taking willow tree bark willy nilly.
It could kill them.
Need to censor this information on social media.
Latest FDA tweet on using aspirin to treat Covid: 'You Are Not a Dog. Seriously, y'all. Stop it.'
It's a parody of the childish tweet the official @US_FDA did make on August 21st:Is that a real tweet? I don't use Twitter, but I think you're lying.Veterinarians prescribe aspirin for dogs, like they prescribe Ivermectin for horses.Don't confuse a non-preferred treatment with an off-label use.Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%OMG this is an off-label use!
We can't just have people taking willow tree bark willy nilly.
It could kill them.
Need to censor this information on social media.
Latest FDA tweet on using aspirin to treat Covid: 'You Are Not a Dog. Seriously, y'all. Stop it.'
Lol… just rofl here.That's hilarious.
We had just done something absolutely extraordinary. Public health had adopted this lockdown, this quarantine order, for a very large fraction of the population. A healthy quarantine at population scale, I don't think has ever been done before, and we had to justify it. [If] this is not a 3% fatal disease but in fact only 0.2% fatal disease, the costs, the harms of that are enormous. And we've seen the harms... the harms of the lockdown are devastating, orders of magnitude worse than whatever marginal benefit you think you might have gotten from it.Don't waste an hour on this interview with Jay Bhattacharya. He's a Ph.D. economist and(!) M.D. from Stanford who has done most of his work with the NIH and the FDA. He was involved in studies of Sars1, was a co-author on one of the first studies showing the infection fatality rate of Sars2 was far, far lower than earlier reports (which has since has been verified by hundreds of other studies), and was one of the three authors of the Great Barrington Declaration. So he's clearly unqualified in every possible way when it comes to the pandemic, and you should not follow the link and should instead turn on CNN or listen to your favorite politician to understand the Science amen.
There's also the effectively unverifiable assumption I've heard that the unvaccinated are less likely to subject themselves to testing (excepting those that are hospitalized). It might make sense in a gut feeling sort of way, but it's not something that can really be studied in an effective manner.
I've never been tested. I don't comply with any part of this bullshit charade.
So how exactly do you know you've actually had covid, not just the cold you said its symptoms were like?
Guess their symptoms must've been a lot worse than yours then...
but YOU DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW you had it!
Guess their symptoms must've been a lot worse than yours then...
but YOU DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW you had it!
They were, but I'm much healthier than they are.
But it's the most infectious disease EVAR, don't you know!
So stunning. So brave.There's also the effectively unverifiable assumption I've heard that the unvaccinated are less likely to subject themselves to testing (excepting those that are hospitalized). It might make sense in a gut feeling sort of way, but it's not something that can really be studied in an effective manner.
I've never been tested. I don't comply with any part of this bullshit charade.
So stunning. So brave.
Oh wait, you are complying with the bullshit charade, you're just too stupid to recognize you're the one being fooled. The My Pillow guy fully supports your brand of dumb.
You're complying with the moronic fools that dismiss that it has caused significant illnesses and deaths worldwide for the past 1.75 years.So stunning. So brave.
Oh wait, you are complying with the bullshit charade, you're just too stupid to recognize you're the one being fooled. The My Pillow guy fully supports your brand of dumb.
Never been tested, never worn a mask, never been jabbed, never used hand sanitiser, ignore anti-social distancing, never used the government tracking app. Which part of the covid theatre am I complying with, exactly?
I'm not pretending the sniffles merit changing the way I live.
You're complying with the moronic fools that dismiss that it has caused significant illnesses and deaths worldwide for the past 1.75 years.
You're complying with the moronic fools that dismiss that it has caused significant illnesses and deaths worldwide for the past 1.75 years.
It hasn't. The whole scam rests on bogus testing and a completely new way of measuring death. Take them away and it's equivalent to a bad flu year.
Have you seen--with your own eyes--real people die from COVID-19? I have. If they're faking it for a scam, then these are some awesome talents.You're complying with the moronic fools that dismiss that it has caused significant illnesses and deaths worldwide for the past 1.75 years.
It hasn't. The whole scam rests on bogus testing and a completely new way of measuring death. Take them away and it's equivalent to a bad flu year.
How does the scam work? By this I mean who are the scammers, how are they implementing the scam and what's their endgame?
Medicare is paying hospitals $39,000 per patient put on a ventilator for C*VID19. The government is literally paying hospitals to k*ll people, i.e., 80% of patients put on ventilators die.
Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko said last month via Belarusian Telegraph Agency, BelTA., that World Bank and IMF offered him a bribe of $940 million USD in the form of “Covid Relief Aid.” In exchange for $940 million USD, the World Bank and IMF demanded that the President of Belarus:
• imposed “extreme lockdown on his people”
• force them to wear face masks
• impose very strict curfews
• impose a police state
• crash the economy
How does the scam work? By this I mean who are the scammers, how are they implementing the scam and what's their endgame?
- Create a bioweapon in China, bypassing US laws prohibiting it
- Run simulations on outcomes of releasing bioweapon
- Release (accidentally?) the bioweapon.
- Cover up the release of the bioweapon, allowing it to spread unhindered for months
- Publish letters in prominent "discrediting" the bioweapon lab-leak.
- Coordinate social media censorship of obvious lab origins
- etc.
Meanwhile:QuoteMedicare is paying hospitals $39,000 per patient put on a ventilator for C*VID19. The government is literally paying hospitals to k*ll people, i.e., 80% of patients put on ventilators die.QuoteBelarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko said last month via Belarusian Telegraph Agency, BelTA., that World Bank and IMF offered him a bribe of $940 million USD in the form of “Covid Relief Aid.” In exchange for $940 million USD, the World Bank and IMF demanded that the President of Belarus:
• imposed “extreme lockdown on his people”
• force them to wear face masks
• impose very strict curfews
• impose a police state
• crash the economy
Scottish Parliament: Making the UK Government look good since 1999
Scottish Parliament: Making the UK Government look good since 1999
You're going to have to unpack that for me,are you saying that the Scottish Parliament are the secret masters behind the conspiracy?
How does the scam work? By this I mean who are the scammers, how are they implementing the scam and what's their endgame?
Have you seen--with your own eyes--real people die from COVID-19? I have. If they're faking it for a scam, then these are some awesome talents.
Your connecting a mix of ineptness, normal tory graft and necessary stuff into one big conspiracy. I'm focusing on the UK government because it's one we share and there's simply nothing that coordinated.
Take your fucking mandates and get the fuck out.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/delta-air-lines-ceo-ditches-e2-80-98divisive-e2-80-99-covid-vaccine-mandate-marks-90-25-employee-vaccination-rate/ar-AAPxP1G
Looks like Delta Air has had enough. Can't say I'm surprised.
(https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F109200d4-6cb2-4847-9846-939d9af2a6ed_608x1162.png)
Some basic discussion of the revolving door of corruption involving high-ranking FDA officials profiteering by joining pharmaceutical companies (https://dossier.substack.com/p/the-revolving-door-all-3-fda-authorized).
In the latest instance of natural immunity from infection vastly superior to the anemic "immunity" the jabs give you: https://www.cell.com/cell-reports/fulltext/S2211-1247(21)01287-0
Yes, natural immunity is superior to vaccination immunity.
However, once you answer "immunity to what" if you're not doing a double take you're a fucking idiot.
Which we've established you are.
It's like saying you can reduce your chances of being struck by a second bolt of lightening if you just go out and get struck by a bolt of lightening to begin with. As if lightening strikes are harmless.
For some, covid is effectively harmless. If you are old and/or have multiple comorbidities, perhaps not so harmless. Young and healthy (obese ~= healthy), harmless for the vast majority.
On the other hand, the lethality of lightning is, for the most part, invariant with the respect to the attributes of the strikee.
As for trying to catch covid in order to gain natural immunity, I believe there was some discussion (in the UK?) in that regard in early 2020, but beyond that I haven't heard that proffered. But I have heard that conflated with the position of if you have already had covid, you don't need to get the vaccine (e.g., like with measles, smallpox, etc.)
Regards.
Study (https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/Fulltext/2021/04000/Aspirin_Use_Is_Associated_With_Decreased.2.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=4)reports Aspirin cuts severe Covid outcomes by 50%
UK Data showing that Covid (or Covid-like-illness) is more common in fully-injected individuals for most age groups.
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBJjlWAVQAQTkY-.png%3Fname%3Dorig)
I went to the source cited (not the asprin study - which simply concludes they didn't do a random study and one is needed - the chart). It says exactly the opposite of that twitter-spread meme. Check it for yourself (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1016465/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_36.pdf).
Your connecting a mix of ineptness, normal tory graft and necessary stuff into one big conspiracy. I'm focusing on the UK government because it's one we share and there's simply nothing that coordinated.
Uh no, this go way beyond "normal graft". Nothing on this scale has ever been pulled off. They used the sniffles to justify ripping off the Exchequer to an eye-watering amount. And it's not just "der toreez" either, they paid off every MP with a £10k bung right at the start.
If this were a real pandemic, they wouldn't dare, they'd be too busy trying to manage a genuine situation. Instead, we have an entirely fabricated situation that's easily manipulated for greatest gain.
See the G7 and many other instances of them treating it with the seriousness it deserves - none.
Look at the full text of the report. They give a poor explanation for the results of table 4:I went to the source cited (not the asprin study - which simply concludes they didn't do a random study and one is needed - the chart). It says exactly the opposite of that twitter-spread meme. Check it for yourself (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1016465/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_36.pdf).
Table 4 (p.14) has the data represented in the infographic. Are you saying that data is "exactly the opposite"?
I went to the source cited (not the asprin study - which simply concludes they didn't do a random study and one is needed - the chart). It says exactly the opposite of that twitter-spread meme. Check it for yourself (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1016465/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_36.pdf).
Table 4 (p.14) has the data represented in the infographic. Are you saying that data is "exactly the opposite"?
Colin Powell passed away from Covid complications. He was 84. My condolences to his family.People that talked smack here, or people that talked smack elsewhere (like Twitter)?
This is not the 'big own' that certain folks might think it is -- he was vaccinated, yes, but he also had a nasty case of cancer that had him fucked up.
That being said, it'll be interesting to see if the same worthless shitbirds who talked smack about Herman Cain when he bit it (same situation -- had cancer, and Covid caught him) will shut the fuck up here.
This is not the 'big own' that certain folks might think it is -- he was vaccinated, yes, but he also had a nasty case of cancer that had him fucked up.People whose immune system is severely compromised often don't produce the antibodies the vaccine is supposed to trigger.
People that talked smack here, or people that talked smack elsewhere (like Twitter)?Twitter is a cesspool of hatred.
Colin Powell passed away from Covid complications. He was 84. My condolences to his family.Most of them are more concerned that anti-vaxxers will use his death as ammunition.
This is not the 'big own' that certain folks might think it is -- he was vaccinated, yes, but he also had a nasty case of cancer that had him fucked up.
That being said, it'll be interesting to see if the same worthless shitbirds who talked smack about Herman Cain when he bit it (same situation -- had cancer, and Covid caught him) will shut the fuck up here.
Kind of like how the Branch Covidians used Herman Cain's death?Colin Powell passed away from Covid complications. He was 84. My condolences to his family.Most of them are more concerned that anti-vaxxers will use his death as ammunition.
This is not the 'big own' that certain folks might think it is -- he was vaccinated, yes, but he also had a nasty case of cancer that had him fucked up.
That being said, it'll be interesting to see if the same worthless shitbirds who talked smack about Herman Cain when he bit it (same situation -- had cancer, and Covid caught him) will shut the fuck up here.
We are in total agreement on something.People that talked smack here, or people that talked smack elsewhere (like Twitter)?Twitter is a cesspool of hatred.
Herman Cain did promote anti vaccine views and didn't take reasonable precautions against covid.Kind of like how the Branch Covidians used Herman Cain's death?Colin Powell passed away from Covid complications. He was 84. My condolences to his family.Most of them are more concerned that anti-vaxxers will use his death as ammunition.
This is not the 'big own' that certain folks might think it is -- he was vaccinated, yes, but he also had a nasty case of cancer that had him fucked up.
That being said, it'll be interesting to see if the same worthless shitbirds who talked smack about Herman Cain when he bit it (same situation -- had cancer, and Covid caught him) will shut the fuck up here.
Herman Cain did promote anti vaccine views and didn't take reasonable precautions against covid.
Most of them are more concerned that anti-vaxxers will use his death as ammunition.
Did what it was supposed to. Powell had blood cancer which reduced the effectiveness.He was an old, sick man, it did fuck all. Same as if he'd been a younger, healthier man, his immune system would have dealt with it, irrespective of the jab.
Did what it was supposed to. Powell had blood cancer which reduced the effectiveness.Citations needed for cancer reducing the effectiveness of the jab.
The report covered in the last page of the thread shows you are quite wrong. So much disinformation you are peddling...Did what it was supposed to. Powell had blood cancer which reduced the effectiveness.He was an old, sick man, it did fuck all. Same as if he'd been a younger, healthier man, his immune system would have dealt with it, irrespective of the jab.
Let's stop pretending that something that doesn't actually provide immunity (which is what real vaccines do) is providing any protection here.
American Cancer Society notes that it is probable that treatments that impact the immune system, such as chemotherapy and radiation therapy, as well as certain cancers themselves, will reduce the effectiveness of the vaccine, but that there is currently insufficient research to make a definitive statement to the degree of impact. However, the fact that the immune system is impaired in such patients is clear.Did what it was supposed to. Powell had blood cancer which reduced the effectiveness.Citations needed for cancer reducing the effectiveness of the jab.
I am saying the people who conducted the study give a summary and their summary concludes exactly the opposite of this meme.
Cant believe you guys are arguing about exactly why an old guy with Cancer died.You should talk about the first black president with more respect.
He was an old guy with cancer.
I am saying the people who conducted the study give a summary and their summary concludes exactly the opposite of this meme.
IOW: "I don't care about the data, just about the politicized interpretation of the data."
Cant believe you guys are arguing about exactly why an old guy with Cancer died.You should talk about the first black president with more respect.
He was an old guy with cancer.
Have a look at all of the data, not just one table.I am saying the people who conducted the study give a summary and their summary concludes exactly the opposite of this meme.
IOW: "I don't care about the data, just about the politicized interpretation of the data."
No, our first black president was released from the hospital (UC Irvine in Socal) this week after having an infection.Cant believe you guys are arguing about exactly why an old guy with Cancer died.You should talk about the first black president with more respect.
He was an old guy with cancer.
I'm not always up on my racism. Are people here really pretending they don't know the difference between Colin Powell and James Earl Jones and/or Colin Powell and Barrack Obama?I think it's less out of racism and more out of generic sarcasm.
It is important to note that part of becoming a Leftist is replacing your sense of humor with an extra outrage meter.I'm not always up on my racism. Are people here really pretending they don't know the difference between Colin Powell and James Earl Jones and/or Colin Powell and Barrack Obama?I think it's less out of racism and more out of generic sarcasm.
I'm not always up on my racism. Are people here really pretending they don't know the difference between Colin Powell and James Earl Jones and/or Colin Powell and Barrack Obama?Back after the first Gulf War, Colin Powell was widely touted as a potential presidential candidate. He had a sterling reputation, and was widely respected. Nearly everyone thought he was a shoe-in, if he did decide to run. He chose not to, because he didn't want to subject himself and his family to the raking over the coals and public exposure that go with a presidential campaign. And even if he did run, there was no guarantee. Elections are unpredictable things. But at the time, nearly everyone thought he was far and away the best candidate. And nobody really cared he was black.
Funny, Pundit's video persona is all based on stoking the outrage of old school D&D players, and I don't figure most of his audience is Leftist.It is important to note that part of becoming a Leftist is replacing your sense of humor with an extra outrage meter.I'm not always up on my racism. Are people here really pretending they don't know the difference between Colin Powell and James Earl Jones and/or Colin Powell and Barrack Obama?I think it's less out of racism and more out of generic sarcasm.
I'm outraged at your lack of a sense of humor!Funny, Pundit's video persona is all based on stoking the outrage of old school D&D players, and I don't figure most of his audience is Leftist.It is important to note that part of becoming a Leftist is replacing your sense of humor with an extra outrage meter.I'm not always up on my racism. Are people here really pretending they don't know the difference between Colin Powell and James Earl Jones and/or Colin Powell and Barrack Obama?I think it's less out of racism and more out of generic sarcasm.
:PI'm outraged at your lack of a sense of humor!Funny, Pundit's video persona is all based on stoking the outrage of old school D&D players, and I don't figure most of his audience is Leftist.It is important to note that part of becoming a Leftist is replacing your sense of humor with an extra outrage meter.I'm not always up on my racism. Are people here really pretending they don't know the difference between Colin Powell and James Earl Jones and/or Colin Powell and Barrack Obama?I think it's less out of racism and more out of generic sarcasm.
It is important to note that part of becoming a Leftist is replacing your sense of humor with an extra outrage meter.I'm not always up on my racism. Are people here really pretending they don't know the difference between Colin Powell and James Earl Jones and/or Colin Powell and Barrack Obama?I think it's less out of racism and more out of generic sarcasm.
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFCZ4RTNXEAgZaba.jpg%3Fname%3Dsmall)Sure am. How bout u?
Everyone ready for the definition of "Fully Vaccinated" to change to 3rd & 4th shots?
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFCZ4RTNXEAgZaba.jpg%3Fname%3Dsmall)
Everyone ready for the definition of "Fully Vaccinated" to change to 3rd & 4th shots?
(https://i.imgur.com/jzIsYTA.jpg)
Which makes it not a vaccine, really.(https://i.imgur.com/jzIsYTA.jpg)
Indeed, even though "vaccinated" people carry the exact same viral load as the unvaccinated when infected. Because their "immunity" doesn't actually stop them getting infected or spreading the virus. So everyone needs the same "protection" by being jabbed or their "protection" doesn't work properly. Duh.
This is inconvenient: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.06.21259924v1.full.pdf
Study confirms what we already knew about Ivermectin from India - that it works and is highly effective in treating the sniffles.
This is inconvenient: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.06.21259924v1.full.pdf
Study confirms what we already knew about Ivermectin from India - that it works and is highly effective in treating the sniffles.
The only thing that's sure about ivermectin is they've lied about it and tried to suppress it, and the liars and suppressors are the same people who want to take away free speech under the guise of fighting "misinformation".
"My" best defense? Whose narrative, mine or theirs? What am I supposed to be defending, and where did I defend it? You seem to be a big fan of suggesting people are conspiracy theorists without directly stating your position or specifically addressing anything other people say.The only thing that's sure about ivermectin is they've lied about it and tried to suppress it, and the liars and suppressors are the same people who want to take away free speech under the guise of fighting "misinformation".
Because reasons.
This whole narrative is incoherent. Your best defence of it has been that government naturally gathers power out of crises but that's an assumption that only acts as an excuse for a conspiracy theory.
I'm not as knowledgeable about US politics as I am of the UK sort. As far as I can see you had a shit show that you replaced with another because it was wasn't the first.
I'm not as knowledgeable...You could have stopped there and been equally as accurate.
Ah, a bongland inmate. That explains a bit.The only thing that's sure about ivermectin is they've lied about it and tried to suppress it, and the liars and suppressors are the same people who want to take away free speech under the guise of fighting "misinformation".
Because reasons.
This whole narrative is incoherent. Your best defence of it has been that government naturally gathers power out of crises but that's an assumption that only acts as an excuse for a conspiracy theory.
I'm not as knowledgeable about US politics as I am of the UK sort. As far as I can see you had a shit show that you replaced with another because it was wasn't the first.
I am saying the people who conducted the study give a summary and their summary concludes exactly the opposite of this meme.
IOW: "I don't care about the data, just about the politicized interpretation of the data."
Funny, Pundit's video persona is all based on stoking the outrage of old school D&D players, and I don't figure most of his audience is Leftist.It is important to note that part of becoming a Leftist is replacing your sense of humor with an extra outrage meter.I'm not always up on my racism. Are people here really pretending they don't know the difference between Colin Powell and James Earl Jones and/or Colin Powell and Barrack Obama?I think it's less out of racism and more out of generic sarcasm.
Greetings!
Yep, I said this months ago--there will never be an "END" to this virus crisis. There will never be an end to mask mandates, lockdowns, and whatever other restrictions they come up with.
Greetings!
Yep, I said this months ago--there will never be an "END" to this virus crisis. There will never be an end to mask mandates, lockdowns, and whatever other restrictions they come up with.
When mask mandates and lockdowns end, I will remind you that you said this :)
Greetings!
Yep, I said this months ago--there will never be an "END" to this virus crisis. There will never be an end to mask mandates, lockdowns, and whatever other restrictions they come up with.
When mask mandates and lockdowns end, I will remind you that you said this :)
Greetings!
Yep, I said this months ago--there will never be an "END" to this virus crisis. There will never be an end to mask mandates, lockdowns, and whatever other restrictions they come up with.
When mask mandates and lockdowns end, I will remind you that you said this :)
Care to proffer an over/under for either of those?
In the US, my proffer is that there may be one more lockdown, likely invoked by the spread of the next variant. After that, I think that a sufficient number of people will be fed up with lockdowns that to invoke yet another would be political suicide. So my over/under is 1.5, and I am taking the over.
I think that in (D) states mask mandates will happen twice a year, in conjunction with the summer and winter case peaks. I will take 6.5 as my over/under, and I am taking the over. I am assuming that "Let's go Brandon" will go the way of the peanut farmer, and that will bring mask mandates to a halt.
I also predict that the very (D) politicians that push mask mandates will increasingly violate them (e.g. Biden, Breed, Lightfoot, Newsom). No over/under, just a freebie.
And as an additional bonus, I predict that as long as there is covid, we will be forced to get a covid vax every six months. Again, no over/under, just another freebie.
Greetings!
Yep, I said this months ago--there will never be an "END" to this virus crisis. There will never be an end to mask mandates, lockdowns, and whatever other restrictions they come up with.
When mask mandates and lockdowns end, I will remind you that you said this :)
Care to proffer an over/under for either of those?
In the US, my proffer is that there may be one more lockdown, likely invoked by the spread of the next variant. After that, I think that a sufficient number of people will be fed up with lockdowns that to invoke yet another would be political suicide. So my over/under is 1.5, and I am taking the over.
I think that in (D) states mask mandates will happen twice a year, in conjunction with the summer and winter case peaks. I will take 6.5 as my over/under, and I am taking the over. I am assuming that "Let's go Brandon" will go the way of the peanut farmer, and that will bring mask mandates to a halt.
I also predict that the very (D) politicians that push mask mandates will increasingly violate them (e.g. Biden, Breed, Lightfoot, Newsom). No over/under, just a freebie.
And as an additional bonus, I predict that as long as there is covid, we will be forced to get a covid vax every six months. Again, no over/under, just another freebie.
Your over/under is years, measured from today?
Greetings!
Yep, I said this months ago--there will never be an "END" to this virus crisis. There will never be an end to mask mandates, lockdowns, and whatever other restrictions they come up with.
When mask mandates and lockdowns end, I will remind you that you said this :)
Care to proffer an over/under for either of those?
In the US, my proffer is that there may be one more lockdown, likely invoked by the spread of the next variant. After that, I think that a sufficient number of people will be fed up with lockdowns that to invoke yet another would be political suicide. So my over/under is 1.5, and I am taking the over.
I think that in (D) states mask mandates will happen twice a year, in conjunction with the summer and winter case peaks. I will take 6.5 as my over/under, and I am taking the over. I am assuming that "Let's go Brandon" will go the way of the peanut farmer, and that will bring mask mandates to a halt.
I also predict that the very (D) politicians that push mask mandates will increasingly violate them (e.g. Biden, Breed, Lightfoot, Newsom). No over/under, just a freebie.
And as an additional bonus, I predict that as long as there is covid, we will be forced to get a covid vax every six months. Again, no over/under, just another freebie.
Your over/under is years, measured from today?
My bad, should have included units.
1.5 lockdowns, with me taking the over (i.e., betting on there being 2+ lockdowns in the future).
6.5 mask mandates, with me taking the over (i.e., betting on there being 7+ mask mandates in the future).
Of course, these are all state dependent. if I lived in FL, TN, or TX, I would be taking the under. But I live in a Peoples' Republic state, so I am counting on more lockdowns and mask mandates.
And starting from now.
Greetings!
Yep, I said this months ago--there will never be an "END" to this virus crisis. There will never be an end to mask mandates, lockdowns, and whatever other restrictions they come up with.
When mask mandates and lockdowns end, I will remind you that you said this :)
Care to proffer an over/under for either of those?
In the US, my proffer is that there may be one more lockdown, likely invoked by the spread of the next variant. After that, I think that a sufficient number of people will be fed up with lockdowns that to invoke yet another would be political suicide. So my over/under is 1.5, and I am taking the over.
I think that in (D) states mask mandates will happen twice a year, in conjunction with the summer and winter case peaks. I will take 6.5 as my over/under, and I am taking the over. I am assuming that "Let's go Brandon" will go the way of the peanut farmer, and that will bring mask mandates to a halt.
I also predict that the very (D) politicians that push mask mandates will increasingly violate them (e.g. Biden, Breed, Lightfoot, Newsom). No over/under, just a freebie.
And as an additional bonus, I predict that as long as there is covid, we will be forced to get a covid vax every six months. Again, no over/under, just another freebie.
Your over/under is years, measured from today?
My bad, should have included units.
1.5 lockdowns, with me taking the over (i.e., betting on there being 2+ lockdowns in the future).
6.5 mask mandates, with me taking the over (i.e., betting on there being 7+ mask mandates in the future).
Of course, these are all state dependent. if I lived in FL, TN, or TX, I would be taking the under. But I live in a Peoples' Republic state, so I am counting on more lockdowns and mask mandates.
And starting from now.
Kinda a weird bet given it's so state dependent right? I mean, will 7 states revoke their current mask mandate and then reinstate it 1 more time? Is that how that would work? Wouldn't some just not revoke their mask mandate and that would count as 0 new mandates?
It would go a long way toward explaining this type of graph too, since the pre-2019 excess mortality in Asia and prevalence of natural immunity would effectively give us graphs like these:
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBK9sV8WYAARAVO.jpg%3Fname%3Dorig)
In the US, my proffer is that there may be one more lockdown, likely invoked by the spread of the next variant.
It would go a long way toward explaining this type of graph too, since the pre-2019 excess mortality in Asia and prevalence of natural immunity would effectively give us graphs like these:
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBK9sV8WYAARAVO.jpg%3Fname%3Dorig)
What an incredible coincidence that the second surge in deaths in the EU coincides with all the vaccination programmes...
Greetings!
Yep, I said this months ago--there will never be an "END" to this virus crisis. There will never be an end to mask mandates, lockdowns, and whatever other restrictions they come up with.
When mask mandates and lockdowns end, I will remind you that you said this :)
Care to proffer an over/under for either of those?
In the US, my proffer is that there may be one more lockdown, likely invoked by the spread of the next variant. After that, I think that a sufficient number of people will be fed up with lockdowns that to invoke yet another would be political suicide. So my over/under is 1.5, and I am taking the over.
I think that in (D) states mask mandates will happen twice a year, in conjunction with the summer and winter case peaks. I will take 6.5 as my over/under, and I am taking the over. I am assuming that "Let's go Brandon" will go the way of the peanut farmer, and that will bring mask mandates to a halt.
I also predict that the very (D) politicians that push mask mandates will increasingly violate them (e.g. Biden, Breed, Lightfoot, Newsom). No over/under, just a freebie.
And as an additional bonus, I predict that as long as there is covid, we will be forced to get a covid vax every six months. Again, no over/under, just another freebie.
Your over/under is years, measured from today?
My bad, should have included units.
1.5 lockdowns, with me taking the over (i.e., betting on there being 2+ lockdowns in the future).
6.5 mask mandates, with me taking the over (i.e., betting on there being 7+ mask mandates in the future).
Of course, these are all state dependent. if I lived in FL, TN, or TX, I would be taking the under. But I live in a Peoples' Republic state, so I am counting on more lockdowns and mask mandates.
And starting from now.
Kinda a weird bet given it's so state dependent right? I mean, will 7 states revoke their current mask mandate and then reinstate it 1 more time? Is that how that would work? Wouldn't some just not revoke their mask mandate and that would count as 0 new mandates?
Yep; state dependent. And for my state, I am betting that our Dear Leader will cycle through 7+ mask mandates and 2+ lockdowns. What could burn me on the mask mandates is Dear Leader never ends the current mask mandate.
You are the undisputed dumbest fucker on this message board.
Greetings!
Yep, I said this months ago--there will never be an "END" to this virus crisis. There will never be an end to mask mandates, lockdowns, and whatever other restrictions they come up with.
When mask mandates and lockdowns end, I will remind you that you said this :)
Care to proffer an over/under for either of those?
In the US, my proffer is that there may be one more lockdown, likely invoked by the spread of the next variant. After that, I think that a sufficient number of people will be fed up with lockdowns that to invoke yet another would be political suicide. So my over/under is 1.5, and I am taking the over.
I think that in (D) states mask mandates will happen twice a year, in conjunction with the summer and winter case peaks. I will take 6.5 as my over/under, and I am taking the over. I am assuming that "Let's go Brandon" will go the way of the peanut farmer, and that will bring mask mandates to a halt.
I also predict that the very (D) politicians that push mask mandates will increasingly violate them (e.g. Biden, Breed, Lightfoot, Newsom). No over/under, just a freebie.
And as an additional bonus, I predict that as long as there is covid, we will be forced to get a covid vax every six months. Again, no over/under, just another freebie.
Your over/under is years, measured from today?
My bad, should have included units.
1.5 lockdowns, with me taking the over (i.e., betting on there being 2+ lockdowns in the future).
6.5 mask mandates, with me taking the over (i.e., betting on there being 7+ mask mandates in the future).
Of course, these are all state dependent. if I lived in FL, TN, or TX, I would be taking the under. But I live in a Peoples' Republic state, so I am counting on more lockdowns and mask mandates.
And starting from now.
Kinda a weird bet given it's so state dependent right? I mean, will 7 states revoke their current mask mandate and then reinstate it 1 more time? Is that how that would work? Wouldn't some just not revoke their mask mandate and that would count as 0 new mandates?
Yep; state dependent. And for my state, I am betting that our Dear Leader will cycle through 7+ mask mandates and 2+ lockdowns. What could burn me on the mask mandates is Dear Leader never ends the current mask mandate.
Yeah I think you're setting yourself up for failure. Odds are any state which would institute 7 mask mandates in a year or two period would simply enact one or two instead and just make them last longer. Government bureaucracies just don't move that fast. But sure I would take the under because of that.
You are the undisputed dumbest fucker on this message board.
Says the thicko mainlining the narrative...
I'm sure you'll be perfectly fine after your fifth jab.
He's also got signs of possible brain damage...long Covid perhaps? Those sniffles sure have done a number on him. Now he wants others to catch it because right now, he's special and he's hoping that once everyone catches it and becomes special...you know how it goes.You are the undisputed dumbest fucker on this message board.
Says the thicko mainlining the narrative...
I'm sure you'll be perfectly fine after your fifth jab.
Kiero, unfortunately a think everyone agrees with Mistwell. Your macho stance is incredibly fucking dumb. Just saying. If anything, I strongly believe you been jabbed.
Kiero, unfortunately a think everyone agrees with Mistwell. Your macho stance is incredibly fucking dumb. Just saying. If anything, I strongly believe you been jabbed.
He's also got signs of possible brain damage...long Covid perhaps? Those sniffles sure have done a number on him. Now he wants others to catch it because right now, he's special and he's hoping that once everyone catches it and becomes special...you know how it goes.
I pity you, Kiero, I really do.Kiero, unfortunately a think everyone agrees with Mistwell. Your macho stance is incredibly fucking dumb. Just saying. If anything, I strongly believe you been jabbed.
I really couldn't give a fuck what you or anyone else thinks. Fortunately, your mistaken belief that everyone is as weak-willed and compliant as you is erroneous.He's also got signs of possible brain damage...long Covid perhaps? Those sniffles sure have done a number on him. Now he wants others to catch it because right now, he's special and he's hoping that once everyone catches it and becomes special...you know how it goes.
I don't live differently to the way I did in 2019. I'm not the one experiencing brain damage, thinking the world has somehow changed.
The sniffles did nothing out of the ordinary that any other respiratory infection did.
I pity you, Kiero, I really do.
Some things are done regularly to stay healthy, like dental cleanings... oh, wait...you're British. Never mind then.I pity you, Kiero, I really do.
I pity you, so used to seeing sick people you have no idea what healthy is like.
Oh look, fourth jabs! This is normal: https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19vaccine/95280
A "booster" every six months is coming.
Some things are done regularly to stay healthy, like dental cleanings... oh, wait...you're British. Never mind then.
Sure... and we believed Hulk Hogan when he said it was all just prayer and vitamins.Some things are done regularly to stay healthy, like dental cleanings... oh, wait...you're British. Never mind then.
I don't have regular injections of anything, thanks. Nor am I on any kind of regular medication. That's what being healthy is, you require no routine medical interventions.
The fact that you think visiting the hygienist is analogous to being injected with something tells me how little sense of proportion you have.
What I do regularly to stay healthy is exercise, every day. And not eat crap. I don't smoke and hardly ever drink alcohol.
Sure... and we believed Hulk Hogan when he said it was all just prayer and vitamins.
You are the undisputed dumbest fucker on this message board.
Says the thicko mainlining the narrative...
I'm sure you'll be perfectly fine after your fifth jab.
Kiero, unfortunately a think everyone agrees with Mistwell. Your macho stance is incredibly fucking dumb. Just saying. If anything, I strongly believe you been jabbed.
Because posters here are a representative sample of what exactly?Sure... and we believed Hulk Hogan when he said it was all just prayer and vitamins.
Whatever. We'll see how many of us are still here six months from now, won't we?
Because posters here are a representative sample of what exactly?
Sikh trans lesbian cabaret singers with multiple Ph.D.s in particle physics and theme park management.Because posters here are a representative sample of what exactly?Sure... and we believed Hulk Hogan when he said it was all just prayer and vitamins.
Whatever. We'll see how many of us are still here six months from now, won't we?
Some things are done regularly to stay healthy, like dental cleanings... oh, wait...you're British. Never mind then.
I don't have regular injections of anything, thanks. Nor am I on any kind of regular medication. That's what being healthy is, you require no routine medical interventions.
The fact that you think visiting the hygienist is analogous to being injected with something tells me how little sense of proportion you have.
What I do regularly to stay healthy is exercise, every day. And not eat crap. I don't smoke and hardly ever drink alcohol.
Mask mandates will never end, they're too useful a signal of compliance.
I'm not as knowledgeable...You could have stopped there and been equally as accurate.
Greetings!
Compliance to what?
Hmmm...
Compliance to Government Tyranny
Compliance to Eicts made by Health Agencies
Compliance to Pharmas
Compliance to Giant Corporations
Compliance to the Media
Compliance to the Academic "Authorities"
Compliance to the OFFICIAL NARRATIVE, pushed and promoted, in concert, by all of the above institutions.
Furthermore, by embracing one act of submission, gradually and progressively leading to a meek and groveling submission to every other demand, policy, or edict, regardless of how such violates federal rights, state rights, or individual human rights. Regardless of how suspicious, confusing, contradictory, or deceptive and otherwise misleading all such policies, suggestions, edicts, and any other kind of state-sponsored or corporate-sponsored tyranny that is served up with patronizing tones of how submission to it all is "For the Greater Good!".
It is all designed and intended to psychologically and socially condition the population into absolute obedience and submission, and an avoidance or refusal to question or challenge the Official Narrative in any way. Questioning the Official Narrative leads to public denouncements and cancellation, firing, de-platforming, and other isolation techniques promoted by the government, or corporations. Anyone questioning the Official Narrative must be, and will be, punished.
There can be no alternative explanations, inquiries, or research allowed that questions, countermands, or contradicts any aspect of the Official Narrative.
And of course, there are millions of drooling, blind sheep out there that support all of these policies and stances promoted by the government and the various agencies, and few of them recognize the inherent traits and dynamics of tyranny and control being promoted against them! They are so thoroughly brainwashed and drooling morons--they become angry and enraged even, that anyone, anywhere, voices concerns, questions, or skepticism towards all of this bullshit. Anyone that doesn't bow down and embrace the Official Narrative must be a "Conspiracy Theorist". Recently, there are government officials suggesting that anyone that questions the Official Narrative should be considered as DOMESTIC TERRORISTS.
Yeah. There's nothing to be concerned about at all in any of this, right?
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Greetings!
Compliance to what?
Hmmm...
Compliance to Government Tyranny
Compliance to Eicts made by Health Agencies
Compliance to Pharmas
Compliance to Giant Corporations
Compliance to the Media
Compliance to the Academic "Authorities"
Compliance to the OFFICIAL NARRATIVE, pushed and promoted, in concert, by all of the above institutions.
Furthermore, by embracing one act of submission, gradually and progressively leading to a meek and groveling submission to every other demand, policy, or edict, regardless of how such violates federal rights, state rights, or individual human rights. Regardless of how suspicious, confusing, contradictory, or deceptive and otherwise misleading all such policies, suggestions, edicts, and any other kind of state-sponsored or corporate-sponsored tyranny that is served up with patronizing tones of how submission to it all is "For the Greater Good!".
It is all designed and intended to psychologically and socially condition the population into absolute obedience and submission, and an avoidance or refusal to question or challenge the Official Narrative in any way. Questioning the Official Narrative leads to public denouncements and cancellation, firing, de-platforming, and other isolation techniques promoted by the government, or corporations. Anyone questioning the Official Narrative must be, and will be, punished.
There can be no alternative explanations, inquiries, or research allowed that questions, countermands, or contradicts any aspect of the Official Narrative.
And of course, there are millions of drooling, blind sheep out there that support all of these policies and stances promoted by the government and the various agencies, and few of them recognize the inherent traits and dynamics of tyranny and control being promoted against them! They are so thoroughly brainwashed and drooling morons--they become angry and enraged even, that anyone, anywhere, voices concerns, questions, or skepticism towards all of this bullshit. Anyone that doesn't bow down and embrace the Official Narrative must be a "Conspiracy Theorist". Recently, there are government officials suggesting that anyone that questions the Official Narrative should be considered as DOMESTIC TERRORISTS.
Yeah. There's nothing to be concerned about at all in any of this, right?
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
This is my problem, you're just spaffing words at a wall here.
What I'm asking Kiero to do is to marry his theory with what a particular government has actually done. I'm looking at a divided ruling party led by a man who doesn't want to make any decisions until he is absolutely forced to. I need that to be married up to a conspiracy to control the British people. You're answer is a piece of nonsense.
Hey Kiero, got news for you. I eat crap, drink, and also smoke. Guess what!? I’m totally healthy. You know, good genes will be good genes. Please help us understand if your
strange Popeye flexs come from retardation, or Covid related sequels. Which one is it?
Compliance to what?
It's not my job to educate you. Isn't that what your side says about race and CRT?I'm not as knowledgeable...You could have stopped there and been equally as accurate.
I'm asking to be educated on the subject but you don't seem able.
Some things are done regularly to stay healthy, like dental cleanings... oh, wait...you're British. Never mind then.
I don't have regular injections of anything, thanks. Nor am I on any kind of regular medication. That's what being healthy is, you require no routine medical interventions.
The fact that you think visiting the hygienist is analogous to being injected with something tells me how little sense of proportion you have.
What I do regularly to stay healthy is exercise, every day. And not eat crap. I don't smoke and hardly ever drink alcohol.
Greetings!
Compliance to what?
Hmmm...
Compliance to Government Tyranny
Compliance to Eicts made by Health Agencies
Compliance to Pharmas
Compliance to Giant Corporations
Compliance to the Media
Compliance to the Academic "Authorities"
Compliance to the OFFICIAL NARRATIVE, pushed and promoted, in concert, by all of the above institutions.
Furthermore, by embracing one act of submission, gradually and progressively leading to a meek and groveling submission to every other demand, policy, or edict, regardless of how such violates federal rights, state rights, or individual human rights. Regardless of how suspicious, confusing, contradictory, or deceptive and otherwise misleading all such policies, suggestions, edicts, and any other kind of state-sponsored or corporate-sponsored tyranny that is served up with patronizing tones of how submission to it all is "For the Greater Good!".
It is all designed and intended to psychologically and socially condition the population into absolute obedience and submission, and an avoidance or refusal to question or challenge the Official Narrative in any way. Questioning the Official Narrative leads to public denouncements and cancellation, firing, de-platforming, and other isolation techniques promoted by the government, or corporations. Anyone questioning the Official Narrative must be, and will be, punished.
There can be no alternative explanations, inquiries, or research allowed that questions, countermands, or contradicts any aspect of the Official Narrative.
And of course, there are millions of drooling, blind sheep out there that support all of these policies and stances promoted by the government and the various agencies, and few of them recognize the inherent traits and dynamics of tyranny and control being promoted against them! They are so thoroughly brainwashed and drooling morons--they become angry and enraged even, that anyone, anywhere, voices concerns, questions, or skepticism towards all of this bullshit. Anyone that doesn't bow down and embrace the Official Narrative must be a "Conspiracy Theorist". Recently, there are government officials suggesting that anyone that questions the Official Narrative should be considered as DOMESTIC TERRORISTS.
Yeah. There's nothing to be concerned about at all in any of this, right?
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
You're just a parrot for the alt-right narrative with this though Shark. There isn't an ounce of independent thought in what you wrote. I could find a thousand clones of you on the Internet any day of the week, all dancing the same tune. You're a sheep complaining about sheep.
You're just a parrot for the alt-right narrative with this though Shark. There isn't an ounce of independent thought in what you wrote. I could find a thousand clones of you on the Internet any day of the week, all dancing the same tune. You're a sheep complaining about sheep.
(https://i.imgur.com/exFn7bP.png)
/believing the literal words out of people's mouths
"You're just a sheep!"
You sure do drink an awful lot of Kool Aid though.
You're just a parrot for the alt-right narrative with this though Shark. There isn't an ounce of independent thought in what you wrote. I could find a thousand clones of you on the Internet any day of the week, all dancing the same tune. You're a sheep complaining about sheep.
(https://i.imgur.com/exFn7bP.png)
/believing the literal words out of people's mouths
"You're just a sheep!"
You're just a parrot for the alt-right narrative with this though Shark. There isn't an ounce of independent thought in what you wrote. I could find a thousand clones of you on the Internet any day of the week, all dancing the same tune. You're a sheep complaining about sheep.
(https://i.imgur.com/exFn7bP.png)
/believing the literal words out of people's mouths
"You're just a sheep!"
Greetings!
*LAUGHING*
Exactly, Zelen! Brilliant!
Geesus, everything I cited has been inspired and informed by actual statements, policies, edicts, made by officials of the federal government; various state governors--hello, Governor Cuomo (NY) and Governor Newsome (CA); numerous statements and behavior by city mayors and city-council members; the assorted media talking heads and "respected journalists"; various "Medical Experts"--yeah, like Doctor Fauci!; and policies an statements made by corporate CEO's and other company representatives.
It is in the news, every day, every fucking week.
I haven't made anything up. It's all based on what these various sources and authorities have actually said and done.
But somehow, I and anyone that agrees with what I wrote is a sheep?
Fucking amazing.
Great find, too, Zelen! It is shocking what these jackasses and petty tyrants actually believe. But there are lots of sheep that don't want to believe that these people actually say things like that--or they rationalize it, deluding themselves and others, "Well, even if they really did say something awful like that, they didn't mean it the way you think they did!"
Yeah. Lots of sheep in our society are so fucking eager to bend the knee and to be slaves. They resent anyone that resists. Just like I mentioned in an earlier post, as soon as you make some kind of stand--out come the admonitions of you being "ALT RIGHT!" or a "Conspiracy Theorist!" or...as one of our own federal officials in a note sent to the FBI, he described US citizens that oppose Mask Mandates and Vaccines are "Domestic Terrorists". Yeah, I forgot who it was exactly, but it actually happened.
There are so many people in this country that are yearning to be slaves. Likewise, there are certainly also quite a number of people that have a superiority and elitist complex, and see themselves as the rightful "masters" to rule over the unwashed masses. Those scum *love* tyranny and power, and eagerly grasp at seizing more of it for themselves at every opportunity.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
You're a sheep Shark. You watch a bubble of information which justifies your world view, and then you parrot back the bullshit you see like it's absolute fact and like there are no counter-facts which would cause anyone to doubt your position (just like this Tweet - from a Sanders supporter I believe, IE an actual fucing socialist, who matches your biases on this topic). It's just you spewing the same shit everyone else on the alt-right thinks about these topics. You have not expressed any single doubt about any hardline view on these topics in years now - it's just repetition of what others told you to think about those topics. And then you claim you're an independent thinker because you counter Government bullshit which is also parroting. As if your parroting is somehow superior to their parroting. As if you never once stepping outside your narrative is "better" then them never once stepping outside their narrative, as you both fail to realize you're just two sides of the same coin.You were saying I'd changed, but that was just projection, wasn't it? It's you who has changed. You no longer address facts or data, you just cast aspersions.
If you were the free thinker you purport to be, you're first questions would have been "is this valid information" and not "this matches my bias so I will praise it without questioning it." You no longer question shit which matches your world view, and you assume everything which doesn't match your world view must be lies. You're a sheep. Or, more akin to a robot. We could program a bot to predict how you'd approach pretty much any political topic these days, because you don't ever question your world view anymore.
You're a sheep Shark. You watch a bubble of information which justifies your world view, and then you parrot back the bullshit you see like it's absolute fact and like there are no counter-facts which would cause anyone to doubt your position (just like this Tweet - from a Sanders supporter I believe, IE an actual fucing socialist, who matches your biases on this topic). It's just you spewing the same shit everyone else on the alt-right thinks about these topics. You have not expressed any single doubt about any hardline view on these topics in years now - it's just repetition of what others told you to think about those topics. And then you claim you're an independent thinker because you counter Government bullshit which is also parroting. As if your parroting is somehow superior to their parroting. As if you never once stepping outside your narrative is "better" then them never once stepping outside their narrative, as you both fail to realize you're just two sides of the same coin.You were saying I'd changed, but that was just projection, wasn't it? It's you who has changed. You no longer address facts or data, you just cast aspersions.
If you were the free thinker you purport to be, you're first questions would have been "is this valid information" and not "this matches my bias so I will praise it without questioning it." You no longer question shit which matches your world view, and you assume everything which doesn't match your world view must be lies. You're a sheep. Or, more akin to a robot. We could program a bot to predict how you'd approach pretty much any political topic these days, because you don't ever question your world view anymore.
You're a sheep Shark. You watch a bubble of information which justifies your world view, and then you parrot back the bullshit you see like it's absolute fact and like there are no counter-facts which would cause anyone to doubt your position (just like this Tweet - from a Sanders supporter I believe, IE an actual fucing socialist, who matches your biases on this topic). It's just you spewing the same shit everyone else on the alt-right thinks about these topics. You have not expressed any single doubt about any hardline view on these topics in years now - it's just repetition of what others told you to think about those topics. And then you claim you're an independent thinker because you counter Government bullshit which is also parroting. As if your parroting is somehow superior to their parroting. As if you never once stepping outside your narrative is "better" then them never once stepping outside their narrative, as you both fail to realize you're just two sides of the same coin.You were saying I'd changed, but that was just projection, wasn't it? It's you who has changed. You no longer address facts or data, you just cast aspersions.
If you were the free thinker you purport to be, you're first questions would have been "is this valid information" and not "this matches my bias so I will praise it without questioning it." You no longer question shit which matches your world view, and you assume everything which doesn't match your world view must be lies. You're a sheep. Or, more akin to a robot. We could program a bot to predict how you'd approach pretty much any political topic these days, because you don't ever question your world view anymore.
I knew you'd hear me on that one about you changing. Or, more likely, the fact multiple unrelated people independently mentioned it to you got to you. Which is good. At least you're listening.
I am of course addressing facts. I like Shark. I've known Shark for many, many years online. I know Shark will listen to my observation (though he won't agree with it) because there is some level of mutual respect there. You don't need to speak for Shark on this - he will do it just fine himself.
I'm not speaking to Shark. I'm speaking to you. You've changed.You're a sheep Shark. You watch a bubble of information which justifies your world view, and then you parrot back the bullshit you see like it's absolute fact and like there are no counter-facts which would cause anyone to doubt your position (just like this Tweet - from a Sanders supporter I believe, IE an actual fucing socialist, who matches your biases on this topic). It's just you spewing the same shit everyone else on the alt-right thinks about these topics. You have not expressed any single doubt about any hardline view on these topics in years now - it's just repetition of what others told you to think about those topics. And then you claim you're an independent thinker because you counter Government bullshit which is also parroting. As if your parroting is somehow superior to their parroting. As if you never once stepping outside your narrative is "better" then them never once stepping outside their narrative, as you both fail to realize you're just two sides of the same coin.You were saying I'd changed, but that was just projection, wasn't it? It's you who has changed. You no longer address facts or data, you just cast aspersions.
If you were the free thinker you purport to be, you're first questions would have been "is this valid information" and not "this matches my bias so I will praise it without questioning it." You no longer question shit which matches your world view, and you assume everything which doesn't match your world view must be lies. You're a sheep. Or, more akin to a robot. We could program a bot to predict how you'd approach pretty much any political topic these days, because you don't ever question your world view anymore.
I knew you'd hear me on that one about you changing. Or, more likely, the fact multiple unrelated people independently mentioned it to you got to you. Which is good. At least you're listening.
I am of course addressing facts. I like Shark. I've known Shark for many, many years online. I know Shark will listen to my observation (though he won't agree with it) because there is some level of mutual respect there. You don't need to speak for Shark on this - he will do it just fine himself.
Did you not see all the videos of Pelosi, Gov. Newsome, Beetlejuice Girl from Chicago, amongst other LIBERAL OFFICIALS attending restaurants and parties and other shit, all while IGNORING MASKS? While they laughed and fucked and played grab-ass? You missed all of that?I don't think that really says anything about what they really believe, about the effectiveness of masks. I think what it really shows it how inconvenient it is to wear a mask all the time, how it impedes social interaction, and that people aren't automatons who perfectly follow arbitrary procedures, and at least not without a shitload of practice and reinforcement.
That doesn't make you question these people's integrity? Their own truthfulness? That doesn't make you wonder, hmm...if this virus was REALLY a threat, would anyone be acting like that?
Did you not see all the videos of Pelosi, Gov. Newsome, Beetlejuice Girl from Chicago, amongst other LIBERAL OFFICIALS attending restaurants and parties and other shit, all while IGNORING MASKS? While they laughed and fucked and played grab-ass? You missed all of that?I don't think that really says anything about what they really believe, about the effectiveness of masks. I think what it really shows it how inconvenient it is to wear a mask all the time, how it impedes social interaction, and that people aren't automatons who perfectly follow arbitrary procedures, and at least not without a shitload of practice and reinforcement.
That doesn't make you question these people's integrity? Their own truthfulness? That doesn't make you wonder, hmm...if this virus was REALLY a threat, would anyone be acting like that?
If it's awkward, or you're distracted, it easy to forget; or to recognize you should put it on, but... maybe a little later. But then you get to talking and secondary things blur as the conversation and the people take all your attention, and suddenly half the night's over. These are the sort of little excuses we all make. Like all the people who know perfectly well that they're supposed to stop at a stop sign, but if there's no one around, they roll right through. Same kind of thing. That kind of behavior is perfectly understandable.
Those examples are all despicable, but it's not for those reasons. They're not despicable because they fail to perfectly follow all the rules. That's just being human. And it's not even because they're the ones who made the rules. Because somebody has to make the rules.
The reason they're despicable is because they're violating one of the most basic principles of human fairness. If we all have to follow some stupid rule, that's fine. And if we slip, whether we're the rulemakers or not, that's understandable. What isn't understandable, and what makes these situations seem so egregiously unfair, is the rules for thee but not for me mentality. They're willing to enforce the rules to the fullest extent for anyone else, but brush it off as nothing when they violate the rules themselves. That's what triggers the sense of outrage. Either everyone should get the same slack, or everyone should be treated equally harshly. One standard. When those who make the rules are exempt, it's a gross violation of our most basic sense of justice.
Yeah, "Rules for thee, but not for me!" is right, Pat. And it is despicable and an injustice.It's not new. Remember when the ACA as being passed, and Nancy Pelosi got up and almost spit out "free riders" as an epithet to describe all the people who couldn't afford insurance, implying they were these horrible leeches who were hurting good people like her? And then, when someone suggested that Congress should lead the way by requiring all members get insurance for themselves and their families on the ACA's exchanges, Pelosi shut it down so hard it didn't even make it to committee? Because damn, she didn't want to give up her gold-plated solid platinum studded with diamonds healthcare plan, did she?
Yeah, "Rules for thee, but not for me!" is right, Pat. And it is despicable and an injustice.
What I do regularly to stay healthy is exercise, every day. And not eat crap. I don't smoke and hardly ever drink alcohol.
Now I pity you. You can do everything right and still get hit by a bus. Nobody lives forever. Have some fun. Remembers, it's the journey not the destination. We're all going to the same place, but don't hurry!
Oh...winning like Charlie Sheen?Now I pity you. You can do everything right and still get hit by a bus. Nobody lives forever. Have some fun. Remembers, it's the journey not the destination. We're all going to the same place, but don't hurry!
Every moment before I get hit by that metaphorical bus is spent in peak health, which is a boon all of it's own. I never wake up feeling like shite for no apparent reason, as seems to be common with people my age. I don't have any lingering injuries or age-related degeneration. I look much younger than I am. That's winning.
Or as I like to put it, 'Getting old sucks but it beats the hell out of the alternative' :)Now I pity you. You can do everything right and still get hit by a bus. Nobody lives forever. Have some fun. Remembers, it's the journey not the destination. We're all going to the same place, but don't hurry!
Every moment before I get hit by that metaphorical bus is spent in peak health, which is a boon all of it's own. I never wake up feeling like shite for no apparent reason, as seems to be common with people my age. I don't have any lingering injuries or age-related degeneration. I look much younger than I am. That's winning.
Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635)
(https://imageproxy.ifunny.co/crop:x-20,resize:640x,quality:90x75/images/eb0b608f2a0a93927e99ce2c651544ace9c56a46024f9e2c5fc9d0c310b86ad9_1.jpg)
It's not my job to educate you. Isn't that what your side says about race and CRT?I'm not as knowledgeable...You could have stopped there and been equally as accurate.
I'm asking to be educated on the subject but you don't seem able.
It's not my job to educate you. Isn't that what your side says about race and CRT?I'm not as knowledgeable...You could have stopped there and been equally as accurate.
I'm asking to be educated on the subject but you don't seem able.
My side? I didn't realise the virus had a political affiliation.
This interests me. Why is there sides in this discussion that are in some sort of Venn diagram with something like identity politics? Kiero rages against a government who pushed through a Brexit agenda he whole heartedly agrees with, lockdowns tend to have a worse effect on impoverished black communities and there doesn't seem to be any particular affiliation for any governments reaction, Australia and New Zealand both went for big lockdowns despite having radically different ruling parties.
Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635)I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
(https://imageproxy.ifunny.co/crop:x-20,resize:640x,quality:90x75/images/eb0b608f2a0a93927e99ce2c651544ace9c56a46024f9e2c5fc9d0c310b86ad9_1.jpg)
It's not my job to educate you. Isn't that what your side says about race and CRT?I'm not as knowledgeable...You could have stopped there and been equally as accurate.
I'm asking to be educated on the subject but you don't seem able.
My side? I didn't realise the virus had a political affiliation.
This interests me. Why is there sides in this discussion that are in some sort of Venn diagram with something like identity politics? Kiero rages against a government who pushed through a Brexit agenda he whole heartedly agrees with, lockdowns tend to have a worse effect on impoverished black communities and there doesn't seem to be any particular affiliation for any governments reaction, Australia and New Zealand both went for big lockdowns despite having radically different ruling parties.
Bahaha, they didn't "push through" shit. We haven't left the EU, we're still paying them and still following their laws. So give me a break.
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635)I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
(https://imageproxy.ifunny.co/crop:x-20,resize:640x,quality:90x75/images/eb0b608f2a0a93927e99ce2c651544ace9c56a46024f9e2c5fc9d0c310b86ad9_1.jpg)
So they will soon be jabbing 5 yr-olds. Why?
Vaccinated people carry the same viral load with respect to transmission, which is the reason for mask mandates for vaccinated people. So vaccinating 5 yr-olds isn't going to reduce transmission rates. And it can't be due to their chance of death from covid (in the US, 0-17 year-old deaths from covid are 558).
So why?
My apologies for making assumptions about your mental health. Physically you're fabulous of course so you have that.
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635)I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
(https://imageproxy.ifunny.co/crop:x-20,resize:640x,quality:90x75/images/eb0b608f2a0a93927e99ce2c651544ace9c56a46024f9e2c5fc9d0c310b86ad9_1.jpg)
Thacker P D. Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial BMJ 2021; 375 :n2635 doi:10.1136/bmj.n2635
https://nypost.com/2021/11/04/bidens-private-business-vaccine-mandate-begins-jan-4/
"But no one will force you to take the vaccine!"
My consolation is that the lawsuits are probably hitting right about now, followed by the injunctions and restraining orders blocking enforcement of this shit.
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635)I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
(https://imageproxy.ifunny.co/crop:x-20,resize:640x,quality:90x75/images/eb0b608f2a0a93927e99ce2c651544ace9c56a46024f9e2c5fc9d0c310b86ad9_1.jpg)
Thacker P D. Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial BMJ 2021; 375 :n2635 doi:10.1136/bmj.n2635
So at ONE of their several sub-contractors, the allegation is " some paperwork may have been left out in the open, potentially unblinding some of the participants. Among her other concerns: Participants were not properly monitored by clinical staff after their injections, vaccines not being stored at the right temperature and mislabeling of specimens." They're investigating the claims, but the claims are not alleged to have been present at any of the other subcontractors.
My apologies for making assumptions about your mental health. Physically you're fabulous of course so you have that.
U ok hun? You do an awful lot of projection about other people's mental health.
Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635)I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
(https://imageproxy.ifunny.co/crop:x-20,resize:640x,quality:90x75/images/eb0b608f2a0a93927e99ce2c651544ace9c56a46024f9e2c5fc9d0c310b86ad9_1.jpg)
Thacker P D. Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial BMJ 2021; 375 :n2635 doi:10.1136/bmj.n2635
So at ONE of their several sub-contractors, the allegation is " some paperwork may have been left out in the open, potentially unblinding some of the participants. Among her other concerns: Participants were not properly monitored by clinical staff after their injections, vaccines not being stored at the right temperature and mislabeling of specimens." They're investigating the claims, but the claims are not alleged to have been present at any of the other subcontractors.
Yes. And typing all that out nicely emphasizes that even putting a dismissive spin on it makes it sound pretty bad.
Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Actually yes.
If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Actually yes.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635)I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
(https://imageproxy.ifunny.co/crop:x-20,resize:640x,quality:90x75/images/eb0b608f2a0a93927e99ce2c651544ace9c56a46024f9e2c5fc9d0c310b86ad9_1.jpg)
Thacker P D. Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial BMJ 2021; 375 :n2635 doi:10.1136/bmj.n2635
So at ONE of their several sub-contractors, the allegation is " some paperwork may have been left out in the open, potentially unblinding some of the participants. Among her other concerns: Participants were not properly monitored by clinical staff after their injections, vaccines not being stored at the right temperature and mislabeling of specimens." They're investigating the claims, but the claims are not alleged to have been present at any of the other subcontractors.
Yes. And typing all that out nicely emphasizes that even putting a dismissive spin on it makes it sound pretty bad.
LOL come on man that was a cut and paste. I didn't type anything out nicely or dismissively.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
The mandate for "large" 100+ employee companies was literally unveiled today, and in the exact same day the administration is already indicating that it will follow up with a mandate for smaller companies. The divide and conquer strategy is obvious.
Are you really this dense, or do you just really love licking ass of people who don't give a damn about you or anyone else?
No. It is a literal application of physical force.Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
The mandate for "large" 100+ employee companies was literally unveiled today, and in the exact same day the administration is already indicating that it will follow up with a mandate for smaller companies. The divide and conquer strategy is obvious.
Are you really this dense, or do you just really love licking ass of people who don't give a damn about you or anyone else?
Even if the mandate wasn't poised to cover all companies, it is a sophist argument.
Sure, nobody is physically forcing you to work, at either a 100+ or <100 employee company. But it is simply incorrect to ignore that for many people the end result of "you should just get a job at a small company" is great economic harm. So while not a literal application of physical force, it is coercion that will eventually result in physical force being used on you.
Some of the small companies are forced to mandate for employees. By virtue of "If you 3rd-subcontractors want to come onto our site, you have to abide by Megacorp Inc. rules".
There's only so many of X type jobs, in this case construction engineering, so you make your choice. Vax, or skip contracts.Some of the small companies are forced to mandate for employees. By virtue of "If you 3rd-subcontractors want to come onto our site, you have to abide by Megacorp Inc. rules".
But nobody is forcing any small companes to work for any Megacorp Inc. Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
There's only so many of X type jobs, in this case construction engineering, so you make your choice. Vax, or skip contracts.Some of the small companies are forced to mandate for employees. By virtue of "If you 3rd-subcontractors want to come onto our site, you have to abide by Megacorp Inc. rules".
But nobody is forcing any small companes to work for any Megacorp Inc. Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
Even if the mandate wasn't poised to cover all companies, it is a sophist argument.
Sure, nobody is physically forcing you to work, at either a 100+ or <100 employee company. But it is simply incorrect to ignore that for many people the end result of "you should just get a job at a small company" is great economic harm. So while not a literal application of physical force, it is coercion that will eventually result in physical force being used on you.
Exactly.
The writing is on the wall and it's clear that the goal is 100% compliance. To put it bluntly, if you're supporting this agenda, you are evil.
I thought only totalitarians called those that disagree with them "evil."Even if the mandate wasn't poised to cover all companies, it is a sophist argument.
Sure, nobody is physically forcing you to work, at either a 100+ or <100 employee company. But it is simply incorrect to ignore that for many people the end result of "you should just get a job at a small company" is great economic harm. So while not a literal application of physical force, it is coercion that will eventually result in physical force being used on you.
Exactly.
The writing is on the wall and it's clear that the goal is 100% compliance. To put it bluntly, if you're supporting this agenda, you are evil.
So all the people who called Nazis evil over the last 70 years are the real totalitarians?I thought only totalitarians called those that disagree with them "evil."Even if the mandate wasn't poised to cover all companies, it is a sophist argument.
Sure, nobody is physically forcing you to work, at either a 100+ or <100 employee company. But it is simply incorrect to ignore that for many people the end result of "you should just get a job at a small company" is great economic harm. So while not a literal application of physical force, it is coercion that will eventually result in physical force being used on you.
Exactly.
The writing is on the wall and it's clear that the goal is 100% compliance. To put it bluntly, if you're supporting this agenda, you are evil.
If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Actually yes.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
The mandate for "large" 100+ employee companies was literally unveiled today, and in the exact same day the administration is already indicating that it will follow up with a mandate for smaller companies. The divide and conquer strategy is obvious.
Are you really this dense, or do you just really love licking ass of people who don't give a damn about you or anyone else?
No. It is a literal application of physical force.Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
The mandate for "large" 100+ employee companies was literally unveiled today, and in the exact same day the administration is already indicating that it will follow up with a mandate for smaller companies. The divide and conquer strategy is obvious.
Are you really this dense, or do you just really love licking ass of people who don't give a damn about you or anyone else?
Even if the mandate wasn't poised to cover all companies, it is a sophist argument.
Sure, nobody is physically forcing you to work, at either a 100+ or <100 employee company. But it is simply incorrect to ignore that for many people the end result of "you should just get a job at a small company" is great economic harm. So while not a literal application of physical force, it is coercion that will eventually result in physical force being used on you.
The statists like to argue that "nobody's forcing you to do X", when it comes to government mandates. They start by saying it's just a rule, they're not kicking down anybody's door are they? Or not yours, at least. Then when you resist, they start to throw penalties your way. Fines, public censure, blacklists like no fly or barring various permissions and privileges, pressure on your employers or other institutions they claim are independent actors even though they're being coerced, and so on. They point out that all these other people going along, why don't you? And then if you keep resisting, they throw up their hands in a melodramatic and figurative way, sigh, and say that you were given all these chances to comply, so you're just being obstinate, and when they finally send armed cops to your door to drag you away, they weren't the aggressor, you were just being unreasonable. It was really your fault.
But that's a complete lie. The apologists and collaborators start with softer means like social and political pressure, try to mask it by indirection, and obfuscate it by trying to put the blame on the victims, but mandates are, simply and plainly, the threat of physical force. And because there is never 100% submission, they are always the application of physical force.
We should never forget, when we impose mandates, that we're inflicting a grave harm on real people. We're taking away their autonomy, their right to decide to what's best for themselves and their loved ones. That's why we should never do it lightly. We should never institute these kind of rules without exploring all other options first, without making them as constrained as narrow as possible, and ensuring they have a clear and quick end.
There's only so many of X type jobs, in this case construction engineering, so you make your choice. Vax, or skip contracts.Some of the small companies are forced to mandate for employees. By virtue of "If you 3rd-subcontractors want to come onto our site, you have to abide by Megacorp Inc. rules".
But nobody is forcing any small companes to work for any Megacorp Inc. Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Actually yes.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
You think requiring a vaccine or a covid test to work at larger corporations is the same as not being allowed to work somewhere or go to school somewhere or drink from the same water fountain as white people or ride on the same bus as white people or eat at the same restaurants as white people because of the color of your skin?
OH. OK. You're a fucking tool Pat. You finally crossed over to full retard. Welcome to Kiero Kountry, dumbass. Don't deny being batshit crazy anymore dude. Your "I'm a reasonable dude" card has been revoked.
Pointing out that government edicts are enforced is a conspiracy theory?No. It is a literal application of physical force.Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
The mandate for "large" 100+ employee companies was literally unveiled today, and in the exact same day the administration is already indicating that it will follow up with a mandate for smaller companies. The divide and conquer strategy is obvious.
Are you really this dense, or do you just really love licking ass of people who don't give a damn about you or anyone else?
Even if the mandate wasn't poised to cover all companies, it is a sophist argument.
Sure, nobody is physically forcing you to work, at either a 100+ or <100 employee company. But it is simply incorrect to ignore that for many people the end result of "you should just get a job at a small company" is great economic harm. So while not a literal application of physical force, it is coercion that will eventually result in physical force being used on you.
The statists like to argue that "nobody's forcing you to do X", when it comes to government mandates. They start by saying it's just a rule, they're not kicking down anybody's door are they? Or not yours, at least. Then when you resist, they start to throw penalties your way. Fines, public censure, blacklists like no fly or barring various permissions and privileges, pressure on your employers or other institutions they claim are independent actors even though they're being coerced, and so on. They point out that all these other people going along, why don't you? And then if you keep resisting, they throw up their hands in a melodramatic and figurative way, sigh, and say that you were given all these chances to comply, so you're just being obstinate, and when they finally send armed cops to your door to drag you away, they weren't the aggressor, you were just being unreasonable. It was really your fault.
But that's a complete lie. The apologists and collaborators start with softer means like social and political pressure, try to mask it by indirection, and obfuscate it by trying to put the blame on the victims, but mandates are, simply and plainly, the threat of physical force. And because there is never 100% submission, they are always the application of physical force.
We should never forget, when we impose mandates, that we're inflicting a grave harm on real people. We're taking away their autonomy, their right to decide to what's best for themselves and their loved ones. That's why we should never do it lightly. We should never institute these kind of rules without exploring all other options first, without making them as constrained as narrow as possible, and ensuring they have a clear and quick end.
Full. Blown. Conspiracy. Theorist. Nutter.
It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Actually yes.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
You think requiring a vaccine or a covid test to work at larger corporations is the same as not being allowed to work somewhere or go to school somewhere or drink from the same water fountain as white people or ride on the same bus as white people or eat at the same restaurants as white people because of the color of your skin?
OH. OK. You're a fucking tool Pat. You finally crossed over to full retard. Welcome to Kiero Kountry, dumbass. Don't deny being batshit crazy anymore dude. Your "I'm a reasonable dude" card has been revoked.
Lots of people are born with medical conditions that prevent them from getting the vaccine, and you'll notice that most of the mandates don't have medical exemptions. Other people have religious objections to taking vaccines made with stem cells. And others are hesitant about the long term side effects. And other people just don't like fascism.It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Actually yes.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
You think requiring a vaccine or a covid test to work at larger corporations is the same as not being allowed to work somewhere or go to school somewhere or drink from the same water fountain as white people or ride on the same bus as white people or eat at the same restaurants as white people because of the color of your skin?
OH. OK. You're a fucking tool Pat. You finally crossed over to full retard. Welcome to Kiero Kountry, dumbass. Don't deny being batshit crazy anymore dude. Your "I'm a reasonable dude" card has been revoked.
No. No it's fucking well not. Race is something you are born with. Getting a vaccine or getting tested once a week by spitting in a tube is a choice, not something that is a factor of birth. They are not "closest equivalent" at all. Only people who have gone right off the deep end would equate those two disparate situations.
Pointing out that government edicts are enforced is a conspiracy theory?No. It is a literal application of physical force.Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
The mandate for "large" 100+ employee companies was literally unveiled today, and in the exact same day the administration is already indicating that it will follow up with a mandate for smaller companies. The divide and conquer strategy is obvious.
Are you really this dense, or do you just really love licking ass of people who don't give a damn about you or anyone else?
Even if the mandate wasn't poised to cover all companies, it is a sophist argument.
Sure, nobody is physically forcing you to work, at either a 100+ or <100 employee company. But it is simply incorrect to ignore that for many people the end result of "you should just get a job at a small company" is great economic harm. So while not a literal application of physical force, it is coercion that will eventually result in physical force being used on you.
The statists like to argue that "nobody's forcing you to do X", when it comes to government mandates. They start by saying it's just a rule, they're not kicking down anybody's door are they? Or not yours, at least. Then when you resist, they start to throw penalties your way. Fines, public censure, blacklists like no fly or barring various permissions and privileges, pressure on your employers or other institutions they claim are independent actors even though they're being coerced, and so on. They point out that all these other people going along, why don't you? And then if you keep resisting, they throw up their hands in a melodramatic and figurative way, sigh, and say that you were given all these chances to comply, so you're just being obstinate, and when they finally send armed cops to your door to drag you away, they weren't the aggressor, you were just being unreasonable. It was really your fault.
But that's a complete lie. The apologists and collaborators start with softer means like social and political pressure, try to mask it by indirection, and obfuscate it by trying to put the blame on the victims, but mandates are, simply and plainly, the threat of physical force. And because there is never 100% submission, they are always the application of physical force.
We should never forget, when we impose mandates, that we're inflicting a grave harm on real people. We're taking away their autonomy, their right to decide to what's best for themselves and their loved ones. That's why we should never do it lightly. We should never institute these kind of rules without exploring all other options first, without making them as constrained as narrow as possible, and ensuring they have a clear and quick end.
Full. Blown. Conspiracy. Theorist. Nutter.
manwut
That's not an argument, that's just Mistwell screeching because of hurt fee fees.Pointing out that government edicts are enforced is a conspiracy theory?No. It is a literal application of physical force.Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
The mandate for "large" 100+ employee companies was literally unveiled today, and in the exact same day the administration is already indicating that it will follow up with a mandate for smaller companies. The divide and conquer strategy is obvious.
Are you really this dense, or do you just really love licking ass of people who don't give a damn about you or anyone else?
Even if the mandate wasn't poised to cover all companies, it is a sophist argument.
Sure, nobody is physically forcing you to work, at either a 100+ or <100 employee company. But it is simply incorrect to ignore that for many people the end result of "you should just get a job at a small company" is great economic harm. So while not a literal application of physical force, it is coercion that will eventually result in physical force being used on you.
The statists like to argue that "nobody's forcing you to do X", when it comes to government mandates. They start by saying it's just a rule, they're not kicking down anybody's door are they? Or not yours, at least. Then when you resist, they start to throw penalties your way. Fines, public censure, blacklists like no fly or barring various permissions and privileges, pressure on your employers or other institutions they claim are independent actors even though they're being coerced, and so on. They point out that all these other people going along, why don't you? And then if you keep resisting, they throw up their hands in a melodramatic and figurative way, sigh, and say that you were given all these chances to comply, so you're just being obstinate, and when they finally send armed cops to your door to drag you away, they weren't the aggressor, you were just being unreasonable. It was really your fault.
But that's a complete lie. The apologists and collaborators start with softer means like social and political pressure, try to mask it by indirection, and obfuscate it by trying to put the blame on the victims, but mandates are, simply and plainly, the threat of physical force. And because there is never 100% submission, they are always the application of physical force.
We should never forget, when we impose mandates, that we're inflicting a grave harm on real people. We're taking away their autonomy, their right to decide to what's best for themselves and their loved ones. That's why we should never do it lightly. We should never institute these kind of rules without exploring all other options first, without making them as constrained as narrow as possible, and ensuring they have a clear and quick end.
Full. Blown. Conspiracy. Theorist. Nutter.
manwut
I often wonder how a person that does not like to argue manages to get into so many arguments.
But probably just bad luck.
Greetings!
I was talking with some friends of mine yesterday about all of this Covid bullshit, and the tyranny all around our society. Advocates and apologists for the Junta claim "The Virus isn't political!"
Right. It shouldn't be. That means it isn't the fucking government's business toknow or ask whether or not I have been vaccinated. Likewise, it isn't any company's business of whether or not I have gotten vaccinated. The mandates themselves are fucking tyrannical. Period. Go get fucked.
When was the last time anyone in the government or an employer asked me if I was vaccinated for the Flu, for Pnuemonia, for whatever? Right. Never. If YOU want to get vaccinated, good for YOU. That choice is between YOU and your DOCTOR--and NO ONE ELSE. It's no one else's business, and I think it is horribly insulting, rude, and monstrous for anyone to even ask such a thing, let alone *expect me to answer*
Certainly not to expected from relative strangers--the government, people at work, or simply others in society. Obviously, your friends and family might inquire, and that's always been fine.
This whole thing of get vaccinated or get fired? WTF is wrong with you people? You don't see how that is tyrannical and evil? Get vaccinated, or get tested every week! That isn't tyrannical, invasive, and evil? And oppressive?
Like Pat described the costs involved. Fuck you tyrant loving people. The goddamn wormy, apologists, the bootlickers, the fucking Grima Wormtongues.
Ben Shapiro--who, by the way, has gotten vaccinated, as well as his wife, and his parents, generally thinks that getting vaccinated is a good idea. However, he thinks government and company-sponsored manadates is fucking TYRANNY. He also agrees with me. Getting vaccinated should be a individual, personal choice, and is no one else's business, and regardless of what kind of choice YOU choice, their should be no stigma, punishment, or coercion involved.
People are dying because of mandates and masks. MORE are going to be killed. Or beaten. More blood and more pain. You don't like that? SHUT YOUR FUCKING MOUTH. NO VACCINE MANDATES. NO MASK MANDATES. Just think, if all the Grima Wormtongue just dropped the issue entirely, all of the blood and pain and screaming, and fighting, and rage would stop. All of this would be taken out of the public sphere, and returned firmly to the PRIVATE sphere, where it belongs. Yes, people would still die from Covid. So what? People die from the Flu and Pneumonia every year too. That is part of life. Old, sick, weak people die regularly. None of this should be a public crisis. It is fucking lodged into the public sphere because fucking tyrants want POWER. And compliance, and fucking submission.
When Covid has a 98% or 99%survival rate, all of this crisis and mandate bullshit really comes off as absolutely ridiculous. Keep enforcing it, and more people are simply going to crush your fucking had in with a lead pipe or shoot you to death. Over and over and over. More people dying. How does that make sense? If you are worried abut fucking Covid, why don't you just shut up about it and let people deal with it the way they want?
All of this strife, fighting, and division is entirely avoidable and also entirely manufactured. It has been manufactured by the government, by corporations, by Health Agencies, by the Media, and by academics.
This whole fucking tyranny is bullshit and evil. Over a fucking virus that has a 98% or higher survival rate.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
That's not an argument, that's just Mistwell screeching because of hurt fee fees.Mistwell has bought into the bullshit wholecloth, and is going to feel like an utter tool when he finally realises he's been conned into ruining his immune system for no reason.
Even if the vaccine is not dangerous, the precedent set by this bullshit is VERY dangerous.That's not an argument, that's just Mistwell screeching because of hurt fee fees.Mistwell has bought into the bullshit wholecloth, and is going to feel like an utter tool when he finally realises he's been conned into ruining his immune system for no reason.
Even if the vaccine is not dangerous, the precedent set by this bullshit is VERY dangerous.That's not an argument, that's just Mistwell screeching because of hurt fee fees.Mistwell has bought into the bullshit wholecloth, and is going to feel like an utter tool when he finally realises he's been conned into ruining his immune system for no reason.
'My body, my choice'? Dead.
Someone elsewhere pointed out that the whole mandate not only contradicted part of the original OSHA regs, but it also horrendously contradicts Roe vs Wade. Hence my comments about killing 'my body, my choice'.Even if the vaccine is not dangerous, the precedent set by this bullshit is VERY dangerous.That's not an argument, that's just Mistwell screeching because of hurt fee fees.Mistwell has bought into the bullshit wholecloth, and is going to feel like an utter tool when he finally realises he's been conned into ruining his immune system for no reason.
'My body, my choice'? Dead.
We have way too many activists in government doing things allegedly on behalf of and in support of people who don't want or need their help.
When the people who just want to be left alone (many of whom are combat vets who are intimately familiar with killing) reach their breaking point, there will be rivers of blood and bodies stacked like cordwood. We already saw the Kenosha hat trick - and that was an untrained teen. Those mobs of antifa and their ilk would be destroyed against an organized and motivated group - and government won't stand a chance. Bureaucratic activists would be cowering like rats in a hole.
You tell an army of guys who drive a forklift on double shifts that they have to get an unneeded vaccine or worse, that their zero risk kids need to. Go ahead. We're already seeing strikes, walkouts, and lawsuits. Ayn Rand wasn't correct - John Galt won't be business owners, it'll be the core of their companies.
... disintegrate existing government and start over...
So what's it gonna be, leftards and Branch Covidians? Mandate, or abortions? I look forward to this Sophie's Choice.
Lots of people are born with medical conditions that prevent them from getting the vaccine, and you'll notice that most of the mandates don't have medical exemptions. Other people have religious objections to taking vaccines made with stem cells. And others are hesitant about the long term side effects. And other people just don't like fascism.It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Actually yes.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
You think requiring a vaccine or a covid test to work at larger corporations is the same as not being allowed to work somewhere or go to school somewhere or drink from the same water fountain as white people or ride on the same bus as white people or eat at the same restaurants as white people because of the color of your skin?
OH. OK. You're a fucking tool Pat. You finally crossed over to full retard. Welcome to Kiero Kountry, dumbass. Don't deny being batshit crazy anymore dude. Your "I'm a reasonable dude" card has been revoked.
No. No it's fucking well not. Race is something you are born with. Getting a vaccine or getting tested once a week by spitting in a tube is a choice, not something that is a factor of birth. They are not "closest equivalent" at all. Only people who have gone right off the deep end would equate those two disparate situations.
I never understood it before, because it seemed so far removed. But this is how fascism spreads, by the quisling self-justifying sophistries of people like you, who take the knee and then try to convince themselves they're being moral.
And it's not spitting in a tube. The PCR tests are an invasive nose swab. Last time I had one, it took over 2 hours waiting in line. That amounts to more than 2-1/2 full work weeks, a year. And the regressives are using twisted logic to argue that it's not mandatory because they could just take the jab, so anyone opting out has to pay for the tests themselves. Which run about $150/each, or $7800/year. Try to explain to a family working hand to mouth how that's not coercion.
Lots of people are born with medical conditions that prevent them from getting the vaccine, and you'll notice that most of the mandates don't have medical exemptions. Other people have religious objections to taking vaccines made with stem cells. And others are hesitant about the long term side effects. And other people just don't like fascism.It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Actually yes.
Who is forcing you to work for a specific larger company? Pretty sure that's a violation of the 13th amendment.
More than half the nations jobs are for small companies. You should get one of those.
You think requiring a vaccine or a covid test to work at larger corporations is the same as not being allowed to work somewhere or go to school somewhere or drink from the same water fountain as white people or ride on the same bus as white people or eat at the same restaurants as white people because of the color of your skin?
OH. OK. You're a fucking tool Pat. You finally crossed over to full retard. Welcome to Kiero Kountry, dumbass. Don't deny being batshit crazy anymore dude. Your "I'm a reasonable dude" card has been revoked.
No. No it's fucking well not. Race is something you are born with. Getting a vaccine or getting tested once a week by spitting in a tube is a choice, not something that is a factor of birth. They are not "closest equivalent" at all. Only people who have gone right off the deep end would equate those two disparate situations.
I never understood it before, because it seemed so far removed. But this is how fascism spreads, by the quisling self-justifying sophistries of people like you, who take the knee and then try to convince themselves they're being moral.
And it's not spitting in a tube. The PCR tests are an invasive nose swab. Last time I had one, it took over 2 hours waiting in line. That amounts to more than 2-1/2 full work weeks, a year. And the regressives are using twisted logic to argue that it's not mandatory because they could just take the jab, so anyone opting out has to pay for the tests themselves. Which run about $150/each, or $7800/year. Try to explain to a family working hand to mouth how that's not coercion.
No dude, it's spitting in a bottle these days for weekly tests. My kid has done it once a week every week since returning to school. So have all of her friends, even in other districts. So has one adult friend of mine working at a company that requires weekly tests. You're just spitting in a tube once a week as you enter. Takes about 30 seconds.
That is not equivalent to being born a certain race. Only a nutcase who cannot tell the difference between degrees of something would equate the two.
No dude, it's spitting in a bottle these days for weekly tests. My kid has done it once a week every week since returning to school. So have all of her friends, even in other districts. So has one adult friend of mine working at a company that requires weekly tests. You're just spitting in a tube once a week as you enter. Takes about 30 seconds.
That is not equivalent to being born a certain race. Only a nutcase who cannot tell the difference between degrees of something would equate the two.
That is not equivalent to being born a certain race. Only a nutcase who cannot tell the difference between degrees of something would equate the two.I defer to your expertise in being a nutcase.
(http://ace.mu.nu/archives/Screenshot%20(763).png)
https://twitter.com/CDCDirector/status/1456645731691925518
But no, it's not a cult, they won't ask us to wear masks forever. Only to flatten the curve! You don't want to kill grandma, do you?
Where is her citation to the source for the 80% number?
The Checkmark is Truth! The Checkmark is Power!Where is her citation to the source for the 80% number?
We don't need evidence, Comrade, just believe!
All Cause Mortality | Deaths among Injected | Deaths among Uninjected |
Falsified Data | 15 | 14 |
Actual Data | 21 | 17 |
Interesting news from the AP....
https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-pandemics-united-nations-fcf28a83c9352a67e50aa2172eb01a2f (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-pandemics-united-nations-fcf28a83c9352a67e50aa2172eb01a2f)
I am shocked that somebody has largely avoided the worst of the Covid-19 pandemic....
We should have some science and medical experts weigh in on this...
Has anybody seen Dr. Fauci offer an opinion yet?
;D ;D ;D
Interesting news from the AP....
https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-pandemics-united-nations-fcf28a83c9352a67e50aa2172eb01a2f (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-pandemics-united-nations-fcf28a83c9352a67e50aa2172eb01a2f)
I am shocked that somebody has largely avoided the worst of the Covid-19 pandemic....
We should have some science and medical experts weigh in on this...
Has anybody seen Dr. Fauci offer an opinion yet?
;D ;D ;D
Could it possibly be a combination of a young population (not enough 80-somethings to be bumped off), bountiful and free vitamin D (ie sunshine) and the fact that their immune systems are used to dealing with much nastier bugs than the sniffles?
Plus they haven't fucked their immune systems with a massive rollout of an experimental mRNA therapy.
Interesting news from the AP....
https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-pandemics-united-nations-fcf28a83c9352a67e50aa2172eb01a2f (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-pandemics-united-nations-fcf28a83c9352a67e50aa2172eb01a2f)
I am shocked that somebody has largely avoided the worst of the Covid-19 pandemic....
We should have some science and medical experts weigh in on this...
Has anybody seen Dr. Fauci offer an opinion yet?
;D ;D ;D
Could it possibly be a combination of a young population (not enough 80-somethings to be bumped off), bountiful and free vitamin D (ie sunshine) and the fact that their immune systems are used to dealing with much nastier bugs than the sniffles?
Plus they haven't fucked their immune systems with a massive rollout of an experimental mRNA therapy.
Death rates for the under 60s by vaccination status in the UK, according to official government statistics:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEqLmjNXEAMloim?format=jpg&name=medium)
Note that's with them artifically boosting the "unvaccinated" grouping by excluding people who are less than 14 days post-jab. So people who died shortly after their jabs are called "unvaccinated".
Interesting. I believe that in the US it is unvaccinated people that are the majority of deaths (and hospitalizations).
Most certainly not a univariate problem.
It's not a function of vaccination percent its a function of how long since the 2nd jab. Hence the big push for boosters. The developed world has been placed on a subscription-based immune system.
It's not a function of vaccination percent its a function of how long since the 2nd jab. Hence the big push for boosters. The developed world has been placed on a subscription-based immune system.The deepest irony imaginable: our health and immune system is now based on microtransactions.
The deepest irony imaginable: our health and immune system is now based on microtransactions.
Death rates for the under 60s by vaccination status in the UK, according to official government statistics:It's possible that those who choose to be unvaxxed are younger and healthier.
--snip--
Note that's with them artifically boosting the "unvaccinated" grouping by excluding people who are less than 14 days post-jab. So people who died shortly after their jabs are called "unvaccinated".
Masks don't stop covid; masks do stop covid; 14-day lockdown to flatten the curve, wear two masks, vax or mask; and now...gain of function is completely meaningless term
https://gazette.com/news/fauci-claims-gain-of-function-is-completely-meaningless-term-as-he-defends-nih-actions/article_b6e579d5-1633-51d6-b56a-95f38ab98993.html
Is it any wonder that many people wouldn't believe St. Fauci if he said the sun rose in the east.
You'd think the "Progressives" wouldn't have sided with the man who was directly responsible for the death of so many LGBTQ, sexual deviants, and drug addicts.
You'd think the "Progressives" wouldn't have sided with the man who was directly responsible for the death of so many LGBTQ, sexual deviants, and drug addicts.
Likely plain ignorance on their part.
Combining these analyses, we found that an estimated 18.7 million life-years will be lost in the United States due to the COVID-19 lockdowns. Comparative data analysis between nations shows that the lockdowns in the United States likely had a minimal effect in saving life-years. Using two different comparison groups, we estimate that the COVID-19 lockdowns in the U.S. saved between a quarter to three quarters of a million life-years.
It is never going to end.Nah. They can use strings of Greek letters next and make variants that sound like fraternities and sororities. Eventually, we'll see the Lambda Lambda Lambda variant.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-gov-kathy-hochul-state-of-emergency-omicron-variant
Or maybe they will cease after they run out of Greek letters. They only have 9 more to go.
It is never going to end.Nah. They can use strings of Greek letters next and make variants that sound like fraternities and sororities. Eventually, we'll see the Lambda Lambda Lambda variant.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-gov-kathy-hochul-state-of-emergency-omicron-variant
Or maybe they will cease after they run out of Greek letters. They only have 9 more to go.
Big bad Omicron is on the loose!The next wave of the virus will remake Megatron into Galvatron!
Our nationwide mask mandate is back on again, announced today. I'll be ignoring it as usual, still haven't worn one and don't own one.
I'll be out every single day, maskless, as is normal. I might taunt the muzzled drones in the shops by whistling as I go.
What's your solution to the pandemic, Kiero? Just let it rage?
What's your solution to the pandemic, Kiero? Just let it rage?
If there ever was a pandemic, it passed last summer. And yes, "let it rage", same as we have done every fucking year before 2020.
If you still believe there's an active outbreak going on that merits all this bullshit right now, you're tapped in the head.
I am in the "let it rage" camp for the young and healthy. If the old, those with co-morbidities, or anyone else wants to take the proffered therapeutic, go for it. And feel free to wear a mask (or two if St. Fauci style is your thing), N-95, or full-face respirator to your heart's content. Otherwise, stop stepping on my dick.
YMMV.
What's your solution to the pandemic, Kiero? Just let it rage?
If there ever was a pandemic, it passed last summer. And yes, "let it rage", same as we have done every fucking year before 2020.
If you still believe there's an active outbreak going on that merits all this bullshit right now, you're tapped in the head.
Just to be clear, "bullshit" means everything--vaccinations, social distancing, handwashing, masks, self-isolation, contact-tracing, testing--or does it mean just mask-wearing?
Just to be clear, "bullshit" means everything--vaccinations, social distancing, handwashing, masks, self-isolation, contact-tracing, testing--or does it mean just mask-wearing?
All of it. None of this charade, no part of it, was ever necessary for a seasonal bug less deadly than the flu to anyone under 65.
Real pandemics don't require a marketing budget. There's no reason we should be living any differently now than we did in 2019 and all the years before it.
Hmm. Do you eschew the regular influenza vaccine as well?
Our nationwide mask mandate is back on again, announced today. I'll be ignoring it as usual, still haven't worn one and don't own one.
I'll be out every single day, maskless, as is normal. I might taunt the muzzled drones in the shops by whistling as I go.
What's your solution to the pandemic, Kiero? Just let it rage?
Our nationwide mask mandate is back on again, announced today. I'll be ignoring it as usual, still haven't worn one and don't own one.
I'll be out every single day, maskless, as is normal. I might taunt the muzzled drones in the shops by whistling as I go.
What's your solution to the pandemic, Kiero? Just let it rage?
Has there been any solution to the pandemic, Neoplastonist1?
Lockdown has not worked.
Masks have not worked.
"Vaccines" have not worked.
Maybe it is time for 2 weeks of letting it rage to flatten the curve?
What's your solution to the pandemic, Kiero? Just let it rage?
If there ever was a pandemic, it passed last summer. And yes, "let it rage", same as we have done every fucking year before 2020.
If you still believe there's an active outbreak going on that merits all this bullshit right now, you're tapped in the head.
Just to be clear, "bullshit" means everything--vaccinations, social distancing, handwashing, masks, self-isolation, contact-tracing, testing--or does it mean just mask-wearing?
The one thing that would seriously hamper the virus's transmission rates would be stopping air travel. The virus doesn't have legs or wings, it only goes where humans go. Shutting down air travel would be the best way to stop the variants from spreading.The only measure that's worked in slowing the spread is locking down borders followed by aggressive contract tracing. But that only worked with island countries. It's not feasible for the rest of the world.
Lockdowns worked for parts of Australia, from what I've read, but, lockdowns appear to lose us more life-years than they save. https://www.revolver.news/2020/08/study-covid-19-lockdowns-deadlier-than-pandemic-itself/ (https://www.revolver.news/2020/08/study-covid-19-lockdowns-deadlier-than-pandemic-itself/)
Our nationwide mask mandate is back on again, announced today. I'll be ignoring it as usual, still haven't worn one and don't own one.
I'll be out every single day, maskless, as is normal. I might taunt the muzzled drones in the shops by whistling as I go.
What's your solution to the pandemic, Kiero? Just let it rage?
Has there been any solution to the pandemic, Neoplastonist1?
Lockdown has not worked.
Masks have not worked.
"Vaccines" have not worked.
Maybe it is time for 2 weeks of letting it rage to flatten the curve?
The one thing that would seriously hamper the virus's transmission rates would be stopping air travel. The virus doesn't have legs or wings, it only goes where humans go. Shutting down air travel would be the best way to stop the variants from spreading.
Lockdowns worked for parts of Australia, from what I've read, but, lockdowns appear to lose us more life-years than they save. https://www.revolver.news/2020/08/study-covid-19-lockdowns-deadlier-than-pandemic-itself/ (https://www.revolver.news/2020/08/study-covid-19-lockdowns-deadlier-than-pandemic-itself/)
By the way, good news. The new variant, Omicron or whatever it's called, may present with mild symptoms including so far no known loss of taste and smell. Most common symptoms with this strain appear to be rapid heart beat, a fever, both of which seem to go away in a few days.
By the way, good news. The new variant, Omicron or whatever it's called, may present with mild symptoms including so far no known loss of taste and smell. Most common symptoms with this strain appear to be rapid heart beat, a fever, both of which seem to go away in a few days.
Just don’t feel Omicron to be a catchy name for a variant. It’s not even scary. Assuming they’re saving Omega for the real deal.
So if you disagree with St. Fauci, the claim is that you are criticizing science:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rand-paul-blasts-fauci-astounding-alarming-represent-science
"...but they’re really criticizing science because I represent science."
By the way, good news. The new variant, Omicron or whatever it's called, may present with mild symptoms including so far no known loss of taste and smell. Most common symptoms with this strain appear to be rapid heart beat, a fever, both of which seem to go away in a few days.
It's the natural evolution of a virus to become more contagious, but less lethal. Just as Delta was less severe than Alpha, so Omicron is less severe again than Delta.
Even less reason to risk an adverse reaction with an experimental therapeutic treatment.
As for the "rapid heart beat" - bollocks. That's them trying to sweep the "mysterious" cardiac side effects of the jabs under the carpet.
By the way, good news. The new variant, Omicron or whatever it's called, may present with mild symptoms including so far no known loss of taste and smell. Most common symptoms with this strain appear to be rapid heart beat, a fever, both of which seem to go away in a few days.
It's the natural evolution of a virus to become more contagious, but less lethal. Just as Delta was less severe than Alpha, so Omicron is less severe again than Delta.
Even less reason to risk an adverse reaction with an experimental therapeutic treatment.
As for the "rapid heart beat" - bollocks. That's them trying to sweep the "mysterious" cardiac side effects of the jabs under the carpet.
Naw the rapid heart beat was detected in unvaccinated kids in South Africa. But you go on with your batshit conspiracy theories.
Perhaps those that are concerned with catching covid should get a prescription for a Bubblixa. If it can beat southern pollen, it will kick covid's ass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT2tpGQHfQY
Perhaps those that are concerned with catching covid should get a prescription for a Bubblixa. If it can beat southern pollen, it will kick covid's ass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT2tpGQHfQY
I didn't need anything more than paracetamol and ibuprofen last time.
Therefore everyone has a mild case, because you did.
Therefore everyone has a mild case, because you did.
Fatties, oldies and people with broken immune systems, don't, no.
Healthy people, nothing to concern themselves about.
And the sick (e.g. the sugar, the pressure, auto-immune conditions, cancer).
Variants will keep popping. Can’t call a lockdown, lockdown if only restaurants and barbershops get closed. The way Australia is handling things is likely the most effective way had it been adopted here since the very beginning. There’s no point in shutting anything down anymore.
Variants will keep popping. Can’t call a lockdown, lockdown if only restaurants and barbershops get closed. The way Australia is handling things is likely the most effective way had it been adopted here since the very beginning. There’s no point in shutting anything down anymore.Yeah, throwing the aborigines in camps is clearly the way to go.
Variants will keep popping. Can’t call a lockdown, lockdown if only restaurants and barbershops get closed. The way Australia is handling things is likely the most effective way had it been adopted here since the very beginning. There’s no point in shutting anything down anymore.
Variants will keep popping. Can’t call a lockdown, lockdown if only restaurants and barbershops get closed. The way Australia is handling things is likely the most effective way had it been adopted here since the very beginning. There’s no point in shutting anything down anymore.Yeah, throwing the aborigines in camps is clearly the way to go.
Fucking racist.
Tell us more about your hatred of the Australian natives.Variants will keep popping. Can’t call a lockdown, lockdown if only restaurants and barbershops get closed. The way Australia is handling things is likely the most effective way had it been adopted here since the very beginning. There’s no point in shutting anything down anymore.Yeah, throwing the aborigines in camps is clearly the way to go.
Fucking racist.
Must every point of view, whether left or right be met with this word? You can misconstrue any statement and spin, twist it into something favorable towards your ideology. I don’t understand it, does it make you feel better or something?
Variants will keep popping. Can’t call a lockdown, lockdown if only restaurants and barbershops get closed. The way Australia is handling things is likely the most effective way had it been adopted here since the very beginning. There’s no point in shutting anything down anymore.
Yes, the selective evolutionary pressure created by the jabs will spur ever more variants. Fortunately, they're getting milder even as they ignore the jabs limited "protection".
Australia is a dystopian nightmare, there's nothing of value to be learned there.
Must every point of view, whether left or right be met with this word? You can misconstrue any statement and spin, twist it into something favorable towards your ideology. I don’t understand it, does it make you feel better or something?
Au contraire mon ami. You can learn much from Australia, for example NEVER, EVER, surrender your guns, under no circumstance no matter what they tell you.
Must every point of view, whether left or right be met with this word? You can misconstrue any statement and spin, twist it into something favorable towards your ideology. I don’t understand it, does it make you feel better or something?
Are you really this ignorant of what Australia is doing to their aboriginal population right now, and historically what they did to them?
So far I’ve only seen one person say something on the news, without any actual facts to back it up. So are you implying their lockdowns are solely based on this? Are you saying it isn’t about keeping cases down? Please provide proof from a credible source and I might actually take a second look into it.
So far I’ve only seen one person say something on the news, without any actual facts to back it up. So are you implying their lockdowns are solely based on this? Are you saying it isn’t about keeping cases down? Please provide proof from a credible source and I might actually take a second look into it.
Lockdowns? They've got concentration camps and forced vaccination.
"Voluntary" concentration camps that if you try to leave they arrest you.
Funny how voluntary works down under, wonder if the same goes for other stuff, like say work?
"Voluntary" concentration camps that if you try to leave they arrest you.
Funny how voluntary works down under, wonder if the same goes for other stuff, like say work?
"Voluntary" concentration camps that the army "escort" you to.
"Voluntary" concentration camps that if you try to leave they arrest you.
Funny how voluntary works down under, wonder if the same goes for other stuff, like say work?
"Voluntary" concentration camps that the army "escort" you to.
Therefore everyone has a mild case, because you did.
Fatties, oldies and people with broken immune systems, don't, no.
Healthy people, nothing to concern themselves about.
Therefore everyone has a mild case, because you did.
Fatties, oldies and people with broken immune systems, don't, no.
Healthy people, nothing to concern themselves about.
How many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
It's for your own safety dude, you wouldn't want to get lost on the Australian wilderness. /S
How many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
It's for your own safety dude, you wouldn't want to get lost on the Australian wilderness. /S
Dont worry, if you manage to escape then they will send armed police and attack dogs to "rescue" you.
Wow! I find it impressive how you guys go on and on solely based in myths and rumors. If any of that were true, three things.
1. World intervention
2. There would be videos and footage of such
3. Everyone would be talking about Australia
Wow! I find it impressive how you guys go on and on solely based in myths and rumors. If any of that were true, three things.
1. World intervention
2. There would be videos and footage of such
3. Everyone would be talking about Australia
It's like you haven't lived through the last two years. Fucking hell you're dumb.
Hmm, yes? Recapping the past 2 years comes down to two words. Covid, Lockdowns.
Hmm, yes? Recapping the past 2 years comes down to two words. Covid, Lockdowns.
Governments bought the press right at the start, who only report what they want them to. Wake the fuck up.
Wow! I find it impressive how you guys go on and on solely based in myths and rumors. If any of that were true, three things.
1. World intervention
2. There would be videos and footage of such
3. Everyone would be talking about Australia
Therefore everyone has a mild case, because you did.
Fatties, oldies and people with broken immune systems, don't, no.
Healthy people, nothing to concern themselves about.
How many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
Hmm, yes? Recapping the past 2 years comes down to two words. Covid, Lockdowns.
Governments bought the press right at the start, who only report what they want them to. Wake the fuck up.
God, you’re dumb. Here you’re fuckos. Enjoy some Australian women in bikinis, and please, try leaving the house once in a while. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10260599/amp/Aussies-hit-Americans-calling-NT-quarantine-centre-concentration-camp.html
Therefore everyone has a mild case, because you did.
Fatties, oldies and people with broken immune systems, don't, no.
Healthy people, nothing to concern themselves about.
How many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
CDC Data: ~70% of Covid Deaths in 1 Year Were in People With 6 Comorbid Medical Conditions! 97% Had 2 or More!
https://newsrescue.com/cdc-data-70-of-covid-deaths-in-1-year-were-in-people-with-6-comorbid-medical-conditions-97-had-2-or-more/
As a headline ending with a bang makes me a bit skeptical, here's the link to the CDC paper that the article claims to quote; read it for yourself.
https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2021/pdf/21_0123.pdf
I think a better metric is relative risk of dying from covid vs the other risks of dying for your age and health. For example, more children 0-14 died of drowning (645) or homicide (893) in 2019
https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa-cause-of-death-by-age-and-gender (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Final Deaths 2019 Release Date 12/22/20.)
than children 0-17 from covid (621)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/
What I would really like would be for the data to be broken down by age and # of comorbitities. It would also be interesting to see how # of comorbidities correlates with age. That could then be compared to other risks of dying.
Hmm, yes? Recapping the past 2 years comes down to two words. Covid, Lockdowns.
Governments bought the press right at the start, who only report what they want them to. Wake the fuck up.
God, you’re dumb. Here you’re fuckos. Enjoy some Australian women in bikinis, and please, try leaving the house once in a while. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10260599/amp/Aussies-hit-Americans-calling-NT-quarantine-centre-concentration-camp.html
You're willingly ignorant dude, here learn about people being arrested for trying to leave the "Voluntary" Quarantine Camps.
It comes down to having to serve a 14-day mandatory quarantine stage. The ones who got locked up were people who chose to break quarantine. I don’t see the huge deal here, especially if you’re even allowed to quarantine at home.
It comes down to having to serve a 14-day mandatory quarantine stage. The ones who got locked up were people who chose to break quarantine. I don’t see the huge deal here, especially if you’re even allowed to quarantine at home.
It comes down to having to serve a 14-day mandatory quarantine stage. The ones who got locked up were people who chose to break quarantine. I don’t see the huge deal here, especially if you’re even allowed to quarantine at home.
That goal post shifted quickly.
14 years to flatten curve!It comes down to having to serve a 14-day mandatory quarantine stage. The ones who got locked up were people who chose to break quarantine. I don’t see the huge deal here, especially if you’re even allowed to quarantine at home.
That goal post shifted quickly.
14 years to flatten curve!It comes down to having to serve a 14-day mandatory quarantine stage. The ones who got locked up were people who chose to break quarantine. I don’t see the huge deal here, especially if you’re even allowed to quarantine at home.
That goal post shifted quickly.
I'm confused as to why pictures of chicks in bikinis makes the quarantinen camps somehow ok? I've seen a fair bit of it on twitter. Like, are these Covid Cathouses where you get to meet Hot Covid Babes and fuck them?
I'm confused as to why pictures of chicks in bikinis makes the quarantinen camps somehow ok? I've seen a fair bit of it on twitter. Like, are these Covid Cathouses where you get to meet Hot Covid Babes and fuck them?
I bet a whole lot more of men will be willing to quarantine now. Till the whole thing turns into one giant sausage party, then it won’t be fun anymore. Nothing for nothing, both new cases and deaths are down significantly. If other things were happening in there I’m sure we would be hearing about it, real quick.
I'm confused as to why pictures of chicks in bikinis makes the quarantinen camps somehow ok? I've seen a fair bit of it on twitter. Like, are these Covid Cathouses where you get to meet Hot Covid Babes and fuck them?
I bet a whole lot more of men will be willing to quarantine now. Till the whole thing turns into one giant sausage party, then it won’t be fun anymore. Nothing for nothing, both new cases and deaths are down significantly. If other things were happening in there I’m sure we would be hearing about it, real quick.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary feeling of Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Me paraphrasing Benjamin Franklin
I'm confused as to why pictures of chicks in bikinis makes the quarantinen camps somehow ok? I've seen a fair bit of it on twitter. Like, are these Covid Cathouses where you get to meet Hot Covid Babes and fuck them?
I bet a whole lot more of men will be willing to quarantine now.
I'm confused as to why pictures of chicks in bikinis makes the quarantinen camps somehow ok? I've seen a fair bit of it on twitter. Like, are these Covid Cathouses where you get to meet Hot Covid Babes and fuck them?
I bet a whole lot more of men will be willing to quarantine now. Till the whole thing turns into one giant sausage party, then it won’t be fun anymore. Nothing for nothing, both new cases and deaths are down significantly. If other things were happening in there I’m sure we would be hearing about it, real quick.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary feeling of Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Me paraphrasing Benjamin Franklin
Only sounds outlandish to us because it’s a different culture. Australia is its own country, it doesn’t need approval from anyone. That’s what us here in the west don’t understand. It’s not a good look on us, they must think we are intolerant. The irony…
How many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
In the UK, 1,500 people die of all causes every single day. At the moment 1,000 people die "with" (not from, 95% of those people actually die from their underlying conditions) covid a week.
Even if I was being generous and allowing all those "with", barely 10% of daily deaths with covid (c 140), when almost all those people are already sickly, is fuck all. Certainly doesn't merit any of this charade.
Therefore everyone has a mild case, because you did.
Fatties, oldies and people with broken immune systems, don't, no.
Healthy people, nothing to concern themselves about.
How many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
CDC Data: ~70% of Covid Deaths in 1 Year Were in People With 6 Comorbid Medical Conditions! 97% Had 2 or More!
https://newsrescue.com/cdc-data-70-of-covid-deaths-in-1-year-were-in-people-with-6-comorbid-medical-conditions-97-had-2-or-more/
As a headline ending with a bang makes me a bit skeptical, here's the link to the CDC paper that the article claims to quote; read it for yourself.
https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2021/pdf/21_0123.pdf
I think a better metric is relative risk of dying from covid vs the other risks of dying for your age and health. For example, more children 0-14 died of drowning (645) or homicide (893) in 2019
https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa-cause-of-death-by-age-and-gender (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Final Deaths 2019 Release Date 12/22/20.)
than children 0-17 from covid (621)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/
What I would really like would be for the data to be broken down by age and # of comorbitities. It would also be interesting to see how # of comorbidities correlates with age. That could then be compared to other risks of dying.
I'm confused as to why pictures of chicks in bikinis makes the quarantinen camps somehow ok? I've seen a fair bit of it on twitter. Like, are these Covid Cathouses where you get to meet Hot Covid Babes and fuck them?
Only sounds outlandish to us because it’s a different culture. Australia is its own country, it doesn’t need approval from anyone. That’s what us here in the west don’t understand. It’s not a good look on us, they must think we are intolerant. The irony…
Therefore everyone has a mild case, because you did.
Fatties, oldies and people with broken immune systems, don't, no.
Healthy people, nothing to concern themselves about.
How many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
CDC Data: ~70% of Covid Deaths in 1 Year Were in People With 6 Comorbid Medical Conditions! 97% Had 2 or More!
https://newsrescue.com/cdc-data-70-of-covid-deaths-in-1-year-were-in-people-with-6-comorbid-medical-conditions-97-had-2-or-more/
As a headline ending with a bang makes me a bit skeptical, here's the link to the CDC paper that the article claims to quote; read it for yourself.
https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2021/pdf/21_0123.pdf
I think a better metric is relative risk of dying from covid vs the other risks of dying for your age and health. For example, more children 0-14 died of drowning (645) or homicide (893) in 2019
https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa-cause-of-death-by-age-and-gender (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Final Deaths 2019 Release Date 12/22/20.)
than children 0-17 from covid (621)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/
What I would really like would be for the data to be broken down by age and # of comorbitities. It would also be interesting to see how # of comorbidities correlates with age. That could then be compared to other risks of dying.
Yet another total failure to answer the question asked.
Guys, I am not asking you what you personally think the covid risks are right now.
I am asking you how many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
The answer to that question is not to dig into the numbers for covid and figure out what you think they are right now.
Biden orders "free" covid tests for all (https://news.trust.org/item/20211202202255-46xyj) (except Pat, who has to pay through the nose).In response to the fear mongering about omicron, and not to the concerns about the financial burden imposed by the test opt-out option. We still have to see if the cost of tests will be used to coerce poor workers into taking the jab. Hopefully it never reaches that level, and mandates are tossed out with extreme prejudice by the courts.
I put "free" in quotes because, of course, it's paid for with taxpayer money, and that is meaningful.
This differs from the prior "free" order in that it now includes at-home testing kits.
Not sure where you are going with this.It's a dishonest attempt to reframe the question in a way that no matter how you answer, Mistwell can claim victory. Notice, for example, that the core question itself assumes you believe that covid has zero risk to healthy people. That is tantamountly false, because there's always a risk, even if it's minuscule. So if you answer the question directly, instead of challenging the precepts underlying the question, you're tacitly agreeing to a falsehood, which will allow Mistwell to jump in and claim "ha ha you're wrong!"
Therefore everyone has a mild case, because you did.
Fatties, oldies and people with broken immune systems, don't, no.
Healthy people, nothing to concern themselves about.
How many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
CDC Data: ~70% of Covid Deaths in 1 Year Were in People With 6 Comorbid Medical Conditions! 97% Had 2 or More!
https://newsrescue.com/cdc-data-70-of-covid-deaths-in-1-year-were-in-people-with-6-comorbid-medical-conditions-97-had-2-or-more/
As a headline ending with a bang makes me a bit skeptical, here's the link to the CDC paper that the article claims to quote; read it for yourself.
https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2021/pdf/21_0123.pdf
I think a better metric is relative risk of dying from covid vs the other risks of dying for your age and health. For example, more children 0-14 died of drowning (645) or homicide (893) in 2019
https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa-cause-of-death-by-age-and-gender (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Final Deaths 2019 Release Date 12/22/20.)
than children 0-17 from covid (621)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/
What I would really like would be for the data to be broken down by age and # of comorbitities. It would also be interesting to see how # of comorbidities correlates with age. That could then be compared to other risks of dying.
Yet another total failure to answer the question asked.
Guys, I am not asking you what you personally think the covid risks are right now.
I am asking you how many healthy people, of appropriate weight and age and immune system, would need to be in the hospital, ICU, or die, for you to believe there is actual risk to people outside those categories?
The answer to that question is not to dig into the numbers for covid and figure out what you think they are right now.
Wait, has anyone here denied that people WITH pre existing health problems are more at risk?
This isn't a new phenomenom, Take the common cold, to me it's nothing, if you're immuno compromised it could kill you.
But this doesn't justify violating the rights of millions of healthy people so the people at risk DON'T HAVE TO take responsability over their well being.
Wait, has anyone here denied that people WITH pre existing health problems are more at risk?Exactly. I don't remember all these champions of public health demanding we lock down in the 2017/18 flu season.
This isn't a new phenomenom, Take the common cold, to me it's nothing, if you're immuno compromised it could kill you.
But this doesn't justify violating the rights of millions of healthy people so the people at risk DON'T HAVE TO take responsability over their well being.
Wait, has anyone here denied that people WITH pre existing health problems are more at risk?Exactly. I don't remember all these champions of public health demanding we lock down in the 2017/18 flu season.
This isn't a new phenomenom, Take the common cold, to me it's nothing, if you're immuno compromised it could kill you.
But this doesn't justify violating the rights of millions of healthy people so the people at risk DON'T HAVE TO take responsability over their well being.
Mexico is a strange place then, because in Florida we still find flu, RSV, and other respiratory viruses along with a number of other respiratory conditions, both acute and chronic.Wait, has anyone here denied that people WITH pre existing health problems are more at risk?Exactly. I don't remember all these champions of public health demanding we lock down in the 2017/18 flu season.
This isn't a new phenomenom, Take the common cold, to me it's nothing, if you're immuno compromised it could kill you.
But this doesn't justify violating the rights of millions of healthy people so the people at risk DON'T HAVE TO take responsability over their well being.
A disease that in México, with the "vaccines" and all, was killing about 50k a year before the "pandemic".
Miracoulosly no more Flu deaths, no more not covid related pneomonia deaths, etc.
Every single type of respiratory infection that used to kill people has all but vanished from the country.
"Experts" will tell you that covid drove them out, funny, normally being sick of something means more chances of getting something else cuz your immune system is compromised. But okay lets say it did.
Take the total deaths "from" covid, substract all the deaths you would expect from other diseases that have disapeared. And you're left with a very different number.
If instead of locking people down, we were trying to get them healthy by loosing weight and exercizing we would be getting much better results. But we did the opposite, Gyms closed, don't dare go to the park to run....
I mean world wide, México also bought into the histeria and our El Presidente lacks the cojones to stand up to the press and the "right wing parties" demanding we destroy our economy. The bitches keep on crying, I hope this time around the asshole grows a pair and tells them to fuck off. And I didn't vote for him cuz he's a fucking commie.
Mexico is a strange place then, because in Florida we still find flu, RSV, and other respiratory viruses along with a number of other respiratory conditions, both acute and chronic.At least you don't have to worry about typhus and bubonic plague, like California and other third world countries.
Welp, Germany has locked down theThe pictures are absolutely jaw-dropping. It's like Mutti Merkel decided to crib off old 1930s era German propaganda. All she needs is the funny mustache.Untermenschen, I mean the unvaccinated. Because we all know those that got the shots can't get sick, die from it nor transmit it right? RIGHT?
And to think Remaincunts would ridicule Brexiteers for calling the EU the 4th Reich...
Like the tetanus vaccination?And to think Remaincunts would ridicule Brexiteers for calling the EU the 4th Reich...
For the same reason they get mad when you point out that vaccines are supposed to VACCINATE you against a disease and thus should only need to be taken once.
Like the tetanus vaccination?And to think Remaincunts would ridicule Brexiteers for calling the EU the 4th Reich...
For the same reason they get mad when you point out that vaccines are supposed to VACCINATE you against a disease and thus should only need to be taken once.
Oh wait.
Mexico is a strange place then, because in Florida we still find flu, RSV, and other respiratory viruses along with a number of other respiratory conditions, both acute and chronic.At least you don't have to worry about typhus and bubonic plague, like California and other third world countries.
In the United States, Texas reports the highest numbers of flea-borne typhus cases annually. From the 1940s through the early 2000s, highly endemic areas of typhus were limited to the lower Rio Grande Valley and the Coastal Bend area; however in the past 10 years, new areas of endemnicity have emerged in Bexar, Harris, and Travis counties, among others.Source: https://www.dshs.texas.gov/IDCU/disease/murine_typhus/Flea-borne-Typhus.aspx
Almost where? I Insistonusingmyprivatedefinitionsforeverythinginsteadofacceptinghowwordsareusedbyeveryonelseland?Like the tetanus vaccination?And to think Remaincunts would ridicule Brexiteers for calling the EU the 4th Reich...
For the same reason they get mad when you point out that vaccines are supposed to VACCINATE you against a disease and thus should only need to be taken once.
Oh wait.
You're almost there. Keep going.
I was curious about that since you mentioned. From what I see, the geographic prevalence of typhus is higher in Mexico than the U.S. in general.It was a reference to the tent cities and street defecation so popular, and the ensuring worry about the rise of medieval diseases like typhus. It's like a little corner of the dark ages amidst the stars and sunshine.
I was curious about that since you mentioned. From what I see, the geographic prevalence of typhus is higher in Mexico than the U.S. in general.It was a reference to the tent cities and street defecation so popular, and the ensuring worry about the rise of medieval diseases like typhus. It's like a little corner of the dark ages amidst the stars and sunshine.
No, it's not. Do a little more research.I was curious about that since you mentioned. From what I see, the geographic prevalence of typhus is higher in Mexico than the U.S. in general.It was a reference to the tent cities and street defecation so popular, and the ensuring worry about the rise of medieval diseases like typhus. It's like a little corner of the dark ages amidst the stars and sunshine.
OK, I see the intent, but evidently Texas has a higher typhus rate than California, despite California having a higher homelessness rate. So it seems like it's off-base as a critique.
In the United States, most cases occur in Texas, California, and Hawaii, with an average of about 300 cases every year. In California, flea-borne typhus is considered endemic (always present) in areas of Los Angeles and Orange counties, but sometimes cases are also reported from other parts of California.That's from California's own website. Also, you're confusing overall prevalence in two huge states with the specific public health concerns that were raised about the tent cities, and the worries about the localized spread of diseases that are, for the most part, almost extinct in the US.
OK, I see the intent, but evidently Texas has a higher typhus rate than California, despite California having a higher homelessness rate. So it seems like it's off-base as a critique.No, it's not. Do a little more research.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/Typhus.aspxQuoteIn the United States, most cases occur in Texas, California, and Hawaii, with an average of about 300 cases every year. In California, flea-borne typhus is considered endemic (always present) in areas of Los Angeles and Orange counties, but sometimes cases are also reported from other parts of California.That's from California's own website. Also, you're confusing overall prevalence in two huge states with the specific public health concerns that were raised about the tent cities, and the worries about the localized spread of diseases that are, for the most part, almost extinct in the US.
In the United States, Texas reports the highest numbers of flea-borne typhus cases annually. From the 1940s through the early 2000s, highly endemic areas of typhus were limited to the lower Rio Grande Valley and the Coastal Bend area; however in the past 10 years, new areas of endemnicity have emerged in Bexar, Harris, and Travis counties, among others.Source: https://www.dshs.texas.gov/IDCU/disease/murine_typhus/Flea-borne-Typhus.aspx
Mexico is a strange place then, because in Florida we still find flu, RSV, and other respiratory viruses along with a number of other respiratory conditions, both acute and chronic.At least you don't have to worry about typhus and bubonic plague, like California and other third world countries.
I was curious about that since you mentioned. From what I see, the geographic prevalence of typhus is higher in Mexico than the U.S. in general.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/58/Fievre_typhoide.png/460px-Fievre_typhoide.png)
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_typhoid_fever
See also: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/typhoid-fever
Within the U.S., I don't see a national distribution map - but this is from a current Texas government report:QuoteIn the United States, Texas reports the highest numbers of flea-borne typhus cases annually. From the 1940s through the early 2000s, highly endemic areas of typhus were limited to the lower Rio Grande Valley and the Coastal Bend area; however in the past 10 years, new areas of endemnicity have emerged in Bexar, Harris, and Travis counties, among others.Source: https://www.dshs.texas.gov/IDCU/disease/murine_typhus/Flea-borne-Typhus.aspx
That is in absolute numbers rather than rate, so other states may have a higher rate per population - but it implies the rate is less in California which has a higher population.
"Enteric Fever - Typhoid is an acute febrile illness that attacks the gastrointestinal tract caused by the bacteria Salmonella typhi. Without prompt treatment it can cause serious and life-threatening complications. 21.5 million cases are reported annually and it is considered that more than 75% are acquired during the trip. It represents the fifth infectious disease in travelers due to lack of adequate hygiene, it is estimated that there are 1-10 new cases per 100,000 inhabitants worldwide."
That's a 2016 study. The "medieval plague" worries in California only really popped up in the news in the last couple years. And as I've noted a couple times, it was a reference to public health concerns related to the feces and tent cities. That's different from endemism.
Though another report from CA, this one current (2021), shows some troubling trends:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/CDPH%20Document%20Library/Flea-borneTyphusCaseCounts.pdf
Part of the spectacular rise since 2008 seems to be related to a change in data collection or recording methods, since they added suspect and probable as well as confirmed cases. But even discounting that, it's still a pretty steep rise until 2018/2019, and then what appears to be an almost complete absence of testing in the covid years. Which is very odd.
Like the tetanus vaccination?And to think Remaincunts would ridicule Brexiteers for calling the EU the 4th Reich...
For the same reason they get mad when you point out that vaccines are supposed to VACCINATE you against a disease and thus should only need to be taken once.
I might be wrong here but aren't there more than one type of Typhus?
Cuz In México it's something you get from contaminated food/dirty water, etc. That map paints thw whole country the same but cases are concentrated in... You guessed it the poorest communities who have no access to clean water, etc.
While In California all I can find are cases of Flea-Borne Typhus transmited to humans.
On a First world country in it's biggest economy by state, in it's cities.
Good catch, I didn't even look at the legend on Kim's map.That's a 2016 study. The "medieval plague" worries in California only really popped up in the news in the last couple years. And as I've noted a couple times, it was a reference to public health concerns related to the feces and tent cities. That's different from endemism.
Though another report from CA, this one current (2021), shows some troubling trends:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/CDPH%20Document%20Library/Flea-borneTyphusCaseCounts.pdf
Part of the spectacular rise since 2008 seems to be related to a change in data collection or recording methods, since they added suspect and probable as well as confirmed cases. But even discounting that, it's still a pretty steep rise until 2018/2019, and then what appears to be an almost complete absence of testing in the covid years. Which is very odd.
It's still not the same disease as in México.
I might be wrong here but aren't there more than one type of Typhus?
Cuz In México it's something you get from contaminated food/dirty water, etc. That map paints thw whole country the same but cases are concentrated in... You guessed it the poorest communities who have no access to clean water, etc.
While In California all I can find are cases of Flea-Borne Typhus transmited to humans.
On a First world country in it's biggest economy by state, in it's cities.
Sorry, my bad. It seems the distinction is that "typhoid fever" is caused by contaminated food and water, which is distinct from "typhus" which is spread by lice, chiggers, and fleas. I had an international comparison of typhoid fever, but compared typhus between U.S. states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoid_fever
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhus
https://www.cdc.gov/typhoid-fever/index.html
https://www.cdc.gov/typhus/index.html
The international map I posted previously was for typhoid fever. The U.S. cases were typhus - generally murine typhus which is spread by fleas. Still, it's the same type of typhus in both Texas and California, as well as Hawaii. This is an international map of murine typhus from 2011:
(https://darkshire.net/jhkim/opinions/murine-typhus-map.png)
Source: https://www.rcpath.org/uploads/assets/d6b53f36-c27b-40d9-ad3e6179201ca87f/Typhus-in-all-its-forms-Dr-Nick-Beeching.pdf
I don't see a more recent map.
Good catch, I didn't even look at the legend on Kim's map.That's a 2016 study. The "medieval plague" worries in California only really popped up in the news in the last couple years. And as I've noted a couple times, it was a reference to public health concerns related to the feces and tent cities. That's different from endemism.
Though another report from CA, this one current (2021), shows some troubling trends:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/CDPH%20Document%20Library/Flea-borneTyphusCaseCounts.pdf
Part of the spectacular rise since 2008 seems to be related to a change in data collection or recording methods, since they added suspect and probable as well as confirmed cases. But even discounting that, it's still a pretty steep rise until 2018/2019, and then what appears to be an almost complete absence of testing in the covid years. Which is very odd.
It's still not the same disease as in México.
For anyone following: Typhus is a disease spread by lice, fleas, gnats, and so on. It's one of the "medieval" disease whose resurgence in California hit the news about two years ago. It's definitely related to the homeless and street shitting problems, and it's concentrated in areas with dense populations and poor hygiene, i.e. cities. Think fever and rash.
https://www.thevintagenews.com/2019/06/07/return-of-medieval-diseases/
Typhoid fever is a disease related to salmonella, and is spread by contaminated drinking water, and thus it's more common in poor rural areas with poor water treatment. Think Twitte... I mean vomiting and diarrhea. It's not typhus.
That's a 2016 study. The "medieval plague" worries in California only really popped up in the news in the last couple years. And as I've noted a couple times, it was a reference to public health concerns related to the feces and tent cities. That's different from endemism.
Though another report from CA, this one current (2021), shows some troubling trends:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/CDPH%20Document%20Library/Flea-borneTyphusCaseCounts.pdf
Part of the spectacular rise since 2008 seems to be related to a change in data collection or recording methods, since they added suspect and probable as well as confirmed cases. But even discounting that, it's still a pretty steep rise until 2018/2019, and then what appears to be an almost complete absence of testing in the covid years. Which is very odd.
I'm not saying typhus is not a problem, but you're singling out California, when Texas has a much higher rate. Here are the numbers from Texas compared to the numbers from California from your source linked above:And you're ignoring everything I said.
Whatever the explanations for the observed data, it is clear that it is both unreliable and misleading. We considered the socio-demographic and behavioural differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated that have been proposed as possible explanations for the data anomalies, but found no evidence supports any of these explanations. By Occam’s razor we believe the most likely explanations are
• Systematic miscategorisation of deaths between the different groups of unvaccinated and vaccinated
• Delayed or non-reporting of vaccinations.
• Systematic underestimation of the proportion of unvaccinated.
• Incorrect population selection for Covid deaths.
With these considerations in mind we applied adjustments to the ONS data and showed that they lead to the conclusion that the vaccines do not reduce all-cause mortality, but rather produce genuine spikes in all-cause mortality shortly after vaccination
I'm not saying typhus is not a problem, but you're singling out California, when Texas has a much higher rate. Here are the numbers from Texas compared to the numbers from California from your source linked above:And you're ignoring everything I said.
I'm pointing out specific issues raised by specific public health authorities in specific areas. 300 cases spread over hundreds and hundreds of miles isn't an epidemic or a resurgence. It's a minor, recurrent, perhaps endemic problem that can mostly be dealt with as a series of isolated cases. That has absolutely nothing to do with concerns about an outbreak in a small handful of densely packed urban areas where public officials have caused a public health disaster, uncontrolled spread would be very dangerous, and where a number of cases were found.
Prior infection may not offer good protection against Omicron infection. (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-africa-south-africa-2e44bbbd4f6e46447a17638580647a52)
The findings, posted online Thursday, are preliminary and haven’t yet undergone scientific review. Nor did the researchers say what portion of the reinfections were confirmed as omicron cases — or whether they caused serious illness.
Prior infection may not offer good protection against Omicron infection. (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-africa-south-africa-2e44bbbd4f6e46447a17638580647a52)Vaccines also don't seem to provide much protection. Which isn't a huge surprise. It has far more mutations than earlier strains, so it's lot more likely to have found a way around natural or artificial immunity.
Prior infection may not offer good protection against Omicron infection. (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-africa-south-africa-2e44bbbd4f6e46447a17638580647a52)
When I search, I see more news reports about Los Angeles typhus cases - but I think that's media bias rather than medical reality.Could be, but it's still irrelevant. You're still talking endemism and Texas, which have nothing to do with what I've said.
Even St. Fauci, the patron saint of alarmism, has said it's "comforting, but not definitive" that the rise in omicron cases in South Africa has not been followed by a surge of hospitalizations.
Now researchers from Nference have published a pre-print of a paper that shows that omicron has a snippet of genetic code from one of the coronaviruses that causes the common cold, probably due to lateral gene transfer in someone who was infected by both viruses. Soundararajan, one of the co-authors, said this helps explain how omicron "lives and transmits more efficiently with human beings", and that as it becomes more transmissible it loses traits that are more likely to cause severe symptoms.
The delta strain was dominant in South Africa in October, but by November 74% of the cases where the virus' genome were sequenced were omicron.
Why are we supposed to panic every time a new variant emerges, again?
O RLYEven St. Fauci, the patron saint of alarmism, has said it's "comforting, but not definitive" that the rise in omicron cases in South Africa has not been followed by a surge of hospitalizations.
Now researchers from Nference have published a pre-print of a paper that shows that omicron has a snippet of genetic code from one of the coronaviruses that causes the common cold, probably due to lateral gene transfer in someone who was infected by both viruses. Soundararajan, one of the co-authors, said this helps explain how omicron "lives and transmits more efficiently with human beings", and that as it becomes more transmissible it loses traits that are more likely to cause severe symptoms.
The delta strain was dominant in South Africa in October, but by November 74% of the cases where the virus' genome were sequenced were omicron.
Why are we supposed to panic every time a new variant emerges, again?
It's not even "new", they've known about it for a year.
Prior infection may not offer good protection against Omicron infection. (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-africa-south-africa-2e44bbbd4f6e46447a17638580647a52)
O RLYEven St. Fauci, the patron saint of alarmism, has said it's "comforting, but not definitive" that the rise in omicron cases in South Africa has not been followed by a surge of hospitalizations.
Now researchers from Nference have published a pre-print of a paper that shows that omicron has a snippet of genetic code from one of the coronaviruses that causes the common cold, probably due to lateral gene transfer in someone who was infected by both viruses. Soundararajan, one of the co-authors, said this helps explain how omicron "lives and transmits more efficiently with human beings", and that as it becomes more transmissible it loses traits that are more likely to cause severe symptoms.
The delta strain was dominant in South Africa in October, but by November 74% of the cases where the virus' genome were sequenced were omicron.
Why are we supposed to panic every time a new variant emerges, again?
It's not even "new", they've known about it for a year.
Citation? Because the best explanation so far is that covid-19 originated in a Mojiang mine in 2012, samples were brought to Wuhan, and it escaped before the Military World Games in 2019. While that places the origins before 2016, it doesn't match up because mutation rates are based not just on years but on how much virus is out there, which didn't really start to escalate until 2019.O RLYEven St. Fauci, the patron saint of alarmism, has said it's "comforting, but not definitive" that the rise in omicron cases in South Africa has not been followed by a surge of hospitalizations.
Now researchers from Nference have published a pre-print of a paper that shows that omicron has a snippet of genetic code from one of the coronaviruses that causes the common cold, probably due to lateral gene transfer in someone who was infected by both viruses. Soundararajan, one of the co-authors, said this helps explain how omicron "lives and transmits more efficiently with human beings", and that as it becomes more transmissible it loses traits that are more likely to cause severe symptoms.
The delta strain was dominant in South Africa in October, but by November 74% of the cases where the virus' genome were sequenced were omicron.
Why are we supposed to panic every time a new variant emerges, again?
It's not even "new", they've known about it for a year.
When you look at the rate of mutation from original SARS-COV2 and Omicron, the math results in the original strain having to have originated in 2016 - * minimum* rather than 2019.
Did the 'rona give him that belly? He was also double-jabbed, so thought he was safe. Great protection offered there!That picture was AFTER he lost "3 and a-bit stone" or in US between 42 and 56 pounds.
Did the 'rona give him that belly? He was also double-jabbed, so thought he was safe. Great protection offered there!That picture was AFTER he lost "3 and a-bit stone" or in US between 42 and 56 pounds.
I read the site where the picture was at as "Whales online".
Even St. Fauci, the patron saint of alarmism, has said it's "comforting, but not definitive" that the rise in omicron cases in South Africa has not been followed by a surge of hospitalizations.
Now researchers from Nference have published a pre-print of a paper that shows that omicron has a snippet of genetic code from one of the coronaviruses that causes the common cold, probably due to lateral gene transfer in someone who was infected by both viruses. Soundararajan, one of the co-authors, said this helps explain how omicron "lives and transmits more efficiently with human beings", and that as it becomes more transmissible it loses traits that are more likely to cause severe symptoms.
The delta strain was dominant in South Africa in October, but by November 74% of the cases where the virus' genome were sequenced were omicron.
Why are we supposed to panic every time a new variant emerges, again?
Did the 'rona give him that belly? He was also double-jabbed, so thought he was safe. Great protection offered there!That picture was AFTER he lost "3 and a-bit stone" or in US between 42 and 56 pounds.
I read the site where the picture was at as "Whales online".
He's one of those guys with the physique of a jellyfish. Not fat enough to be a concern to NHS, but definitely not healthy.
I also don't quite understand the idea of not going to the doctor until you're already blue with an SpO2 in the low 90s (or lower). Everyone in my family caught the 'rona. I woke up on a Sunday with head cold symptoms, by 2pm lost my sense of taste and smell and by 3pm was at urgent care getting tested. Results two days later, monoclonal antibodies 3 days after that. While waiting for the mAb treatment, I felt shortness of breath and the $20 O2 monitor bought from the drugstore registered 96%. We monitored ourselves until we got the mAbs and planned to go to them hospital if it dipped below 94%. Who the hell waits until they can't even breathe? Even if you don't believe HCQ or Ivermectin works, early treatment is the key.
That, and his recovery photo makes him look like a pussy-hat wearing unemployed antifa-feminism-BLM supporter. They *always* look like that...
Did the 'rona give him that belly? He was also double-jabbed, so thought he was safe. Great protection offered there!That picture was AFTER he lost "3 and a-bit stone" or in US between 42 and 56 pounds.
I read the site where the picture was at as "Whales online".
He's one of those guys with the physique of a jellyfish. Not fat enough to be a concern to NHS, but definitely not healthy.
I also don't quite understand the idea of not going to the doctor until you're already blue with an SpO2 in the low 90s (or lower). Everyone in my family caught the 'rona. I woke up on a Sunday with head cold symptoms, by 2pm lost my sense of taste and smell and by 3pm was at urgent care getting tested. Results two days later, monoclonal antibodies 3 days after that. While waiting for the mAb treatment, I felt shortness of breath and the $20 O2 monitor bought from the drugstore registered 96%. We monitored ourselves until we got the mAbs and planned to go to them hospital if it dipped below 94%. Who the hell waits until they can't even breathe? Even if you don't believe HCQ or Ivermectin works, early treatment is the key.
That, and his recovery photo makes him look like a pussy-hat wearing unemployed antifa-feminism-BLM supporter. They *always* look like that...
As an ex-whale: The guy probably was used to almost always being short of breath.
Did the 'rona give him that belly? He was also double-jabbed, so thought he was safe. Great protection offered there!That picture was AFTER he lost "3 and a-bit stone" or in US between 42 and 56 pounds.
I read the site where the picture was at as "Whales online".
He's one of those guys with the physique of a jellyfish. Not fat enough to be a concern to NHS, but definitely not healthy.
I also don't quite understand the idea of not going to the doctor until you're already blue with an SpO2 in the low 90s (or lower). Everyone in my family caught the 'rona. I woke up on a Sunday with head cold symptoms, by 2pm lost my sense of taste and smell and by 3pm was at urgent care getting tested. Results two days later, monoclonal antibodies 3 days after that. While waiting for the mAb treatment, I felt shortness of breath and the $20 O2 monitor bought from the drugstore registered 96%. We monitored ourselves until we got the mAbs and planned to go to them hospital if it dipped below 94%. Who the hell waits until they can't even breathe? Even if you don't believe HCQ or Ivermectin works, early treatment is the key.
That, and his recovery photo makes him look like a pussy-hat wearing unemployed antifa-feminism-BLM supporter. They *always* look like that...
As an ex-whale: The guy probably was used to almost always being short of breath.
The shortness of breath is *different*. I'm still working my down from Humpback to Orca and then down to non-whale status (I lost 30 lbs in 2020 just from working from home where I'd have my morning coffee while tapping away at the laptop and then next thing I know it's like 2pm and I don't feel like taking the time to make myself runchee)...
That "lemme catch my breath" that fat people experience is different than the "I'm able to take full breaths and know I'm getting enough air, but this is the O2 debt sensation I got when I was exercising at nuke prototype in Idaho - almost a mile above sea level" sensation I experienced with COVID. Which makes sense - COVID is a circulatory system virus, not a respiratory system virus.
You're going to love wearing a mask forever...Because if you don't, you're attacking SCIENCE!
https://www.foxnews.com/us/oregon-health-authority-moves-to-implement-permanent-indoor-mask-mandate
"Permanent means indefinite. It doesn’t necessarily mean permanent," Cieslak said.
Permanent means permanent. Indefinite means indefinite. Why should I trust any medical information coming out of the mouth of someone that is that stupid or disingenuous.
Just want to say I kinda dig the mask. I see it as a fashion accessory. Even better on winter.
Just want to say I kinda dig the mask. I see it as a fashion accessory. Even better on winter.
I am all for anyone who wants to wear a mask wearing a mask. I am not for forcing people to wear masks.
Just want to say I kinda dig the mask. I see it as a fashion accessory. Even better on winter.
What would be *really* interesting to find out is, given how covid vaccinations aren't doing shit besides reducing risks of hospitalization and death (i.e. therapy rather than vaccination), how similar it was for flu vaccines to also not really prevent infection but to reduce severity instead...
What would be *really* interesting to find out is, given how covid vaccinations aren't doing shit besides reducing risks of hospitalization and death (i.e. therapy rather than vaccination), how similar it was for flu vaccines to also not really prevent infection but to reduce severity instead...
People keep saying this, where's the evidence? In the UK the majority of those hospitalised and dying with covid are double-jabbed. It's the same in every country where a high proportion have been jabbed.
Surely if this was going on, the unjabbed would be the ones doing the dying?
Prior infection may not offer good protection against Omicron infection. (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-africa-south-africa-2e44bbbd4f6e46447a17638580647a52)
Complete and utter bollocks, all part of the fear-driven narrative to try to coerce people who haven't already been jabbed to do so.
Newsflash! The jabs (designed for the now obsolete Alpha variant) don't provide any protection against Delta or Omicron. Every case they've recorded of Omicron so far has been in the double- or triple-jabbed. Fortunately, Omicron is even less severe than the weedy Delta was, no one has even been hospitalised with it. So the jabs are even more irrelevant.
The "pandemic" if there ever was one, is comprehensively over.
Hey, perpetual dumbass, the same source is saying the vaccine booster doesn't offer much protection against Omnicron either. So how would it be part of a fear-driven narrative to coerce people to get another booster vaccine when the next breath they tell you the booster isn't great against it either?
It can be true that prior infection AND the vaccine booster do not offer great protection against the Omnicron variant. They are not mutually exclusive statements.
Oh I know I know, your logic doesn't need to hold up to scrutiny. As long as you are consistent in your asshattery, that's all that matters right?
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/12/big-tech-censors-science-twitter-slaps-warning-label-on-american-heart-association-abstract/
Twitter has decided that a scientific article in an American Heart Association journal about the heart-related risks of the mRNA vaccines needs a warning label because it's either "violent and misleading content that could lead to real world harm" or against Twitter's rules.
I wonder why are they pushing for 2+ "booster shoots" per year for everybody forever, and why is it the governments are willing to become fascists so these goals are met.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/12/big-tech-censors-science-twitter-slaps-warning-label-on-american-heart-association-abstract/
Twitter has decided that a scientific article in an American Heart Association journal about the heart-related risks of the mRNA vaccines needs a warning label because it's either "violent and misleading content that could lead to real world harm" or against Twitter's rules.
More accurately it's against the commercial interests of Big Pharma, who pay for the "fact checking" on social media.
Just as I said, the liars in the media pushing the narrative that the covid is responsible for all the cardiac damage caused by the jabs:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FF7j6u7XoAA9Tyx?format=jpg)
VACCINES “appear to expose people to an INCREASED MORTALITY”
Professor Martin Neil, Queen Mary University, London
Hold the Line.
We Are Coming Bandera del Reino Unido
#RESIST
Womp, womp.
https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1466845934428504072 (https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1466845934428504072)
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/coronavirus/nyc-mulls-tougher-vaccine-mandate-amid-covid-19-surge/3434858/
Starting December 27th, all private sector workers in New York City will be required to have 2 jabs, if they want to work. Starting December 14th, all children ages 5-11 will be required to have 1 jab, if they want to eat out or be entertained.
Merry Christmas, New York!
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/coronavirus/nyc-mulls-tougher-vaccine-mandate-amid-covid-19-surge/3434858/
Starting December 27th, all private sector workers in New York City will be required to have 2 jabs, if they want to work. Starting December 14th, all children ages 5-11 will be required to have 1 jab, if they want to eat out or be entertained.
Merry Christmas, New York!
I hope Warren Wilhelm Jr. likes having no tax revenues to fund law enforcement after businesses relocate and take their employees with them, on top of everyone who already left last year who are never coming back. NYC is a shithole full of lawless maniacs, so if we just block off the bridges and tunnels and go full-on Escape from NY, I'd be fine with it.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/coronavirus/nyc-mulls-tougher-vaccine-mandate-amid-covid-19-surge/3434858/
Starting December 27th, all private sector workers in New York City will be required to have 2 jabs, if they want to work. Starting December 14th, all children ages 5-11 will be required to have 1 jab, if they want to eat out or be entertained.
Merry Christmas, New York!
I hope Warren Wilhelm Jr. likes having no tax revenues to fund law enforcement after businesses relocate and take their employees with them, on top of everyone who already left last year who are never coming back. NYC is a shithole full of lawless maniacs, so if we just block off the bridges and tunnels and go full-on Escape from NY, I'd be fine with it.
89% of NYC adults have had at least one dose. (https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data-vaccines.page)
89% of NYC adults have had at least one dose. (https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data-vaccines.page)
https://www.newsweek.com/mom-son-vaccinated-school-permission-pizza-california-1656792
Mind you, it's Newsweek.
But bribing kids with pizza, giving them the vax, and then encouraging them not to tell their parents is so far out of bounds I should not even have to voice it.
'Indefensible' is the word that springs to mind.https://www.newsweek.com/mom-son-vaccinated-school-permission-pizza-california-1656792
Mind you, it's Newsweek.
But bribing kids with pizza, giving them the vax, and then encouraging them not to tell their parents is so far out of bounds I should not even have to voice it.
Shouldn't even be a trial. Shit like that is grounds for summary execution.
Don't violations of the Numerberg code carry the death penalty?
It's all about being on the right side of history.Don't violations of the Numerberg code carry the death penalty?
You know the head of the European Commission wants to repeal the Nuremburg Code (and by extension all the Member States of the EU follow suit), right?
It's all about being on the right side of history.
(https://i.imgur.com/4RZgYU8.png)
Hmm.
New study (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.04.21267114v1.full.pdf)out of Israel compares the effectiveness of natural immunity vs. injection vs. NI+I vs. I+NI. Natural immunity is demonstrated to be far superior to injection across the entire study's time period. Aligns well with results seen in Sweden, India, et. al that have not relied on injections to beat Sars-Cov-2.
Harvard study (https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7.pdf) demonstrates positive correlation between injection-rate and Covid-19 cases across 68 countries.
(https://i.imgur.com/BTdhJfN.png)
This aligns with UK HSA data demonstrating injections result in higher chance of infection.
Danish data indicates negative efficiency for injections:
(https://i.imgur.com/kt4dGWI.png)
Generally I think the statement that, "Injections don't reduce infections. But they do reduce mortality" has been defensible. But why are we not seeing lower CFR comparing 2020 vs. 2021 when so many are now injected?
(https://i.imgur.com/1N3pTSJ.png)
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
It's data, not a conclusion. There's undoubtedly confounders.
The real point is simply to emphasize that so much of the madness we see (e.g. demonization of outgroup, mandatory injections, social credit passports, concentration camps) are based on completely nonscientific indeed contrary-to-all-evidence assumptions about who is infected and spreading Sars-Cov-2.
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
It's data, not a conclusion. There's undoubtedly confounders.
The real point is simply to emphasize that so much of the madness we see (e.g. demonization of outgroup, mandatory injections, social credit passports, concentration camps) are based on completely nonscientific indeed contrary-to-all-evidence assumptions about who is infected and spreading Sars-Cov-2.
Fair enough, but we also need to recognize that anti-vaxxers may draw the wrong conclusion that being vaccinated will lead to being more susceptible to getting infected.
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
It's data, not a conclusion. There's undoubtedly confounders.
The real point is simply to emphasize that so much of the madness we see (e.g. demonization of outgroup, mandatory injections, social credit passports, concentration camps) are based on completely nonscientific indeed contrary-to-all-evidence assumptions about who is infected and spreading Sars-Cov-2.
Fair enough, but we also need to recognize that anti-vaxxers may draw the wrong conclusion that being vaccinated will lead to being more susceptible to getting infected.
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
It's data, not a conclusion. There's undoubtedly confounders.
The real point is simply to emphasize that so much of the madness we see (e.g. demonization of outgroup, mandatory injections, social credit passports, concentration camps) are based on completely nonscientific indeed contrary-to-all-evidence assumptions about who is infected and spreading Sars-Cov-2.
Fair enough, but we also need to recognize that anti-vaxxers may draw the wrong conclusion that being vaccinated will lead to being more susceptible to getting infected.
If the data supports that conclusion, how exactly can you label it "wrong"?
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
It's data, not a conclusion. There's undoubtedly confounders.
The real point is simply to emphasize that so much of the madness we see (e.g. demonization of outgroup, mandatory injections, social credit passports, concentration camps) are based on completely nonscientific indeed contrary-to-all-evidence assumptions about who is infected and spreading Sars-Cov-2.
Fair enough, but we also need to recognize that anti-vaxxers may draw the wrong conclusion that being vaccinated will lead to being more susceptible to getting infected.
If the data supports that conclusion, how exactly can you label it "wrong"?
Because it doesn't. The data does not show that you'll be more likely to catch covid as a result of being vaccinated.
What it does show is that if most of your population is vaccinated and most of the infected are vaccinated, then:
1. The expected ratio of vaxed to unvaxed who got covid correlates to the ratio of vaxed to unvaxed of the overall population.
2. Vaccines aren't stopping infections from happening.
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
It's data, not a conclusion. There's undoubtedly confounders.
The real point is simply to emphasize that so much of the madness we see (e.g. demonization of outgroup, mandatory injections, social credit passports, concentration camps) are based on completely nonscientific indeed contrary-to-all-evidence assumptions about who is infected and spreading Sars-Cov-2.
Fair enough, but we also need to recognize that anti-vaxxers may draw the wrong conclusion that being vaccinated will lead to being more susceptible to getting infected.
If the data supports that conclusion, how exactly can you label it "wrong"?
Because it doesn't. The data does not show that you'll be more likely to catch covid as a result of being vaccinated.
What it does show is that if most of your population is vaccinated and most of the infected are vaccinated, then:
1. The expected ratio of vaxed to unvaxed who got covid correlates to the ratio of vaxed to unvaxed of the overall population.
2. Vaccines aren't stopping infections from happening.
1. That isn't what the USA Today article says: "More than 35% of eligible Americans, including 28% of adults, still aren't fully vaccinated." So 75% of the covid cases are occurring in the 65% of the vaccinated population, and 25% of the covid cases are occurring in the 35% of the not-vaccinated population. That tells me that, at least in terms of becoming a reported covid case, being vaccinated provides no better protection that not being vaccinated.
2. Isn't that the purpose of a "vaccine", to stop infections from happening?
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
It's data, not a conclusion. There's undoubtedly confounders.
The real point is simply to emphasize that so much of the madness we see (e.g. demonization of outgroup, mandatory injections, social credit passports, concentration camps) are based on completely nonscientific indeed contrary-to-all-evidence assumptions about who is infected and spreading Sars-Cov-2.
Fair enough, but we also need to recognize that anti-vaxxers may draw the wrong conclusion that being vaccinated will lead to being more susceptible to getting infected.
If the data supports that conclusion, how exactly can you label it "wrong"?
Because it doesn't. The data does not show that you'll be more likely to catch covid as a result of being vaccinated.
What it does show is that if most of your population is vaccinated and most of the infected are vaccinated, then:
1. The expected ratio of vaxed to unvaxed who got covid correlates to the ratio of vaxed to unvaxed of the overall population.
2. Vaccines aren't stopping infections from happening.
1. That isn't what the USA Today article says: "More than 35% of eligible Americans, including 28% of adults, still aren't fully vaccinated." So 75% of the covid cases are occurring in the 65% of the vaccinated population, and 25% of the covid cases are occurring in the 35% of the not-vaccinated population. That tells me that, at least in terms of becoming a reported covid case, being vaccinated provides no better protection that not being vaccinated.
2. Isn't that the purpose of a "vaccine", to stop infections from happening?
I'm not saying that the vaccines are providing protection. I'm stating that they do not offer any significant level of protection against infection, but cautioning that it doesn't mean that you're *more* likely to get infected if you've been vaccinated.
And, no - non-sterilizing vaccines are not intended to prevent infections. We've just never been made aware of that fact despite the flu vaccine being non-sterilizing. Veterinarians have been aware of this for years because some of the vaccines they administer are definitely in this category (I'm looking at you, bordetella...)
I'm not saying that the vaccines are providing protection. I'm stating that they do not offer any significant level of protection against infection, but cautioning that it doesn't mean that you're *more* likely to get infected if you've been vaccinated.
I'm not saying that the vaccines are providing protection. I'm stating that they do not offer any significant level of protection against infection, but cautioning that it doesn't mean that you're *more* likely to get infected if you've been vaccinated.
And, no - non-sterilizing vaccines are not intended to prevent infections. We've just never been made aware of that fact despite the flu vaccine being non-sterilizing. Veterinarians have been aware of this for years because some of the vaccines they administer are definitely in this category (I'm looking at you, bordetella...)
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
It's data, not a conclusion. There's undoubtedly confounders.
The real point is simply to emphasize that so much of the madness we see (e.g. demonization of outgroup, mandatory injections, social credit passports, concentration camps) are based on completely nonscientific indeed contrary-to-all-evidence assumptions about who is infected and spreading Sars-Cov-2.
Fair enough, but we also need to recognize that anti-vaxxers may draw the wrong conclusion that being vaccinated will lead to being more susceptible to getting infected.
If the data supports that conclusion, how exactly can you label it "wrong"?
Because it doesn't. The data does not show that you'll be more likely to catch covid as a result of being vaccinated.
What it does show is that if most of your population is vaccinated and most of the infected are vaccinated, then:
1. The expected ratio of vaxed to unvaxed who got covid correlates to the ratio of vaxed to unvaxed of the overall population.
2. Vaccines aren't stopping infections from happening.
I'm not saying that the vaccines are providing protection. I'm stating that they do not offer any significant level of protection against infection, but cautioning that it doesn't mean that you're *more* likely to get infected if you've been vaccinated.
UK HSA does demonstrate that vaccinated people are more likely to get infected. Could be there are some other variables that are affecting this? Sure. Should it be a red flag? Yes.
Similarly, the study linked suggests a correlation between a higher % of the population vaccinated, and rates of infection. Could be there are some other variables that are affecting this? Sure. Should it be a red flag? Yes.
I don't necessarily know that those conclusions are correct. In countries with high vaccination rates, if the vaccines don't prevent infection to begin with, you'd expect to see a larger percentage of infected who were previously vaccinated simply because of a larger percentage of the total population having been vaccinated. One also can't discount that the vaccinated may be "riskier" in their behavior, leading to more of them being infected then those who aren't vaccinated and still hiding in their basements.
It's data, not a conclusion. There's undoubtedly confounders.
The real point is simply to emphasize that so much of the madness we see (e.g. demonization of outgroup, mandatory injections, social credit passports, concentration camps) are based on completely nonscientific indeed contrary-to-all-evidence assumptions about who is infected and spreading Sars-Cov-2.
Fair enough, but we also need to recognize that anti-vaxxers may draw the wrong conclusion that being vaccinated will lead to being more susceptible to getting infected.
If the data supports that conclusion, how exactly can you label it "wrong"?
Because it doesn't. The data does not show that you'll be more likely to catch covid as a result of being vaccinated.
What it does show is that if most of your population is vaccinated and most of the infected are vaccinated, then:
1. The expected ratio of vaxed to unvaxed who got covid correlates to the ratio of vaxed to unvaxed of the overall population.
2. Vaccines aren't stopping infections from happening.
I'm sorry, but I don't see any data in your post that justifies your conclusions and eliminates other potential conclusions. Just your assertions that your conclusions are the correct ones. Do you hate science?
That's the issue - taking the clotshot isn't what is driving them to be more likely to be infected except the public has been led to believe it will. It's the alteration of behavior resulting from the incorrect belief that they're now not going to be infected - less masks, less social distancing, more risk. We know (some of us will before others) that this is a non-sterilizing vaccine, so it's not going to prevent transmission - it'll only moderate symptoms.
This entire thing is a shit-show caused by scientifically illiterate government officials taking the word of medical bureaucrats and of scientists who are not as smart as they think they are. Some of these guys have never actually produced any science of merit - such as Ferguson's infamous computer models that have *never* been correct - whether for covid or climate change.
Those of us who have experience with complex system-of-systems problems and an understanding of probablistic risk assessment are seeing this thing play out as pretty much anticipated. You'll never get rid of COVID-19 because nob-sterilizing vaccines and an animal reservoir(s) make ideal conditions for mutations that make it easier for the virus to become endemic. Omicron, if the initial data pans out, is the endemic form of the virus - infecting vaxed and unvaxed but not causing serious symptoms.
Kiero is not going to like this one, though it's accurate:
(https://i.ibb.co/DWYWHqh/image.png)
That's the issue - taking the clotshot isn't what is driving them to be more likely to be infected except the public has been led to believe it will. It's the alteration of behavior resulting from the incorrect belief that they're now not going to be infected - less masks, less social distancing, more risk. We know (some of us will before others) that this is a non-sterilizing vaccine, so it's not going to prevent transmission - it'll only moderate symptoms.
Kiero is not going to like this one, though it's accurate:
(https://i.ibb.co/DWYWHqh/image.png)
Source would be nice, there's no attribution on there.
It looks like total bollocks to me, given the actual results in the real world, whereby the jabbed die more frequently than the unjabbed:
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16beafd944d34095ce36e3809e28b4433836b43298733261909ae90a4c14fbd7.jpg?w=600&h=309)
That's based on UK government official statistics as of last week, not a curated "study" paid for by a jab manufacturer.
Man you're fucking simple sometimes.
Let's say we have 10 units of people.
8 units of people are vaccinated, and 2 units of people are not.
1 unit of the 2 units of unvaccinated people get covid.
1.5 units of 8 units of vaccinated people get covid.
By your measurement, which was so simplistic it didn't account for any percentages of the population for each category (it's showing percentage of the total deaths etc. are vaccinated or unvaccinated but not adjusting for the percentage of the population that represents), the vaccinated people are getting sick "more often" (in fact your spin would have them getting sick at a rate of 50% more than the unvaccinated) even though 50% of the unvaccinated got sick in this example but only 19% of vaccinated got sick in this example.
It looks like total bollocks to me, given the actual results in the real world, whereby the jabbed die more frequently than the unjabbed:
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16beafd944d34095ce36e3809e28b4433836b43298733261909ae90a4c14fbd7.jpg?w=600&h=309)
That's based on UK government official statistics as of last week, not a curated "study" paid for by a jab manufacturer.
Man you're fucking simple sometimes.
Let's say we have 10 units of people.
8 units of people are vaccinated, and 2 units of people are not.
1 unit of the 2 units of unvaccinated people get covid.
1.5 units of 8 units of vaccinated people get covid.
By your measurement, which was so simplistic it didn't account for any percentages of the population for each category (it's showing percentage of the total deaths etc. are vaccinated or unvaccinated but not adjusting for the percentage of the population that represents), the vaccinated people are getting sick "more often" (in fact your spin would have them getting sick at a rate of 50% more than the unvaccinated) even though 50% of the unvaccinated got sick in this example but only 19% of vaccinated got sick in this example.
Not only that, but people with comorbidities are also more likely to seek out vaccination too. Seeing comparisons where the only variable that differs is vaccination status would be the only way to make the claims Kiero is making, but this doesn't look like it does that.It looks like total bollocks to me, given the actual results in the real world, whereby the jabbed die more frequently than the unjabbed:
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16beafd944d34095ce36e3809e28b4433836b43298733261909ae90a4c14fbd7.jpg?w=600&h=309)
That's based on UK government official statistics as of last week, not a curated "study" paid for by a jab manufacturer.
Man you're fucking simple sometimes.
Let's say we have 10 units of people.
8 units of people are vaccinated, and 2 units of people are not.
1 unit of the 2 units of unvaccinated people get covid.
1.5 units of 8 units of vaccinated people get covid.
By your measurement, which was so simplistic it didn't account for any percentages of the population for each category (it's showing percentage of the total deaths etc. are vaccinated or unvaccinated but not adjusting for the percentage of the population that represents), the vaccinated people are getting sick "more often" (in fact your spin would have them getting sick at a rate of 50% more than the unvaccinated) even though 50% of the unvaccinated got sick in this example but only 19% of vaccinated got sick in this example.
Breaking down Kiero's numbers. Vaccinated is 69.0% and unvaccinated is 31.0%. Taking the other numbers relative to this population, we get:
Vaccinated: case rate 80.5, hospitalization rate 91.4, death rate 115.5
Unvaccinated: case rate 112.9, hospitalization rate 114.5, death rate 62.9
So Kiero is right that relative to percentage of population, the death rate is higher - though case rate and hospitalization rate is lower.
However, vaccinated versus unvaccinated is not random. In particular, the UK rate of vaccination is much higher in older people - and elderly people have a much higher death rate than younger people - both from covid and from other causes. I think the numbers would be much more meaningful if they were normalized by age group.
Not only that, but people with comorbidities are also more likely to seek out vaccination too. Seeing comparisons where the only variable that differs is vaccination status would be the only way to make the claims Kiero is making, but this doesn't look like it does that.It looks like total bollocks to me, given the actual results in the real world, whereby the jabbed die more frequently than the unjabbed:
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16beafd944d34095ce36e3809e28b4433836b43298733261909ae90a4c14fbd7.jpg?w=600&h=309)
That's based on UK government official statistics as of last week, not a curated "study" paid for by a jab manufacturer.
Man you're fucking simple sometimes.
Let's say we have 10 units of people.
8 units of people are vaccinated, and 2 units of people are not.
1 unit of the 2 units of unvaccinated people get covid.
1.5 units of 8 units of vaccinated people get covid.
By your measurement, which was so simplistic it didn't account for any percentages of the population for each category (it's showing percentage of the total deaths etc. are vaccinated or unvaccinated but not adjusting for the percentage of the population that represents), the vaccinated people are getting sick "more often" (in fact your spin would have them getting sick at a rate of 50% more than the unvaccinated) even though 50% of the unvaccinated got sick in this example but only 19% of vaccinated got sick in this example.
Breaking down Kiero's numbers. Vaccinated is 69.0% and unvaccinated is 31.0%. Taking the other numbers relative to this population, we get:
Vaccinated: case rate 80.5, hospitalization rate 91.4, death rate 115.5
Unvaccinated: case rate 112.9, hospitalization rate 114.5, death rate 62.9
So Kiero is right that relative to percentage of population, the death rate is higher - though case rate and hospitalization rate is lower.
However, vaccinated versus unvaccinated is not random. In particular, the UK rate of vaccination is much higher in older people - and elderly people have a much higher death rate than younger people - both from covid and from other causes. I think the numbers would be much more meaningful if they were normalized by age group.
Breaking down Kiero's numbers. Vaccinated is 69.0% and unvaccinated is 31.0%. Taking the other numbers relative to this population, we get:Not only that, but people with comorbidities are also more likely to seek out vaccination too. Seeing comparisons where the only variable that differs is vaccination status would be the only way to make the claims Kiero is making, but this doesn't look like it does that.
Vaccinated: case rate 80.5, hospitalization rate 91.4, death rate 115.5
Unvaccinated: case rate 112.9, hospitalization rate 114.5, death rate 62.9
So Kiero is right that relative to percentage of population, the death rate is higher - though case rate and hospitalization rate is lower.
However, vaccinated versus unvaccinated is not random. In particular, the UK rate of vaccination is much higher in older people - and elderly people have a much higher death rate than younger people - both from covid and from other causes. I think the numbers would be much more meaningful if they were normalized by age group.
Vaccination status | _ Deaths involving COVID-19 | _ All deaths |
Unvaccinated | _ 849.7 (840.3, 859.2) | _ 2,187.1 (2,172.2, 2,202.0) |
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | _ 192.4 (182.4, 202.4) | _ 811.9 (793.4, 830.4) |
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | _ 105.3 (102.8, 107.8 ) | _ 1,124.3 (1,115.9, 1,132.7) |
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | _ 7.2 (6.1, 8.2) | _ 464.6 (455.8, 473.4) |
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | _ 26.2 (25.4, 27.1) | _ 783.6 (779.1, 788.0) |
Not only that, but people with comorbidities are also more likely to seek out vaccination too. Seeing comparisons where the only variable that differs is vaccination status would be the only way to make the claims Kiero is making, but this doesn't look like it does that.
Go back to what I wrote and try to understand it without your redefining of words to manipulate the truth.Not only that, but people with comorbidities are also more likely to seek out vaccination too. Seeing comparisons where the only variable that differs is vaccination status would be the only way to make the claims Kiero is making, but this doesn't look like it does that.
If it actually worked, the people supposedly being "protected" against covid wouldn't be the majority of people dying with covid.
Not only that, but people with comorbidities are also more likely to seek out vaccination too. Seeing comparisons where the only variable that differs is vaccination status would be the only way to make the claims Kiero is making, but this doesn't look like it does that.
If it actually worked, the people supposedly being "protected" against covid wouldn't be the majority of people dying with covid.
Man you're fucking simple sometimes.
Let's say we have 10 units of people.
8 units of people are vaccinated, and 2 units of people are not.
1 unit of the 2 units of unvaccinated people get covid.
1.5 units of 8 units of vaccinated people get covid.
By your measurement, which was so simplistic it didn't account for any percentages of the population for each category (it's showing percentage of the total deaths etc. are vaccinated or unvaccinated but not adjusting for the percentage of the population that represents), the vaccinated people are getting sick "more often" (in fact your spin would have them getting sick at a rate of 50% more than the unvaccinated) even though 50% of the unvaccinated got sick in this example but only 19% of vaccinated got sick in this example.
The mental gymnastics you brainwashed twats have to engage in to support your cognitive dissonance is incredible. If the fucking thing worked the way you deluded fools claim, then the majority of people being hospitalised and dying "with" covid wouldn't be double jabbed. Except they are. Because it isn't providing any "protection" at all.
It looks like total bollocks to me, given the actual results in the real world, whereby the jabbed die more frequently than the unjabbed:
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16beafd944d34095ce36e3809e28b4433836b43298733261909ae90a4c14fbd7.jpg?w=600&h=309)
That's based on UK government official statistics as of last week, not a curated "study" paid for by a jab manufacturer.
Man you're fucking simple sometimes.
Let's say we have 10 units of people.
8 units of people are vaccinated, and 2 units of people are not.
1 unit of the 2 units of unvaccinated people get covid.
1.5 units of 8 units of vaccinated people get covid.
By your measurement, which was so simplistic it didn't account for any percentages of the population for each category (it's showing percentage of the total deaths etc. are vaccinated or unvaccinated but not adjusting for the percentage of the population that represents), the vaccinated people are getting sick "more often" (in fact your spin would have them getting sick at a rate of 50% more than the unvaccinated) even though 50% of the unvaccinated got sick in this example but only 19% of vaccinated got sick in this example.
Breaking down Kiero's numbers. Vaccinated is 69.0% and unvaccinated is 31.0%. Taking the other numbers relative to this population, we get:
Vaccinated: case rate 80.5, hospitalization rate 91.4, death rate 115.5
Unvaccinated: case rate 112.9, hospitalization rate 114.5, death rate 62.9
So Kiero is right that relative to percentage of population, the death rate is higher - though case rate and hospitalization rate is lower.
However, vaccinated versus unvaccinated is not random. In particular, the UK rate of vaccination is much higher in older people - and elderly people have a much higher death rate than younger people - both from covid and from other causes. I think the numbers would be much more meaningful if they were normalized by age group.
Naw man you're incorrect. There isn't the data in Kiero's chart to pull out the percent of the population reflected in that sample which is vaccinated vs unvaccinated relative to the UK. His chart isn't showing you that data. If you think it is, go to the source he's citing and look there.
Look at how Omicron is ravaging South Africa:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FGa5h_xXsAQW66S?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Worth keeping in mind that South Africa is in the southern hemisphere, so they are getting their warm weather months now. This is a seasonal virus. Going outside, breathing fresh air, and getting sunlight & vitamin D are all helping.
Global collapse is around the corner.
The graph is derived from this report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1037987/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-48.pdf
All this bollocks about "interpreting by age", if they were doing anything, that wouldn't matter. Old people were the majority dying with covid before "vaccination". They still are. Young people didn't die before the jabs, they still aren't, only now they're dying from adverse reactions.
The jabs haven't done a fucking thing and you mugs keep parroting all the bullshit official lines about how we just need to look at the data in a certain way.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19byvaccinationstatusengland/deathsoccurringbetween2januaryand24september2021
The key result is age-standardised mortality rate per 100,000 person-years:
Vaccination status _ Deaths involving COVID-19 _ All deaths Unvaccinated _ 849.7 (840.3, 859.2) _ 2,187.1 (2,172.2, 2,202.0) Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago _ 192.4 (182.4, 202.4) _ 811.9 (793.4, 830.4) Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago _ 105.3 (102.8, 107.8 ) _ 1,124.3 (1,115.9, 1,132.7) Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago _ 7.2 (6.1, 8.2) _ 464.6 (455.8, 473.4) Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago _ 26.2 (25.4, 27.1) _ 783.6 (779.1, 788.0)
I am having a difficult time getting my head around the person-years. I understand (I think) how it is calculated, but it is not clear why that is a good normalization for this data.
From the website: "For example, 100 people in a particular vaccination status for 0.5 years would be 50 person-years."
So that means that if 10 people had been in the 2-dose, >=21 days status for 0.1 year when they died with covid, that would be 1 person-year. And if they had died with covid at 0.2 year, that would be 2 person-year. Seems odd that the longer in a status before you die, the higher your contribution to the count.
Also, should I read the table as saying that being unvaccinated results in overall worse death results than being fully-vaccinated (2,187.1 vs. 783.6, respectively)?
Regarding UK statistics:https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19byvaccinationstatusengland/deathsoccurringbetween2januaryand24september2021
The key result is age-standardised mortality rate per 100,000 person-years:
Vaccination status _ Deaths involving COVID-19 _ All deaths Unvaccinated _ 849.7 (840.3, 859.2) _ 2,187.1 (2,172.2, 2,202.0) Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago _ 192.4 (182.4, 202.4) _ 811.9 (793.4, 830.4) Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago _ 105.3 (102.8, 107.8 ) _ 1,124.3 (1,115.9, 1,132.7) Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago _ 7.2 (6.1, 8.2) _ 464.6 (455.8, 473.4) Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago _ 26.2 (25.4, 27.1) _ 783.6 (779.1, 788.0)
I am having a difficult time getting my head around the person-years. I understand (I think) how it is calculated, but it is not clear why that is a good normalization for this data.
From the website: "For example, 100 people in a particular vaccination status for 0.5 years would be 50 person-years."
So that means that if 10 people had been in the 2-dose, >=21 days status for 0.1 year when they died with covid, that would be 1 person-year. And if they had died with covid at 0.2 year, that would be 2 person-year. Seems odd that the longer in a status before you die, the higher your contribution to the count.
Also, should I read the table as saying that being unvaccinated results in overall worse death results than being fully-vaccinated (2,187.1 vs. 783.6, respectively)?
It looks like the idea of measuring by person-years is that there is a statistical difference between (A) someone who was unvaccinated for 11 months and vaccinated for 1 month versus (B) someone who was vaccinated for the whole year. A who was unvaccinated for 11 months and lived would mostly add to the safety record of the unvaccinated, because he went through 11 months unvaccinated and didn't die during that time. I haven't reviewed their math, but that's the stated intent.
And yes, according to this data, the unvaccinated population has an overall worse death rate for this sample.
Kiero, are you aware of how viral transmissions occur? You should start with the basics first.
And as I keep saying, the tests are bullshit. The inventor of the PCR test (who died mysteriously a few years ago) recommended a CT of no higher than 25.
Here's one of many trusts who when asked what they're using are way above:
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b0bef8b577d9815c68bb2b2619a13e462849868f38e345712f074ad14679d0e5.jpg)
Huge volumes of false positives, because "cases" are the foundation of this entire covid scam.
There is no "grand conspiracy". Rather, it is in the selfish interests of Big Pharma, Big Tech, governments, etc. to over-hype covid so as to make money and expand their control.
It has to be a conspiracy! Otherwise, we couldn't just dismiss it out of hand, could we?There is no "grand conspiracy". Rather, it is in the selfish interests of Big Pharma, Big Tech, governments, etc. to over-hype covid so as to make money and expand their control.
Thats just conspiracy by another name. Otherwise it's people and organisations doing stuff under their own agendas which will conflict and we'll see what's going on.
There is no "grand conspiracy". Rather, it is in the selfish interests of Big Pharma, Big Tech, governments, etc. to over-hype covid so as to make money and expand their control.
Thats just conspiracy by another name. Otherwise it's people and organisations doing stuff under their own agendas which will conflict and we'll see what's going on.
There is no "grand conspiracy". Rather, it is in the selfish interests of Big Pharma, Big Tech, governments, etc. to over-hype covid so as to make money and expand their control.
Thats just conspiracy by another name. Otherwise it's people and organisations doing stuff under their own agendas which will conflict and we'll see what's going on.
Actually, it is the literal opposite of a conspiracy.
I know this may sound repetitive but can you explain how this highly complicated international conspiracy works? A simple step by step explanation on how the dark masters, I think it's Big Pharma this week but may be wrong, started and spread this scam through numerous governments with different agendas and stopped any sort of leak that would blow the whole thing wide open.
I know this may sound repetitive but can you explain how this highly complicated international conspiracy works? A simple step by step explanation on how the dark masters, I think it's Big Pharma this week but may be wrong, started and spread this scam through numerous governments with different agendas and stopped any sort of leak that would blow the whole thing wide open.
Spot the "pandemic":
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/82a4706b2fe0356b5d1dbdb4d6822936d19f3bc402ff4e92da6169e460cad126.png?w=600&h=306)
Spot the "pandemic":
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/82a4706b2fe0356b5d1dbdb4d6822936d19f3bc402ff4e92da6169e460cad126.png?w=600&h=306)
Worth repeating for the hard of thinking. This is one statistic that cannot be massaged or faked, it's the deaths from all causes for each year. If there were so many "excess" deaths in 2020, why isn't there a spike compared to other years?
Where is the "pandemic"?
I think that I can. It's the higher numbers of 2020 vs those of 2019. However, by that logic, there must have been a pandemic between 2014 and 2015, albeit not as severe in England as in Wales.
What would be interesting to see is a set of similar plots with the top causes of death, with separate plots for age ranges. I would also like to see a set of plots made in terms of number of co-morbidities.
There is no "grand conspiracy". Rather, it is in the selfish interests of Big Pharma, Big Tech, governments, etc. to over-hype covid so as to make money and expand their control.Pretty much this. The biggest part of it is to know that the FDA and CDC get about half their funding not from taxes, but from private donations from Big Pharma companies. They also give millions of dollars to politicians. Based on FDA and CDC recommendations, the politicians are spending BILLIONS of our tax dollars on drugs from Big Pharma to fight the Pandemic.
I think that I can. It's the higher numbers of 2020 vs those of 2019. However, by that logic, there must have been a pandemic between 2014 and 2015, albeit not as severe in England as in Wales.
What would be interesting to see is a set of similar plots with the top causes of death, with separate plots for age ranges. I would also like to see a set of plots made in terms of number of co-morbidities.
Accentuated by the fact that 2019 was an especially low death year, historically. Not a big spike either, not in the normal levels for the 00s.
Notice it dropped sharply again for 2021, so much for an ongoing emergency. I bet 2022 will be bad, though, with all the missed disagnoses and treatments due to our health service being closed.
My guess is that a significant fraction of "deaths with covid" would have been "deaths from xxxx", where xxxx are the chronic comorbidities in the elderly. And that you would see the same trend, but to a lesser extent, in the not-elderly.
It's not either/or. If you're infected by a disease that aggravates an underlying heart condition, resulting in death, is the disease the cause or the underlying heart condition? The correct answer is both, because without the heart condition the disease might have just been the sniffles; and without the disease, they might have lived for a number of years before something else aggravated the heart condition.My guess is that a significant fraction of "deaths with covid" would have been "deaths from xxxx", where xxxx are the chronic comorbidities in the elderly. And that you would see the same trend, but to a lesser extent, in the not-elderly.
Around 95% of deaths "with" covid were actually caused by underlying comorbidities.
I think the point though is that can (and does, by the hundreds of thousands annually for decades) happen with any old influenza someone in that compromised condition happens to catch. There’s nothing unique about Covid-19 except for the MSM/BigTech/Pharma/Government insisting it’s unique so Phizer can sell vaccines that barely work at best for billions of our tax dollars.It's not either/or. If you're infected by a disease that aggravates an underlying heart condition, resulting in death, is the disease the cause or the underlying heart condition? The correct answer is both, because without the heart condition the disease might have just been the sniffles; and without the disease, they might have lived for a number of years before something else aggravated the heart condition.My guess is that a significant fraction of "deaths with covid" would have been "deaths from xxxx", where xxxx are the chronic comorbidities in the elderly. And that you would see the same trend, but to a lesser extent, in the not-elderly.
Around 95% of deaths "with" covid were actually caused by underlying comorbidities.
I don't see how that has anything to do with the cause of death.I think the point though is that can (and does, by the hundreds of thousands annually for decades) happen with any old influenza someone in that compromised condition happens to catch. There’s nothing unique about Covid-19 except for the MSM/BigTech/Pharma/Government insisting it’s unique so Phizer can sell vaccines that barely work at best for billions of our tax dollars.It's not either/or. If you're infected by a disease that aggravates an underlying heart condition, resulting in death, is the disease the cause or the underlying heart condition? The correct answer is both, because without the heart condition the disease might have just been the sniffles; and without the disease, they might have lived for a number of years before something else aggravated the heart condition.My guess is that a significant fraction of "deaths with covid" would have been "deaths from xxxx", where xxxx are the chronic comorbidities in the elderly. And that you would see the same trend, but to a lesser extent, in the not-elderly.
Around 95% of deaths "with" covid were actually caused by underlying comorbidities.
I don't see how that has anything to do with the cause of death.
.It's not either/or. If you're infected by a disease that aggravates an underlying heart condition, resulting in death, is the disease the cause or the underlying heart condition? The correct answer is both, because without the heart condition the disease might have just been the sniffles; and without the disease, they might have lived for a number of years before something else aggravated the heart condition.My guess is that a significant fraction of "deaths with covid" would have been "deaths from xxxx", where xxxx are the chronic comorbidities in the elderly. And that you would see the same trend, but to a lesser extent, in the not-elderly.
Around 95% of deaths "with" covid were actually caused by underlying comorbidities.
People love to point out that obesity and hypertension are why someone died "with" Covid, but neither of these comorbidities tend to be lethal on their own except in the most extreme examples..It's not either/or. If you're infected by a disease that aggravates an underlying heart condition, resulting in death, is the disease the cause or the underlying heart condition? The correct answer is both, because without the heart condition the disease might have just been the sniffles; and without the disease, they might have lived for a number of years before something else aggravated the heart condition.My guess is that a significant fraction of "deaths with covid" would have been "deaths from xxxx", where xxxx are the chronic comorbidities in the elderly. And that you would see the same trend, but to a lesser extent, in the not-elderly.
Around 95% of deaths "with" covid were actually caused by underlying comorbidities.
I basically agree. Where we may disagree is over the weight to put on each "straw" so to speak. If I am old and have a heart condition that is going to kill me within the next year or two, covid tipping the scales isn't nearly as tragic as if I am young and have a heart condition that is going to kill me when I am 80 and covid tips the scales.
I posit that the former case trades "deaths from xxxx" for "deaths with covid and xxxx" (with covid now getting the credit for the death), with those deaths now occurring sooner (on the order of months to a year or two) than they would otherwise. I imagine that the reduction in flu deaths is due to those people that would have died of flu (with comorbidities) instead died of covid (with comorbidities).
Kiero's point is indicative of causes of deaths changing, but the overall number of deaths staying relatively the same.
Don't forget, in the US 16% of people 85+ die every year.
People love to point out that obesity and hypertension are why someone died "with" Covid, but neither of these comorbidities tend to be lethal on their own except in the most extreme examples..It's not either/or. If you're infected by a disease that aggravates an underlying heart condition, resulting in death, is the disease the cause or the underlying heart condition? The correct answer is both, because without the heart condition the disease might have just been the sniffles; and without the disease, they might have lived for a number of years before something else aggravated the heart condition.My guess is that a significant fraction of "deaths with covid" would have been "deaths from xxxx", where xxxx are the chronic comorbidities in the elderly. And that you would see the same trend, but to a lesser extent, in the not-elderly.
Around 95% of deaths "with" covid were actually caused by underlying comorbidities.
I basically agree. Where we may disagree is over the weight to put on each "straw" so to speak. If I am old and have a heart condition that is going to kill me within the next year or two, covid tipping the scales isn't nearly as tragic as if I am young and have a heart condition that is going to kill me when I am 80 and covid tips the scales.
I posit that the former case trades "deaths from xxxx" for "deaths with covid and xxxx" (with covid now getting the credit for the death), with those deaths now occurring sooner (on the order of months to a year or two) than they would otherwise. I imagine that the reduction in flu deaths is due to those people that would have died of flu (with comorbidities) instead died of covid (with comorbidities).
Kiero's point is indicative of causes of deaths changing, but the overall number of deaths staying relatively the same.
Don't forget, in the US 16% of people 85+ die every year.
People love to point out that obesity and hypertension are why someone died "with" Covid, but neither of these comorbidities tend to be lethal on their own except in the most extreme examples.
You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.People love to point out that obesity and hypertension are why someone died "with" Covid, but neither of these comorbidities tend to be lethal on their own except in the most extreme examples.
Being fat with high blood pressure will kill you just fine by itself, your risk of heart attack, stroke and countless other fatal incidents is hugely increased. If you're old too, it's just a matter of time.
The average age of death with covid is indistinguishable from the average age of death from all causes, because it doesn't take people suddenly in their prime, it finishes off decrepit people a few months earlier than they would have died anyway. Not least because a big chunk of things classified as "covid" are actually pneumonia, traditionally known as "the old man's friend" because it's a kinder way for someone to die than many other means.
For the sake of protecting a few additional months of ill health at the end of someone's already long life, all these bullshit restrictions were brought in. Then for the benefit of those same months of additional life, a risky therapeutic which is significantly worse than the infection for anyone under the age of 65 has been added to the equation.
Well, folks, since HappyDerp has never seen it, it certainly doesn't happen. Throw all the statistics out the window; the numbers are irrelevant.You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.People love to point out that obesity and hypertension are why someone died "with" Covid, but neither of these comorbidities tend to be lethal on their own except in the most extreme examples.
Being fat with high blood pressure will kill you just fine by itself, your risk of heart attack, stroke and countless other fatal incidents is hugely increased. If you're old too, it's just a matter of time.
The average age of death with covid is indistinguishable from the average age of death from all causes, because it doesn't take people suddenly in their prime, it finishes off decrepit people a few months earlier than they would have died anyway. Not least because a big chunk of things classified as "covid" are actually pneumonia, traditionally known as "the old man's friend" because it's a kinder way for someone to die than many other means.
For the sake of protecting a few additional months of ill health at the end of someone's already long life, all these bullshit restrictions were brought in. Then for the benefit of those same months of additional life, a risky therapeutic which is significantly worse than the infection for anyone under the age of 65 has been added to the equation.
While I've seen many patients die "with" obesity, I've never seen one yet that died "from" obesity. I can't truthfully say that about Covid.
Go ahead, fool, show us how many patients arrive to emergency departments with a primary complaint of obesity. Show us how many are admitted to hospitals with a primary diagnosis of obesity. Show us how many did with obesity listed as the principle cause of death.Well, folks, since HappyDerp has never seen it, it certainly doesn't happen. Throw all the statistics out the window; the numbers are irrelevant.You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.People love to point out that obesity and hypertension are why someone died "with" Covid, but neither of these comorbidities tend to be lethal on their own except in the most extreme examples.
Being fat with high blood pressure will kill you just fine by itself, your risk of heart attack, stroke and countless other fatal incidents is hugely increased. If you're old too, it's just a matter of time.
The average age of death with covid is indistinguishable from the average age of death from all causes, because it doesn't take people suddenly in their prime, it finishes off decrepit people a few months earlier than they would have died anyway. Not least because a big chunk of things classified as "covid" are actually pneumonia, traditionally known as "the old man's friend" because it's a kinder way for someone to die than many other means.
For the sake of protecting a few additional months of ill health at the end of someone's already long life, all these bullshit restrictions were brought in. Then for the benefit of those same months of additional life, a risky therapeutic which is significantly worse than the infection for anyone under the age of 65 has been added to the equation.
While I've seen many patients die "with" obesity, I've never seen one yet that died "from" obesity. I can't truthfully say that about Covid.
Wait, aren't you the same person upthread who has argued that anecdotes aren't conclusive evidence? Seems inconsistent...
They still died of covid. That's still wrong. But otherwise, I largely agree. I've pointed out in endless posts that expected years of life lost is a more useful metric than a flat number of deaths, which is just a figure used to drum up terror by the fear merchants who pretend to be journalists. Covid is unusual in that the morbidity profile almost perfectly matches the natural morbidity profile (i.e. your chance of dying from covid is proportional to your chance of dying from all other causes). It's very dangerous to those who would be expected to die soon anyway, and of very little risk to everyone else. In many states, the average age of someone dying of covid was higher than the natural lifespan. That's very different from many other diseases, for instance the 1918 flu, which killed the young at very high rates..It's not either/or. If you're infected by a disease that aggravates an underlying heart condition, resulting in death, is the disease the cause or the underlying heart condition? The correct answer is both, because without the heart condition the disease might have just been the sniffles; and without the disease, they might have lived for a number of years before something else aggravated the heart condition.My guess is that a significant fraction of "deaths with covid" would have been "deaths from xxxx", where xxxx are the chronic comorbidities in the elderly. And that you would see the same trend, but to a lesser extent, in the not-elderly.
Around 95% of deaths "with" covid were actually caused by underlying comorbidities.
I basically agree. Where we may disagree is over the weight to put on each "straw" so to speak. If I am old and have a heart condition that is going to kill me within the next year or two, covid tipping the scales isn't nearly as tragic as if I am young and have a heart condition that is going to kill me when I am 80 and covid tips the scales.
I posit that the former case trades "deaths from xxxx" for "deaths with covid and xxxx" (with covid now getting the credit for the death), with those deaths now occurring sooner (on the order of months to a year or two) than they would otherwise. I imagine that the reduction in flu deaths is due to those people that would have died of flu (with comorbidities) instead died of covid (with comorbidities).
Kiero's point is indicative of causes of deaths changing, but the overall number of deaths staying relatively the same.
Don't forget, in the US 16% of people 85+ die every year.
While I've seen many patients die "with" obesity, I've never seen one yet that died "from" obesity. I can't truthfully say that about Covid.
Your article says outright that the cause of death was asphyxiation. He didn't die from his own obesity.While I've seen many patients die "with" obesity, I've never seen one yet that died "from" obesity. I can't truthfully say that about Covid.
Does this count as dying with obesity?
https://nypost.com/2021/05/19/russian-woman-reportedly-suffocated-husband-to-death-with-her-butt/ (https://nypost.com/2021/05/19/russian-woman-reportedly-suffocated-husband-to-death-with-her-butt/)
Your article says outright that the cause of death was asphyxiation. He didn't die from his own obesity.While I've seen many patients die "with" obesity, I've never seen one yet that died "from" obesity. I can't truthfully say that about Covid.
Does this count as dying with obesity?
https://nypost.com/2021/05/19/russian-woman-reportedly-suffocated-husband-to-death-with-her-butt/ (https://nypost.com/2021/05/19/russian-woman-reportedly-suffocated-husband-to-death-with-her-butt/)
Regardless, the priciple cause of death was not determined to be obesity.Your article says outright that the cause of death was asphyxiation. He didn't die from his own obesity.While I've seen many patients die "with" obesity, I've never seen one yet that died "from" obesity. I can't truthfully say that about Covid.
Does this count as dying with obesity?
https://nypost.com/2021/05/19/russian-woman-reportedly-suffocated-husband-to-death-with-her-butt/ (https://nypost.com/2021/05/19/russian-woman-reportedly-suffocated-husband-to-death-with-her-butt/)
You never specified whose obesity. You said died "from" obesity.
They still died of covid. That's still wrong. But otherwise, I largely agree. I've pointed out in endless posts that expected years of life lost is a more useful metric than a flat number of deaths, which is just a figure used to drum up terror by the fear merchants who pretend to be journalists. Covid is unusual in that the morbidity profile almost perfectly matches the natural morbidity profile (i.e. your chance of dying from covid is proportional to your chance of dying from all other causes). It's very dangerous to those who would be expected to die soon anyway, and of very little risk to everyone else. In many states, the average age of someone dying of covid was higher than the natural lifespan. That's very different from many other diseases, for instance the 1918 flu, which killed the young at very high rates..It's not either/or. If you're infected by a disease that aggravates an underlying heart condition, resulting in death, is the disease the cause or the underlying heart condition? The correct answer is both, because without the heart condition the disease might have just been the sniffles; and without the disease, they might have lived for a number of years before something else aggravated the heart condition.My guess is that a significant fraction of "deaths with covid" would have been "deaths from xxxx", where xxxx are the chronic comorbidities in the elderly. And that you would see the same trend, but to a lesser extent, in the not-elderly.
Around 95% of deaths "with" covid were actually caused by underlying comorbidities.
I basically agree. Where we may disagree is over the weight to put on each "straw" so to speak. If I am old and have a heart condition that is going to kill me within the next year or two, covid tipping the scales isn't nearly as tragic as if I am young and have a heart condition that is going to kill me when I am 80 and covid tips the scales.
I posit that the former case trades "deaths from xxxx" for "deaths with covid and xxxx" (with covid now getting the credit for the death), with those deaths now occurring sooner (on the order of months to a year or two) than they would otherwise. I imagine that the reduction in flu deaths is due to those people that would have died of flu (with comorbidities) instead died of covid (with comorbidities).
Kiero's point is indicative of causes of deaths changing, but the overall number of deaths staying relatively the same.
Don't forget, in the US 16% of people 85+ die every year.
You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.People love to point out that obesity and hypertension are why someone died "with" Covid, but neither of these comorbidities tend to be lethal on their own except in the most extreme examples.
Being fat with high blood pressure will kill you just fine by itself, your risk of heart attack, stroke and countless other fatal incidents is hugely increased. If you're old too, it's just a matter of time.
The average age of death with covid is indistinguishable from the average age of death from all causes, because it doesn't take people suddenly in their prime, it finishes off decrepit people a few months earlier than they would have died anyway. Not least because a big chunk of things classified as "covid" are actually pneumonia, traditionally known as "the old man's friend" because it's a kinder way for someone to die than many other means.
For the sake of protecting a few additional months of ill health at the end of someone's already long life, all these bullshit restrictions were brought in. Then for the benefit of those same months of additional life, a risky therapeutic which is significantly worse than the infection for anyone under the age of 65 has been added to the equation.
While I've seen many patients die "with" obesity, I've never seen one yet that died "from" obesity. I can't truthfully say that about Covid.
Which wasn't a bad call, when the pandemic first started. After all, if you get covid and die, you typically die within 2 or 3 weeks. If you become fat, or get diabetes or hypertension, you typically live longer than 2 or 3 weeks. Usually decades longer. So if someone dies in the hospital with a host of co-morbidities and a positive test for covid, it's good bet that covid is the proximate cause. Conversely, if someone dies within an hour of a motorcycle crash while testing positive, it's probably the crash not covid. Lacking other information, it's a reasonable assessment.You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.People love to point out that obesity and hypertension are why someone died "with" Covid, but neither of these comorbidities tend to be lethal on their own except in the most extreme examples.
Being fat with high blood pressure will kill you just fine by itself, your risk of heart attack, stroke and countless other fatal incidents is hugely increased. If you're old too, it's just a matter of time.
The average age of death with covid is indistinguishable from the average age of death from all causes, because it doesn't take people suddenly in their prime, it finishes off decrepit people a few months earlier than they would have died anyway. Not least because a big chunk of things classified as "covid" are actually pneumonia, traditionally known as "the old man's friend" because it's a kinder way for someone to die than many other means.
For the sake of protecting a few additional months of ill health at the end of someone's already long life, all these bullshit restrictions were brought in. Then for the benefit of those same months of additional life, a risky therapeutic which is significantly worse than the infection for anyone under the age of 65 has been added to the equation.
While I've seen many patients die "with" obesity, I've never seen one yet that died "from" obesity. I can't truthfully say that about Covid.
I don't doubt that. However, I am sure that many of those EMS-delivered patients were brought in due to a primary complaint that was caused/exacerbated by obesity. By the same token, as Pat has pointed out, the same thing is true for some covid cases. But there are cases where a patient dies from something not covid-related and simply tests positive for covid (the PCR testing cycle numbers so high that yield a large percentage of false positive, and you can "test positive" for covid months after you have it), and that death is counted (incorrectly) as a death from covid.
Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
Do you believe it didn't happen, despite widespread reporting?Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
This could lead you to believe otherwise:
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-briefing-april-7-2020/
"There are other countries that if you had a pre-existing condition and let’s say the virus caused you to go to the ICU and then have a heart or kidney problem — some countries are recording that as a heart issue or a kidney issue and not a COVID-19 death. Right now, we’re still recording it, and we’ll — I mean, the great thing about having forms that come in and a form that has the ability to mark it as COVID-19 infection — the intent is, right now, that those — if someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death."
https://cbs12.com/news/local/man-who-died-in-motorcycle-crash-counted-as-covid-19-death-in-florida-report
Pino's answer was that one of the two people who was listed as a COVID death actually died in a motorcycle crash. Despite health officials knowing the man died in a motorcycle crash, it is unclear whether or not his death was removed from the overall count in the state.
I do not believe that overall there is a large over-count, as I suspicion that old, sick people with covid are likely to be infected to such an extent that covid contributed to their deaths. However, there have been a number of stories pushed of "perfectly healthy" teenagers/young adults that died of covid, but when you see a picture of them they are obviously obese (i.e., not perfectly healthy), so my trust in the count of the young and healthy is not all that.
As Pat noted, the optics in this regard are terrible. I would extend that to pretty much everything regarding covid.
Doctors (including MEs) document cause of death (immediate and proximate). I don't think that's really in question. You might be better off questioning who filters those reports to get the numbers they want.Do you believe it didn't happen, despite widespread reporting?Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
I do not believe that overall there is a large over-count, as I suspicion that old, sick people with covid are likely to be infected to such an extent that covid contributed to their deaths. However, there have been a number of stories pushed of "perfectly healthy" teenagers/young adults that died of covid, but when you see a picture of them they are obviously obese (i.e., not perfectly healthy), so my trust in the count of the young and healthy is not all that.Fully agree. The counts are probably in the correct ballpark, even early in the pandemic. Covid probably was responsible for the vast majority of the deaths attributed to covid.
As Pat noted, the optics in this regard are terrible. I would extend that to pretty much everything regarding covid.
That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.Doctors (including MEs) document cause of death (immediate and proximate). I don't think that's really in question. You might be better off questioning who filters those reports to get the numbers they want.Do you believe it didn't happen, despite widespread reporting?Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.Doctors (including MEs) document cause of death (immediate and proximate). I don't think that's really in question. You might be better off questioning who filters those reports to get the numbers they want.Do you believe it didn't happen, despite widespread reporting?Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
I do not believe that overall there is a large over-count, as I suspicion that old, sick people with covid are likely to be infected to such an extent that covid contributed to their deaths. However, there have been a number of stories pushed of "perfectly healthy" teenagers/young adults that died of covid, but when you see a picture of them they are obviously obese (i.e., not perfectly healthy), so my trust in the count of the young and healthy is not all that.Fully agree. The counts are probably in the correct ballpark, even early in the pandemic. Covid probably was responsible for the vast majority of the deaths attributed to covid.
As Pat noted, the optics in this regard are terrible. I would extend that to pretty much everything regarding covid.
But fuck, their response was terrible. The correct answer to things like the motorcycle crash should have been to be completely upfront, admit it's wrong, explain why they were using imperfect data and making simplistic assumptions at the start of the pandemic (because speed was more important than total accuracy), and then also explain how they're moving to more rigorous standards, including (ideally) going back through the initial data with a fine toothed comb to ensure it's as accurate as possible.
The absolute worst possible response was to react to the motorcycle crash is to get hostile and defensive, attack the critics, and then obfuscate the process.
Yes, and that's exactly the point I've been making. We should be relying on the clinical assessments of doctors (and not giving them shit guidelines on how to do it, but that's a separate issue), rather than on simplistic aggregates. For instance, the UK's notorious "anyone who had a positive covid test within this broad span of many weeks is listed as a covid death" standard. Which are okay in a crisis, because it's better to have a broad but possibly incorrect assessment today than perfection in 3 years. But it's important to be upfront and acknowledge those limits instead of attacking the people who point them out, and better methods of collecting data should be phased in as soon as possible. This was clear in my first post, and I've explained it several times since as well. That's why you earned the *derp moniker.Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.Doctors (including MEs) document cause of death (immediate and proximate). I don't think that's really in question. You might be better off questioning who filters those reports to get the numbers they want.Do you believe it didn't happen, despite widespread reporting?Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
I did read your whole post, and I'm saying you're pointing fingers at the wrong part of the issue. The doctors do state causes of death. Then those reports get entered into datasets and filtered by others that may or may not themselves be doctors into the garbage statistics that we see.
Pat you've been making a habit of arguing with posters that agree with your point but don't necessarily agree that you make your points clearly. This has happened enough with several different posters that you should probably consider that your posts are not as clear as you believe them to be.Yes, and that's exactly the point I've been making. We should be relying on the clinical assessments of doctors (and not giving them shit guidelines on how to do it, but that's a separate issue), rather than on simplistic aggregates. For instance, the UK's notorious "anyone who had a positive covid test within this broad span of many weeks is listed as a covid death" standard. Which are okay in a crisis, because it's better to have a broad but possibly incorrect assessment today than perfection in 3 years. But it's important to be upfront and acknowledge those limits instead of attacking the people who point them out, and better methods of collecting data should be phased in as soon as possible. This was clear in my first post, and I've explained it several times since as well. That's why you earned the *derp moniker.Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.Doctors (including MEs) document cause of death (immediate and proximate). I don't think that's really in question. You might be better off questioning who filters those reports to get the numbers they want.Do you believe it didn't happen, despite widespread reporting?Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
I did read your whole post, and I'm saying you're pointing fingers at the wrong part of the issue. The doctors do state causes of death. Then those reports get entered into datasets and filtered by others that may or may not themselves be doctors into the garbage statistics that we see.
I always consider that. I go back and check what I said, repeatedly, when other people jump to false conclusions. I suspect I'm one of the few people who does that. But if the failure is on my part, you should be able to go back and point out where I said something that I later contradicted, or at least clearly describe how the overall thrust of my argument conveyed the wrong impression.Pat you've been making a habit of arguing with posters that agree with your point but don't necessarily agree that you make your points clearly. This has happened enough with several different posters that you should probably consider that your posts are not as clear as you believe them to be.Yes, and that's exactly the point I've been making. We should be relying on the clinical assessments of doctors (and not giving them shit guidelines on how to do it, but that's a separate issue), rather than on simplistic aggregates. For instance, the UK's notorious "anyone who had a positive covid test within this broad span of many weeks is listed as a covid death" standard. Which are okay in a crisis, because it's better to have a broad but possibly incorrect assessment today than perfection in 3 years. But it's important to be upfront and acknowledge those limits instead of attacking the people who point them out, and better methods of collecting data should be phased in as soon as possible. This was clear in my first post, and I've explained it several times since as well. That's why you earned the *derp moniker.Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.Doctors (including MEs) document cause of death (immediate and proximate). I don't think that's really in question. You might be better off questioning who filters those reports to get the numbers they want.Do you believe it didn't happen, despite widespread reporting?Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
I did read your whole post, and I'm saying you're pointing fingers at the wrong part of the issue. The doctors do state causes of death. Then those reports get entered into datasets and filtered by others that may or may not themselves be doctors into the garbage statistics that we see.
No matter how much you proofread your own material, you'll always miss something that others might not (even if it's just the absence of something). You know this.I always consider that. I go back and check what I said, repeatedly, when other people jump to false conclusions. I suspect I'm one of the few people who does that. But if the failure is on my part, you should be able to go back and point out where I said something that I later contradicted, or at least clearly describe how the overall thrust of my argument conveyed the wrong impression.Pat you've been making a habit of arguing with posters that agree with your point but don't necessarily agree that you make your points clearly. This has happened enough with several different posters that you should probably consider that your posts are not as clear as you believe them to be.Yes, and that's exactly the point I've been making. We should be relying on the clinical assessments of doctors (and not giving them shit guidelines on how to do it, but that's a separate issue), rather than on simplistic aggregates. For instance, the UK's notorious "anyone who had a positive covid test within this broad span of many weeks is listed as a covid death" standard. Which are okay in a crisis, because it's better to have a broad but possibly incorrect assessment today than perfection in 3 years. But it's important to be upfront and acknowledge those limits instead of attacking the people who point them out, and better methods of collecting data should be phased in as soon as possible. This was clear in my first post, and I've explained it several times since as well. That's why you earned the *derp moniker.Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.Doctors (including MEs) document cause of death (immediate and proximate). I don't think that's really in question. You might be better off questioning who filters those reports to get the numbers they want.Do you believe it didn't happen, despite widespread reporting?Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.Do you believe that this isn't happening?
I did read your whole post, and I'm saying you're pointing fingers at the wrong part of the issue. The doctors do state causes of death. Then those reports get entered into datasets and filtered by others that may or may not themselves be doctors into the garbage statistics that we see.
But that never happens. It's always something like this, where you cherry pick a single statement and ignore the context in which it's placed, thus misinterpreting the overall point I'm making; and when challenged, you just state, vaguely, that I need to be clearer without being able to specify how I was imprecise or misleading. That amorphous accusation combined with the inability to point out where I did anything wrong shifts the burden of fault to you.
The most plausible assumption is I presented my case clearly, but you either didn't read it all, or jumped to conclusions based on assumptions about my beliefs, or just skimmed it for hot button statements to latch onto, without considering the context or how the statement contributes to everything else around it.
So my assessment is that people rarely read for context anymore. They skim texts, latch onto isolated points and assume entire an entire edifice of political beliefs based on single isolated statements, and then cherry pick statements to "rebut". Or they only read a bit, and miss the cumulative argument that's being constructed and supported.
I could write in a way that's always clear to people who peruse texts like that, but I'd be limited to one sentence cliches, preferably without any real content, which clearly signal a simplistic set of team-based beliefs. If I want to make substantive points, or develop arguments beyond a sound-bite, that's not an option.
No matter how much you proofread your own material, you'll always miss something that others might not (even if it's just the absence of something). You know this.And that's why I go back and double check, whenever someone draws the wrong conclusion.
It's always possible to draw more than one conclusion from a post, and it's rare that only one is 'correct' -- unless you're the one posting (in which case the other conclusions that you don't intend will fall into your blindspot due to your own inherent biases).No matter how much you proofread your own material, you'll always miss something that others might not (even if it's just the absence of something). You know this.And that's why I go back and double check, whenever someone draws the wrong conclusion.
Then be specific. Otherwise, this is just a accusation you're keeping deliberately vague so you can make an attack without having to support it.It's always possible to draw more than one conclusion from a post, and it's rare that only one is 'correct' -- unless you're the one posting (in which case the other conclusions that you don't intend will fall into your blindspot due to your own inherent biases).No matter how much you proofread your own material, you'll always miss something that others might not (even if it's just the absence of something). You know this.And that's why I go back and double check, whenever someone draws the wrong conclusion.
I'm not trying to attack you, but that's a fine example of you drawing a conclusion out that I didn't intend. Is it 'correct' though?Then be specific. Otherwise, this is just a accusation you're keeping deliberately vague so you can make an attack without having to support it.It's always possible to draw more than one conclusion from a post, and it's rare that only one is 'correct' -- unless you're the one posting (in which case the other conclusions that you don't intend will fall into your blindspot due to your own inherent biases).No matter how much you proofread your own material, you'll always miss something that others might not (even if it's just the absence of something). You know this.And that's why I go back and double check, whenever someone draws the wrong conclusion.
That would be fair, if that was my only statement on the subject. But it's not. It's literally a quick summary of a longer argument I made, just a few posts ago:I'm not trying to attack you, but that's a fine example of you drawing a conclusion out that I didn't intend. Is it 'correct' though?Then be specific. Otherwise, this is just a accusation you're keeping deliberately vague so you can make an attack without having to support it.It's always possible to draw more than one conclusion from a post, and it's rare that only one is 'correct' -- unless you're the one posting (in which case the other conclusions that you don't intend will fall into your blindspot due to your own inherent biases).No matter how much you proofread your own material, you'll always miss something that others might not (even if it's just the absence of something). You know this.And that's why I go back and double check, whenever someone draws the wrong conclusion.
They still died of covid. That's still wrong. But otherwise, I largely agree. I've pointed out in endless posts that expected years of life lost is a more useful metric than a flat number of deaths, which is just a figure used to drum up terror by the fear merchants who pretend to be journalists. Covid is unusual in that the morbidity profile almost perfectly matches the natural morbidity profile (i.e. your chance of dying from covid is proportional to your chance of dying from all other causes). It's very dangerous to those who would be expected to die soon anyway, and of very little risk to everyone else. In many states, the average age of someone dying of covid was higher than the natural lifespan. That's very different from many other diseases, for instance the 1918 flu, which killed the young at very high rates.
Yes, and that's exactly the point I've been making. We should be relying on the clinical assessments of doctors (and not giving them shit guidelines on how to do it, but that's a separate issue), rather than on simplistic aggregates. For instance, the UK's notorious "anyone who had a positive covid test within this broad span of many weeks is listed as a covid death" standard. Which are okay in a crisis, because it's better to have a broad but possibly incorrect assessment today than perfection in 3 years. But it's important to be upfront and acknowledge those limits instead of attacking the people who point them out, and better methods of collecting data should be phased in as soon as possible. This was clear in my first post, and I've explained it several times since as well. That's why you earned the *derp moniker.
The Midazolam Murders? Oh goody, more tinfoil hat madness from Kiero the King of Nutcases.They still died of covid. That's still wrong. But otherwise, I largely agree. I've pointed out in endless posts that expected years of life lost is a more useful metric than a flat number of deaths, which is just a figure used to drum up terror by the fear merchants who pretend to be journalists. Covid is unusual in that the morbidity profile almost perfectly matches the natural morbidity profile (i.e. your chance of dying from covid is proportional to your chance of dying from all other causes). It's very dangerous to those who would be expected to die soon anyway, and of very little risk to everyone else. In many states, the average age of someone dying of covid was higher than the natural lifespan. That's very different from many other diseases, for instance the 1918 flu, which killed the young at very high rates.
No they didn't. They died of something else, but because at some point within the last month/two months they tested positive on a shitty test never designed as a diagnostic tool, they are a "covid death" (bonus money for the hospital, no conflict of interests there!).
It perfectly matches the natural morbidity profile because it's an irrelevant aside that almost never killed the people concerned. That's why Italy reclassified 95% of their covid deaths as something else.
Comparisons to the 1918 flu are meaningless, that was actually deadly in its own right. It killed old and young, healthy and sick alike.
That's without getting into what happened in spring 2020. Which was mass murder of old people. In the UK they used up three years supply of Midazolam (a sedative) to euthanise elderly patients because they feared a surge of cases that would overwhelm hospitals. New York state did the same thing.Yes, and that's exactly the point I've been making. We should be relying on the clinical assessments of doctors (and not giving them shit guidelines on how to do it, but that's a separate issue), rather than on simplistic aggregates. For instance, the UK's notorious "anyone who had a positive covid test within this broad span of many weeks is listed as a covid death" standard. Which are okay in a crisis, because it's better to have a broad but possibly incorrect assessment today than perfection in 3 years. But it's important to be upfront and acknowledge those limits instead of attacking the people who point them out, and better methods of collecting data should be phased in as soon as possible. This was clear in my first post, and I've explained it several times since as well. That's why you earned the *derp moniker.
We're not in a crisis now, and likely never were. The UK's all-cause death stats for 2020 are not exceptional. If the Midazolam murders hadn't taken place, along with all the people who's lungs were destroyed by ventilating them, it would probably have continued the downward trend that had been consistent since 2000.
The Midazolam Murders? Oh goody, more tinfoil hat madness from Kiero the King of Nutcases.
Nice source you got there, be a shame if someone were to fact check them...The Midazolam Murders? Oh goody, more tinfoil hat madness from Kiero the King of Nutcases.
Yes, end of life care was prematurely applied to the elderly in care homes in their tens of thousands to get them out of the way: EDIT: <link removed>
Nice source you got there, be a shame if someone were to fact check them...
I mean, really, tin foil hat & quackery are literally some of the terms used to describe them.
Just keep on shitting out your conspiracy theory nonsense, fool, as there's nothing in the rules here against it. You might want to support your quackery depot though, looks like they need money to keep their lights on for another month.Nice source you got there, be a shame if someone were to fact check them...
I mean, really, tin foil hat & quackery are literally some of the terms used to describe them.
"Fact check" - you mean propagandists paid for by Big Pharma?
Just keep on shitting out your conspiracy theory nonsense, fool, as there's nothing in the rules here against it. You might want to support your quackery depot though, looks like they need money to keep their lights on for another month.
So this week I'm a fascist? The labels keep changing so fast these days. But not your label, Kiero, you're consistently a conspiracy theory spouting nutjob.Just keep on shitting out your conspiracy theory nonsense, fool, as there's nothing in the rules here against it. You might want to support your quackery depot though, looks like they need money to keep their lights on for another month.
"Nothing in the rules here against it" - you fascists really can't help yourselves can you? So desperate to ban viewpoints that don't conform with the official narrative you unquestioningly guzzle.
Ten years from now, assuming you're still alive, I'll be telling you "I told you so".
So this week I'm a fascist? The labels keep changing so fast these days. But not your label, Kiero, you're consistently a conspiracy theory spouting nutjob.
You'll notice "nutjob that spreads conspiracy theories" isn't recognized as a contributing comorbidity for Covid. So your bit of stupid can survive and we edge closer to Idiocracy becoming manifest.So this week I'm a fascist? The labels keep changing so fast these days. But not your label, Kiero, you're consistently a conspiracy theory spouting nutjob.
A "nutjob" who's somehow not dead in this "pandemic" despite ignoring all the safety advice and not taking your poison prick.
"Fact check" - you mean propagandists paid for by Big Pharma?While Im not thrilled with the vaccines (and sceptical), this is also the same sort of logic used by things like BLM to say that you can't trust federal data on crime statistics.
While Im not thrilled with the vaccines (and sceptical), this is also the same sort of logic used by things like BLM to say that you can't trust federal data on crime statistics.
Its important to know to yourself what kind of evidence you would need to see to be proven wrong to yourself, otherwise your stuck in a logic loop.
No logic loop necessary when the people who profit from the narrative are the people who are paying for the "fact checks".But all research is baised in one way or another. You must have an 'in' in your brain that some group must be able to convince you that their right and your wrong. Otherwise its just a gut feeling and not based in logic.
But all research is baised in one way or another. You must have an 'in' in your brain that some group must be able to convince you that their right and your wrong. Otherwise its just a gut feeling and not based in logic.
"Fact checking" isn't research. It's Big Pharma's paid partisans trying to direct the narrative, aided and abetted by Big Tech.
I know big pharma and big tech exist, but im asking you: what sort of evidence or research would you require to verify vaccine effectiveness? What would have to be the source?
If the source is impossible to happen, then your stuck in a logic loop.
Where they hadn't deliberately compromised the control group.
How did they do that? Im asking because I don't have a scientific background.
Pfizer gave the control group, who were supposed to be receiving a placebo, the same drug as those being tested. They deliberately invalidated the trial.Links to that and stuff? Sorry if Im late to the party.
Links to that and stuff? Sorry if Im late to the party.
Reported in the British Medical Journal: https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635OK thats insane. Not in the 'Your Insane' Way, but its crazy that this sort of thing happened and was obviously brushed under the rug.
"Fact check" - you mean propagandists paid for by Big Pharma?While Im not thrilled with the vaccines (and sceptical), this is also the same sort of logic used by things like BLM to say that you can't trust federal data on crime statistics.
Its important to know to yourself what kind of evidence you would need to see to be proven wrong to yourself, otherwise your stuck in a logic loop.
You know it's bad when CNN is coming out and saying that cloth masks blow dogs for quarters:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/cloth-masks-useless-omicron-expert-b1980394.html
“Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations. There’s no place for them in light of Omicron. And so wear a high-quality mask, at least a three-ply surgical mask,” she added.
“Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations.That's not entirely true. Cloth masks act as rape protection in certain ethnic cultural areas.
In one of my previous careers, our technical work products were subject to legal discovery. That included our emails. During the process of sorting out the personal emails from the business-related emails, an email conversation between two scientists was discovered, in which they were disparaging the quality assurance process (all work was performed under an NQA-1 program). That conversation was considered damaging enough that the analysis they had done was scrapped and $1M was spent to have another organization on the project re-do the analysis.That's true in a lot of fields. For another example, look at the news last week about J.P. Morgan. They've been fined because many of their financial advisors got into the habit of using alternative means of communication, so they could have off the record conversations. The SEC said hell no.
Moreover, everything we did had to be traceable and and transparent. That meant that all software, inputs, and references had to be documented and turned over to the customer and the interveners. And if the traceability or transparency was found lacking, we would have to go back and fix it.
I wish that we could have used the St. Fauci "I represent Science" defense to simply demonize and shut-down our reviewers.
All that to say that I have been skeptical from the jump.
OK thats insane. Not in the 'Your Insane' Way, but its crazy that this sort of thing happened and was obviously brushed under the rug.
However, this proves that they did sloppy testing (and lies), not that it doesn't work. In addition phizer isn't the only vaccine provider.
It does feed into my general unease about the blind trust put into the medical establishment and the media running damage control.
Our cash-strapped NHS are so desperate for funds that there are nearly 3,000 unfilled diversity posts:Is 40-45k a good 'starting salary'? I'm not up on cost of living in Britland.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FHOhsBjXEA4MMAn?format=jpg)
That only equates to about £110m on their salaries alone.
Is 40-45k a good 'starting salary'? I'm not up on cost of living in Britland.
"Fact check" - you mean propagandists paid for by Big Pharma?While Im not thrilled with the vaccines (and sceptical), this is also the same sort of logic used by things like BLM to say that you can't trust federal data on crime statistics.
Its important to know to yourself what kind of evidence you would need to see to be proven wrong to yourself, otherwise your stuck in a logic loop.
Dunno about anyone else, but I went from "kinda skeptical" to "none of these motherfuckers can be trusted" over the course of the past year.
I want to see a clean sweep of media, government and industries before even considering trusting them again. And that's to get a reset back to 0 trust.
Misinformation?
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/who-says-covid-vaccine-booster-programs-will-prolong-pandemic.html
Misinformation?
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/who-says-covid-vaccine-booster-programs-will-prolong-pandemic.html
If you read more than the headline of the article you're linking you'd be able to understand that the WHO is saying that many poor countries are having a hard time getting their hands on enough vaccines because many rich countries are using a lot of vaccination doses on boosters. It's not saying that getting a third shot is bad, just that it's less good than giving someone who hasn't had any shots their first shot.
Misinformation?
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/who-says-covid-vaccine-booster-programs-will-prolong-pandemic.html
If you read more than the headline of the article you're linking you'd be able to understand that the WHO is saying that many poor countries are having a hard time getting their hands on enough vaccines because many rich countries are using a lot of vaccination doses on boosters. It's not saying that getting a third shot is bad, just that it's less good than giving someone who hasn't had any shots their first shot.
I did read the article. And regardless of their reasons, the WHO's conclusion is counter to the US narrative (per a recent tweet by Let's Go Brandon) that everyone in the US (except for illegal aliens crossing the Mexican border) should get vaccinated and boosted. Hence, by definition, it is misinformation.
:swoosh:Misinformation?
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/who-says-covid-vaccine-booster-programs-will-prolong-pandemic.html
If you read more than the headline of the article you're linking you'd be able to understand that the WHO is saying that many poor countries are having a hard time getting their hands on enough vaccines because many rich countries are using a lot of vaccination doses on boosters. It's not saying that getting a third shot is bad, just that it's less good than giving someone who hasn't had any shots their first shot.
I did read the article. And regardless of their reasons, the WHO's conclusion is counter to the US narrative (per a recent tweet by Let's Go Brandon) that everyone in the US (except for illegal aliens crossing the Mexican border) should get vaccinated and boosted. Hence, by definition, it is misinformation.
Ah, so you did read the article. You just don't understand it. Got it.
Misinformation?
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/who-says-covid-vaccine-booster-programs-will-prolong-pandemic.html
If you read more than the headline of the article you're linking you'd be able to understand that the WHO is saying that many poor countries are having a hard time getting their hands on enough vaccines because many rich countries are using a lot of vaccination doses on boosters. It's not saying that getting a third shot is bad, just that it's less good than giving someone who hasn't had any shots their first shot.
I did read the article. And regardless of their reasons, the WHO's conclusion is counter to the US narrative (per a recent tweet by Let's Go Brandon) that everyone in the US (except for illegal aliens crossing the Mexican border) should get vaccinated and boosted. Hence, by definition, it is misinformation.
Ah, so you did read the article. You just don't understand it. Got it.
Ah, so you did read the article. You just don't understand it. Got it.
Remember kids, you can't vote your way out of communism.
But you can hubris your way into a pandemic.
Misinformation?
WHO says vaccine booster programs will prolong Covid crisis: ‘No country can boost its way out of the pandemic’
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/who-says-covid-vaccine-booster-programs-will-prolong-pandemic.html
Link edited out
Almost nobody knows what the fuck you're talking about or why you're talking about it in this thread.
Turns out 97.1% of deaths hitherto attributed to Covid were not due directly to Covid.
According to its latest report on Covid mortality, the Institute says COVID-19 has killed fewer people than the average bout of seasonal flu. According to the statistical sample of medical records collected by the Institute, only 2.9% of the deaths registered since the end of February 2020 have been due to COVID-19. So, of the 130,468 deaths registered by official statistics dating back to the beginning of the pandemic, only 3,783 are due to the virus alone. All the other Italians who lost their lives had from between one and five pre-existing diseases. Of those aged over 67 who died, 7% had more than three co-morbidities, and 18% at least two. According to the Institute, 65.8% of Italians who died after being infected with Covid were ill with arterial hypertension (high blood pressure), 23.5% had dementia, 29.3% had diabetes, and 24.8% atrial fibrillation. Add to that, 17.4% had lung problems, 16.3% had had cancer in the last five years and 15.7% suffered from previous heart failures.
Misinformation?
WHO says vaccine booster programs will prolong Covid crisis: ‘No country can boost its way out of the pandemic’
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/who-says-covid-vaccine-booster-programs-will-prolong-pandemic.html
Because it means not enough people in poor nations can get even a first dose of the vaccine if the rich nations take those doses for boosters.
WHO is in fact differing with USA policy. But WHO is saying people SHOULD GET VACCINATED TO STOP THE PANDEMIC. They're just saying the supply of vaccines is limited and should be used first as an initial dose, then as a second dose, before anyone turns to boosters.
But you go on with your intentionally spinning a pro-vaccine article as if it's an anti-vaccine article and hope nobody actually clicks on the article self.
But you can hubris your way into a pandemic.
What pandemic?
Kiero will soon tell you that windows only show you the lies of mainstream media and that window coatings have been manufactured by big pharma.But you can hubris your way into a pandemic.
What pandemic?
Have you looked outside your window as of late?
Have you looked outside your window as of late?
Have you looked outside your window as of late?
I go out and mix with the general public every single day, without fail.
Are you still hiding behind your sofa, waiting for someone in authority to tell you it's "safe"?
Kiero is impervious to real life stories from those working n healthcare, so I doubt firsthand experience as a patient will sway him.Have you looked outside your window as of late?
I go out and mix with the general public every single day, without fail.
I believe you: no virus will ever kill an ally.QuoteAre you still hiding behind your sofa, waiting for someone in authority to tell you it's "safe"?
I was in a clinic, actually, a detachment of a bigger one. Us “non serious” cases were given three hours to pack and go home, because the mother clinic had been overrun by COVID cases and the one I was in had been marked to accept the overflow. Just like that. This happened two days ago. The nurses’ faces were quite ashen.
But it is all a big conspiracy, sure: in 2019, 90% of the World secretly met and made a plan to con the remaining 10%.
Kiero is impervious to real life stories from those working n healthcare, so I doubt firsthand experience as a patient will sway him.Have you looked outside your window as of late?
I go out and mix with the general public every single day, without fail.
I believe you: no virus will ever kill an ally.QuoteAre you still hiding behind your sofa, waiting for someone in authority to tell you it's "safe"?
I was in a clinic, actually, a detachment of a bigger one. Us “non serious” cases were given three hours to pack and go home, because the mother clinic had been overrun by COVID cases and the one I was in had been marked to accept the overflow. Just like that. This happened two days ago. The nurses’ faces were quite ashen.
But it is all a big conspiracy, sure: in 2019, 90% of the World secretly met and made a plan to con the remaining 10%.
Kiero is impervious to real life stories from those working n healthcare, so I doubt firsthand experience as a patient will sway him.
I believe you: no virus will ever kill an ally.
I was in a clinic, actually, a detachment of a bigger one. Us “non serious” cases were given three hours to pack and go home, because the mother clinic had been overrun by COVID cases and the one I was in had been marked to accept the overflow. Just like that. This happened two days ago. The nurses’ faces were quite ashen.
But it is all a big conspiracy, sure: in 2019, 90% of the World secretly met and made a plan to con the remaining 10%.
To be clear, I don’t wish for people like Kiero to get COVID. They would simply A) divert a ICU from someone more deserving and, B) divert a doctor from curing something else (like in my case).
Having said that, if they get COVID without me wishing for it… ;)
The Midazolam murders are "nutjobbery" - except someone has put a private criminal prosecution before a magistrate's court today: https://www.thebernician.net/midazolam-murders-pub-lay-charges-in-magistrates-court/
What an incredibly coincidental correlation between Midazolam prescriptions and care home deaths:
(https://i0.wp.com/www.thebernician.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Care-Home-v-Midaz.jpg?resize=768%2C543&ssl=1)
Having assembled an international team of fearless and vastly experienced investigators to assess the vast amount of evidence amassed by Dave Laity, Mark Oakford and myself over the course of the past twenty months, the senior barrister who has agreed to take the case described it as “the most significant case in legal history” and for good reason.
On the basis that we can prove that the policies the UK Government covertly imposed upon the British People were intended to end the lives of as many of us as they could, under the sick and twisted pretense of keeping the very demographics they targeted for elimination safe from harm.
However, we also have evidence that these crimes are being carried out as part of an international plan to reduce population by up to 95%, as per the UN’s Sustainable Development agenda, which, once common knowledge, will be enough to bring down almost every government worldwide.
Nevertheless, for legal reasons, we will not yet be releasing the identities of the first eight defendants PUB is seeking to charge, indict and convict of Midazolam Murders by government policy.
How one views the needs of the sickest and most vulnerable people says a lot about them. Here it tells me that you are a piece of shit.Kiero is impervious to real life stories from those working n healthcare, so I doubt firsthand experience as a patient will sway him.
I don't give a toss about your skewed perspective, only seeing the sickest and most vulnerable people. What you don't see are the multitudes who never require any medical attention and get better on their own.
We also can't stop society just to protect a few people, because that causes far more harm in the long run to everyone, vulnerable or not. Plus how we treat the young is at least as important as how we treat the sick and elderly, and the coronavirus response has been a case of sacrificing children to preserve the old, from the abandonment of face to face learning to myocarditis risks.How one views the needs of the sickest and most vulnerable people says a lot about them. Here it tells me that you are a piece of shit.Kiero is impervious to real life stories from those working n healthcare, so I doubt firsthand experience as a patient will sway him.
I don't give a toss about your skewed perspective, only seeing the sickest and most vulnerable people. What you don't see are the multitudes who never require any medical attention and get better on their own.
How one views the needs of the sickest and most vulnerable people says a lot about them. Here it tells me that you are a piece of shit.
Link edited out
Looking into the linked article, it seems like these 160,000 murders are just the first step in an international plan to reduce the world population by 95% as per the U.N. Sustainable Development agenda. The story goes:QuoteHaving assembled an international team of fearless and vastly experienced investigators to assess the vast amount of evidence amassed by Dave Laity, Mark Oakford and myself over the course of the past twenty months, the senior barrister who has agreed to take the case described it as “the most significant case in legal history” and for good reason.
On the basis that we can prove that the policies the UK Government covertly imposed upon the British People were intended to end the lives of as many of us as they could, under the sick and twisted pretense of keeping the very demographics they targeted for elimination safe from harm.
However, we also have evidence that these crimes are being carried out as part of an international plan to reduce population by up to 95%, as per the UN’s Sustainable Development agenda, which, once common knowledge, will be enough to bring down almost every government worldwide.
Nevertheless, for legal reasons, we will not yet be releasing the identities of the first eight defendants PUB is seeking to charge, indict and convict of Midazolam Murders by government policy.
I'm skeptical of this based on what's shown, but I'd be curious what the next supposed step in the plan is. Reducing the population by 95% means over 6 billion deaths, which calls for a lot more than just mass killing helpless old people with Midazolam.
Link edited out[/quote]
Did you respond to the wake up call by sorting out your health? Because I've had covid twice and never went anywhere near a hospital.
Once again because you cut this part out of my post and refused to respond to it: The site you're linking to claims Covid is a Government conspiracy to commit genocide against those the Government feels are useless like the elderly. that the Rothschild family secretly controls the world and all wars are Rothschild wars, he goes on to speak about "Jewish Conspiracies" and proxies for "Jewish world ambitions" and Bilderberg connections, and trilateralists. Oh and that cornoavirus is not making people sick, it's instead non-ionising radiation emitted by 5G making people sick and Corona is being used as a mask for electromagnetic hypersensitivity.
The site is, in every way, a nutcase conspiracy theory paranoid delusional paradise. I am directly asking you again why you are citing it, and if you read that website for information?
Well, that you never sought professional help - in a very general sense - is quite clear.
Which children are those? Oh yes, some more of your tinfoil hat & quackery nonsense. The reality is that vaccine reactions have been infrequent, mild, and of limited duration not deaths and lifelimiting damage.How one views the needs of the sickest and most vulnerable people says a lot about them. Here it tells me that you are a piece of shit.
I'm rather more concerned about the perfectly healthy children they're threatening with death and life-limiting damage, than those who are already on the downward spiral.
So go fuck yourself, you sanctimonious cunt.
Almost nobody knows what the fuck you're talking about or why you're talking about it in this thread.
If you weren't a blinkered moron, desperately clinging to the lies being told again and again by the government and their media shills, you'd know exactly what I'm talking about. Which is that "covid deaths" are utter bollocks and the so-called pandemic was a nothing. But it worked on plenty of dumbasses like you, who gladly handed over your freedom in exchange for a promise that maybe you'll get them back one day.
All the stats are garbage, here's the Italian recount: https://dailysceptic.org/2021/11/03/italian-higher-institute-of-health-adjusts-number-of-deaths-due-to-covid-alone-since-february-2020-downwards-from-over-130000-to-under-4000/
They revised their 130,000 dead with covid to less than 4,000 from covid:QuoteTurns out 97.1% of deaths hitherto attributed to Covid were not due directly to Covid.
According to its latest report on Covid mortality, the Institute says COVID-19 has killed fewer people than the average bout of seasonal flu. According to the statistical sample of medical records collected by the Institute, only 2.9% of the deaths registered since the end of February 2020 have been due to COVID-19. So, of the 130,468 deaths registered by official statistics dating back to the beginning of the pandemic, only 3,783 are due to the virus alone. All the other Italians who lost their lives had from between one and five pre-existing diseases. Of those aged over 67 who died, 7% had more than three co-morbidities, and 18% at least two. According to the Institute, 65.8% of Italians who died after being infected with Covid were ill with arterial hypertension (high blood pressure), 23.5% had dementia, 29.3% had diabetes, and 24.8% atrial fibrillation. Add to that, 17.4% had lung problems, 16.3% had had cancer in the last five years and 15.7% suffered from previous heart failures.
Once again because you cut this part out of my post and refused to respond to it: The site you're linking to claims Covid is a Government conspiracy to commit genocide against those the Government feels are useless like the elderly. that the Rothschild family secretly controls the world and all wars are Rothschild wars, he goes on to speak about "Jewish Conspiracies" and proxies for "Jewish world ambitions" and Bilderberg connections, and trilateralists. Oh and that cornoavirus is not making people sick, it's instead non-ionising radiation emitted by 5G making people sick and Corona is being used as a mask for electromagnetic hypersensitivity.
The site is, in every way, a nutcase conspiracy theory paranoid delusional paradise. I am directly asking you again why you are citing it, and if you read that website for information?
Which children are those? Oh yes, some more of your tinfoil hat & quackery nonsense. The reality is that vaccine reactions have been infrequent, mild, and of limited duration not deaths and lifelimiting damage.
Even we're I to believe one word from a fool that mainlines conspiracy theories, using your own reasoning, how many of those teens died "with" the vaccine vs those that died "from" the vaccine? Go ahead, chew on some of your own shit.Which children are those? Oh yes, some more of your tinfoil hat & quackery nonsense. The reality is that vaccine reactions have been infrequent, mild, and of limited duration not deaths and lifelimiting damage.
47% increase in teenage death in this country since their jab rollout started. Admission from our JCVI that two healthy children might be saved for every million children jabbed, which is why they didn't recommend it for 5-11 year olds. Because many more than two would suffer adverse effects.
All for a medication which provides no benefit to them whatsoever, what with children being at near-zero risk from covid.
Even we're I to believe one word from a fool that mainlines conspiracy theories, using your own reasoning, how many of those teens died "with" the vaccine vs those that died "from" the vaccine? Go ahead, chew on some of your own shit.
Once again because you cut this part out of my post and refused to respond to it: The site you're linking to claims Covid is a Government conspiracy to commit genocide against those the Government feels are useless like the elderly. that the Rothschild family secretly controls the world and all wars are Rothschild wars, he goes on to speak about "Jewish Conspiracies" and proxies for "Jewish world ambitions" and Bilderberg connections, and trilateralists. Oh and that cornoavirus is not making people sick, it's instead non-ionising radiation emitted by 5G making people sick and Corona is being used as a mask for electromagnetic hypersensitivity.
The site is, in every way, a nutcase conspiracy theory paranoid delusional paradise. I am directly asking you again why you are citing it, and if you read that website for information?
I'm not interested in any of that shit, I cited it as proof a legal action was taking place.
But hey, we gotta make sure all the leftists get their unlimited series of boosters!
Considering the worthless definition of fascist these days is 'person that I don't like', your opinion is garbage just like you are.But hey, we gotta make sure all the leftists get their unlimited series of boosters!
Thanks!
I hope that fascist get all the bleach they can drink.
Nobody asked you if you found my question interesting. I am asking why you are using THAT SITE for information? How is THAT SITE "proof" of anything, and why did you find yourself on that particular crazy website?
This, folks, is what narrative collapse looks like: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54145299QuoteIf the covid test was available prior to 2020 most people with cold or flu symptoms would have tested positive for covid.
The BBC, of all people, admitting coronaviruses have always been with us and the tests can't distinguish between covid19 or any other strain. And that pre-2020 it was all classed as cold or flu.
Fauci says large holiday gatherings not safe — even with boosterThat's one of the few areas where I agree with him. It's pretty clear that a disproportionate amount of transmission occurs because of superspreader events, and 30 to 50 is a lot of people. And it's a recommendation, not a mandate.
https://thehill.com/homenews/coronavirus-report/587061-fauci-says-large-holiday-gatherings-not-safe-even-with-booster
Should I take this to mean that there is no going back to pre-covid normal?
Fauci says large holiday gatherings not safe — even with boosterThat's one of the few areas where I agree with him. It's pretty clear that a disproportionate amount of transmission occurs because of superspreader events, and 30 to 50 is a lot of people. And it's a recommendation, not a mandate.
https://thehill.com/homenews/coronavirus-report/587061-fauci-says-large-holiday-gatherings-not-safe-even-with-booster
Should I take this to mean that there is no going back to pre-covid normal?
That's widely known.Fauci says large holiday gatherings not safe — even with boosterThat's one of the few areas where I agree with him. It's pretty clear that a disproportionate amount of transmission occurs because of superspreader events, and 30 to 50 is a lot of people. And it's a recommendation, not a mandate.
https://thehill.com/homenews/coronavirus-report/587061-fauci-says-large-holiday-gatherings-not-safe-even-with-booster
Should I take this to mean that there is no going back to pre-covid normal?
“There are many of these parties that have 30, 40, 50 people in which you do not know the vaccination status of individuals,” he said. “Those are the kind of functions in the context of Omicron that you do not want to go to.” --St Fauci
So he is effectively admitting that the vaccine does not prevent you from getting covid.
That's widely known.Fauci says large holiday gatherings not safe — even with boosterThat's one of the few areas where I agree with him. It's pretty clear that a disproportionate amount of transmission occurs because of superspreader events, and 30 to 50 is a lot of people. And it's a recommendation, not a mandate.
https://thehill.com/homenews/coronavirus-report/587061-fauci-says-large-holiday-gatherings-not-safe-even-with-booster
Should I take this to mean that there is no going back to pre-covid normal?
“There are many of these parties that have 30, 40, 50 people in which you do not know the vaccination status of individuals,” he said. “Those are the kind of functions in the context of Omicron that you do not want to go to.” --St Fauci
So he is effectively admitting that the vaccine does not prevent you from getting covid.
I cannot find that quote in the article.
So he is effectively admitting that the vaccine does not prevent you from getting covid.
The vaccines don't prevent transmission, but that's a null argument. Nobody seems to disagree on that topic.
When it comes to sars2, very few interventions seem to work. Locking down borders, combined with quarantines for new arrivals, and aggressive contact tracing when cases do slip through, is one. But that only works for island nations that can completely control their borders. The contact tracing part also only works when there is no community transmission. If you contain any new outbreaks, and identify every single person who was infected, then you can stop the spread. But if you find a single case that you can't trace back to a new arrival, then you've lost control and the virus will spread in invisible chains of transmission until it becomes endemic, regardless of what you do. But even this solution isn't viable in the long term, because shutting your borders permanently will wreck your economy.
Shutting down large gatherings is another intervention that seems to work. This is because a very high proportion of covid-19 cases can be linked back to superspreader events, where numerous people are infected and then carry the disease back home. Because of the highly aerosolized nature of the disease, most superspreader events are indoors. In other words, in areas where the air is relatively still, allowing tiny droplets with viral loads to build up in high concentrations, over tens of minute or hours. In addition, most of the superspreader events involve some kind of talking or singing, because open mouths lead to more of these tiny droplets being emitted. It's very clear that infection, and the severity of the infection, is related to viral loads. High concentrations lead to increased numbers of infections, and worse outcomes.
Conversely, events held outdoors present very little risk, because the constant natural airflow prevents the particles from building up. Though this isn't really a practical solution in the northern hemisphere in winter. Also, there have been very few cases of transmission in airplanes, apparently because of the lack of talking and constant recirculation of the air. Another surprising example is the high speed trains in Japan, where people are packed together. It's speculation, but lack of transmission may be due to cultural mores against talking on mass transit.
Despite a lot of panicked public health messaging, bars didn't turn out to a major driver of transmission. Cases certainly happened, but not to degree many expected. Supermarkets were also very low risk. These may be due to turnover. It's the concentration of the tiny particles that linger in the air for hours that causes most infections, not casual exposure. People didn't stay in one place long enough for the particles to build up.
Thus, large indoor family gatherings are a risk, because they tend to be fairly lengthy affairs, in closed in areas with little air circulation, and lots of socialization. But with all things, risk assessment is personal. Excluding grandma isn't good, because of social isolation and rejection. But having smaller events when you have a lot of elderly relatives might make sense.
But this is only a temporary solution. The virus is endemic. It's going to spread everywhere, regardless of what you do. But you can slow it down a bit, or spread out sharp peaks over longer periods of time, which might be useful to prevent hospitals from being overloaded. But there's been so much disinformation on that particular topic, it's reasonable to be skeptical.
Because on the sudden travel changes my father nearly didn't get into the states and had to call me up at 11 pm to have me make him a covid test that was 24 hours ago and not 35 hours ago. He was very thankful because he was surrounded by a large group of people stunned or weeping that they would not get to visit their families for the holidays because of a sudden change of testing conditions for a disease about as bad as sniffles.
The mechanism of transmission does a good job of explaining why the superspreader events happen. In fact, it was the nature of the superspreader events (indoors not outdoors, none in airplanes) that was one of the early clues suggesting that covid-19 was highly aerosolized, and that the large droplet model was wrong.The vaccines don't prevent transmission, but that's a null argument. Nobody seems to disagree on that topic.
When it comes to sars2, very few interventions seem to work. Locking down borders, combined with quarantines for new arrivals, and aggressive contact tracing when cases do slip through, is one. But that only works for island nations that can completely control their borders. The contact tracing part also only works when there is no community transmission. If you contain any new outbreaks, and identify every single person who was infected, then you can stop the spread. But if you find a single case that you can't trace back to a new arrival, then you've lost control and the virus will spread in invisible chains of transmission until it becomes endemic, regardless of what you do. But even this solution isn't viable in the long term, because shutting your borders permanently will wreck your economy.
Shutting down large gatherings is another intervention that seems to work. This is because a very high proportion of covid-19 cases can be linked back to superspreader events, where numerous people are infected and then carry the disease back home. Because of the highly aerosolized nature of the disease, most superspreader events are indoors. In other words, in areas where the air is relatively still, allowing tiny droplets with viral loads to build up in high concentrations, over tens of minute or hours. In addition, most of the superspreader events involve some kind of talking or singing, because open mouths lead to more of these tiny droplets being emitted. It's very clear that infection, and the severity of the infection, is related to viral loads. High concentrations lead to increased numbers of infections, and worse outcomes.
Conversely, events held outdoors present very little risk, because the constant natural airflow prevents the particles from building up. Though this isn't really a practical solution in the northern hemisphere in winter. Also, there have been very few cases of transmission in airplanes, apparently because of the lack of talking and constant recirculation of the air. Another surprising example is the high speed trains in Japan, where people are packed together. It's speculation, but lack of transmission may be due to cultural mores against talking on mass transit.
Despite a lot of panicked public health messaging, bars didn't turn out to a major driver of transmission. Cases certainly happened, but not to degree many expected. Supermarkets were also very low risk. These may be due to turnover. It's the concentration of the tiny particles that linger in the air for hours that causes most infections, not casual exposure. People didn't stay in one place long enough for the particles to build up.
Thus, large indoor family gatherings are a risk, because they tend to be fairly lengthy affairs, in closed in areas with little air circulation, and lots of socialization. But with all things, risk assessment is personal. Excluding grandma isn't good, because of social isolation and rejection. But having smaller events when you have a lot of elderly relatives might make sense.
But this is only a temporary solution. The virus is endemic. It's going to spread everywhere, regardless of what you do. But you can slow it down a bit, or spread out sharp peaks over longer periods of time, which might be useful to prevent hospitals from being overloaded. But there's been so much disinformation on that particular topic, it's reasonable to be skeptical.
Too much emphasis is being placed on "super spreader" stuff as a function of quantity of people rather than looking at the kinematics of viral particle motion.
SARS-COV-2 is just like every other airborne respiratory virus with an animal reservoir. The only masks that will stop it are full-face positive pressure respirators. Even N95s won't fully stop it. Social distancing won't stop it. All that masks and social distancing do is cut down the quantity of viral particles trapped in large droplets of vapor exhalate. Once those droplets (of both infected and uninfected) have saturated the mask material, the weave expands, making the openings in the weave even larger. That's assuming you've got it tightly-fitted, otherwise you leave a vapor wake around the sides of the mask that linger after your passage. Those smaller water droplets float on that air wake and have a significant hang time, especially in still air.
Unless you've touched snot or phlegm and then touched a surface, the primary means of transmission is airborne.
When are the US due to reach one million deaths BTW?
When are the US due to reach one million deaths BTW?
As the CDC admitted long ago that only 6% of the "death total" actually died FROM the China Virus and 94% died WITH the China Virus, the USA won't be hitting 1M deaths FROM the virus for at least two decades.
Because on the sudden travel changes my father nearly didn't get into the states and had to call me up at 11 pm to have me make him a covid test that was 24 hours ago and not 35 hours ago. He was very thankful because he was surrounded by a large group of people stunned or weeping that they would not get to visit their families for the holidays because of a sudden change of testing conditions for a disease about as bad as sniffles.
When are the US due to reach one million deaths BTW?
When are the US due to reach one million deaths BTW?
As the CDC admitted long ago that only 6% of the "death total" actually died FROM the China Virus and 94% died WITH the China Virus, the USA won't be hitting 1M deaths FROM the virus for at least two decades.
However, we'll be hitting 1M deaths FROM the lockdowns and FROM the experimental vax long before then.
Nobody asked you if you found my question interesting. I am asking why you are using THAT SITE for information? How is THAT SITE "proof" of anything, and why did you find yourself on that particular crazy website?
Careful with those pearls!
When are the US due to reach one million deaths BTW?
As the CDC admitted long ago that only 6% of the "death total" actually died FROM the China Virus and 94% died WITH the China Virus, the USA won't be hitting 1M deaths FROM the virus for at least two decades.
Link for the data?
But even if the death toll is a true number, thats very much a 'PEOPLE WILL DIE' catchall that can be used to ban fast food, cars, and Kinder Suprises.
Well, that you never sought professional help - in a very general sense - is quite clear.
That's a no then. I'd put good money on you being overweight and unfit, which is why you were hospitalised with the 'rona, and I wasn't.
Because on the sudden travel changes my father nearly didn't get into the states and had to call me up at 11 pm to have me make him a covid test that was 24 hours ago and not 35 hours ago. He was very thankful because he was surrounded by a large group of people stunned or weeping that they would not get to visit their families for the holidays because of a sudden change of testing conditions for a disease about as bad as sniffles.
When are the US due to reach one million deaths BTW?
If you are honest about it, never. Like most other seasonal respiratory viruses the death count should reset every new season. We don't keep a running total of flu deaths, why are we doing it for C-19?
But hey, we gotta make sure all the leftists get their unlimited series of boosters!
Thanks!
I hope that fascist get all the bleach they can drink.
The mechanism of transmission does a good job of explaining why the superspreader events happen. In fact, it was the nature of the superspreader events (indoors not outdoors, none in airplanes) that was one of the early clues suggesting that covid-19 was highly aerosolized, and that the large droplet model was wrong.
Masks and social distancing are different topics. Masks have been shown to be largely ineffective, and this follows from what we know about the highly aerosolized nature of the disease. The droplets carrying the great majority of shed viruses are smaller than the particles even an N95 respirator can block. Positive pressure may help, but I haven't seen any studies, and it's not a feature of any face covering that's been seriously considered for public use. Social distancing is also of marginal benefit. It's remarkable how long public health took to recognize the highly aerosolized nature of the disease despite very strong evidence, and even more remarkable that the conclusion didn't change any of their policy recommendations. If they were true advocates for public health instead of political animals, they would have dropped the mask and constant sanitation recommendations, and strongly pushed ventilation.
You think it's inappropriate in some way to ask why a person would be going to and re-posting from a blatantly antisemitic site?
I think it's a total irrelevance that you're trying to use as a smokescreen rather than address the point itself.
Bullshit. You read and quote an antisemitic site, it's fair for me to ask why. I don't give a shit if you think it's irrelevant - it's literally the one thing Pundit has banned people for here, and if you don't want to fucking escalate this you will offer some shred of an explanation for why you're linking people to articles on a blatantly antisemitic website here. Stop diverting from the question and answer it.
Misty's one step from going full Karen, 'I WANT TO TALK TO YOUR MANAGER', I see.Bullshit. You read and quote an antisemitic site, it's fair for me to ask why. I don't give a shit if you think it's irrelevant - it's literally the one thing Pundit has banned people for here, and if you don't want to fucking escalate this you will offer some shred of an explanation for why you're linking people to articles on a blatantly antisemitic website here. Stop diverting from the question and answer it.
You can take your oh-so-veiled threat of getting me banned and stick it up your arse. I don't owe you an explanation of anything.
Misty's one step from going full Karen, 'I WANT TO TALK TO YOUR MANAGER', I see.Bullshit. You read and quote an antisemitic site, it's fair for me to ask why. I don't give a shit if you think it's irrelevant - it's literally the one thing Pundit has banned people for here, and if you don't want to fucking escalate this you will offer some shred of an explanation for why you're linking people to articles on a blatantly antisemitic website here. Stop diverting from the question and answer it.
You can take your oh-so-veiled threat of getting me banned and stick it up your arse. I don't owe you an explanation of anything.
Do it, Misty. C'mon! Let's fucking DO this.
Or fuck off like the pussy we all know you are.
Bullshit. You read and quote an antisemitic site, it's fair for me to ask why. I don't give a shit if you think it's irrelevant - it's literally the one thing Pundit has banned people for here, and if you don't want to fucking escalate this you will offer some shred of an explanation for why you're linking people to articles on a blatantly antisemitic website here. Stop diverting from the question and answer it.
You can take your oh-so-veiled threat of getting me banned and stick it up your arse. I don't owe you an explanation of anything.
You definitely owe me one. And it better be a damn good one. Like, along the lines that you're an absolute idiot and that you didn't realize that site was full of anti-semitic bile, and you're going to remove the link from your posts.
As will anyone who quoted him.
This might offend people's sensibilities less: https://principia-scientific.com/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/
Furthermore, the following passages are taken from the Hull & East Riding Prescribing Committee’s recommendations for assessing people with suspected COVID symptoms, which were in reality caused by the graphine oxide in the masks, the tests and the vaxxes imposed upon them prior to their diagnosis.
Again though: why on earth would you prescribe morphine and midazolam for someone with breathing issues?This might offend people's sensibilities less: https://principia-scientific.com/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/
From the article above:QuoteFurthermore, the following passages are taken from the Hull & East Riding Prescribing Committee’s recommendations for assessing people with suspected COVID symptoms, which were in reality caused by the graphine oxide in the masks, the tests and the vaxxes imposed upon them prior to their diagnosis.
That site is filled with just as much bullshit as any other conspiracy site.
Again though: why on earth would you prescribe morphine and midazolam for someone with breathing issues?This might offend people's sensibilities less: https://principia-scientific.com/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/
From the article above:QuoteFurthermore, the following passages are taken from the Hull & East Riding Prescribing Committee’s recommendations for assessing people with suspected COVID symptoms, which were in reality caused by the graphine oxide in the masks, the tests and the vaxxes imposed upon them prior to their diagnosis.
That site is filled with just as much bullshit as any other conspiracy site.
Again though: why on earth would you prescribe morphine and midazolam for someone with breathing issues?
Intravenous midazolam is indicated for procedural sedation (often in combination with an opioid, such as fentanyl), for preoperative sedation, for the induction of general anesthesia, and for sedation of people who are ventilated in critical care units
Both sedatives and paralytics are give to patients on ventilators, as without them, the procedure is torturous (trying to fight/breath against the ventilator is a very bad thing).Again though: why on earth would you prescribe morphine and midazolam for someone with breathing issues?Quote from: Wikipedia entry for MidazolamIntravenous midazolam is indicated for procedural sedation (often in combination with an opioid, such as fentanyl), for preoperative sedation, for the induction of general anesthesia, and for sedation of people who are ventilated in critical care units
I am not a real doctor and I've never been on a ventilator, but I suspect it is very uncomfortable.
I presume it isn't an act of murder.
Again though: why on earth would you prescribe morphine and midazolam for someone with breathing issues?This might offend people's sensibilities less: https://principia-scientific.com/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/
From the article above:QuoteFurthermore, the following passages are taken from the Hull & East Riding Prescribing Committee’s recommendations for assessing people with suspected COVID symptoms, which were in reality caused by the graphine oxide in the masks, the tests and the vaxxes imposed upon them prior to their diagnosis.
That site is filled with just as much bullshit as any other conspiracy site.
Based on the extensive claims and enclosed documentation, we charge those responsible for numerous violations of the Nuremberg Code, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimesof aggression in the United Kingdom, but not limited to individuals in these countries.
Filing with the International Criminal Court at the Hague against the British government and numerous others: https://www.docdroid.com/WUjv6iw/icc-complaint-7-1-pdf
It opens:QuoteBased on the extensive claims and enclosed documentation, we charge those responsible for numerous violations of the Nuremberg Code, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimesof aggression in the United Kingdom, but not limited to individuals in these countries.
They're going after every single element of the coronascam - it's all in there. The Midazolam murders are in paragraphs 69-74 (and specifically in 73 the policy of giving the sick elderly 10 times the recommended dose - which is murder).
They're going after every single element of the coronascam - it's all in there.
So your actual conspiracy theory is revealed and it turns out that yes you are a mental. You were challenged about linking to anti-semitic sites and your defence us that it's top of the list in a search that agrees with you, that's not a good sign.I want to hear about how the vaccine contains graphene oxide nanotubes that are used to build 5G receivers so Bill Gates can make you do what he wants. And also about we’re gonna get the jack together and we’re gonna have a little house and a couple of acres an’ a cow and some pigs and an’ live off the fatta the lan. An’ have rabbits. Tell about what we’re gonna have in the garden and about the rabbits in the cages and about the rain in the winter and the stove, and how thick the cream is on the milk like you can hardly cut it. Tell about that.
Filing with the International Criminal Court at the Hague against the British government and numerous others: https://www.docdroid.com/WUjv6iw/icc-complaint-7-1-pdf
It opens:QuoteBased on the extensive claims and enclosed documentation, we charge those responsible for numerous violations of the Nuremberg Code, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimesof aggression in the United Kingdom, but not limited to individuals in these countries.
They're going after every single element of the coronascam - it's all in there. The Midazolam murders are in paragraphs 69-74 (and specifically in 73 the policy of giving the sick elderly 10 times the recommended dose - which is murder).
The real problem with conspiracy websites is that they serve mainly as counter-intel to ridiculize the very legitimate arguments about the abuse of institutions, which didn't cause Covid in some great Shadowy Cabal Master Plan, but who are taking enormous advantage of Covid for their own power-grab, as well as for personal enrichment.Yep. But equating the most extreme outliers with everyone on the other side and all their arguments is only a tiny part of the rhetorical games being played, like words being redefined to normalize extreme positions or extremicize normal positions, opposing positions being subtly altered to claim something that's true isn't or something that isn't true is, or the constant repetition of biased generalizations to suggest guilt without making specific claims.
It's being done by almost every government on the planet, by the nonelected bureaucracies of those governments, by establishment corporations and media, by teacher's unions, and yes, by the World Economic Forum. And the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away and much greater centralized control by a power elite. And none of that needs a secret master plan.
The real problem with conspiracy websites is that they serve mainly as counter-intel to ridiculize the very legitimate arguments about the abuse of institutions, which didn't cause Covid in some great Shadowy Cabal Master Plan, but who are taking enormous advantage of Covid for their own power-grab, as well as for personal enrichment.
It's being done by almost every government on the planet, by the nonelected bureaucracies of those governments, by establishment corporations and media, by teacher's unions, and yes, by the World Economic Forum. And the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away and much greater centralized control by a power elite. And none of that needs a secret master plan.
Lastest UK government bullshit, they don't talk about the "unvaccinated" any more, but the "unboostered" - meaning anyone who hasn't had three jabs.Show, don't tell.
Our PM was on record yesterday claiming 90% of those in ICU were unboostered - which might even be true. Unfortunately for the narrative, the majority of them had two jabs, rather than none at all. There's also evidence most of those worst affected contracted the virus in hospital. Ooops.
Show, don't tell.
I'm asking you to show the evidence that the worst infected contracted the virus in hospital (that's the linenof your post I put in bold to call attention to it. Perhaps I should have used another color?Show, don't tell.
Why should I bother?
Here's something more useful, put your overweening and outsized fear in proportion, with this clinical calculator of your personal risk from covid: https://www.qcovid.org/
Mine:
Risk of catching and being admitted to hospital with COVID-19 0.0575%
Risk of catching and being admitted to hospital with COVID-19 following a positive test result 2.0103%
Risk of catching and dying from COVID-19 0.0009%
Risk of dying from COVID-19 following a positive test result 0.1248%
What's more I have no risk factors, so should be using the lower results from column b. And the test doesn't even ask far more important questions about my level of activity and intake of vitamins C and D, along with zinc and other micronutrients.
I'd be amazed if you get over 1%.
I'm asking you to show the evidence that the worst infected contracted the virus in hospital (that's the linenof your post I put in bold to call attention to it. Perhaps I should have used another color?
The real problem with conspiracy websites is that they serve mainly as counter-intel to ridiculize the very legitimate arguments about the abuse of institutions, which didn't cause Covid in some great Shadowy Cabal Master Plan, but who are taking enormous advantage of Covid for their own power-grab, as well as for personal enrichment.
It's being done by almost every government on the planet, by the nonelected bureaucracies of those governments, by establishment corporations and media, by teacher's unions, and yes, by the World Economic Forum. And the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away and much greater centralized control by a power elite. And none of that needs a secret master plan.
The real problem with conspiracy websites is that they serve mainly as counter-intel to ridiculize the very legitimate arguments about the abuse of institutions, which didn't cause Covid in some great Shadowy Cabal Master Plan, but who are taking enormous advantage of Covid for their own power-grab, as well as for personal enrichment.
It's being done by almost every government on the planet, by the nonelected bureaucracies of those governments, by establishment corporations and media, by teacher's unions, and yes, by the World Economic Forum. And the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away and much greater centralized control by a power elite. And none of that needs a secret master plan.
Only problem in this instance is that there's nothing "secret" about it. How do you explain virtually every government mouthpiece using the WEF's "Build Back Better" and repeatedly referring to elements of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals, which align to it?
As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
Only problem in this instance is that there's nothing "secret" about it. How do you explain virtually every government mouthpiece using the WEF's "Build Back Better" and repeatedly referring to elements of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals, which align to it?Don't worry about it. Raymond Reddington is QAnon. He will have stopped the Cabal by the end of this season. Trust the plan.
As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
They gave you an out. You didn't take it and doubled down again on actual nutcase conspiracy theory.
At some point, more people will notice you might need meds.
No corporation can ever compete with the finances available to the federal government. You are correct, though, that the vast majority of federal agencies are filled with people who used to work for the businesses that they are supposed to be regulating. It's called "regulatory capture" and it's a huge part of the problem. So, no one needs to tell your sister what the "plan" is. She's already worked for the folks who made the plan ("get rich at any cost, everyone else... and their rights... be damned").As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
As far as I can tell from conversations with her, the problem is that the SEC has very limited authority to investigate and prosecute. They are nothing like drug cops who can bust down doors and seize evidence. It's difficult to prosecute big corporations for anything given their armies of lawyers, and the SEC is not an exception. My sister has been on the witness stand a handful of times at prosecutions, but at best the SEC seem to be a partial deterrent against the most blatant abuses, and prosecutions are rare.
Basically, it's not that the SEC is failing to enforce the law -- it's that the laws themselves favor those with expensive lawyers, and that is because the laws tend to be written by corporations, or at least with corporate consultants.
I know partly because she worked on the other side of the law previously, as a consultant for Deloitte where she was hired often to get around the law as much as possible.
How many corrupt bankers were jailed after the crash of 2008?As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
You think the entire purpose of the SEC was to find Bernie Madoff?
Regulatory capture is usually the other way around. Bureaucrats in the public sector going off to take lucrative private sector jobs in the industries they formerly regulated. But a lot of it is companies pressuring agencies and politicians to install the people they want in the various regulatory agencies.No corporation can ever compete with the finances available to the federal government. You are correct, though, that the vast majority of federal agencies are filled with people who used to work for the businesses that they are supposed to be regulating. It's called "regulatory capture" and it's a huge part of the problem. So, no one needs to tell your sister what the "plan" is. She's already worked for the folks who made the plan ("get rich at any cost, everyone else... and their rights... be damned").As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
As far as I can tell from conversations with her, the problem is that the SEC has very limited authority to investigate and prosecute. They are nothing like drug cops who can bust down doors and seize evidence. It's difficult to prosecute big corporations for anything given their armies of lawyers, and the SEC is not an exception. My sister has been on the witness stand a handful of times at prosecutions, but at best the SEC seem to be a partial deterrent against the most blatant abuses, and prosecutions are rare.
Basically, it's not that the SEC is failing to enforce the law -- it's that the laws themselves favor those with expensive lawyers, and that is because the laws tend to be written by corporations, or at least with corporate consultants.
I know partly because she worked on the other side of the law previously, as a consultant for Deloitte where she was hired often to get around the law as much as possible.
As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
As far as I can tell from conversations with her, the problem is that the SEC has very limited authority to investigate and prosecute. They are nothing like drug cops who can bust down doors and seize evidence. It's difficult to prosecute big corporations for anything given their armies of lawyers, and the SEC is not an exception. My sister has been on the witness stand a handful of times at prosecutions, but at best the SEC seem to be a partial deterrent against the most blatant abuses, and prosecutions are rare.
Basically, it's not that the SEC is failing to enforce the law -- it's that the laws themselves favor those with expensive lawyers, and that is because the laws tend to be written by corporations, or at least with corporate consultants.
I know partly because she worked on the other side of the law previously, as a consultant for Deloitte where she was hired often to get around the law as much as possible.
No corporation can ever compete with the finances available to the federal government. You are correct, though, that the vast majority of federal agencies are filled with people who used to work for the businesses that they are supposed to be regulating. It's called "regulatory capture" and it's a huge part of the problem. So, no one needs to tell your sister what the "plan" is. She's already worked for the folks who made the plan ("get rich at any cost, everyone else... and their rights... be damned").
No, regulatory capture goes both ways. It is a revolving door from industry to bureaucracy to industry. And, despite my oblique method of presentation, I am stating clearly that, yes, she is implementing Deloitte's will, not because she is some nefarious villain, but because she has the same set of world views as the folks in that business. There is a culture, a mindset, a set of assumptions about how things are supposed to work that are inherent in every profession. You cannot be successful in your profession unless you understand the culture and, for lack of a better term, belief systems inherent in that business. Sure, an occasional person is able to be both successful and bend or break the business norms, but we generally can identify them easily (they are the "mavericks" of the industry, and usually pretty notorious within them). Otherwise, those who don't follow the general culture of the industry get spit out, and are either the reviled gadflys or move on to a pursuit that fits their world-view. I'm very familiar with Deloitte (as far back as when they were Deloitte, Haskins, and Sells... and later Deloitte and Touche). There isn't a nanometer of difference between what Deloitte sees as good business and good governance and what the SEC sees as the same. They share the same biases, world-views, expectations, and sense of "what is right." I don't know your sister, and therefore can make no claims as to her personality, morals, or righteousness. But I can say, with perfect certainty, is that, as a member of the financial systems in good standing, she sees the world the same way as the folks she is supposed to be regulating. Maybe not on little points here and there. But her view of how the system works aligns with theirs 100%, otherwise she couldn't do what she does. That's regulatory capture... the standardization of expectations as to how the system should work (far beyond what those outside of the system may care about). A shared perspective based on shared worldview. People who think that regulatory capture consists of bribes or offers of reward and jobs are fools. None of that is necessary. A bureaucrat doesn't need to be compelled to behave in the "right" manner, because they already agree on what is "right"...As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
As far as I can tell from conversations with her, the problem is that the SEC has very limited authority to investigate and prosecute. They are nothing like drug cops who can bust down doors and seize evidence. It's difficult to prosecute big corporations for anything given their armies of lawyers, and the SEC is not an exception. My sister has been on the witness stand a handful of times at prosecutions, but at best the SEC seem to be a partial deterrent against the most blatant abuses, and prosecutions are rare.
Basically, it's not that the SEC is failing to enforce the law -- it's that the laws themselves favor those with expensive lawyers, and that is because the laws tend to be written by corporations, or at least with corporate consultants.
I know partly because she worked on the other side of the law previously, as a consultant for Deloitte where she was hired often to get around the law as much as possible.
No corporation can ever compete with the finances available to the federal government. You are correct, though, that the vast majority of federal agencies are filled with people who used to work for the businesses that they are supposed to be regulating. It's called "regulatory capture" and it's a huge part of the problem. So, no one needs to tell your sister what the "plan" is. She's already worked for the folks who made the plan ("get rich at any cost, everyone else... and their rights... be damned").
So, your claim is that because she used to work for Deloitte -- now she's part of the plan and she's implementing Deloitte's will within the SEC? First of all, I don't believe that from my knowledge of her, but I don't even see the logic in the accusation. She quit her job at Deloitte. Why would she have any loyalty to them? I don't have any loyalty to my ex-employers. They could offer her money - but they could offer money to anyone regardless of whether they were an ex-employee or not.
The term "regulatory capture" refers to corporations controlling regulatory agencies -- which I think happens, but not by ex-employees being hired at agencies. Being offered a future career at the corporation would be a conflict of interest, but going the other way doesn't. But regulatory capture doesn't require there to be intentional sabotage of the regulation. As far as I can tell, it happens more because of ignorance and bias - mostly in the public and in elected officials.
i.e. It's not mustache-twirling villains whose conscious goal is to strip away people's human and civil rights. Regulatory capture comes more from well-intended by ignorant people playing into their hands, often in the guise of politics (both left-leaning and right-leaning).
EDIT: Cross-posted with Pat.
No, regulatory capture goes both ways. It is a revolving door from industry to bureaucracy to industry. And, despite my oblique method of presentation, I am stating clearly that, yes, she is implementing Deloitte's will, not because she is some nefarious villain, but because she has the same set of world views as the folks in that business. There is a culture, a mindset, a set of assumptions about how things are supposed to work that are inherent in every profession. You cannot be successful in your profession unless you understand the culture and, for lack of a better term, belief systems inherent in that business. Sure, an occasional person is able to be both successful and bend or break the business norms, but we generally can identify them easily (they are the "mavericks" of the industry, and usually pretty notorious within them). Otherwise, those who don't follow the general culture of the industry get spit out, and are either the reviled gadflys or move on to a pursuit that fits their world-view. I'm very familiar with Deloitte (as far back as when they were Deloitte, Haskins, and Sells... and later Deloitte and Touche). There isn't a nanometer of difference between what Deloitte sees as good business and good governance and what the SEC sees as the same. They share the same biases, world-views, expectations, and sense of "what is right." I don't know your sister, and therefore can make no claims as to her personality, morals, or righteousness. But I can say, with perfect certainty, is that, as a member of the financial systems in good standing, she sees the world the same way as the folks she is supposed to be regulating. Maybe not on little points here and there. But her view of how the system works aligns with theirs 100%, otherwise she couldn't do what she does. That's regulatory capture... the standardization of expectations as to how the system should work (far beyond what those outside of the system may care about). A shared perspective based on shared worldview. People who think that regulatory capture consists of bribes or offers of reward and jobs are fools. None of that is necessary. A bureaucrat doesn't need to be compelled to behave in the "right" manner, because they already agree on what is "right"...Yep. Regulatory capture isn't about direct tit for tat. It's about the people you go golfing with, or who you meet at conferences. It's about the lectures you all hear, and the assumptions you all share. You may not agree on everything, and may even fight bitterly over certain things. But you're all part of the same overriding culture, and share many of the same values and world views.
So just more of your usual bullshit then.I'm asking you to show the evidence that the worst infected contracted the virus in hospital (that's the linenof your post I put in bold to call attention to it. Perhaps I should have used another color?
And I'm telling you fuck off, I can't be bothered.
All very true. And that's how "good" people become the engine of very bad things...No, regulatory capture goes both ways. It is a revolving door from industry to bureaucracy to industry. And, despite my oblique method of presentation, I am stating clearly that, yes, she is implementing Deloitte's will, not because she is some nefarious villain, but because she has the same set of world views as the folks in that business. There is a culture, a mindset, a set of assumptions about how things are supposed to work that are inherent in every profession. You cannot be successful in your profession unless you understand the culture and, for lack of a better term, belief systems inherent in that business. Sure, an occasional person is able to be both successful and bend or break the business norms, but we generally can identify them easily (they are the "mavericks" of the industry, and usually pretty notorious within them). Otherwise, those who don't follow the general culture of the industry get spit out, and are either the reviled gadflys or move on to a pursuit that fits their world-view. I'm very familiar with Deloitte (as far back as when they were Deloitte, Haskins, and Sells... and later Deloitte and Touche). There isn't a nanometer of difference between what Deloitte sees as good business and good governance and what the SEC sees as the same. They share the same biases, world-views, expectations, and sense of "what is right." I don't know your sister, and therefore can make no claims as to her personality, morals, or righteousness. But I can say, with perfect certainty, is that, as a member of the financial systems in good standing, she sees the world the same way as the folks she is supposed to be regulating. Maybe not on little points here and there. But her view of how the system works aligns with theirs 100%, otherwise she couldn't do what she does. That's regulatory capture... the standardization of expectations as to how the system should work (far beyond what those outside of the system may care about). A shared perspective based on shared worldview. People who think that regulatory capture consists of bribes or offers of reward and jobs are fools. None of that is necessary. A bureaucrat doesn't need to be compelled to behave in the "right" manner, because they already agree on what is "right"...Yep. Regulatory capture isn't about direct tit for tat. It's about the people you go golfing with, or who you meet at conferences. It's about the lectures you all hear, and the assumptions you all share. You may not agree on everything, and may even fight bitterly over certain things. But you're all part of the same overriding culture, and share many of the same values and world views.
And the reason why democracy is terrible at defending against it is the asymmetry of professional investment vs. casual interest. If you're part of that industry, whether in the business side or amongst the public regulators, it's your life. You spend all your time immersed in it, have generations to work things in your favor, know the ins and out intimately, and it's vitally important for your financial and personal interests. Conversely, the public knows nothing about any of that, doesn't know where the levers of power lie, and the cost of any failure or inefficiency is spread so thinly that the personal cost to each member of the public is tiny and not worth the effort to learn more, so they only pay attention maybe once a generation when there's a scandal big enough to garner widespread attention. But in the decades in between, the regulators and the businesses they supposedly regulate become cozy and develop a symbiosis that favors their interests, with only a few perfunctory moves toward public interest.
For a historical example, look at the Interstate Commerce Commision, and how quickly they were suborned by the railroad interests. It happened in less than an election cycle. And then when interstate trucking became a thing, how quickly they became invested in protecting the brokers with licenses and excluding everyone else from competing. That's how it works in every industry, and with every regulatory agency.
And, despite my oblique method of presentation, I am stating clearly that, yes, she is implementing Deloitte's will, not because she is some nefarious villain, but because she has the same set of world views as the folks in that business. There is a culture, a mindset, a set of assumptions about how things are supposed to work that are inherent in every profession. You cannot be successful in your profession unless you understand the culture and, for lack of a better term, belief systems inherent in that business. Sure, an occasional person is able to be both successful and bend or break the business norms, but we generally can identify them easily (they are the "mavericks" of the industry, and usually pretty notorious within them). Otherwise, those who don't follow the general culture of the industry get spit out, and are either the reviled gadflys or move on to a pursuit that fits their world-view.
People who think that regulatory capture consists of bribes or offers of reward and jobs are fools. None of that is necessary. A bureaucrat doesn't need to be compelled to behave in the "right" manner, because they already agree on what is "right"...
All very true. And that's how "good" people become the engine of very bad things...There's nothing good about what those people are doing. Hannah Arendt came up with the phrase "the banality of evil" after meeting Eichmann during the Nuremberg Trials. She was describing how unremarkable he seemed, and how he never showed any of the stereotypical signs of evil, like sadism, or hate, or anything except a desire to just go about his life and advance his career. You can blame the system, but the system doesn't exist as a separate thing. It's just people, and how they interact, so any evil in the system is entirely and completely the fault of those who work within it. It's just a name for the tools that people use to absolve and distance themselves from evil actions when opposition would inconvenience them.
All very true. And that's how "good" people become the engine of very bad things...There's nothing good about what those people are doing. Hannah Arendt came up with the phrase "the banality of evil" after meeting Eichmann during the Nuremberg Trials. She was describing how unremarkable he seemed, and how he never showed any of the stereotypical signs of evil, like sadism, or hate, or anything except a desire to just go about his life and advance his career. You can blame the system, but the system doesn't exist as a separate thing. It's just people, and how they interact, so any evil in the system is entirely and completely the fault of those who work within it. It's just a name for the tools that people use to absolve and distance themselves from evil actions when opposition would inconvenience them.
No, that's just your statist bias showing though. I was very clear in the previous post that I'm criticizing all participants, whether they're in the public or the private sector. Though the government is more at fault, because they have the power to make the laws, enforce them, and adjudicate them. People often forget or even deny that, because public officials use those bully powers to blame the private the sector so incessantly that a fair amount of the public end up believing them.All very true. And that's how "good" people become the engine of very bad things...There's nothing good about what those people are doing. Hannah Arendt came up with the phrase "the banality of evil" after meeting Eichmann during the Nuremberg Trials. She was describing how unremarkable he seemed, and how he never showed any of the stereotypical signs of evil, like sadism, or hate, or anything except a desire to just go about his life and advance his career. You can blame the system, but the system doesn't exist as a separate thing. It's just people, and how they interact, so any evil in the system is entirely and completely the fault of those who work within it. It's just a name for the tools that people use to absolve and distance themselves from evil actions when opposition would inconvenience them.
You're blaming only government employees -- when they are enacting laws that were approved by people via popularly elected leaders.
By parallel, I have big problems with many of the U.S.'s series of foreign wars. However, I don't blame our soldiers for them. The soldiers were only doing their duty. The blame goes on not just the politicians who started the war, but on the public who approved of the war and elected (and re-elected) the leaders responsible.
Not stringently regulating corporations is something we are *all* responsible for. It's not something originating from bureaucrats foisted on a hapless population. The vast majority of Americans are willing consumers and supporters of the mainstream party politicians.
So just more of your usual bullshit then.
Today’s death figures include a backlog of hospital deaths reported overnight by NHS England covering the period 24th–29th December.
The real problem with conspiracy websites is that they serve mainly as counter-intel to ridiculize the very legitimate arguments about the abuse of institutions, which didn't cause Covid in some great Shadowy Cabal Master Plan, but who are taking enormous advantage of Covid for their own power-grab, as well as for personal enrichment.
It's being done by almost every government on the planet, by the nonelected bureaucracies of those governments, by establishment corporations and media, by teacher's unions, and yes, by the World Economic Forum. And the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away and much greater centralized control by a power elite. And none of that needs a secret master plan.
Only problem in this instance is that there's nothing "secret" about it. How do you explain virtually every government mouthpiece using the WEF's "Build Back Better" and repeatedly referring to elements of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals, which align to it?
The real problem with conspiracy websites is that they serve mainly as counter-intel to ridiculize the very legitimate arguments about the abuse of institutions, which didn't cause Covid in some great Shadowy Cabal Master Plan, but who are taking enormous advantage of Covid for their own power-grab, as well as for personal enrichment.
It's being done by almost every government on the planet, by the nonelected bureaucracies of those governments, by establishment corporations and media, by teacher's unions, and yes, by the World Economic Forum. And the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away and much greater centralized control by a power elite. And none of that needs a secret master plan.
I'd agree that in general, people often use extremes to ridiculize legitimate arguments from the other side. However, in this case, the person citing the work in question is Kiero -- who I believe cited it in good faith. HappyDaze just accurately quoted from a source that Kiero himself first referenced -- the filing with the International Criminal Court here:
https://www.docdroid.com/WUjv6iw/icc-complaint-7-1-pdf
This isn't a false association - it's part of the authentic debate between posters here.
As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
How many corrupt bankers were jailed after the crash of 2008?As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
You think the entire purpose of the SEC was to find Bernie Madoff?
The SEC doesn't seem to do much except put barriers in the way of startups.
All very true. And that's how "good" people become the engine of very bad things...There's nothing good about what those people are doing. Hannah Arendt came up with the phrase "the banality of evil" after meeting Eichmann during the Nuremberg Trials. She was describing how unremarkable he seemed, and how he never showed any of the stereotypical signs of evil, like sadism, or hate, or anything except a desire to just go about his life and advance his career. You can blame the system, but the system doesn't exist as a separate thing. It's just people, and how they interact, so any evil in the system is entirely and completely the fault of those who work within it. It's just a name for the tools that people use to absolve and distance themselves from evil actions when opposition would inconvenience them.
You're blaming only government employees -- when they are enacting laws that were approved by people via popularly elected leaders.
You made the statement that most people acquiring Covid were catching it in hospitals. I asked you for a source. That's hardly a delusion you ignorant fuckwit.So just more of your usual bullshit then.
Not my job to reason you out of a position you didn't reason yourself into in the first place. Hope the collapse of your delusion isn't too painful, when the time comes.
Case in point: Fauci. He's been in the Bureaucratic Class since forever, he was in charge of the government response to the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s and fucked it up so badly that he could be responsible for at least hundreds of thousands of deaths, yet suffered no consequences for it, and was then put in charge of the COVID pandemic in spite of his atrocious track record. He's the highest paid federal civil servant and if he eventually chooses to retire, he will have the highest retirement salary of any federal employee in history.
And to help enforce the "ESG" agenda that has allowed Anti-Western Leftist Communists to infiltrate every level of the corporate world. JhKim's sister is partially responsible for all the shit that Marvel, Disney, Hasbro and countless other companies have been doing which go totally against the normal profit agenda of "don't produce garbage no one but a tiny group of extremists would like & that will alienate your entire customer base".
Case in point: Fauci. He's been in the Bureaucratic Class since forever, he was in charge of the government response to the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s and fucked it up so badly that he could be responsible for at least hundreds of thousands of deaths, yet suffered no consequences for it, and was then put in charge of the COVID pandemic in spite of his atrocious track record. He's the highest paid federal civil servant and if he eventually chooses to retire, he will have the highest retirement salary of any federal employee in history.
And to help enforce the "ESG" agenda that has allowed Anti-Western Leftist Communists to infiltrate every level of the corporate world. JhKim's sister is partially responsible for all the shit that Marvel, Disney, Hasbro and countless other companies have been doing which go totally against the normal profit agenda of "don't produce garbage no one but a tiny group of extremists would like & that will alienate your entire customer base".
I think you're stretching here to place blame. You say "Politicians come and go, but the Bureaucratic Class is forever." -- but while individual politicians may come and go, what remains behind is the law. That's what politicians create.
And under current law, I don't believe that the SEC has the legal authority to force Marvel to make the sort of comics you think they should. So even if you had the power to put all people of the right mindset into every SEC employee position, they still wouldn't be able to dictate the sort of comics that Marvel publishes.
How many laws do politicians pass?And to help enforce the "ESG" agenda that has allowed Anti-Western Leftist Communists to infiltrate every level of the corporate world. JhKim's sister is partially responsible for all the shit that Marvel, Disney, Hasbro and countless other companies have been doing which go totally against the normal profit agenda of "don't produce garbage no one but a tiny group of extremists would like & that will alienate your entire customer base".
I think you're stretching here to place blame. You say "Politicians come and go, but the Bureaucratic Class is forever." -- but while individual politicians may come and go, what remains behind is the law. That's what politicians create.
And to help enforce the "ESG" agenda that has allowed Anti-Western Leftist Communists to infiltrate every level of the corporate world. JhKim's sister is partially responsible for all the shit that Marvel, Disney, Hasbro and countless other companies have been doing which go totally against the normal profit agenda of "don't produce garbage no one but a tiny group of extremists would like & that will alienate your entire customer base".
I think you're stretching here to place blame. You say "Politicians come and go, but the Bureaucratic Class is forever." -- but while individual politicians may come and go, what remains behind is the law. That's what politicians create.
And under current law, I don't believe that the SEC has the legal authority to force Marvel to make the sort of comics you think they should. So even if you had the power to put all people of the right mindset into every SEC employee position, they still wouldn't be able to dictate the sort of comics that Marvel publishes.
No, but the SEC can now FORCE corporations to have "diversity hires" at the very top of their structure.
How many laws do politicians pass?And to help enforce the "ESG" agenda that has allowed Anti-Western Leftist Communists to infiltrate every level of the corporate world. JhKim's sister is partially responsible for all the shit that Marvel, Disney, Hasbro and countless other companies have been doing which go totally against the normal profit agenda of "don't produce garbage no one but a tiny group of extremists would like & that will alienate your entire customer base".
I think you're stretching here to place blame. You say "Politicians come and go, but the Bureaucratic Class is forever." -- but while individual politicians may come and go, what remains behind is the law. That's what politicians create.
For each page one of one of those laws, how many pages of regulations are written by life-long bureaucrats, who define in exacting detail how those often-vague laws will be interpreted? How many regulations unrelated to any specific law are given the force of law because Congress delegates that authority to the bureaucratic class?
One of those two categories is absurdly larger than the other.
You seem to have a very grasp of how the government works.
As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
You think the entire purpose of the SEC was to find Bernie Madoff?
There's nothing good about what those people are doing. Hannah Arendt came up with the phrase "the banality of evil" after meeting Eichmann during the Nuremberg Trials. She was describing how unremarkable he seemed, and how he never showed any of the stereotypical signs of evil, like sadism, or hate, or anything except a desire to just go about his life and advance his career.
It's nice when evil wears an evil shirt and twirls their mustaches and talks about how they love evil, isn't it?There's nothing good about what those people are doing. Hannah Arendt came up with the phrase "the banality of evil" after meeting Eichmann during the Nuremberg Trials. She was describing how unremarkable he seemed, and how he never showed any of the stereotypical signs of evil, like sadism, or hate, or anything except a desire to just go about his life and advance his career.
Eichmann was a charming and evil bullshit artist, and Arendt bought into his charming bullshit.
I hate that fucking phrase, there's nothing "banal" about the bureaucratic oil that greased the wheels of the Holocaust.
The attempt to reject the banality of evil comes from a desire to not view evil as a thing humans are all capable of, but instead demon spawn that can be killed without need of self reflection.
The real problem with conspiracy websites is that they serve mainly as counter-intel to ridiculize the very legitimate arguments about the abuse of institutions, which didn't cause Covid in some great Shadowy Cabal Master Plan, but who are taking enormous advantage of Covid for their own power-grab, as well as for personal enrichment.
It's being done by almost every government on the planet, by the nonelected bureaucracies of those governments, by establishment corporations and media, by teacher's unions, and yes, by the World Economic Forum. And the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away and much greater centralized control by a power elite. And none of that needs a secret master plan.
The attempt to reject the banality of evil comes from a desire to not view evil as a thing humans are all capable of, but instead demon spawn that can be killed without need of self reflection.
The easy lesson of the Holocaust is that Nazis are evil. The important lesson of the Holocaust is that we are all capable of becoming Nazis.
It's nice when evil wears an evil shirt and twirls their mustaches and talks about how they love evil, isn't it?
You watch too many Snidley Whiplash cartoons.
As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
You think the entire purpose of the SEC was to find Bernie Madoff?
Of course not, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is a U.S. government agency created by Congress to regulate the securities markets and protect investors so obviously its job is not to protect investors from histories largest ever Ponzi scheme.
That would be a silly conspiracy theory.
How many of the right-thinking people who thought themselves good and moral in the 1930s thought an SS uniform was the embodiment of evil? None of them. At that time, the people who were anti-Nazi were ostracized and treated as a wackos. It wasn't until later that until public opinion flipped and it became acceptable to hate Nazis.It's nice when evil wears an evil shirt and twirls their mustaches and talks about how they love evil, isn't it?
You watch too many Snidley Whiplash cartoons.
If an SS uniform isn't an evil shirt what the hell is?
I think it's important to recognize the factors that make one less prone to become Nazi-like, because one thing that should be abundantly clear, both from recent memory and the atrocities of the last century, is that the vast majority of people fall into that category. We're eusocial animals, and the tendency to get along and go along are the fundamental characteristics exploited by totalitarianism. Rather, it's more important to recognize the traits that lead people to resist and push back against the groupthink and compliance, and even more importantly to recognize the means by which a small minority can sway the rest of the public. That's the missing piece, right now. There are people who are resisting the totalitarian demands, but the bulk of the public are just accepting the dictates and abuses, and a huge number are actively defending them. How do we shift that? The battle is between two minorities, and the battlefield is the rest of the body politic.The attempt to reject the banality of evil comes from a desire to not view evil as a thing humans are all capable of, but instead demon spawn that can be killed without need of self reflection.
The easy lesson of the Holocaust is that Nazis are evil. The important lesson of the Holocaust is that we are all capable of becoming Nazis.
Robert Malone touched on this in his conversation with Joe Rogan. Mass Psychosis Formation is a real thing.
That said, while I suppose it is possible that we are "all" capable of becoming some variation on Nazis, I think it is important to understand the various factors that make one more or less prone to be come Nazi-like. I think a lot of it has to do with a propensity for groupthink and demonization of the other. But it also requires a context of propaganda-fueled fear and dissociation.
And this is also why I'm not writing off the "Master Plan Hypothesis": the situation is too perfect for the ushering in of some kind of "new world order."
Yes, exactly. THERE IS NO "CONSPIRACY". Neither the WEF nor the UN require the idea of some shadowy cabal of illuminati or reptilians or whatever behind it all. Just a gang of assholes with a very public agenda of control.
You made the statement that most people acquiring Covid were catching it in hospitals. I asked you for a source. That's hardly a delusion you ignorant fuckwit.
The easy lesson of the Holocaust is that Nazis are evil. The important lesson of the Holocaust is that we are all capable of becoming Nazis.
You, and her, would be wrong.As for your position, Pundit... You say that "the individual goal of these actors would be to see our human and civil rights stripped away". I'm trying to clarify what you mean by that. For example, my sister is part of the unelected bureaucracy - she's a deputy director at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Do you think she knows that this is the goal? If you don't think that, then who in the organization would know that is the goal? Basically, how would one go about verifying this?
No offense to your sister who I am sure is a fine person indeed but the SEC could not even find Bernie Madoff and that is supposed to be their one job.
So what do you think? Corrupt or Incompetent? A little of column A and a little of column B?
As far as I can tell from conversations with her, the problem is that the SEC has very limited authority to investigate and prosecute. They are nothing like drug cops who can bust down doors and seize evidence. It's difficult to prosecute big corporations for anything given their armies of lawyers, and the SEC is not an exception. My sister has been on the witness stand a handful of times at prosecutions, but at best the SEC seem to be a partial deterrent against the most blatant abuses, and prosecutions are rare.
Basically, it's not that the SEC is failing to enforce the law -- it's that the laws themselves favor those with expensive lawyers, and that is because the laws tend to be written by corporations, or at least with corporate consultants.
I know partly because she worked on the other side of the law previously, as a consultant for Deloitte where she was hired often to get around the law as much as possible.
As far as I can tell from conversations with her, the problem is that the SEC has very limited authority to investigate and prosecute. They are nothing like drug cops who can bust down doors and seize evidence. It's difficult to prosecute big corporations for anything given their armies of lawyers, and the SEC is not an exception. My sister has been on the witness stand a handful of times at prosecutions, but at best the SEC seem to be a partial deterrent against the most blatant abuses, and prosecutions are rare.You, and her, would be wrong.
Basically, it's not that the SEC is failing to enforce the law -- it's that the laws themselves favor those with expensive lawyers, and that is because the laws tend to be written by corporations, or at least with corporate consultants.
I know partly because she worked on the other side of the law previously, as a consultant for Deloitte where she was hired often to get around the law as much as possible.
Look up Harry Markopolos. When someone pointed him at Madoff, it took him five minutes to figure out something was wrong. It took another four hours to determine HOW it worked.
The reason the SEC doesn't work is that it isn't staffed with accountants -- it's staffed with lawyers. And all they know how to do is check and make sure the right forms have been filed.
There's a certain amount of regulatory capture there, but the hard fact is that the SEC exists to be used as a club against people who don't pay the danegeld to the feds.
That's a perfect example of a strawman. "Someone criticized corruption! I'm going to pretend they said rid of all regulations! That'll make them look stupid!"
I'm not even arguing the effectiveness of the SEC. The question is -- what would make it more effective? You're implying that it's simple and easy. All the government has to do is replace lawyers with accountants. Similarly, others like theRPGPundit say that the issue is the SEC personnel -- that if only there were different people working there, under the same laws, then Marvel Comics would start producing better comics and probably a ton of other better outcomes.
I think that you could replace all of the personnel in the SEC from top to bottom with different people hand-picked by whoever -- and it would not make the agency significantly more effective (and quite possibly less effective). It certainly would do nothing for the quality of Marvel Comics.
Getting regulation to work is a difficult job -- but the alternative of letting corporations do whatever they want without regulation isn't better, in my opinion. I think the best cases of regulation have been when the public became sufficiently aware and mobilized to make a difference. This happened to pass the Clean Air Act, for example, and I think that the improvement of air quality and the phase-out of leaded gasoline was a massive improvement. I also think that there was a crackdown on drug manufacturers after the scandal of Thalidomide to ensure safety testing of drugs -- and we're due for another crackdown with the opioid crisis.
The Nazis are the wrong example, they were only active for a few years.
Communists oppressed people for decades, they are the past masters of forced compliance. Read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago for a primer on what the commies in authority are doing. It starts with little humiliations, repeated often enough for you to doubt your own conscience and volition. In service to a Big Lie which props up the regime.
I think it's important to recognize the factors that make one less prone to become Nazi-like, because one thing that should be abundantly clear, both from recent memory and the atrocities of the last century, is that the vast majority of people fall into that category. We're eusocial animals, and the tendency to get along and go along are the fundamental characteristics exploited by totalitarianism. Rather, it's more important to recognize the traits that lead people to resist and push back against the groupthink and compliance, and even more importantly to recognize the means by which a small minority can sway the rest of the public. That's the missing piece, right now. There are people who are resisting the totalitarian demands, but the bulk of the public are just accepting the dictates and abuses, and a huge number are actively defending them. How do we shift that? The battle is between two minorities, and the battlefield is the rest of the body politic.The attempt to reject the banality of evil comes from a desire to not view evil as a thing humans are all capable of, but instead demon spawn that can be killed without need of self reflection.
The easy lesson of the Holocaust is that Nazis are evil. The important lesson of the Holocaust is that we are all capable of becoming Nazis.
Robert Malone touched on this in his conversation with Joe Rogan. Mass Psychosis Formation is a real thing.
That said, while I suppose it is possible that we are "all" capable of becoming some variation on Nazis, I think it is important to understand the various factors that make one more or less prone to be come Nazi-like. I think a lot of it has to do with a propensity for groupthink and demonization of the other. But it also requires a context of propaganda-fueled fear and dissociation.
And this is also why I'm not writing off the "Master Plan Hypothesis": the situation is too perfect for the ushering in of some kind of "new world order."
The Nazis are the wrong example, they were only active for a few years.
Communists oppressed people for decades, they are the past masters of forced compliance. Read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago for a primer on what the commies in authority are doing. It starts with little humiliations, repeated often enough for you to doubt your own conscience and volition. In service to a Big Lie which props up the regime.
The Nazis are the wrong example, they were only active for a few years.
Communists oppressed people for decades, they are the past masters of forced compliance. Read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago for a primer on what the commies in authority are doing. It starts with little humiliations, repeated often enough for you to doubt your own conscience and volition. In service to a Big Lie which props up the regime.
The solution is strong and simple but clear rules. Remove bureaucratic and judicial discretion. The ability to decide when there's ambiguity is where corruption grows. The rules don't even have to be particular fair, just clear, because clear is ultimately fairer than arbitrary whim or preferential/adverse treatment. If you know what the rules are, you can make rational decisions and avoid breaking them, even if the rules are stupid.
The worst system is the one we have, where regulators, bureaucrats, legislators and judges have wide discretionary power, vast immunities, and have created and operate under an impenetrable and contradictory fog of rules, which give them great power over the lives and businesses they control, no fear of censure, and everybody they rule over knows they can be punished at any time because there's no way to avoid breaking a dozen rules before breakfast.
TheComputerBureaucracy Is not Your Friend.
I am sure however we're all shocked you in particular tried to minimize the Nazis as "only active for a few years."
I am sure however we're all shocked you in particular tried to minimize the Nazis as "only active for a few years."
Rather than mere rationality, I think what is required is both an active skepticism towards authority and, more importantly, a willingness to think on one's own, without ceding to authority. For some reason, that is very scary to people. Or rather, the reason is obvious: No one wants to be alone, which feels naked and terrifying. Here we see our embedded tribalism: most everyone wants to be part of a tribe, an "us." And unfortunately, the vast majority of people don't bother to work out their own thinking, but instead put a finger to the wind to figure out what their tribe believes, what is "Good Opinion."More than that. What is required is a rejection of "authorities" as an intellectual concept. Any "authority" should have no problem explaining to me why whatever they have concluded is correct. A physicist doesn't need to appeal to their authority to explain quantum mechanics. They can show me the math and explain the experiments that prove it. If I can't follow the math, then that's on me... and lends credence to their argument. But, "you need to believe me, because you wouldn't understand" is never an argument. That's why Fauci is inherently untrustworthy. If the official narrative was so readily apparent, then no one would need to slander and censor those who disagree.
This also implies that many of the "vax-hesitant" merely do so out of tribalism. I imagine their confusion at the recent bro-mance between Trump and Biden about the vaccines. In other words, the kind of blind tribalism and allegiance to the "benevolent dictator" is not a left-right thing, as both tribes are prone to it. This is why we have liberal pundits like Joy Reid talking about how she'd never take "Trump's vaccine" in mid-2020, and then once Biden was elected, joining the cult and bashing the "anti-vaxxers." And so it goes...Well, not so much. One side seems to be more prone to following "authority" figures more than the other. Maybe a political movement that values independence engenders a respect for personal... independence?
1932 to 1945 is not "a few years" and they were "active" for even more than those years (they were the second largest political party in Germany prior to becoming the first largest in 1932).
I am sure however we're all shocked you in particular tried to minimize the Nazis as "only active for a few years."
The entire official narrative is founded on bullshit statistics.The pandemic isn't real and only fat people are dying from it.
The pandemic isn't real and only fat people are dying from it.
You're a moron.
For the third winter in a row, I have suspected covid (someone I've been in close proximity with tested positive with similar symptoms). 48 hours after it begun, it's on the way out with nothing more than paracetamol and ibuprofen. Yet again, no need for bed rest or anything out of the ordinary, besides suspension of exercise.So your aquired immunity isn't so good then.
Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
For the third winter in a row, I have suspected covid (someone I've been in close proximity with tested positive with similar symptoms). 48 hours after it begun, it's on the way out with nothing more than paracetamol and ibuprofen. Yet again, no need for bed rest or anything out of the ordinary, besides suspension of exercise.So your aquired immunity isn't so good then.
Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
For the third winter in a row, I have suspected covid (someone I've been in close proximity with tested positive with similar symptoms). 48 hours after it begun, it's on the way out with nothing more than paracetamol and ibuprofen. Yet again, no need for bed rest or anything out of the ordinary, besides suspension of exercise.So your aquired immunity isn't so good then.
Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
Which is worrying. The hope was that omicron would spread so fast that all of the idiots like Kiero would get it without killing too many people and we'd get to herd immunity that way. But if they keep on getting it over and over and over it'd be an annoying incubator of viral infections that'd hit old and immunocompromised people indefinitely.
Oh well, this is looking good for me personally. I have a pretty much a zero chance of dying from any variant of the virus even without vaccines but I really care about endurance sports and even a small hit to my lung capacity would be horrible. Omicron hitting my throat with my boosters up to date wouldn't have much chance of persistent symptoms like I worried about for delta in my lungs.
Except we do have herd immunity with the flu. One of the many (many) problems with public health messaging is this idea that herd immunity means once you hit a certain percentage, the disease automatically goes extinct. But except in very rare cases, that's not how it works. Instead, it will follow cycles where the disease diminishes, then flares up again when immunity wanes and conditions are good (many seasonal diseases), or when it's introduced to a new population with no immunity, or even when a new generation is born and has to develop their own immunity. It gets even more complicated by diseases like the flu that mutate rapidly and thus are really a complex of diseases and can bypass immunity to various degrees, but herd immunity is messy and imperfect to begin with.For the third winter in a row, I have suspected covid (someone I've been in close proximity with tested positive with similar symptoms). 48 hours after it begun, it's on the way out with nothing more than paracetamol and ibuprofen. Yet again, no need for bed rest or anything out of the ordinary, besides suspension of exercise.So your aquired immunity isn't so good then.
Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
Which is worrying. The hope was that omicron would spread so fast that all of the idiots like Kiero would get it without killing too many people and we'd get to herd immunity that way. But if they keep on getting it over and over and over it'd be an annoying incubator of viral infections that'd hit old and immunocompromised people indefinitely.
Oh well, this is looking good for me personally. I have a pretty much a zero chance of dying from any variant of the virus even without vaccines but I really care about endurance sports and even a small hit to my lung capacity would be horrible. Omicron hitting my throat with my boosters up to date wouldn't have much chance of persistent symptoms like I worried about for delta in my lungs.
Per St. Fauci himself, the vaccine does not stop transmission. Hence whether "all of the idiots like Kiero" get vaccinated or not has no impact on whether you get covid. Moreover, you being vaccinated does not stop you from getting covid (e.g., everyone in Gibraltar is vaccinated, but they still have covid cases), although it does help mitigate the symptoms. So, like the common cold, everybody, vaccinated or unvaccinated, is going to be getting covid over and over in the future.
As for herd immunity, it, like communism, is a red herring. Given covid's mutation rate, I doubt herd immunity is possible. You see the same thing with the flu.
Except we do have herd immunity with the flu. One of the many (many) problems with public health messaging is this idea that herd immunity means once you hit a certain percentage, the disease automatically goes extinct. But except in very rare cases, that's not how it works. Instead, it will follow cycles where the disease diminishes, then flares up again when immunity wanes and conditions are good (many seasonal diseases), or when it's introduced to a new population with no immunity, or even when a new generation is born and has to develop their own immunity. It gets even more complicated by diseases like the flu that mutate rapidly and thus are really a complex of diseases and can bypass immunity to various degrees, but herd immunity is messy and imperfect to begin with.For the third winter in a row, I have suspected covid (someone I've been in close proximity with tested positive with similar symptoms). 48 hours after it begun, it's on the way out with nothing more than paracetamol and ibuprofen. Yet again, no need for bed rest or anything out of the ordinary, besides suspension of exercise.So your aquired immunity isn't so good then.
Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
Which is worrying. The hope was that omicron would spread so fast that all of the idiots like Kiero would get it without killing too many people and we'd get to herd immunity that way. But if they keep on getting it over and over and over it'd be an annoying incubator of viral infections that'd hit old and immunocompromised people indefinitely.
Oh well, this is looking good for me personally. I have a pretty much a zero chance of dying from any variant of the virus even without vaccines but I really care about endurance sports and even a small hit to my lung capacity would be horrible. Omicron hitting my throat with my boosters up to date wouldn't have much chance of persistent symptoms like I worried about for delta in my lungs.
Per St. Fauci himself, the vaccine does not stop transmission. Hence whether "all of the idiots like Kiero" get vaccinated or not has no impact on whether you get covid. Moreover, you being vaccinated does not stop you from getting covid (e.g., everyone in Gibraltar is vaccinated, but they still have covid cases), although it does help mitigate the symptoms. So, like the common cold, everybody, vaccinated or unvaccinated, is going to be getting covid over and over in the future.
As for herd immunity, it, like communism, is a red herring. Given covid's mutation rate, I doubt herd immunity is possible. You see the same thing with the flu.
Getting regulation to work is a difficult job -- but the alternative of letting corporations do whatever they want without regulation isn't better, in my opinion. I think the best cases of regulation have been when the public became sufficiently aware and mobilized to make a difference. This happened to pass the Clean Air Act, for example, and I think that the improvement of air quality and the phase-out of leaded gasoline was a massive improvement. I also think that there was a crackdown on drug manufacturers after the scandal of Thalidomide to ensure safety testing of drugs -- and we're due for another crackdown with the opioid crisis.
The public provides almost no check on the apparatus of bureaucracy, and crises make for terrible legislation. Those are garbage solutions.
The solution is strong and simple but clear rules. Remove bureaucratic and judicial discretion. The ability to decide when there's ambiguity is where corruption grows. The rules don't even have to be particular fair, just clear, because clear is ultimately fairer than arbitrary whim or preferential/adverse treatment. If you know what the rules are, you can make rational decisions and avoid breaking them, even if the rules are stupid.
The worst system is the one we have, where regulators, bureaucrats, legislators and judges have wide discretionary power, vast immunities, and have created and operate under an impenetrable and contradictory fog of rules, which give them great power over the lives and businesses they control, no fear of censure, and everybody they rule over knows they can be punished at any time because there's no way to avoid breaking a dozen rules before breakfast.
So your aquired immunity isn't so good then.
Which is worrying. The hope was that omicron would spread so fast that all of the idiots like Kiero would get it without killing too many people and we'd get to herd immunity that way. But if they keep on getting it over and over and over it'd be an annoying incubator of viral infections that'd hit old and immunocompromised people indefinitely.
Oh well, this is looking good for me personally. I have a pretty much a zero chance of dying from any variant of the virus even without vaccines but I really care about endurance sports and even a small hit to my lung capacity would be horrible. Omicron hitting my throat with my boosters up to date wouldn't have much chance of persistent symptoms like I worried about for delta in my lungs.
Weird. I'm one of the "jabbed" yet I've never had Covid. My immune system must just be better than yours...or perhaps the vaccine is working well for me.So your aquired immunity isn't so good then.
It's good for another year. Similar to the way flu mutates enough to potentially get you each peak season.
I've had covid in December 2019 (two weeks of illness), January 2021 (one week of illness) and now January 2022 (72 hours and almost cleared). Unlike the jabbed who've had it repeatedly in 2021 and some have already got it in 2022 as well.
Zero risk of adverse reactions from gene therapy, too.Which is worrying. The hope was that omicron would spread so fast that all of the idiots like Kiero would get it without killing too many people and we'd get to herd immunity that way. But if they keep on getting it over and over and over it'd be an annoying incubator of viral infections that'd hit old and immunocompromised people indefinitely.
Oh well, this is looking good for me personally. I have a pretty much a zero chance of dying from any variant of the virus even without vaccines but I really care about endurance sports and even a small hit to my lung capacity would be horrible. Omicron hitting my throat with my boosters up to date wouldn't have much chance of persistent symptoms like I worried about for delta in my lungs.
One infection a year, much like flu. I like those odds better than an unknown risk of myocarditis or pericarditis and multiple infections a year, as has afflicted the jabbed.
You lab rats are the incubators, we didn't have major strains percolating this quickly before they started the jab programmes.
So your aquired immunity isn't so good then.
It's good for another year. Similar to the way flu mutates enough to potentially get you each peak season.
I've had covid in December 2019 (two weeks of illness), January 2021 (one week of illness) and now January 2022 (72 hours and almost cleared). Unlike the jabbed who've had it repeatedly in 2021 and some have already got it in 2022 as well.
Zero risk of adverse reactions from gene therapy, too.Which is worrying. The hope was that omicron would spread so fast that all of the idiots like Kiero would get it without killing too many people and we'd get to herd immunity that way. But if they keep on getting it over and over and over it'd be an annoying incubator of viral infections that'd hit old and immunocompromised people indefinitely.
Oh well, this is looking good for me personally. I have a pretty much a zero chance of dying from any variant of the virus even without vaccines but I really care about endurance sports and even a small hit to my lung capacity would be horrible. Omicron hitting my throat with my boosters up to date wouldn't have much chance of persistent symptoms like I worried about for delta in my lungs.
One infection a year, much like flu. I like those odds better than an unknown risk of myocarditis or pericarditis and multiple infections a year, as has afflicted the jabbed.
You lab rats are the incubators, we didn't have major strains percolating this quickly before they started the jab programmes.
Weird. I'm one of the "jabbed" yet I've never had Covid. My immune system must just be better than yours...or perhaps the vaccine is working well for me.This is stupid. There are a ton of people jabbed and still got infected. My dad had to take respiratory meds for a while after being infected, and he was double jabbed and this was before omicron or delta.
Weird. I'm one of the "jabbed" yet I've never had Covid. My immune system must just be better than yours...or perhaps the vaccine is working well for me.This is stupid. There are a ton of people jabbed and still got infected. My dad had to take respiratory meds for a while after being infected, and he was double jabbed and this was before omicron or delta.
So I can see that the disease is bad and hurts some people pretty badly, but to be blaming the unvaxed for something the vaccine doesn't do very well itself is dumb.
At the same time, the disease can have worse reactions with some people more then the flue normally does. So its not completly harmless.
I've had covid in December 2019 (two weeks of illness), January 2021 (one week of illness) and now January 2022 (72 hours and almost cleared). Unlike the jabbed who've had it repeatedly in 2021 and some have already got it in 2022 as well.
Zero risk of adverse reactions from gene therapy, too.
You lab rats are the incubators, we didn't have major strains percolating this quickly before they started the jab programmes.
But the people I know who are medically trained all seem to agree that this is a very serious disease and they encourage vaccinations.
Weird. I'm one of the "jabbed" yet I've never had Covid. My immune system must just be better than yours...or perhaps the vaccine is working well for me.This is stupid. There are a ton of people jabbed and still got infected. My dad had to take respiratory meds for a while after being infected, and he was double jabbed and this was before omicron or delta.
So I can see that the disease is bad and hurts some people pretty badly, but to be blaming the unvaxed for something the vaccine doesn't do very well itself is dumb.
At the same time, the disease can have worse reactions with some people more then the flue normally does. So its not completly harmless.
I agree that many people were vaccinated and still got sick. I had a friend in my church who got covid after vaccination in the fall, and also my girlfriend's ex-husband just this week. However, it is possible that the vaccines somewhat reduce the chance of infection and transmission -- while not preventing them.
However, it is possible that the vaccines somewhat reduce the chance of infection and transmission -- while not preventing them.
A lot of things are possible. I want to know what is likely in the face of government and media pushing a vaccine not even a year old on the entire population, including very young children who likey don't need it.
A vaccine that many are pushing to make mandatory in order to work, shop and otherwise live a "normal" life.
However, it is possible that the vaccines somewhat reduce the chance of infection and transmission -- while not preventing them.
A lot of things are possible. I want to know what is likely in the face of government and media pushing a vaccine not even a year old on the entire population, including very young children who likey don't need it.
A vaccine that many are pushing to make mandatory in order to work, shop and otherwise live a "normal" life.
As far as government propaganda and mandates --
I'd draw an analogy to 9/11. I was opposed to Al Qaeda and the Taliban well before 9/11, back when it was mostly liberal hand-wringers who complained about the Taliban oppressing women and blowing up Buddhist statues. Then 9/11 happened, and the U.S. government started massive action against them. I still opposed Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and I supported action against them. However, I also opposed the Patriot Act that suppressed our civil liberties, and I opposed the Iraq War that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. I think the government was overreaching and acting irresponsibly in those cases, but I still supported action against Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
What the government wants is not the same as what is correct. However, it also isn't always opposed.
With covid-19, I want to do what's best for people generally. I take information especially from people that I know who have a medical background, including my own doctor. Based on their input, I think this is an extremely serious disease, and I want to do my part not to spread it around. Given that this is still killing over a thousand every day in the U.S. alone and millions world-wide, I don't necessarily expect life to be back to normal in a year or for there to be a simple fix-all.
Given that this is still killing over a thousand every day in the U.S. alone and millions world-wide, I don't necessarily expect life to be back to normal in a year or for there to be a simple fix-all.
Here's the problem: for most people, it *isn't* a serious disease. For the frail, the immune compromised, it is - and that is no different than any other virus (ask cystic fibrosis sufferers whether or not they want to get a plain old chest cold...)
What makes this serious for more people than the flu is that fat people are more susceptible to serious complications - and the western world has a lot of fat people. Most of them consider themselves to be in "good" health. They're not. I'm older. I'm fat. I have blood pressure I take meds for. I have sleep apnea I use a CPAP for. For me, getting a vaccine makes sense because covid risks are greater than vaccine risks. My brother-in-law is 2 years younger but in excellent health as a military officer. He got covid before there was a vaccine. It took almost 10 months for him to be cleared medically due to myocarditis. A high school or college athlete? They're in outstanding shape, white healthy, and more at risk from vaccine complications than COVID - with a not- insignificant risk of vaccine induced myocarditis.
Given that this is still killing over a thousand every day in the U.S. alone and millions world-wide, I don't necessarily expect life to be back to normal in a year or for there to be a simple fix-all.
No it isn't, this is the foundation of this entire scam. Because it is a scam. Dead within 28/60 days of a positive PCR test is not "dead from coronavirus". It's a bullshit, new, made-up measure of classification that didn't exist before 2020.
Over 95% of people who died "with" coronavirus actually died from something else, one of their multiple co-morbidities. The presence of covid was incidental, not instrumental.
If there was a huge surge of excess deaths caused by a pandemic, they'd show up in the all-cause mortality stats. Except they barely uptick in 2020, because all that's really happened is a large number of deaths from other causes were all reclassified as "covid deaths".
However, it is possible that the vaccines somewhat reduce the chance of infection and transmission -- while not preventing them.
A lot of things are possible. I want to know what is likely in the face of government and media pushing a vaccine not even a year old on the entire population, including very young children who likey don't need it.
A vaccine that many are pushing to make mandatory in order to work, shop and otherwise live a "normal" life.
As far as government propaganda and mandates --
I'd draw an analogy to 9/11. I was opposed to Al Qaeda and the Taliban well before 9/11, back when it was mostly liberal hand-wringers who complained about the Taliban oppressing women and blowing up Buddhist statues. Then 9/11 happened, and the U.S. government started massive action against them. I still opposed Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and I supported action against them. However, I also opposed the Patriot Act that suppressed our civil liberties, and I opposed the Iraq War that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. I think the government was overreaching and acting irresponsibly in those cases, but I still supported action against Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
What the government wants is not the same as what is correct. However, it also isn't always opposed.
With covid-19, I want to do what's best for people generally. I take information especially from people that I know who have a medical background, including my own doctor. Based on their input, I think this is an extremely serious disease, and I want to do my part not to spread it around. Given that this is still killing over a thousand every day in the U.S. alone and millions world-wide, I don't necessarily expect life to be back to normal in a year or for there to be a simple fix-all.
However, it is possible that the vaccines somewhat reduce the chance of infection and transmission -- while not preventing them.
A lot of things are possible. I want to know what is likely in the face of government and media pushing a vaccine not even a year old on the entire population, including very young children who likey don't need it.
A vaccine that many are pushing to make mandatory in order to work, shop and otherwise live a "normal" life.
As far as government propaganda and mandates --
I'd draw an analogy to 9/11. I was opposed to Al Qaeda and the Taliban well before 9/11, back when it was mostly liberal hand-wringers who complained about the Taliban oppressing women and blowing up Buddhist statues. Then 9/11 happened, and the U.S. government started massive action against them. I still opposed Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and I supported action against them. However, I also opposed the Patriot Act that suppressed our civil liberties, and I opposed the Iraq War that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. I think the government was overreaching and acting irresponsibly in those cases, but I still supported action against Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
What the government wants is not the same as what is correct. However, it also isn't always opposed.
With covid-19, I want to do what's best for people generally. I take information especially from people that I know who have a medical background, including my own doctor. Based on their input, I think this is an extremely serious disease, and I want to do my part not to spread it around. Given that this is still killing over a thousand every day in the U.S. alone and millions world-wide, I don't necessarily expect life to be back to normal in a year or for there to be a simple fix-all.
Considering how governments and the media have handled the situation so far, I don't think life will ever return to "normal", and that any fixes will be incompetent, half assed and potentially dangerous.
The past year and a half has destroyed what little confidence I had in the government, media, the scientific community and medical professionals. I hope they all rot in hell.
However, it is possible that the vaccines somewhat reduce the chance of infection and transmission -- while not preventing them.
A lot of things are possible. I want to know what is likely in the face of government and media pushing a vaccine not even a year old on the entire population, including very young children who likey don't need it.
A vaccine that many are pushing to make mandatory in order to work, shop and otherwise live a "normal" life.
As far as government propaganda and mandates --
I'd draw an analogy to 9/11. I was opposed to Al Qaeda and the Taliban well before 9/11, back when it was mostly liberal hand-wringers who complained about the Taliban oppressing women and blowing up Buddhist statues. Then 9/11 happened, and the U.S. government started massive action against them. I still opposed Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and I supported action against them. However, I also opposed the Patriot Act that suppressed our civil liberties, and I opposed the Iraq War that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. I think the government was overreaching and acting irresponsibly in those cases, but I still supported action against Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
What the government wants is not the same as what is correct. However, it also isn't always opposed.
With covid-19, I want to do what's best for people generally. I take information especially from people that I know who have a medical background, including my own doctor. Based on their input, I think this is an extremely serious disease, and I want to do my part not to spread it around. Given that this is still killing over a thousand every day in the U.S. alone and millions world-wide, I don't necessarily expect life to be back to normal in a year or for there to be a simple fix-all.
Considering how governments and the media have handled the situation so far, I don't think life will ever return to "normal", and that any fixes will be incompetent, half assed and potentially dangerous.
The past year and a half has destroyed what little confidence I had in the government, media, the scientific community and medical professionals. I hope they all rot in hell.
It took you that long to recognize that society is on the cusp of collapse (and has been for a very long time) because of the mediocrity and incompetence that passes for government and industry "expertise?"
I am sure however we're all shocked you in particular tried to minimize the Nazis as "only active for a few years."
Honestly this type of bullshit is extremely pathetic. You aren't willing to accept or admit that the premises of the measures we're seeing are not grounded in sound science, ethical medical practice, or reasonable powers of governance, so you're just going to continuously try to make personal attacks. Worthless.
1932 to 1945 is not "a few years" and they were "active" for even more than those years (they were the second largest political party in Germany prior to becoming the first largest in 1932).
I am sure however we're all shocked you in particular tried to minimize the Nazis as "only active for a few years."
Fuck off. At least 100 million dead because of communism, but leftards forever memory hole the evil they've done and flip to "but what about the Nazis".
The Nazis were evil. I have Ashkenazi heritage, so fuck you with your attempt to paint me as a Nazi apologist.
Communists were even more evil and there are avowed Stalinists and other fellow travellers around today who think the only problem with their evil creed is that it just hasn't been done correctly.
You certainly won't see sympathy for communists from me. I'm pointing out you minimized Nazi power as "a few years" in the same way you minimize covid as "just a cold." Communists can be as bad or worse than Nazis while still acknowledging the Nazis held power for more than "a few years."
But again, you minimizing them, and then refusing to admit it wasn't "a few years" is in line with you routinely linking to sites which engage in anti-Jewish conspiracy theories. Something you've done repeatedly, and only offered even a feeble excuse for after Pundit insisted.
You certainly won't see sympathy for communists from me. I'm pointing out you minimized Nazi power as "a few years" in the same way you minimize covid as "just a cold." Communists can be as bad or worse than Nazis while still acknowledging the Nazis held power for more than "a few years."
But again, you minimizing them, and then refusing to admit it wasn't "a few years" is in line with you routinely linking to sites which engage in anti-Jewish conspiracy theories. Something you've done repeatedly, and only offered even a feeble excuse for after Pundit insisted.
The communists were worse, and have many people around today advocating for their ideology. Lots of them in academia indoctrinating children and young people. The Long March through the institutions has reached it's culmination, identity politics and wokery is communism.
Meanwhile, no one treats Nazi ideology seriously. There are no mainstream voices anywhere advocating for their aims. I think I know which one is the more material threat.
And yes, it's a few years compared to decades of communist activity through the 20th century, and still counting in China.
However, it is possible that the vaccines somewhat reduce the chance of infection and transmission -- while not preventing them.
A lot of things are possible. I want to know what is likely in the face of government and media pushing a vaccine not even a year old on the entire population, including very young children who likey don't need it.
A vaccine that many are pushing to make mandatory in order to work, shop and otherwise live a "normal" life.
As far as government propaganda and mandates --
I'd draw an analogy to 9/11. I was opposed to Al Qaeda and the Taliban well before 9/11, back when it was mostly liberal hand-wringers who complained about the Taliban oppressing women and blowing up Buddhist statues. Then 9/11 happened, and the U.S. government started massive action against them. I still opposed Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and I supported action against them. However, I also opposed the Patriot Act that suppressed our civil liberties, and I opposed the Iraq War that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. I think the government was overreaching and acting irresponsibly in those cases, but I still supported action against Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
What the government wants is not the same as what is correct. However, it also isn't always opposed.
With covid-19, I want to do what's best for people generally. I take information especially from people that I know who have a medical background, including my own doctor. Based on their input, I think this is an extremely serious disease, and I want to do my part not to spread it around. Given that this is still killing over a thousand every day in the U.S. alone and millions world-wide, I don't necessarily expect life to be back to normal in a year or for there to be a simple fix-all.
Considering how governments and the media have handled the situation so far, I don't think life will ever return to "normal", and that any fixes will be incompetent, half assed and potentially dangerous.
The past year and a half has destroyed what little confidence I had in the government, media, the scientific community and medical professionals. I hope they all rot in hell.
It took you that long to recognize that society is on the cusp of collapse (and has been for a very long time) because of the mediocrity and incompetence that passes for government and industry "expertise?"
Depends on what you mean by "collapse".
It took you that long to recognize that society is on the cusp of collapse (and has been for a very long time) because of the mediocrity and incompetence that passes for government and industry "expertise?" The vast majority of those who are considered "experts," or "the foremost authority on" something are anything but. They're all essentially the Theranos bitch grifting through their career and life. If politicians were qualified to govern or legislate, we'd have laws written such that an average 5 year old could understand them and there would never be fraud, waste, corruption or abuse in any government.
It took you that long to recognize that society is on the cusp of collapse (and has been for a very long time) because of the mediocrity and incompetence that passes for government and industry "expertise?" The vast majority of those who are considered "experts," or "the foremost authority on" something are anything but. They're all essentially the Theranos bitch grifting through their career and life. If politicians were qualified to govern or legislate, we'd have laws written such that an average 5 year old could understand them and there would never be fraud, waste, corruption or abuse in any government.
Yes, politicians aren't benevolent and qualified leaders - and governments are full of fraud, waste, corruption, and abuse. However, that has always been true throughout history. If corruptions and abuse in government was a sign of collapse, then society must have had tons of collapses all the time. This just seems naive of history.
As I read histories, I am never struck that government and industry were full of competence and excellence. I think it should be accepted that this is how society works. We can try to make it better, or we can bemoan that we're all doomed because something that has been true throughout history is still true today.
Luckily some of us (the collective "we") were smart enough to not allow government to take away the right to bear arms...Are you saying Australians are stupid? That's hate speech!
Luckily some of us (the collective "we") were smart enough to not allow government to take away the right to bear arms...Are you saying Australians are stupid? That's hate speech!
Luckily some of us (the collective "we") were smart enough to not allow government to take away the right to bear arms...Are you saying Australians are stupid? That's hate speech!
"Hate speech" is free speech... Without the 2nd, we wouldn't have the 1st... Australia has neither, anymore.
I didn't know Elizabeth came out as transgender. Or is that his dead name now?Luckily some of us (the collective "we") were smart enough to not allow government to take away the right to bear arms...Are you saying Australians are stupid? That's hate speech!
"Hate speech" is free speech... Without the 2nd, we wouldn't have the 1st... Australia has neither, anymore.
You know other countries dont follow the US Constitution, right?
As long as the King of England says its all good.
Luckily some of us (the collective "we") were smart enough to not allow government to take away the right to bear arms...Are you saying Australians are stupid? That's hate speech!
"Hate speech" is free speech... Without the 2nd, we wouldn't have the 1st... Australia has neither, anymore.
You know other countries dont follow the US Constitution, right?
As long as the King of England says its all good.
The narrative is starting to unravel.
https://twitter.com/jasonrantz/status/1480327667861782528
I'm expecting a ton of backpedaling and "The science was settled, now we have new data, so It's re-settled!" shenanigans.
You know other countries dont follow the US Constitution, right?
Trust the Science! Doublemask your buttholes!! For the children!
You know other countries dont follow the US Constitution, right?
The US has a poor track record of following the US Constitution.
If a child goes in the hospital, they automatically get tested for COVID. And they get counted as a COVID-hospitalized individual. When in fact, they may go in for a broken leg or appendicitis or something like that. So it’s overcounting the number of children who are, quote, ‘hospitalized with COVID,’ as opposed to because of COVID.
Trust the Science! Doublemask your buttholes!! For the children!
You know other countries dont follow the US Constitution, right?
The US has a poor track record of following the US Constitution.
It is more what youd call ‘guidelines’ than actual rules
Noted conspiracy theorist Anthony Fauci, who in the past has agreed with known conspiracy theories like the idea that covid-19 may have come from a Wuhan lab, has now jumped on board with a new conspiracy theory: That the number of hospitalizations for covid-19 has been overcounted.
WARNING CONTAINS HARMFUL DISINFORMATION WARNINGQuote from: From his MSNBC interviewIf a child goes in the hospital, they automatically get tested for COVID. And they get counted as a COVID-hospitalized individual. When in fact, they may go in for a broken leg or appendicitis or something like that. So it’s overcounting the number of children who are, quote, ‘hospitalized with COVID,’ as opposed to because of COVID.
When are we going to finally cancel this alt-right wacko from all platforms for misinformation?
Luckily some of us (the collective "we") were smart enough to not allow government to take away the right to bear arms...Are you saying Australians are stupid? That's hate speech!
"Hate speech" is free speech... Without the 2nd, we wouldn't have the 1st... Australia has neither, anymore.
You know other countries dont follow the US Constitution, right?
As long as the King of England says its all good.
Australia *used* to have firearms. I was referring to that, not their constitution itself.
While we're at it, the Australian Constitution does not protect *personal* rights to free speech or adsembly. Fundamentally different than the US where the bill of rights enumerates that they are *not* restrictions on legislation because the people do not derive them from government permission.
Luckily some of us (the collective "we") were smart enough to not allow government to take away the right to bear arms...Are you saying Australians are stupid? That's hate speech!
"Hate speech" is free speech... Without the 2nd, we wouldn't have the 1st... Australia has neither, anymore.
You know other countries dont follow the US Constitution, right?
As long as the King of England says its all good.
Australia *used* to have firearms. I was referring to that, not their constitution itself.
While we're at it, the Australian Constitution does not protect *personal* rights to free speech or adsembly. Fundamentally different than the US where the bill of rights enumerates that they are *not* restrictions on legislation because the people do not derive them from government permission.
Well to be fair Australia does follow common law, and the right to self defense is well established in common law. Don't need no constitution if our ancient rights and traditions are respected.
It's not gain of function if we change what gain and function mean.Noted conspiracy theorist Anthony Fauci, who in the past has agreed with known conspiracy theories like the idea that covid-19 may have come from a Wuhan lab, has now jumped on board with a new conspiracy theory: That the number of hospitalizations for covid-19 has been overcounted.
WARNING CONTAINS HARMFUL DISINFORMATION WARNINGQuote from: From his MSNBC interviewIf a child goes in the hospital, they automatically get tested for COVID. And they get counted as a COVID-hospitalized individual. When in fact, they may go in for a broken leg or appendicitis or something like that. So it’s overcounting the number of children who are, quote, ‘hospitalized with COVID,’ as opposed to because of COVID.
When are we going to finally cancel this alt-right wacko from all platforms for misinformation?
Inorite... It's almost as if there was a concerted effort to make a sitting President look bad as an opportunity after screwing up research work that you weren't allowed to be doing to begin with, and then having to figure out how to try and extricate yourself from the flaming wreckage that resulted...
If you got vaccinated to prevent transmission, protect others, and "end" the pandemic, you were a sucker.
Don't need no constitution if our ancient rights and traditions are respected.If.
Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
I don't know about "most people" but Delta filled our system (EDs and inpatient) with patients experiencing significant respiratory distress along with some deaths, so it was plenty bad enough.Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
Mass formation psychosis in action.
I was vaccinated. Five months later I got Delta. It was like a bad head cold with some O2 debt (like you're in the mountains). They get me mAb treatment and I improved within a day. Got a booster. Got Omicron ( sniffles for a day).
Whose to say whether the vax kept me out of hospital given that it was 5 months after being "fully vaxed" when we have evidence that the VE drops off after 3-4 months, or if the Delta wasn't that bad for most people to begin with.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/wellness/column-mocking-anti-vaxxers-deaths-is-ghoulish-yes-but-necessary/ar-AASDwXu
It's about time they recognized all of us who mock the dead are essential to public health!
That would make a good skit. Literally take everything that's been done to hurt the people who haven't completely toed the narrative, and then reverse it. Play it as straight as possible, without any exaggeration. What would it sound like? The sheer number of examples would be overwhelming.https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/wellness/column-mocking-anti-vaxxers-deaths-is-ghoulish-yes-but-necessary/ar-AASDwXu
It's about time they recognized all of us who mock the dead are essential to public health!
If I were as much of an asshole as the vaccine hysterics, I would say that everyone who dies or suffers ill health from vaccinations should be ridiculed and denied treatment as a warning to others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zgoENmeddA
Project Veritas has new documents from DARPA which indicate Fauci and NAIAD did violate the gain of function moratorium, and more broadly about a government investigation into the origins of covid-19 and the coverup.
I don't have a good handle on it. There's some question about why the documents aren't appropriately marked as classified, but otherwise it sounds like a smoking gun. If it holds up, we may actually have good evidence on what caused this whole mess.
Edit: Here's the article on their website, with links to all the documents:
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/military-documents-about-gain-of-function-contradict-fauci-testimony-under/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zgoENmeddAConsidering the inability of government to properly handle classified data over the last several years (hi Sandy Berger!), it's plausible it might not have been properly secured.
Project Veritas has new documents from DARPA which indicate Fauci and NAIAD did violate the gain of function moratorium, and more broadly about a government investigation into the origins of covid-19 and the coverup.
I don't have a good handle on it. There's some question about why the documents aren't appropriately marked as classified, but otherwise it sounds like a smoking gun. If it holds up, we may actually have good evidence on what caused this whole mess.
Edit: Here's the article on their website, with links to all the documents:
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/military-documents-about-gain-of-function-contradict-fauci-testimony-under/
There are many possible explanations for the unmarked documents. It's just a question mark that should be be explored. Though whatever happened, heads should roll. Unless your last name is Clinton, security clearances are taken very seriously.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zgoENmeddAConsidering the inability of government to properly handle classified data over the last several years (hi Sandy Berger!), it's plausible it might not have been properly secured.
Project Veritas has new documents from DARPA which indicate Fauci and NAIAD did violate the gain of function moratorium, and more broadly about a government investigation into the origins of covid-19 and the coverup.
I don't have a good handle on it. There's some question about why the documents aren't appropriately marked as classified, but otherwise it sounds like a smoking gun. If it holds up, we may actually have good evidence on what caused this whole mess.
Edit: Here's the article on their website, with links to all the documents:
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/military-documents-about-gain-of-function-contradict-fauci-testimony-under/
Also, IIRC the docs state that DARPA turned down the prospect of researching gain of function, which might be why Fauci, et. al. laundered the funds through NIH to the Wuhan lab.
There are many possible explanations for the unmarked documents. It's just a question mark that should be be explored. Though whatever happened, heads should roll. Unless your last name is Clinton, security clearances are taken very seriously.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zgoENmeddAConsidering the inability of government to properly handle classified data over the last several years (hi Sandy Berger!), it's plausible it might not have been properly secured.
Project Veritas has new documents from DARPA which indicate Fauci and NAIAD did violate the gain of function moratorium, and more broadly about a government investigation into the origins of covid-19 and the coverup.
I don't have a good handle on it. There's some question about why the documents aren't appropriately marked as classified, but otherwise it sounds like a smoking gun. If it holds up, we may actually have good evidence on what caused this whole mess.
Edit: Here's the article on their website, with links to all the documents:
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/military-documents-about-gain-of-function-contradict-fauci-testimony-under/
Also, IIRC the docs state that DARPA turned down the prospect of researching gain of function, which might be why Fauci, et. al. laundered the funds through NIH to the Wuhan lab.
We already knew about DARPA turning down the gain of function research, but I believe this is the first confirmation that Fauci was aware that his agency went forward with it.
I don't know about "most people" but Delta filled our system (EDs and inpatient) with patients experiencing significant respiratory distress along with some deaths, so it was plenty bad enough.Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
Mass formation psychosis in action.
I was vaccinated. Five months later I got Delta. It was like a bad head cold with some O2 debt (like you're in the mountains). They get me mAb treatment and I improved within a day. Got a booster. Got Omicron ( sniffles for a day).
Whose to say whether the vax kept me out of hospital given that it was 5 months after being "fully vaxed" when we have evidence that the VE drops off after 3-4 months, or if the Delta wasn't that bad for most people to begin with.
I don't know about "most people" but Delta filled our system (EDs and inpatient) with patients experiencing significant respiratory distress along with some deaths, so it was plenty bad enough.Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
Mass formation psychosis in action.
I was vaccinated. Five months later I got Delta. It was like a bad head cold with some O2 debt (like you're in the mountains). They get me mAb treatment and I improved within a day. Got a booster. Got Omicron ( sniffles for a day).
Whose to say whether the vax kept me out of hospital given that it was 5 months after being "fully vaxed" when we have evidence that the VE drops off after 3-4 months, or if the Delta wasn't that bad for most people to begin with.
It was so bad that you never caught it?
Even with the Hospitals so full the ICUs were at 97% capacity?
Our ICU was running at almost 150% capacity during the Delta surge. It had expanded to the neighboring surgical floor which had surrendered half its beds to them (elective surgeries were on hold, so less need for surgical recovery) which were then staffed largely with travelers.I don't know about "most people" but Delta filled our system (EDs and inpatient) with patients experiencing significant respiratory distress along with some deaths, so it was plenty bad enough.Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
Mass formation psychosis in action.
I was vaccinated. Five months later I got Delta. It was like a bad head cold with some O2 debt (like you're in the mountains). They get me mAb treatment and I improved within a day. Got a booster. Got Omicron ( sniffles for a day).
Whose to say whether the vax kept me out of hospital given that it was 5 months after being "fully vaxed" when we have evidence that the VE drops off after 3-4 months, or if the Delta wasn't that bad for most people to begin with.
It was so bad that you never caught it?
Even with the Hospitals so full the ICUs were at 97% capacity?
Our ICU was running at almost 150% capacity during the Delta surge. It had expanded to the neighboring surgical floor which had surrendered half its beds to them (elective surgeries were on hold, so less need for surgical recovery) which were then staffed largely with travelers.I don't know about "most people" but Delta filled our system (EDs and inpatient) with patients experiencing significant respiratory distress along with some deaths, so it was plenty bad enough.Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
Mass formation psychosis in action.
I was vaccinated. Five months later I got Delta. It was like a bad head cold with some O2 debt (like you're in the mountains). They get me mAb treatment and I improved within a day. Got a booster. Got Omicron ( sniffles for a day).
Whose to say whether the vax kept me out of hospital given that it was 5 months after being "fully vaxed" when we have evidence that the VE drops off after 3-4 months, or if the Delta wasn't that bad for most people to begin with.
It was so bad that you never caught it?
Even with the Hospitals so full the ICUs were at 97% capacity?
And no, I didn't catch it. What part of that resulted from natural constitution, vaccination, PPE use, and general precautions is impossible to say.
I'm in Florida. Nurses and staff were not being fired for their vaccination status during Delta, nor for the most part now.Our ICU was running at almost 150% capacity during the Delta surge. It had expanded to the neighboring surgical floor which had surrendered half its beds to them (elective surgeries were on hold, so less need for surgical recovery) which were then staffed largely with travelers.I don't know about "most people" but Delta filled our system (EDs and inpatient) with patients experiencing significant respiratory distress along with some deaths, so it was plenty bad enough.Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
Mass formation psychosis in action.
I was vaccinated. Five months later I got Delta. It was like a bad head cold with some O2 debt (like you're in the mountains). They get me mAb treatment and I improved within a day. Got a booster. Got Omicron ( sniffles for a day).
Whose to say whether the vax kept me out of hospital given that it was 5 months after being "fully vaxed" when we have evidence that the VE drops off after 3-4 months, or if the Delta wasn't that bad for most people to begin with.
It was so bad that you never caught it?
Even with the Hospitals so full the ICUs were at 97% capacity?
And no, I didn't catch it. What part of that resulted from natural constitution, vaccination, PPE use, and general precautions is impossible to say.
Was it at 150% because of the number of patients, or was it at 150% because they fired unvaccinated employees resulting in the inability to staff all of their available beds? This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
I'm in Florida. Nurses and staff were not being fired for their vaccination status during Delta, nor for the most part now.Our ICU was running at almost 150% capacity during the Delta surge. It had expanded to the neighboring surgical floor which had surrendered half its beds to them (elective surgeries were on hold, so less need for surgical recovery) which were then staffed largely with travelers.I don't know about "most people" but Delta filled our system (EDs and inpatient) with patients experiencing significant respiratory distress along with some deaths, so it was plenty bad enough.Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
Mass formation psychosis in action.
I was vaccinated. Five months later I got Delta. It was like a bad head cold with some O2 debt (like you're in the mountains). They get me mAb treatment and I improved within a day. Got a booster. Got Omicron ( sniffles for a day).
Whose to say whether the vax kept me out of hospital given that it was 5 months after being "fully vaxed" when we have evidence that the VE drops off after 3-4 months, or if the Delta wasn't that bad for most people to begin with.
It was so bad that you never caught it?
Even with the Hospitals so full the ICUs were at 97% capacity?
And no, I didn't catch it. What part of that resulted from natural constitution, vaccination, PPE use, and general precautions is impossible to say.
Was it at 150% because of the number of patients, or was it at 150% because they fired unvaccinated employees resulting in the inability to staff all of their available beds? This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
The ICU was expanded from 40 staffed beds to 60 staffed beds with almost half coming from travelers. I can trust what I did see with my own eyes.
Your last bit is some weird thinking. Most travel agencies require vaccination in their employees because it's far easier for hospitals to demand it from them through short term contracts than to try to push vaccination on their own existing permanent employees.
This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
US Supreme Court just blocked the OSHA mandate (6-3) but upheld the CMS one (5-4).
My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
Well, I have been in hospital administration, and while I'm not at present, I have access to internal stats and know full well how to follow them. The hospitals don't decide how to "spin the numbers," that's the decision of the organizations requesting the data.Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
Was amusing myself by reading TBP's incoherent analysis of the recent SCOTUS decision.
Unsurprisingly, it's neither as good or as bad as people think. It's more of a kick back to the lower courts, but there's a fairly strong indication that if a mandate needs to be issued, it's Congress, not the bureaucracy, that needs to be issuing it.
Even better, he basically admits to such on Twitter.Was amusing myself by reading TBP's incoherent analysis of the recent SCOTUS decision.
Unsurprisingly, it's neither as good or as bad as people think. It's more of a kick back to the lower courts, but there's a fairly strong indication that if a mandate needs to be issued, it's Congress, not the bureaucracy, that needs to be issuing it.
I think one of the key factors in there decision was that Ron Klain admitted that they did the mandate despite knowing it wasn't constitutional... When you know you're doing something wrong and you do it anyway, you deserve to suffer the consequences of your actions...
Well, I have been in hospital administration, and while I'm not at present, I have access to internal stats and know full well how to follow them. The hospitals don't decide how to "spin the numbers," that's the decision of the organizations requesting the data.Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
What is the point of your screenshots? The current surge isn't impacting inpatient (including ICU) beds nearly as much as its impacting ED access by flooding triage with huge waves of "chaff" (largely asymptomatic individuals demanding testing or individuals with minor symptoms believing they need emergent treatment). I've discussed this in several previous posts over the last few weeks.
Speaking of old people and nursing homes...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/whitmer-admin-undercounted-michigan-nursing-home-covid-deaths
Shut up and die, old people. Clear the way for the New Generation.
If I was Whitmer I'd lawyer up, pronto.
Whitmer, Cuomo, Newsom, Murphy, and Wolf are mass murderers because they forced covid-19 positive patients into nursing homes, with very predictable and horrific results.Speaking of old people and nursing homes...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/whitmer-admin-undercounted-michigan-nursing-home-covid-deaths
Shut up and die, old people. Clear the way for the New Generation.
If I was Whitmer I'd lawyer up, pronto.
They deployed sedatives in lethal doses to get rid of old people the same as they did here. New York state as well. Probably others.
Whitmer, Cuomo, Newsom, Murphy, and Wolf are mass murderers because they forced covid-19 positive patients into nursing homes, with very predictable and horrific results.Speaking of old people and nursing homes...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/whitmer-admin-undercounted-michigan-nursing-home-covid-deaths
Shut up and die, old people. Clear the way for the New Generation.
If I was Whitmer I'd lawyer up, pronto.
They deployed sedatives in lethal doses to get rid of old people the same as they did here. New York state as well. Probably others.
And people like you are the useful idiots who are providing cover for the Democrats, by helping them conflate those very real and well documented crimes committed in the public eye with sheer unmitigated nonsense like all this crap about secret lethal injections.
Search for palliative care medications on PubMed and you can find many quality studies. Somehow, the studies Kiero favors don't make the cut.Whitmer, Cuomo, Newsom, Murphy, and Wolf are mass murderers because they forced covid-19 positive patients into nursing homes, with very predictable and horrific results.Speaking of old people and nursing homes...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/whitmer-admin-undercounted-michigan-nursing-home-covid-deaths
Shut up and die, old people. Clear the way for the New Generation.
If I was Whitmer I'd lawyer up, pronto.
They deployed sedatives in lethal doses to get rid of old people the same as they did here. New York state as well. Probably others.
And people like you are the useful idiots who are providing cover for the Democrats, by helping them conflate those very real and well documented crimes committed in the public eye with sheer unmitigated nonsense like all this crap about secret lethal injections.
Midazolam is probably part of the standard treatment regimen for end of life treatment where you are trying to give symptomatic relief.
Happydaze would probably know more about the SoP.
I doubt it is "secret" when everyone working in the system knows about it and on the other hand probably seems shocking to people who dont have to deal with terminal patients.
Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
Your experiences don't apply to everyone though, and the list of conditions that it can exacerbate is long and broad. Moreover, not everyone currently sick can be sure they have Omicron (and most tests don't narrow down which variant is present), which is why presenting symptoms have to guide the treatment. The idiots rushing to the ED for testing without any symptoms are fools, but the ones having stronger symptoms and denying that Covid can be a serious health issue are worse in their own way.Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
I could have had 3x worse symptoms and to be honest I would have considered it a middling flu. This was the mildest cold I ever had. I can not see how it actually hurts anyone who is not otherwise compromised or has some sort of extremely rare vulnerability to it. I also understand why people pack in to be tested, the media, the government and half the people on the internet keep making this whole thing out to be captain tripps. At its worst it was the flu, now it is a mild cold.
Your experiences don't apply to everyone though, and the list of conditions that it can exacerbate is long and broad. Moreover, not everyone currently sick can be sure they have Omicron (and most tests don't narrow down which variant is present), which is why presenting symptoms have to guide the treatment. The idiots rushing to the ED for testing without any symptoms are fools, but the ones having stronger symptoms and denying that Covid can be a serious health issue are worse in their own way.Have Covid now. I do not want to be insensitive, but if this is the virus that is stopping the world in its tracks....we are all a bunch of pussies. EXTREMELY mild.The "Covid now" variant is considerably milder overall than the version we had this past summer. I saw a lot of very sick patients during the Delta surge. Now, not so much, but hot damn does every fool that wakes up with a headache want to be tested over and over again.
I could have had 3x worse symptoms and to be honest I would have considered it a middling flu. This was the mildest cold I ever had. I can not see how it actually hurts anyone who is not otherwise compromised or has some sort of extremely rare vulnerability to it. I also understand why people pack in to be tested, the media, the government and half the people on the internet keep making this whole thing out to be captain tripps. At its worst it was the flu, now it is a mild cold.
I know it is Fox News, but I could not find an MSNBC, CNN, etc. article on this -- go figure.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rand-paul-youtube-kiss-my-apologize-cdc-mask-guidance
This is just another example of why I don't trust St. Fauci, the CDC, or the SCIENCE(tm)! And FWIW, I was making the same arguments regarding mask effectiveness since they started recommending, and then requiring, mask wearing.
The mechanism for N-95 mask filtration is the electrostatic potential between the mask material and the particulate matter. It is not impaction, as is illustrated by your picture. Moreover, the effectiveness of an N-95 mask is highly dependent on it having an air-tight fit, which is why you have to have one properly-sized and properly fitted.I've worn N95 respirators for 12+ hour days, only removing them for lunch breaks (typically taken outdoors and away from others), and they are somewhat uncomfortable (leaving marks on both cheekbones and frequently along the bridge of the nose too), but I've never found them to interfere with my breathing at all or to significantly "stifle conversation" so long as I slightly increase my volume and project my voice a bit more forcefully. I have noted that some of my softer-spoken colleagues seem hesitant to do this, but when they do, they are easily understood. OTOH, wearing the Honeywell North respirators (full face or half face) often does make one harder to understand, and a PAPR hood is even worse.
At the hospital my wife works at, there are people specifically trained to pick the proper size and ensure that it properly fits. For my wife, it takes about an hour to go through the process. Also, wearing a properly-fitted N-95 mask is uncomfortable. After an 8+ hour day my wife comes home with bruised cheekbones from the mask pressing on her face. They are also difficult to breath through and they stifle conversation.
Anything other than a mask with an engineered-material and an air-tight fit is doing you little to no good if your concern is long-term exposure (e.g., sitting at work in a cube farm for 8+ hr). They will help somewhat if you are up-close to someone and are talking, or cough, or sneeze. Although for the later two, a hand, a vampire cough, or a tissue are likely as effective as a cloth or surgical mask.
The mechanism for N-95 mask filtration is the electrostatic potential between the mask material and the particulate matter. It is not impaction, as is illustrated by your picture. Moreover, the effectiveness of an N-95 mask is highly dependent on it having an air-tight fit, which is why you have to have one properly-sized and properly fitted.I've worn N95 respirators for 12+ hour days, only removing them for lunch breaks (typically taken outdoors and away from others), and they are somewhat uncomfortable (leaving marks on both cheekbones and frequently along the bridge of the nose too), but I've never found them to interfere with my breathing at all or to significantly "stifle conversation" so long as I slightly increase my volume and project my voice a bit more forcefully. I have noted that some of my softer-spoken colleagues seem hesitant to do this, but when they do, they are easily understood. OTOH, wearing the Honeywell North respirators (full face or half face) often does make one harder to understand, and a PAPR hood is even worse.
At the hospital my wife works at, there are people specifically trained to pick the proper size and ensure that it properly fits. For my wife, it takes about an hour to go through the process. Also, wearing a properly-fitted N-95 mask is uncomfortable. After an 8+ hour day my wife comes home with bruised cheekbones from the mask pressing on her face. They are also difficult to breath through and they stifle conversation.
Anything other than a mask with an engineered-material and an air-tight fit is doing you little to no good if your concern is long-term exposure (e.g., sitting at work in a cube farm for 8+ hr). They will help somewhat if you are up-close to someone and are talking, or cough, or sneeze. Although for the later two, a hand, a vampire cough, or a tissue are likely as effective as a cloth or surgical mask.
Fitting is always tight, regardless of facial size (and refitting for the masks is necessary for any significant weight gain/loss), but the "quiet talker" is probably the key point of difference here. It also might matter what style of N95 she is using, as some are more comfortable than others even if both are properly fitted. For example, the "duckbills" mark my cheeks more but don't mark the bridge of my nose as much as the "turtleshells". Unfortunately, many don't get much choice of what style they use, as that is generally set by the workplace and the supply chain. Still, if her mask is making it difficult to breathe, then she should consider asking for an alternate make (and make sure HR pushes the workplace to provide it).The mechanism for N-95 mask filtration is the electrostatic potential between the mask material and the particulate matter. It is not impaction, as is illustrated by your picture. Moreover, the effectiveness of an N-95 mask is highly dependent on it having an air-tight fit, which is why you have to have one properly-sized and properly fitted.I've worn N95 respirators for 12+ hour days, only removing them for lunch breaks (typically taken outdoors and away from others), and they are somewhat uncomfortable (leaving marks on both cheekbones and frequently along the bridge of the nose too), but I've never found them to interfere with my breathing at all or to significantly "stifle conversation" so long as I slightly increase my volume and project my voice a bit more forcefully. I have noted that some of my softer-spoken colleagues seem hesitant to do this, but when they do, they are easily understood. OTOH, wearing the Honeywell North respirators (full face or half face) often does make one harder to understand, and a PAPR hood is even worse.
At the hospital my wife works at, there are people specifically trained to pick the proper size and ensure that it properly fits. For my wife, it takes about an hour to go through the process. Also, wearing a properly-fitted N-95 mask is uncomfortable. After an 8+ hour day my wife comes home with bruised cheekbones from the mask pressing on her face. They are also difficult to breath through and they stifle conversation.
Anything other than a mask with an engineered-material and an air-tight fit is doing you little to no good if your concern is long-term exposure (e.g., sitting at work in a cube farm for 8+ hr). They will help somewhat if you are up-close to someone and are talking, or cough, or sneeze. Although for the later two, a hand, a vampire cough, or a tissue are likely as effective as a cloth or surgical mask.
I guess she is more delicate than you. :)
Also, she is very lean (works out every day, dances ballet on-point). So perhaps for her the mask has to be extra tight to get a proper seal compared to others that have a little more flesh over their cheekbones.
My wife is a quiet talker. And the patients she mainly deals with are elderly and hard of hearing. Add in the effects of strokes, onset dementia, and English as a second language, and conversation is difficult. Obviously YMDV.
The mechanism for N-95 mask filtration is the electrostatic potential between the mask material and the particulate matter. It is not impaction, as is illustrated by your picture. Moreover, the effectiveness of an N-95 mask is highly dependent on it having an air-tight fit, which is why you have to have one properly-sized and properly fitted.
At the hospital my wife works at, there are people specifically trained to pick the proper size and ensure that it properly fits. For my wife, it takes about an hour to go through the process. Also, wearing a properly-fitted N-95 mask is uncomfortable. After an 8+ hour day my wife comes home with bruised cheekbones from the mask pressing on her face. They are also difficult to breath through and they stifle conversation.
Anything other than a mask with an engineered-material and an air-tight fit is doing you little to no good if your concern is long-term exposure (e.g., sitting at work in a cube farm for 8+ hr). They will help somewhat if you are up-close to someone and are talking, or cough, or sneeze. Although for the later two, a hand, a vampire cough, or a tissue are likely as effective as a cloth or surgical mask.
The mechanism for N-95 mask filtration is the electrostatic potential between the mask material and the particulate matter. It is not impaction, as is illustrated by your picture. Moreover, the effectiveness of an N-95 mask is highly dependent on it having an air-tight fit, which is why you have to have one properly-sized and properly fitted.
At the hospital my wife works at, there are people specifically trained to pick the proper size and ensure that it properly fits. For my wife, it takes about an hour to go through the process. Also, wearing a properly-fitted N-95 mask is uncomfortable. After an 8+ hour day my wife comes home with bruised cheekbones from the mask pressing on her face. They are also difficult to breath through and they stifle conversation.
Anything other than a mask with an engineered-material and an air-tight fit is doing you little to no good if your concern is long-term exposure (e.g., sitting at work in a cube farm for 8+ hr). They will help somewhat if you are up-close to someone and are talking, or cough, or sneeze. Although for the later two, a hand, a vampire cough, or a tissue are likely as effective as a cloth or surgical mask.
And *that's* the whole point - all of the cloth masks and surgical masks have done fuck-all in terms of trying to prevent transmission. They're not fitted tight enough even if the weave were tight enough for electrostatics or quantum effects to drive their ability to capture particles. COVID is transmitted primarily by aerosol, just like flu, rhinovirus, adenovirus, or other coronaviruses. The "experts" knew this very early on yet still told people to alternatively not wear masks and to wear masks. FOIA requests resulted in release of an email from Fauci to some other government drone telling her that the typical drugstore masks aren't doing anything.
It's that flip-flopping when caught in a lie that has resulted in the erosion of trust.
If you really wanted to have an effective lockdown, you'd have announced that COVID is airborne and that the police would shoot on sight anyone found out on the streets with no good reason ( I actually have a letter from SECDEF from 2020 that I was to show the authorities in the event that I was pulled over by local law enforcement on my way to/from work...) Even then you wouldn't have stopped it. Viruses gonna virus:. spread as best they can, replicate as best they can, and if they kill their host too often, they tone it down so that they'll continue to spread and replicate...
There are tons of viruses that *all* people spread to each other on a daily basis. Most of them happy to just replicate without causing illness to anything other than the tons of bacteria in and on us.
Whitmer, Cuomo, Newsom, Murphy, and Wolf are mass murderers because they forced covid-19 positive patients into nursing homes, with very predictable and horrific results.
And people like you are the useful idiots who are providing cover for the Democrats, by helping them conflate those very real and well documented crimes committed in the public eye with sheer unmitigated nonsense like all this crap about secret lethal injections.
There are tons of viruses that *all* people spread to each other on a daily basis. Most of them happy to just replicate without causing illness to anything other than the tons of bacteria in and on us.
[Citation Needed]Whitmer, Cuomo, Newsom, Murphy, and Wolf are mass murderers because they forced covid-19 positive patients into nursing homes, with very predictable and horrific results.
And people like you are the useful idiots who are providing cover for the Democrats, by helping them conflate those very real and well documented crimes committed in the public eye with sheer unmitigated nonsense like all this crap about secret lethal injections.
Deploying a protocol which deliberately gives people several times the normal dosage is a crime.
[Citation Needed]
[Citation Needed]
I posted it several pages back.
You definitely owe me one. And it better be a damn good one. Like, along the lines that you're an absolute idiot and that you didn't realize that site was full of anti-semitic bile, and you're going to remove the link from your posts.
As will anyone who quoted him.
Your site, your rules.
I linked it for no reason beyond the fact that it referenced the case put before the magistrates against our former Health Secretary over the use of that sedative drug. That article was the first one that came up when searching for "midazolam murders".
I've never seen the site before and link removed.
Your push-pins-and-string mapping of whackadoodle nonsense doesn't count.[Citation Needed]
I posted it several pages back.
Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
The mechanism for N-95 mask filtration is the electrostatic potential between the mask material and the particulate matter. It is not impaction, as is illustrated by your picture. Moreover, the effectiveness of an N-95 mask is highly dependent on it having an air-tight fit, which is why you have to have one properly-sized and properly fitted.
At the hospital my wife works at, there are people specifically trained to pick the proper size and ensure that it properly fits. For my wife, it takes about an hour to go through the process. Also, wearing a properly-fitted N-95 mask is uncomfortable. After an 8+ hour day my wife comes home with bruised cheekbones from the mask pressing on her face. They are also difficult to breath through and they stifle conversation.
Anything other than a mask with an engineered-material and an air-tight fit is doing you little to no good if your concern is long-term exposure (e.g., sitting at work in a cube farm for 8+ hr). They will help somewhat if you are up-close to someone and are talking, or cough, or sneeze. Although for the later two, a hand, a vampire cough, or a tissue are likely as effective as a cloth or surgical mask.
And *that's* the whole point - all of the cloth masks and surgical masks have done fuck-all in terms of trying to prevent transmission. They're not fitted tight enough even if the weave were tight enough for electrostatics or quantum effects to drive their ability to capture particles. COVID is transmitted primarily by aerosol, just like flu, rhinovirus, adenovirus, or other coronaviruses. The "experts" knew this very early on yet still told people to alternatively not wear masks and to wear masks. FOIA requests resulted in release of an email from Fauci to some other government drone telling her that the typical drugstore masks aren't doing anything.
It's that flip-flopping when caught in a lie that has resulted in the erosion of trust.
If you really wanted to have an effective lockdown, you'd have announced that COVID is airborne and that the police would shoot on sight anyone found out on the streets with no good reason ( I actually have a letter from SECDEF from 2020 that I was to show the authorities in the event that I was pulled over by local law enforcement on my way to/from work...) Even then you wouldn't have stopped it. Viruses gonna virus:. spread as best they can, replicate as best they can, and if they kill their host too often, they tone it down so that they'll continue to spread and replicate...
There are tons of viruses that *all* people spread to each other on a daily basis. Most of them happy to just replicate without causing illness to anything other than the tons of bacteria in and on us.
Cloth masks still reduce the radius of your breath outward. As someone who has played D&D before, you fully understand and appreciate the importance of the radial spread of a breath weapon. This is provable, and can be seen with your own eyes if you care to conduct an experiment.While this is true, the Omicron virus will out smart your attempt at social distancing and masking, because it has mastered Brownian motion and Fick's Law.
Cloth masks still reduce the radius of your breath outward. As someone who has played D&D before, you fully understand and appreciate the importance of the radial spread of a breath weapon. This is provable, and can be seen with your own eyes if you care to conduct an experiment.
Cloth masks still reduce the radius of your breath outward. As someone who has played D&D before, you fully understand and appreciate the importance of the radial spread of a breath weapon. This is provable, and can be seen with your own eyes if you care to conduct an experiment.
You just compared Covid to a breath weapon? And you call other people out of touch with reality...
The preponderance of the evidence suggests that Covid spreads from person to person primarily as an aerosol, and not via droplet transfer. There are indications that both the likelihood of infection and some severity is based on viral load due to prolonged exposure, and not singular spread due to being coughed on or sneezed on. So the idea that a mask, especially a cloth mask, is doing anything is total wishful thinking. You have far more to worry about from recycled air in buildings, which contains particles of virus far too small for your mask to do anything about. But you'd know all that, if you actually cared about the actual "science" of the virus' spread...
Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
I have a question for you.
You're in the financial services industry, not the medical industry. You're telling a guy who works in the medical industry that you know how his hospital works better than he knows how his hospital works, based purely on your gut instinct and what matches your world view.
My question is: How the fuck?
You're a blind man describing an elephant.Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
I have a question for you.
You're in the financial services industry, not the medical industry. You're telling a guy who works in the medical industry that you know how his hospital works better than he knows how his hospital works, based purely on your gut instinct and what matches your world view.
My question is: How the fuck?
First of all, I'm an engineer. My assessment is data-based. So, yes, based on the data, I am telling him how hospitals, by and large, are not in crisis.
Secondly, while not as well-versed as dkabq in aerosol studies specifically, my work focuses on system-of-systems activities, so I've been involved in several air wake studies - even if you reduce risk to someone directly in front of you, no one in the real world sits there face-to-face in close proximity for hours at a time. The fact remains that you're sharing your exhalate to everyone behind and to the side of you. And that non-laminar flow ensures that anything hanging out in your exhalate is going to float along for quite some time.
Does your data show you the multiple aspects of staffing difficulties (including retention and retraining)?...A crisis of their own making. How many doctors and nurses worked through the entire pandemic before there was a vaccine (as "heroes"), yet got kicked to the curb once the mandates arrived? Maybe not in Florida, but a lot of the Northeast states are bemoaning the lack of staff (which they report as fewer beds available), right after firing a bunch because they wouldn't get the jab. Stupid...
It might surprise you to know that we in the healthcare industry know how to work with data too, and we weigh all of the above when we say hospitals are in a crisis.
The number of staff fired are a drop in the bucket compared to how many vacant positions there are in many hospitals. Granted, the firings were stupid, but they are a much smaller piece of the puzzle than you suggest.Does your data show you the multiple aspects of staffing difficulties (including retention and retraining)?...A crisis of their own making. How many doctors and nurses worked through the entire pandemic before there was a vaccine (as "heroes"), yet got kicked to the curb once the mandates arrived? Maybe not in Florida, but a lot of the Northeast states are bemoaning the lack of staff (which they report as fewer beds available), right after firing a bunch because they wouldn't get the jab. Stupid...
It might surprise you to know that we in the healthcare industry know how to work with data too, and we weigh all of the above when we say hospitals are in a crisis.
You're a blind man describing an elephant.Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
I have a question for you.
You're in the financial services industry, not the medical industry. You're telling a guy who works in the medical industry that you know how his hospital works better than he knows how his hospital works, based purely on your gut instinct and what matches your world view.
My question is: How the fuck?
First of all, I'm an engineer. My assessment is data-based. So, yes, based on the data, I am telling him how hospitals, by and large, are not in crisis.
Secondly, while not as well-versed as dkabq in aerosol studies specifically, my work focuses on system-of-systems activities, so I've been involved in several air wake studies - even if you reduce risk to someone directly in front of you, no one in the real world sits there face-to-face in close proximity for hours at a time. The fact remains that you're sharing your exhalate to everyone behind and to the side of you. And that non-laminar flow ensures that anything hanging out in your exhalate is going to float along for quite some time.
Does your data show you the changes in ED accessibility? Does your data show you the multiple aspects of staffing difficulties (including retention and retraining)? Does your data show you the effects of disrupted supply chain on medical supplies and pharmaceuticals? Does your data show the impact of the pandemic on post-acute care options (which complicates discharges)? Does your data show you the impact any/all of these on patient experience/satisfaction scores (which directly impacts hospital reimbursement)?
It might surprise you to know that we in the healthcare industry know how to work with data too, and we weigh all of the above when we say hospitals are in a crisis.
The only candidate for a link I can find is the one referenced here:
Obviously, if this was the link it is gone. And although I never saw it, probably for good reason.
It sounds as though you just blorped out the first link you found. possibly without even reading it. Do you have anything better?
Actually, ya don't.
The healthcare industry has, for decades, operated on razor-thin margins of material supplies in hand and on staffing bench depth. Administrators have been rewarded for minimizing costs, even when it meant having not enough supplies in reserve and not enough employees to do the work - before covid happened. Because, god forbid, they'd have had to have people employed to manage and rotate stocks of perishables and to survey levels of non-perishable supplies and might have had to pay people with nothing to do on slow shifts other than catch up on endless paperwork. When your model has been "just in time" delivery of stuff coming from China and "almost but not quite enough staff," and you don't change when you can see that supply chain issues will get worse (we knew this almost two years ago) and you purposely fire unvaxxed staff but then order vaxxed staff who are positive and possibly still contagious back to work, you deserve to get fired.
So, blind man, tell me again what an elephant is.You're a blind man describing an elephant.Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
I have a question for you.
You're in the financial services industry, not the medical industry. You're telling a guy who works in the medical industry that you know how his hospital works better than he knows how his hospital works, based purely on your gut instinct and what matches your world view.
My question is: How the fuck?
First of all, I'm an engineer. My assessment is data-based. So, yes, based on the data, I am telling him how hospitals, by and large, are not in crisis.
Secondly, while not as well-versed as dkabq in aerosol studies specifically, my work focuses on system-of-systems activities, so I've been involved in several air wake studies - even if you reduce risk to someone directly in front of you, no one in the real world sits there face-to-face in close proximity for hours at a time. The fact remains that you're sharing your exhalate to everyone behind and to the side of you. And that non-laminar flow ensures that anything hanging out in your exhalate is going to float along for quite some time.
Does your data show you the changes in ED accessibility? Does your data show you the multiple aspects of staffing difficulties (including retention and retraining)? Does your data show you the effects of disrupted supply chain on medical supplies and pharmaceuticals? Does your data show the impact of the pandemic on post-acute care options (which complicates discharges)? Does your data show you the impact any/all of these on patient experience/satisfaction scores (which directly impacts hospital reimbursement)?
It might surprise you to know that we in the healthcare industry know how to work with data too, and we weigh all of the above when we say hospitals are in a crisis.
Actually, ya don't.
The healthcare industry has, for decades, operated on razor-thin margins of material supplies in hand and on staffing bench depth. Administrators have been rewarded for minimizing costs, even when it meant having not enough supplies in reserve and not enough employees to do the work - before covid happened. Because, god forbid, they'd have had to have people employed to manage and rotate stocks of perishables and to survey levels of non-perishable supplies and might have had to pay people with nothing to do on slow shifts other than catch up on endless paperwork. When your model has been "just in time" delivery of stuff coming from China and "almost but not quite enough staff," and you don't change when you can see that supply chain issues will get worse (we knew this almost two years ago) and you purposely fire unvaxxed staff but then order vaxxed staff who are positive and possibly still contagious back to work, you deserve to get fired.
So, blind man, tell me again what an elephant is.You're a blind man describing an elephant.Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
I have a question for you.
You're in the financial services industry, not the medical industry. You're telling a guy who works in the medical industry that you know how his hospital works better than he knows how his hospital works, based purely on your gut instinct and what matches your world view.
My question is: How the fuck?
First of all, I'm an engineer. My assessment is data-based. So, yes, based on the data, I am telling him how hospitals, by and large, are not in crisis.
Secondly, while not as well-versed as dkabq in aerosol studies specifically, my work focuses on system-of-systems activities, so I've been involved in several air wake studies - even if you reduce risk to someone directly in front of you, no one in the real world sits there face-to-face in close proximity for hours at a time. The fact remains that you're sharing your exhalate to everyone behind and to the side of you. And that non-laminar flow ensures that anything hanging out in your exhalate is going to float along for quite some time.
Does your data show you the changes in ED accessibility? Does your data show you the multiple aspects of staffing difficulties (including retention and retraining)? Does your data show you the effects of disrupted supply chain on medical supplies and pharmaceuticals? Does your data show the impact of the pandemic on post-acute care options (which complicates discharges)? Does your data show you the impact any/all of these on patient experience/satisfaction scores (which directly impacts hospital reimbursement)?
It might surprise you to know that we in the healthcare industry know how to work with data too, and we weigh all of the above when we say hospitals are in a crisis.
Actually, ya don't.
The healthcare industry has, for decades, operated on razor-thin margins of material supplies in hand and on staffing bench depth. Administrators have been rewarded for minimizing costs, even when it meant having not enough supplies in reserve and not enough employees to do the work - before covid happened. Because, god forbid, they'd have had to have people employed to manage and rotate stocks of perishables and to survey levels of non-perishable supplies and might have had to pay people with nothing to do on slow shifts other than catch up on endless paperwork. When your model has been "just in time" delivery of stuff coming from China and "almost but not quite enough staff," and you don't change when you can see that supply chain issues will get worse (we knew this almost two years ago) and you purposely fire unvaxxed staff but then order vaxxed staff who are positive and possibly still contagious back to work, you deserve to get fired.
I can refute several of your points, but only for specific hospital systems. That's not saying your points are necessarily correct or incorrect, but they are sweeping generalizations. Further, any fool can point out flaws in a system without identifying feasible fixes. Do you have a magic fix beyond "just do better at everything?"So, blind man, tell me again what an elephant is.You're a blind man describing an elephant.Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
I have a question for you.
You're in the financial services industry, not the medical industry. You're telling a guy who works in the medical industry that you know how his hospital works better than he knows how his hospital works, based purely on your gut instinct and what matches your world view.
My question is: How the fuck?
First of all, I'm an engineer. My assessment is data-based. So, yes, based on the data, I am telling him how hospitals, by and large, are not in crisis.
Secondly, while not as well-versed as dkabq in aerosol studies specifically, my work focuses on system-of-systems activities, so I've been involved in several air wake studies - even if you reduce risk to someone directly in front of you, no one in the real world sits there face-to-face in close proximity for hours at a time. The fact remains that you're sharing your exhalate to everyone behind and to the side of you. And that non-laminar flow ensures that anything hanging out in your exhalate is going to float along for quite some time.
Does your data show you the changes in ED accessibility? Does your data show you the multiple aspects of staffing difficulties (including retention and retraining)? Does your data show you the effects of disrupted supply chain on medical supplies and pharmaceuticals? Does your data show the impact of the pandemic on post-acute care options (which complicates discharges)? Does your data show you the impact any/all of these on patient experience/satisfaction scores (which directly impacts hospital reimbursement)?
It might surprise you to know that we in the healthcare industry know how to work with data too, and we weigh all of the above when we say hospitals are in a crisis.
Actually, ya don't.
The healthcare industry has, for decades, operated on razor-thin margins of material supplies in hand and on staffing bench depth. Administrators have been rewarded for minimizing costs, even when it meant having not enough supplies in reserve and not enough employees to do the work - before covid happened. Because, god forbid, they'd have had to have people employed to manage and rotate stocks of perishables and to survey levels of non-perishable supplies and might have had to pay people with nothing to do on slow shifts other than catch up on endless paperwork. When your model has been "just in time" delivery of stuff coming from China and "almost but not quite enough staff," and you don't change when you can see that supply chain issues will get worse (we knew this almost two years ago) and you purposely fire unvaxxed staff but then order vaxxed staff who are positive and possibly still contagious back to work, you deserve to get fired.
That you can't refute my statements says everything...
Cloth masks still reduce the radius of your breath outward. As someone who has played D&D before, you fully understand and appreciate the importance of the radial spread of a breath weapon. This is provable, and can be seen with your own eyes if you care to conduct an experiment.
You just compared Covid to a breath weapon? And you call other people out of touch with reality...
The preponderance of the evidence suggests that Covid spreads from person to person primarily as an aerosol, and not via droplet transfer. There are indications that both the likelihood of infection and some severity is based on viral load due to prolonged exposure, and not singular spread due to being coughed on or sneezed on. So the idea that a mask, especially a cloth mask, is doing anything is total wishful thinking. You have far more to worry about from recycled air in buildings, which contains particles of virus far too small for your mask to do anything about. But you'd know all that, if you actually cared about the actual "science" of the virus' spread...
You've never backed up those or similar claims in the past, even when I've linked studies and run down the evidence showing otherwise.
Cloth masks still reduce the radius of your breath outward. As someone who has played D&D before, you fully understand and appreciate the importance of the radial spread of a breath weapon. This is provable, and can be seen with your own eyes if you care to conduct an experiment.
You just compared Covid to a breath weapon? And you call other people out of touch with reality...
The preponderance of the evidence suggests that Covid spreads from person to person primarily as an aerosol, and not via droplet transfer. There are indications that both the likelihood of infection and some severity is based on viral load due to prolonged exposure, and not singular spread due to being coughed on or sneezed on. So the idea that a mask, especially a cloth mask, is doing anything is total wishful thinking. You have far more to worry about from recycled air in buildings, which contains particles of virus far too small for your mask to do anything about. But you'd know all that, if you actually cared about the actual "science" of the virus' spread...
Still a ton of droplet transfers of this virus, and LOTS of studies demonstrate that. Strongest dosage has been shown to be from sneezing and coughing, both of which has it's radial spread reduced by any mask. I'll be happy to post studies the moment you back up your bullshit "preponderance of the evidence" claim. Which we both know you won't. Because you spew whatever bullshit comes to your mind and then move on with a dismissal.
Cloth masks still reduce the radius of your breath outward. As someone who has played D&D before, you fully understand and appreciate the importance of the radial spread of a breath weapon. This is provable, and can be seen with your own eyes if you care to conduct an experiment.
You just compared Covid to a breath weapon? And you call other people out of touch with reality...
The preponderance of the evidence suggests that Covid spreads from person to person primarily as an aerosol, and not via droplet transfer. There are indications that both the likelihood of infection and some severity is based on viral load due to prolonged exposure, and not singular spread due to being coughed on or sneezed on. So the idea that a mask, especially a cloth mask, is doing anything is total wishful thinking. You have far more to worry about from recycled air in buildings, which contains particles of virus far too small for your mask to do anything about. But you'd know all that, if you actually cared about the actual "science" of the virus' spread...
Still a ton of droplet transfers of this virus, and LOTS of studies demonstrate that. Strongest dosage has been shown to be from sneezing and coughing, both of which has it's radial spread reduced by any mask. I'll be happy to post studies the moment you back up your bullshit "preponderance of the evidence" claim. Which we both know you won't. Because you spew whatever bullshit comes to your mind and then move on with a dismissal.
I can refute several of your points, but only for specific hospital systems. That's not saying your points are necessarily correct or incorrect, but they are sweeping generalizations. Further, any fool can point out flaws in a system without identifying feasible fixes. Do you have a magic fix beyond "just do better at everything?"So, blind man, tell me again what an elephant is.You're a blind man describing an elephant.Hospitals don't choose which statistics to report or how they do so, they report them in the format they are told to do so by CMS and other authorities. This might be in terms of licensed beds, operational beds, or staffed beds.My hospital just opened 3 new floors on a tower, so 120 new inpatient beds. We've been trying to hire staff for the past year and we still only have about 1/3 what we need for the new beds (many new hires we redirected to cover gaps in other units) and even with traveling nurses, we can only staff 2/3 of those beds right now.This is what is happening in many places. Let's say they have 100 available beds, but only enough staff for 50 beds. They can declare (and several have done so) themselves to be over capacity with 51 patients occupying beds.
This is why you can't trust anything coming from hospital administrators without seeing it for yourself.
We have situations where they've fired unvaccinated nurses and doctors while simultaneously ordering vaccinated but infected ones to come back to work *while still contagious*. Meanwhile all of those fired nurses and doctors are making 2x, 3x, or more salary by being traveling medical practitioners - either going elsewhere or actually being contracted by the hospital that fired them - as independent contractors, they don't have to be vaccinated because they're not employees...
When you say "we" here, 3catcircus, do you also work in health care and saw this yourself? If so, where do you work? If not, what is your source?
I don't doubt that dumb shit has happened. The question is what is the norm? I don't have first-hand knowledge, but people I know in health care seem to think it's roughly real. I'll buy that mainstream liberal-leaning media is biased, but even if I'm reading on Newsmax, I see stuff about hospitals being overwhelmed by the Omicron surge.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/covid-omicron-hospital/2022/01/07/id/1051414/
CNN (lack of staff resulting in inability to use all their beds):
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html
Yahoo (sick healthcare workers ordered back to work):
https://news.yahoo.com/hospitals-reeling-california-tells-covid-130036030.html
travelnursing.org (job opps for traveling nurses):
https://www.travelnursing.org/covid-updates-for-travel-nurses-january-5-2022/
CBS News (no vaccine required to be hired as a nurse).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nebraska-job-ad-nurses-no-vaccination-requirement/
Right. The question is if your hospital will report over capacity if they put more bodies in beds than they have staff for, or only if they start stacking them in hallway gurneys because every other bed in an actual room is full.
Who knows if it is hospital administrators being disengenuous or if the media is (as is typical) not reporting factual information.
Hallway beds are not an inpatient thing, they exist in the EDs d/t the requirements of EMTALA that no patient seeking emergent care be turned away until it can be determined that they no longer have an emergent condition (or that they never did).
Your "who knows" line is the kind of bullshit that doesn't help at all because it implies that nobody knows. I'm telling you facts from within the system and you're still going with "who knows" kind of shit. I know, and so do many others workign in healthcare.
If you're not in hospital administration and you don't think they would spin the numbers to fit a narrative, you're a fool.
Here's numbers from HHS... doesn't look like they're in a crisis at all.
I have a question for you.
You're in the financial services industry, not the medical industry. You're telling a guy who works in the medical industry that you know how his hospital works better than he knows how his hospital works, based purely on your gut instinct and what matches your world view.
My question is: How the fuck?
First of all, I'm an engineer. My assessment is data-based. So, yes, based on the data, I am telling him how hospitals, by and large, are not in crisis.
Secondly, while not as well-versed as dkabq in aerosol studies specifically, my work focuses on system-of-systems activities, so I've been involved in several air wake studies - even if you reduce risk to someone directly in front of you, no one in the real world sits there face-to-face in close proximity for hours at a time. The fact remains that you're sharing your exhalate to everyone behind and to the side of you. And that non-laminar flow ensures that anything hanging out in your exhalate is going to float along for quite some time.
Does your data show you the changes in ED accessibility? Does your data show you the multiple aspects of staffing difficulties (including retention and retraining)? Does your data show you the effects of disrupted supply chain on medical supplies and pharmaceuticals? Does your data show the impact of the pandemic on post-acute care options (which complicates discharges)? Does your data show you the impact any/all of these on patient experience/satisfaction scores (which directly impacts hospital reimbursement)?
It might surprise you to know that we in the healthcare industry know how to work with data too, and we weigh all of the above when we say hospitals are in a crisis.
Actually, ya don't.
The healthcare industry has, for decades, operated on razor-thin margins of material supplies in hand and on staffing bench depth. Administrators have been rewarded for minimizing costs, even when it meant having not enough supplies in reserve and not enough employees to do the work - before covid happened. Because, god forbid, they'd have had to have people employed to manage and rotate stocks of perishables and to survey levels of non-perishable supplies and might have had to pay people with nothing to do on slow shifts other than catch up on endless paperwork. When your model has been "just in time" delivery of stuff coming from China and "almost but not quite enough staff," and you don't change when you can see that supply chain issues will get worse (we knew this almost two years ago) and you purposely fire unvaxxed staff but then order vaxxed staff who are positive and possibly still contagious back to work, you deserve to get fired.
That you can't refute my statements says everything...
Cloth masks still reduce the radius of your breath outward. As someone who has played D&D before, you fully understand and appreciate the importance of the radial spread of a breath weapon. This is provable, and can be seen with your own eyes if you care to conduct an experiment.
You just compared Covid to a breath weapon? And you call other people out of touch with reality...
The preponderance of the evidence suggests that Covid spreads from person to person primarily as an aerosol, and not via droplet transfer. There are indications that both the likelihood of infection and some severity is based on viral load due to prolonged exposure, and not singular spread due to being coughed on or sneezed on. So the idea that a mask, especially a cloth mask, is doing anything is total wishful thinking. You have far more to worry about from recycled air in buildings, which contains particles of virus far too small for your mask to do anything about. But you'd know all that, if you actually cared about the actual "science" of the virus' spread...
Still a ton of droplet transfers of this virus, and LOTS of studies demonstrate that. Strongest dosage has been shown to be from sneezing and coughing, both of which has it's radial spread reduced by any mask. I'll be happy to post studies the moment you back up your bullshit "preponderance of the evidence" claim. Which we both know you won't. Because you spew whatever bullshit comes to your mind and then move on with a dismissal.
What is the effectiveness of masks, in terms of redirecting spread, compared to covering your mouth when you cough or "vampire" coughing, or sneezing into a tissue? I would posit that they are effectively equivalent.
Cloth masks still reduce the radius of your breath outward. As someone who has played D&D before, you fully understand and appreciate the importance of the radial spread of a breath weapon. This is provable, and can be seen with your own eyes if you care to conduct an experiment.
You just compared Covid to a breath weapon? And you call other people out of touch with reality...
The preponderance of the evidence suggests that Covid spreads from person to person primarily as an aerosol, and not via droplet transfer. There are indications that both the likelihood of infection and some severity is based on viral load due to prolonged exposure, and not singular spread due to being coughed on or sneezed on. So the idea that a mask, especially a cloth mask, is doing anything is total wishful thinking. You have far more to worry about from recycled air in buildings, which contains particles of virus far too small for your mask to do anything about. But you'd know all that, if you actually cared about the actual "science" of the virus' spread...
Still a ton of droplet transfers of this virus, and LOTS of studies demonstrate that. Strongest dosage has been shown to be from sneezing and coughing, both of which has it's radial spread reduced by any mask. I'll be happy to post studies the moment you back up your bullshit "preponderance of the evidence" claim. Which we both know you won't. Because you spew whatever bullshit comes to your mind and then move on with a dismissal.
What is the effectiveness of masks, in terms of redirecting spread, compared to covering your mouth when you cough or "vampire" coughing, or sneezing into a tissue? I would posit that they are effectively equivalent.
I would guess you're correct. But, humans are humans. Some cover their mouth and nose when they sneeze or cough, others don't, others do it somethings and not other times. A mask helps.
Cloth masks still reduce the radius of your breath outward. As someone who has played D&D before, you fully understand and appreciate the importance of the radial spread of a breath weapon. This is provable, and can be seen with your own eyes if you care to conduct an experiment.
You just compared Covid to a breath weapon? And you call other people out of touch with reality...
The preponderance of the evidence suggests that Covid spreads from person to person primarily as an aerosol, and not via droplet transfer. There are indications that both the likelihood of infection and some severity is based on viral load due to prolonged exposure, and not singular spread due to being coughed on or sneezed on. So the idea that a mask, especially a cloth mask, is doing anything is total wishful thinking. You have far more to worry about from recycled air in buildings, which contains particles of virus far too small for your mask to do anything about. But you'd know all that, if you actually cared about the actual "science" of the virus' spread...
Still a ton of droplet transfers of this virus, and LOTS of studies demonstrate that. Strongest dosage has been shown to be from sneezing and coughing, both of which has it's radial spread reduced by any mask. I'll be happy to post studies the moment you back up your bullshit "preponderance of the evidence" claim. Which we both know you won't. Because you spew whatever bullshit comes to your mind and then move on with a dismissal.
What is the effectiveness of masks, in terms of redirecting spread, compared to covering your mouth when you cough or "vampire" coughing, or sneezing into a tissue? I would posit that they are effectively equivalent.
I would guess you're correct. But, humans are humans. Some cover their mouth and nose when they sneeze or cough, others don't, others do it somethings and not other times. A mask helps.
Where I would give you the nod is situations where you are in sustained, close proximity to others -- like a heath care worker. Which is why my wife wears an N-95 and a face shield (got to protect those eyes from spit or snot, if you are serious) when she is at work at the hospital.Clinical environments are very different from random people on the street. Even if we ignore things like proper N95 fit and seal, medical professionals at work will be much more careful about donning and doffing their masks, making sure they remain in place, not touching them, cycling them out, and so on. Among the public, people often carry the same mask in a pocket for weeks, touch it all the time, and wear it on their chin.
Where I would give you the nod is situations where you are in sustained, close proximity to others -- like a heath care worker. Which is why my wife wears an N-95 and a face shield (got to protect those eyes from spit or snot, if you are serious) when she is at work at the hospital.Clinical environments are very different from random people on the street. Even if we ignore things like proper N95 fit and seal, medical professionals at work will be much more careful about donning and doffing their masks, making sure they remain in place, not touching them, cycling them out, and so on. Among the public, people often carry the same mask in a pocket for weeks, touch it all the time, and wear it on their chin.
All the pre-covid studies on the effect of masks on the transmission of respiratory diseases focused on clinical environments. There were no studies of the general public wearing masks. And even those studies were highly ambiguous, showing no or a very minor effect just barely crossing the threshold of significance.
Lockdowns were also very strongly recommended against before covid-19. They basically took all the pandemic planning they'd done prior to 2020, threw it out, and made up new stuff.Where I would give you the nod is situations where you are in sustained, close proximity to others -- like a heath care worker. Which is why my wife wears an N-95 and a face shield (got to protect those eyes from spit or snot, if you are serious) when she is at work at the hospital.Clinical environments are very different from random people on the street. Even if we ignore things like proper N95 fit and seal, medical professionals at work will be much more careful about donning and doffing their masks, making sure they remain in place, not touching them, cycling them out, and so on. Among the public, people often carry the same mask in a pocket for weeks, touch it all the time, and wear it on their chin.
All the pre-covid studies on the effect of masks on the transmission of respiratory diseases focused on clinical environments. There were no studies of the general public wearing masks. And even those studies were highly ambiguous, showing no or a very minor effect just barely crossing the threshold of significance.
Indeed. That is why pre-covid the CDC did not recommend the general public wear face masks. Then somehow, between February/March 2020 (St. Fauci's private correspondence in February and his 60-Minutes interview) and ~April 2020 there was enough SCIENCE!(tm) for that CDC guidance to be changed. Throw in the ever-moving goal-posts of %-vaccinated to reach herd immunity, vax or mask, and St. Fauci saying at one point in 2021 that you should wear two masks, and I am doubtful of anything proffered as the official narrative.
If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
Where I would give you the nod is situations where you are in sustained, close proximity to others -- like a heath care worker. Which is why my wife wears an N-95 and a face shield (got to protect those eyes from spit or snot, if you are serious) when she is at work at the hospital.Clinical environments are very different from random people on the street. Even if we ignore things like proper N95 fit and seal, medical professionals at work will be much more careful about donning and doffing their masks, making sure they remain in place, not touching them, cycling them out, and so on. Among the public, people often carry the same mask in a pocket for weeks, touch it all the time, and wear it on their chin.
All the pre-covid studies on the effect of masks on the transmission of respiratory diseases focused on clinical environments. There were no studies of the general public wearing masks. And even those studies were highly ambiguous, showing no or a very minor effect just barely crossing the threshold of significance.
Indeed. That is why pre-covid the CDC did not recommend the general public wear face masks. Then somehow, between February/March 2020 (St. Fauci's private correspondence in February and his 60-Minutes interview) and ~April 2020 there was enough SCIENCE!(tm) for that CDC guidance to be changed. Throw in the ever-moving goal-posts of %-vaccinated to reach herd immunity, vax or mask, and St. Fauci saying at one point in 2021 that you should wear two masks, and I am doubtful of anything proffered as the official narrative.
If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
Nonsense, I nitpick them all. I've regularly stated in this thread that almost all the mask studies are very poor. Non-randomized, very small sample size, and otherwise very low on the tiers of evidence based medicine. And even with that, there's no strong signal in any of them. Most of the studies show no significant effect, while others just barely edge into significance. More importantly, most of the studies don't even measure what they need to measure if they're to have any relevance to public policy. 100% of the studies before covid, and most since, looked at N95 (mostly) or surgical masks (occasionally) in clinical environments. There were exactly zero studies that looked at cloth masks, and exactly zero studies that looked at mask use among the wider population.If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
Focusing on mechanistic effects isn't going to be entirely useful when human behavior is a major factor.If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
FWIW, I put little faith in either. There are just too many confounding effects that cannot be accounted for. I much prefer looking at mechanistic effects (e.g., fluid mechanics, aerosol physics, etc.).
Focusing on mechanistic effects isn't going to be entirely useful when human behavior is a major factor.If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
FWIW, I put little faith in either. There are just too many confounding effects that cannot be accounted for. I much prefer looking at mechanistic effects (e.g., fluid mechanics, aerosol physics, etc.).
Agree with HappyDaze on this. Human behavior is just too complex. You can do all the white room theorizing you want, but it doesn't mean anything unless you can test it in the real world.Focusing on mechanistic effects isn't going to be entirely useful when human behavior is a major factor.If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
FWIW, I put little faith in either. There are just too many confounding effects that cannot be accounted for. I much prefer looking at mechanistic effects (e.g., fluid mechanics, aerosol physics, etc.).
It provides an upper-bound on potential effectiveness.
Agree with HappyDaze on this. Human behavior is just too complex. You can do all the white room theorizing you want, but it doesn't mean anything unless you can test it in the real world.Focusing on mechanistic effects isn't going to be entirely useful when human behavior is a major factor.If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
FWIW, I put little faith in either. There are just too many confounding effects that cannot be accounted for. I much prefer looking at mechanistic effects (e.g., fluid mechanics, aerosol physics, etc.).
It provides an upper-bound on potential effectiveness.
If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
Remember when medical professionals cared about the Hippocratic oath, "First, do no harm"? I guess these days the oath is, "I think this works even though there's no data to support it, just do what I say or the policeman will break your jaw for your own safety."
If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
This is so false as to almost be a direct lie. There are 26 RCT studies of mask usage cited in various CDC publications (almost none of which deal with SARS-Covid-19 directly, as to be expected considering the timeline that such trials have). Over 75% show weak or no correlation. The Bangladesh study and the Danish studies, even if taken at face value, provide little support for either conclusion. Most medical studies are done at p<0.05, which means that there is only a 1-in-20 chance of the correlation being mechanically wrong (the process or conclusions, however...). Do enough studies, and your 1-in-20 chances will start popping up. It's not that surprising, then, that one of the 26 studies cited (the Bangladesh study) goes against the data from the rest. One, or even a handful, of studies does not prove ANYTHING. You need consistent, reproducible, results to start drawing any conclusions... which we don't have. So, until such time as the RCT studies on mask-wearing are clear, reproducible, and overwhelmingly in favor, no efficacy of masks has been proven at all...
I've certainly linked to them before, as well as providing thorough summaries. Remember what happened, every time? You went silent, and stopped responding. Then, pages later, when you believed everyone had forgotten how your posts were thoroughly debunked, you popped up again to post the same ignorant nonsense.If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
This is so false as to almost be a direct lie. There are 26 RCT studies of mask usage cited in various CDC publications (almost none of which deal with SARS-Covid-19 directly, as to be expected considering the timeline that such trials have). Over 75% show weak or no correlation. The Bangladesh study and the Danish studies, even if taken at face value, provide little support for either conclusion. Most medical studies are done at p<0.05, which means that there is only a 1-in-20 chance of the correlation being mechanically wrong (the process or conclusions, however...). Do enough studies, and your 1-in-20 chances will start popping up. It's not that surprising, then, that one of the 26 studies cited (the Bangladesh study) goes against the data from the rest. One, or even a handful, of studies does not prove ANYTHING. You need consistent, reproducible, results to start drawing any conclusions... which we don't have. So, until such time as the RCT studies on mask-wearing are clear, reproducible, and overwhelmingly in favor, no efficacy of masks has been proven at all...
When I clicked your link...oh wait. Right. Just more bullshit assertions from some bullshit article you read some time in the past from some bullshit source from your bubble spinning more bullshit.
If you want to prove what you're claiming, provide a link to a non-insane or non-clickbait website. And note I never claimed "cited in various" anything. I said studies show masks help. Not that they "prevent you from getting covid" because most of the studies I am referring to say they reduce the chance you will SPREAD covid to someone else. People love to call out studies claiming masks don't stop you from GETTING covid and pretend that's where the discussion of masks end when they know full well the claim is more typically that they help reduce the spread of covid from you outward.
Like, for example, this evidence review of face masks against COVID-19, stating, "The preponderance of evidence indicates that mask wearing reduces transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected respiratory particles in both laboratory and clinical contexts (https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118)".
My guess is you will ignore all that, and again repeat that masks don't prevent you from receiving covid. Though you will know it's you misrepresenting everything I just said. Because you don't have jack shit on your side of this debate.
How do you maskholes explain mask mandates causing "cases" to go up? And relaxation of restrictions, including masks, causing them to go down?
Not studies or "models", but real world observation.
I've certainly linked to them before, as well as providing thorough summaries. Remember what happened, every time? You went silent, and stopped responding. Then, pages later, when you believed everyone had forgotten how your posts were thoroughly debunked, you popped up again to post the same ignorant nonsense.If masks help, why do RCTs not (on balance) show they help? Surely if they helped, then the evidence would consistently show this, rather than null/negative effect?
For every legit study showing they don't help there are more legit studies showing they do help. Whenever someone posts one of those studies showing they do help here, people nitpick it in a way they don't nitpick the studies showing it doesn't help. So the answer to your question is confirmation bias.
This is so false as to almost be a direct lie. There are 26 RCT studies of mask usage cited in various CDC publications (almost none of which deal with SARS-Covid-19 directly, as to be expected considering the timeline that such trials have). Over 75% show weak or no correlation. The Bangladesh study and the Danish studies, even if taken at face value, provide little support for either conclusion. Most medical studies are done at p<0.05, which means that there is only a 1-in-20 chance of the correlation being mechanically wrong (the process or conclusions, however...). Do enough studies, and your 1-in-20 chances will start popping up. It's not that surprising, then, that one of the 26 studies cited (the Bangladesh study) goes against the data from the rest. One, or even a handful, of studies does not prove ANYTHING. You need consistent, reproducible, results to start drawing any conclusions... which we don't have. So, until such time as the RCT studies on mask-wearing are clear, reproducible, and overwhelmingly in favor, no efficacy of masks has been proven at all...
When I clicked your link...oh wait. Right. Just more bullshit assertions from some bullshit article you read some time in the past from some bullshit source from your bubble spinning more bullshit.
If you want to prove what you're claiming, provide a link to a non-insane or non-clickbait website. And note I never claimed "cited in various" anything. I said studies show masks help. Not that they "prevent you from getting covid" because most of the studies I am referring to say they reduce the chance you will SPREAD covid to someone else. People love to call out studies claiming masks don't stop you from GETTING covid and pretend that's where the discussion of masks end when they know full well the claim is more typically that they help reduce the spread of covid from you outward.
Like, for example, this evidence review of face masks against COVID-19, stating, "The preponderance of evidence indicates that mask wearing reduces transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected respiratory particles in both laboratory and clinical contexts (https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118)".
My guess is you will ignore all that, and again repeat that masks don't prevent you from receiving covid. Though you will know it's you misrepresenting everything I just said. Because you don't have jack shit on your side of this debate.
And I like the way you attempt to preemptively discredit anyone who disagrees with you with the "non-insane or non-clickbait" claim. If you can't win an argument, I guess it's really important to insinuate anyone who dares to reply to you is insane.
Let's see:
2019 WHO meta-study (of 10 other studies). Conclusion: Masks don't work. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/non-pharmaceutical-public-health-measuresfor-mitigating-the-risk-and-impact-of-epidemic-and-pandemic-influenza
2020 CDC meta-study. Conclusion: Masks don't work. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
2020 Danmask study (RCT with 6000 participants). Conclusion: Masks don't work. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
2020 another large RCT (8000 participants). Conclusion: Masks don't work. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0240287
2020 Oxford review. Conclusion: Masks don't work. https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/
2021 Review by the European CDC. Conclusion: No strong evidence in favor of masks (but we recommend them anyway... because reasons). https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/covid-19-face-masks-community-first-update.pdf
Another 2020 review. Conclusion: Masks don't work. https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-such-hand-washing-or-wearing-masks-stop-or-slow-down-spread-respiratory-viruses
2021 survey of mask use in US states. Conclusion: Masks don't work. https://escipub.com/irjph-2021-08-1005/
2021 study of the physics of masks. Conclusion: At best, masks indoor reduce aerosolized particles by 12%. At worst, they increase them. https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0057100
2021 study in the NEJM. Conclusion: Masks don't work. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372
I assume you'll dismiss them all, because clearly the CDC, the European CDC, the WHO, the New England Journal of Medicine, the British Medical Journal, and Oxford are insane clickbait sites and nobody should trust anyone who dares to link any of them.
Unlike your source, which we know is good because it's dated 5 day in the future, and anything involving time travel is always 100% legit. (https://timecube.2enp.com/)
I am happy to read your links but before I do, because you've read them yourself, which of these is about how well a masks prevents you from receiving a virus, as opposed to measuring how well it reduces the risk of you transmitting a virus to others? That has always been the distinction I've made over and over again, and always been the thing you gloss over. So let's have it - which of these addresses that issue?I have read them, though it's been a while because this has been a long 15 days. Though I'm entertained by how you continue to make these subtle little insinuations. It's really despicable. You're like a mustache-twirling like popinjay.
As for "dated five days in the future" I want everyone to look at my link, look at Pat's claim...At least I haven't had to void a check because I wrote 2021 instead of 2022. Happens to everyone. But of course you try to spin it into some grand act of malfeasance, you wicked little popinjay, because it's all you've got.
I am happy to read your links but before I do, because you've read them yourself, which of these is about how well a masks prevents you from receiving a virus, as opposed to measuring how well it reduces the risk of you transmitting a virus to others? That has always been the distinction I've made over and over again, and always been the thing you gloss over. So let's have it - which of these addresses that issue?I have read them, though it's been a while because this has been a long 15 days. Though I'm entertained by how you continue to make these subtle little insinuations. It's really despicable. You're like a mustache-twirling like popinjay.
But back to your point, to use that word very loosely. It's a false distinction, as always. How would you test that, without violating basic ethical standards?
At least I haven't had to void a check because I wrote 2021 instead of 2022. Happens to everyone. But of course you try to spin it into some grand act of malfeasance, you wicked little popinjay, because it's all you've got.
I am happy to read your links but before I do, because you've read them yourself, which of these is about how well a masks prevents you from receiving a virus, as opposed to measuring how well it reduces the risk of you transmitting a virus to others? That has always been the distinction I've made over and over again, and always been the thing you gloss over. So let's have it - which of these addresses that issue?I have read them, though it's been a while because this has been a long 15 days. Though I'm entertained by how you continue to make these subtle little insinuations. It's really despicable. You're like a mustache-twirling like popinjay.
But back to your point, to use that word very loosely. It's a false distinction, as always. How would you test that, without violating basic ethical standards?
Oh I don't know, TEST THE MASKS AGAINST A SPRAY BOTTLE? OR ANYTHING ELSE PROJECTING DROPLETS? For fucks sake, didn't you watch any of the mask demos I and others posted before? THEY TEST MASKS. You know, using scientific equipment, like you do when you certify safety equipment! Fuck dude, how did you not catch up to that basic level of knowledge two years ago?
Some studies measure how well masks prevent the spread from someone who is infected, others test if masks prevent you from receiving a virus, and some test for both. So which of the studies you cited test to see if masks help reduce the spread away from someone infected? If your answer is you don't know, just fucking say that instead of all this bullshit. Because if a study only tests if it's effective for preventing you receiving a virus, and isn't even looking to see if it reduces the risk you spread a virus, it's a not responsive to the question of "do masks help?"QuoteAt least I haven't had to void a check because I wrote 2021 instead of 2022. Happens to everyone. But of course you try to spin it into some grand act of malfeasance, you wicked little popinjay, because it's all you've got.
Naw man you dug this hole now you eat the shit you found at the bottom. Nobody made you make a point of the date of the article. You chose to do that and so when it turns out you made a bad choice you don't get to then play the victim like I am picking on you for you choosing to bash me in what was a fuckup of your own. Just be responsible and say whoops sorry about that, like a mature fucking adult instead of the child you continue to behave like.
Go look up the hamster study.I am happy to read your links but before I do, because you've read them yourself, which of these is about how well a masks prevents you from receiving a virus, as opposed to measuring how well it reduces the risk of you transmitting a virus to others? That has always been the distinction I've made over and over again, and always been the thing you gloss over. So let's have it - which of these addresses that issue?I have read them, though it's been a while because this has been a long 15 days. Though I'm entertained by how you continue to make these subtle little insinuations. It's really despicable. You're like a mustache-twirling like popinjay.
But back to your point, to use that word very loosely. It's a false distinction, as always. How would you test that, without violating basic ethical standards?
Oh I don't know, TEST THE MASKS AGAINST A SPRAY BOTTLE? OR ANYTHING ELSE PROJECTING DROPLETS? For fucks sake, didn't you watch any of the mask demos I and others posted before? THEY TEST MASKS. You know, using scientific equipment, like you do when you certify safety equipment! Fuck dude, how did you not catch up to that basic level of knowledge two years ago?
Some studies measure how well masks prevent the spread from someone who is infected, others test if masks prevent you from receiving a virus, and some test for both. So which of the studies you cited test to see if masks help reduce the spread away from someone infected? If your answer is you don't know, just fucking say that instead of all this bullshit. Because if a study only tests if it's effective for preventing you receiving a virus, and isn't even looking to see if it reduces the risk you spread a virus, it's a not responsive to the question of "do masks help?"QuoteAt least I haven't had to void a check because I wrote 2021 instead of 2022. Happens to everyone. But of course you try to spin it into some grand act of malfeasance, you wicked little popinjay, because it's all you've got.
Naw man you dug this hole now you eat the shit you found at the bottom. Nobody made you make a point of the date of the article. You chose to do that and so when it turns out you made a bad choice you don't get to then play the victim like I am picking on you for you choosing to bash me in what was a fuckup of your own. Just be responsible and say whoops sorry about that, like a mature fucking adult instead of the child you continue to behave like.
Mistwell didn't even catch my reference to one of the first studies of masks after covid-19 came out, where masks in front of hamster cages were used to measure how many were affected when the infected cage was covered a mask, when the cage downwind was covered by a mask, and when both were. This is not somebody with any real knowledge about the subject, or any desire to learn. Concepts like highly artificial lab trials not translating into real world results, and that's why real world studies of the effectiveness of mask are more important than theoretical models; or everything we now know about aerosolization and how the vast majority of the particles pass through masks as if they weren't even there; just go swoosh.I am happy to read your links but before I do, because you've read them yourself, which of these is about how well a masks prevents you from receiving a virus, as opposed to measuring how well it reduces the risk of you transmitting a virus to others? That has always been the distinction I've made over and over again, and always been the thing you gloss over. So let's have it - which of these addresses that issue?I have read them, though it's been a while because this has been a long 15 days. Though I'm entertained by how you continue to make these subtle little insinuations. It's really despicable. You're like a mustache-twirling like popinjay.
But back to your point, to use that word very loosely. It's a false distinction, as always. How would you test that, without violating basic ethical standards?
Oh I don't know, TEST THE MASKS AGAINST A SPRAY BOTTLE? OR ANYTHING ELSE PROJECTING DROPLETS? For fucks sake, didn't you watch any of the mask demos I and others posted before? THEY TEST MASKS. You know, using scientific equipment, like you do when you certify safety equipment! Fuck dude, how did you not catch up to that basic level of knowledge two years ago?
Some studies measure how well masks prevent the spread from someone who is infected, others test if masks prevent you from receiving a virus, and some test for both. So which of the studies you cited test to see if masks help reduce the spread away from someone infected? If your answer is you don't know, just fucking say that instead of all this bullshit. Because if a study only tests if it's effective for preventing you receiving a virus, and isn't even looking to see if it reduces the risk you spread a virus, it's a not responsive to the question of "do masks help?"QuoteAt least I haven't had to void a check because I wrote 2021 instead of 2022. Happens to everyone. But of course you try to spin it into some grand act of malfeasance, you wicked little popinjay, because it's all you've got.
Naw man you dug this hole now you eat the shit you found at the bottom. Nobody made you make a point of the date of the article. You chose to do that and so when it turns out you made a bad choice you don't get to then play the victim like I am picking on you for you choosing to bash me in what was a fuckup of your own. Just be responsible and say whoops sorry about that, like a mature fucking adult instead of the child you continue to behave like.
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/personal-protective-equipment-infection-control/n95-respirators-surgical-masks-face-masks-and-barrier-face-coverings#s2
"If worn properly, a surgical mask is meant to help block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays, or splatter that may contain germs (viruses and bacteria), keeping it from reaching your mouth and nose. Surgical masks may also help reduce exposure of your saliva and respiratory secretions to others."
Yep, yep. Absolutely. Exactly what surgical masks are designed to do. Of course, your hand, a tissue, or a vampire cough likely does just as well, but given that a surgeon notionally has their hands full, a mask makes sense. However...
"While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a face mask, by design, it does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes, or certain medical procedures. Surgical masks also do not provide complete protection from germs and other contaminants because of the loose fit between the surface of the mask and your face."
So the surgical mask keeps the surgeon from coughing, sneezing, or spitting on you, it isn't going to protect you from the "very small particles in the air", hence the surgeon (wearing a surgical mask) could give you the flu.
And yes, I have seen any number of videos or CFD simulations of masks. And yes, droplets are caught and flow is diverted. All well and good, if, for you, that scenario has a probability not approaching zero. That is why health-care workers wear surgical masks. But as for others, or at least for me, I cannot remember a time when someone sneezed or coughed in my face. I have met juicy talkers in my time, but I have an American sensibility when I comes to personal space so I have never been in the splash zone -- YMMV. I am going to get covid one of there ways:
(1): Long-term exposure in an enclosed space. A mask isn't going to do anything to reduce the aerosol (viral) source term from others into the space or the viral concentration I am exposed to.
(2): Close proximity and/or kissing wife. Or as I like to call it, "the best way to get covid". :)
(3): I go lick the keyboard and mouse of the guy in the cubicle catty-cornered from mine that came down with covid last week.
That said, perhaps your life looks more like a health care environment (up close and personal with people). In which case I can see why you would consider wearing a mask and asking those getting up close to you to also wear one. So knock yourself out, maybe even wear two, St. Fauci style. But stop stepping on my dick about it.
I am happy to read your links but before I do, because you've read them yourself, which of these is about how well a masks prevents you from receiving a virus, as opposed to measuring how well it reduces the risk of you transmitting a virus to others? That has always been the distinction I've made over and over again, and always been the thing you gloss over. So let's have it - which of these addresses that issue?I have read them, though it's been a while because this has been a long 15 days. Though I'm entertained by how you continue to make these subtle little insinuations. It's really despicable. You're like a mustache-twirling like popinjay.
But back to your point, to use that word very loosely. It's a false distinction, as always. How would you test that, without violating basic ethical standards?
Oh I don't know, TEST THE MASKS AGAINST A SPRAY BOTTLE? OR ANYTHING ELSE PROJECTING DROPLETS? For fucks sake, didn't you watch any of the mask demos I and others posted before? THEY TEST MASKS. You know, using scientific equipment, like you do when you certify safety equipment! Fuck dude, how did you not catch up to that basic level of knowledge two years ago?
Some studies measure how well masks prevent the spread from someone who is infected, others test if masks prevent you from receiving a virus, and some test for both. So which of the studies you cited test to see if masks help reduce the spread away from someone infected? If your answer is you don't know, just fucking say that instead of all this bullshit. Because if a study only tests if it's effective for preventing you receiving a virus, and isn't even looking to see if it reduces the risk you spread a virus, it's a not responsive to the question of "do masks help?"QuoteAt least I haven't had to void a check because I wrote 2021 instead of 2022. Happens to everyone. But of course you try to spin it into some grand act of malfeasance, you wicked little popinjay, because it's all you've got.
Naw man you dug this hole now you eat the shit you found at the bottom. Nobody made you make a point of the date of the article. You chose to do that and so when it turns out you made a bad choice you don't get to then play the victim like I am picking on you for you choosing to bash me in what was a fuckup of your own. Just be responsible and say whoops sorry about that, like a mature fucking adult instead of the child you continue to behave like.
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/personal-protective-equipment-infection-control/n95-respirators-surgical-masks-face-masks-and-barrier-face-coverings#s2
"If worn properly, a surgical mask is meant to help block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays, or splatter that may contain germs (viruses and bacteria), keeping it from reaching your mouth and nose. Surgical masks may also help reduce exposure of your saliva and respiratory secretions to others."
Yep, yep. Absolutely. Exactly what surgical masks are designed to do. Of course, your hand, a tissue, or a vampire cough likely does just as well, but given that a surgeon notionally has their hands full, a mask makes sense. However...
"While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a face mask, by design, it does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes, or certain medical procedures. Surgical masks also do not provide complete protection from germs and other contaminants because of the loose fit between the surface of the mask and your face."
So the surgical mask keeps the surgeon from coughing, sneezing, or spitting on you, it isn't going to protect you from the "very small particles in the air", hence the surgeon (wearing a surgical mask) could give you the flu.
And yes, I have seen any number of videos or CFD simulations of masks. And yes, droplets are caught and flow is diverted. All well and good, if, for you, that scenario has a probability not approaching zero. That is why health-care workers wear surgical masks. But as for others, or at least for me, I cannot remember a time when someone sneezed or coughed in my face. I have met juicy talkers in my time, but I have an American sensibility when I comes to personal space so I have never been in the splash zone -- YMMV. I am going to get covid one of there ways:
(1): Long-term exposure in an enclosed space. A mask isn't going to do anything to reduce the aerosol (viral) source term from others into the space or the viral concentration I am exposed to.
(2): Close proximity and/or kissing wife. Or as I like to call it, "the best way to get covid". :)
(3): I go lick the keyboard and mouse of the guy in the cubicle catty-cornered from mine that came down with covid last week.
That said, perhaps your life looks more like a health care environment (up close and personal with people). In which case I can see why you would consider wearing a mask and asking those getting up close to you to also wear one. So knock yourself out, maybe even wear two, St. Fauci style. But stop stepping on my dick about it.
Here's everything you should know about covid being a pandemic of our own making...
https://www.juliusruechel.com/2022/01/the-false-god-of-central-planning.html?m=1
What an amazing job France is doing:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FJ5OKDIXsAA6UGV?format=jpg&name=small)
This is the result of:
➡️ Banned foreigners from entering the country
➡️ Closed nightclubs
➡️ Extended the use of masks in class
➡️ Brought in vaccine passports to hospitality
➡️ Started vaccinating children as young as 5
Clearly this shows that their measures are working! More lockdowns and restrictions, please! Guess what Germany is also doing?
Also note South Africa has essentially stopped playing the covid charade altogether, and the UK is headed in that direction.
Every single last cunt who enacted mandates of any kind need to be held accountable. I don't care if hiding them accountable involves firing them or firing on them.
Every single last cunt who enacted mandates of any kind need to be held accountable. I don't care if hiding them accountable involves firing them or firing on them.
But they've done it, they've flattened the curve!
Against the wrong axis...
It's obvious every single one of them failed basic virology along with statistics. Aerosol-borne respiratory viruses are unstoppable with anything less than a *properly* fitted and worn N95 or a positice pressure respirator. That whole flattening the curve just meant extending the pandemic for longer. Large narrow spike or lower wider spike - area under the curve remains the same since all the people who would get COVID did get COVID. My family had it twice. No idea what the external vector was, but the first infected have it to the rest of us within 3 days before we even knew what it was. Yeah it sucked. For someone with comorbidities my wife and I assessed our risk and were vaccinated before we got it. Fever, no smell/taste, very congested sinuses, shortness of breath (like being at a higher altitude). Kids were not vaccinated - they had the sniffles for two days. 2nd time we got it, only the boy and I got it - he had sniffles for like 6 hours and I had a low grade fever for 2 hours plus burning sinus pain for 2 days - a complete nothing.
Ruechel pretty much makes this abundantly clear that what is happening is exactly what could have been predicted and prevented if governments had not had experts who were advising them panic based upon media reported case counts even as those case counts were an order of magnitude less than the number of people who had antibodies before there were vaccines.
A similar reaction will have similar outcomes for future pandemics. You protect the vulnerable and leave everyone else the fuck alone.
Every single last cunt who enacted mandates of any kind need to be held accountable. I don't care if hiding them accountable involves firing them or firing on them.
But they've done it, they've flattened the curve!
Against the wrong axis...
It's obvious every single one of them failed basic virology along with statistics. Aerosol-borne respiratory viruses are unstoppable with anything less than a *properly* fitted and worn N95 or a positice pressure respirator. That whole flattening the curve just meant extending the pandemic for longer. Large narrow spike or lower wider spike - area under the curve remains the same since all the people who would get COVID did get COVID. My family had it twice. No idea what the external vector was, but the first infected have it to the rest of us within 3 days before we even knew what it was. Yeah it sucked. For someone with comorbidities my wife and I assessed our risk and were vaccinated before we got it. Fever, no smell/taste, very congested sinuses, shortness of breath (like being at a higher altitude). Kids were not vaccinated - they had the sniffles for two days. 2nd time we got it, only the boy and I got it - he had sniffles for like 6 hours and I had a low grade fever for 2 hours plus burning sinus pain for 2 days - a complete nothing.
Ruechel pretty much makes this abundantly clear that what is happening is exactly what could have been predicted and prevented if governments had not had experts who were advising them panic based upon media reported case counts even as those case counts were an order of magnitude less than the number of people who had antibodies before there were vaccines.
A similar reaction will have similar outcomes for future pandemics. You protect the vulnerable and leave everyone else the fuck alone.
The EU wants powers to seize private property in a "pandemic". No chance those powers could be abused, is there?
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-seeks-emergency-powers-on-supply-chains/It's obvious every single one of them failed basic virology along with statistics. Aerosol-borne respiratory viruses are unstoppable with anything less than a *properly* fitted and worn N95 or a positice pressure respirator. That whole flattening the curve just meant extending the pandemic for longer. Large narrow spike or lower wider spike - area under the curve remains the same since all the people who would get COVID did get COVID. My family had it twice. No idea what the external vector was, but the first infected have it to the rest of us within 3 days before we even knew what it was. Yeah it sucked. For someone with comorbidities my wife and I assessed our risk and were vaccinated before we got it. Fever, no smell/taste, very congested sinuses, shortness of breath (like being at a higher altitude). Kids were not vaccinated - they had the sniffles for two days. 2nd time we got it, only the boy and I got it - he had sniffles for like 6 hours and I had a low grade fever for 2 hours plus burning sinus pain for 2 days - a complete nothing.
Ruechel pretty much makes this abundantly clear that what is happening is exactly what could have been predicted and prevented if governments had not had experts who were advising them panic based upon media reported case counts even as those case counts were an order of magnitude less than the number of people who had antibodies before there were vaccines.
A similar reaction will have similar outcomes for future pandemics. You protect the vulnerable and leave everyone else the fuck alone.
Masks of N95 grade were the law in Germany. Now you can make a case that people flouted the expected standard, but it didn't achieve anything at all.
But I agree, there is no "stopping" a respiratory virus, only slowing the spread. Ie slowing the arrival of herd immunity and thus prolonging it. Though the experience of highly jabbed countries shows the vaccination programmes extend that period ever further. Look at Israel - each rollout is followed by a spike in cases which goes even higher than the last time. They've turned a seasonal virus into an all-year virus.
If anyone's interested:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm
Deaths solely from covid with no underlying conditions since the start of the "pandemic" in the UK: https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/deathsfromcovid19withnootherunderlyingcauses
17,000 (and less than 4,000 of those were under 65). Which is basically nothing, that's 11 days worth of normal deaths from all causes from almost two years of this charade. That's why they had to invent the grossly over-inflated deaths "with" nonsense. There is no pandemic, there never was.The only candidate for a link I can find is the one referenced here:
Obviously, if this was the link it is gone. And although I never saw it, probably for good reason.
It sounds as though you just blorped out the first link you found. possibly without even reading it. Do you have anything better?
Paragraph 71-73 in the ICC filing: https://www.docdroid.com/WUjv6iw/icc-complaint-7-1-pdf#page=25
New study that compares hospitalization rates among those who are vaccinated, who had a previous infection, or who had no protection at all. It's an early release, but by all reports seems to be a pretty solid study, controlling for all relevant factors. What's interesting is that it's by the CDC, and published by them, and ends up strongly supporting natural immunity. Here's the key graph:
(https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/figures/mm7104e1_F-large.gif?_=27717)
That big blue line that makes a big peak then a smaller one across the middle of the graph? Those are the people with no previous exposure. If you haven't been vaccinated or caught covid-19 before, there's a significant risk of hospitalization.
The most interesting part is the lines at the bottom. You see the clump of nearly straight lines just barely above the y-axis? That's everyone else. If you've had the jab or the disease, your chances of hospitalization are really low, almost flatlined. And the natural immunity line is below the vaccinated line, meaning natural immunity works better than the vax. Previous exposure plus vaccination is better, but the two lines are almost on top of each other, so the vax doesn't add much to natural immunity.
Here's everything you should know about covid being a pandemic of our own making...
https://www.juliusruechel.com/2022/01/the-false-god-of-central-planning.html?m=1
Pretty comprehensive. That section on New Zealand lines up with exactly what I said months ago - trying to achieve "zero covid" by shutting down your country is lunacy. Unsurprisingly, they're being hammered by every other respiratory infection and as soon as they open up covid will hit them as well.
Despite New York courts ruling the mask mandate was unconstitutional, it appears Kathy Hochul likes her imperial power too much to give a flip and told the schools, 'keep enforcing'.It was a Nassau County Supreme Court ruling not the New York State Supreme Court. Another County Supeme Court had ruled the mask mandate was valid. It's weird to me that in New York they call the lower courts supreme courts. In Ohio, we call them appellate courts. Anyway the AG did gett a stay from the State Supreme Court. The State Supreme Court is packed with totalitarians so I suspect they will go along with mask mandates.
Personally I think it's because NY has to compensate for something :)Despite New York courts ruling the mask mandate was unconstitutional, it appears Kathy Hochul likes her imperial power too much to give a flip and told the schools, 'keep enforcing'.It was a Nassau County Supreme Court ruling not the New York State Supreme Court. Another County Supeme Court had ruled the mask mandate was valid. It's weird to me that in New York they call the lower courts supreme courts. In Ohio, we call them appellate courts. Anyway the AG did gett a stay from the State Supreme Court. The State Supreme Court is packed with totalitarians so I suspect they will go along with mask mandates.
I wonder if we'll see any legal repercutions against those who were bussy spreading covid missinformation regarding invermectine, and if we'll see anyone in the MSM recognize that Trump, Rogan and others were right all along.Nope. Nope.
https://archive.is/ZSuL4 (https://archive.is/ZSuL4)
I wonder if we'll see any legal repercutions against those who were bussy spreading covid missinformation regarding invermectine, and if we'll see anyone in the MSM recognize that Trump, Rogan and others were right all along.Nope. Nope.
https://archive.is/ZSuL4 (https://archive.is/ZSuL4)
But you knew the answers already.
I wonder if we'll see any legal repercutions against those who were bussy spreading covid missinformation regarding invermectine, and if we'll see anyone in the MSM recognize that Trump, Rogan and others were right all along.
https://archive.is/ZSuL4 (https://archive.is/ZSuL4)
I wonder if we'll see any legal repercutions against those who were bussy spreading covid missinformation regarding invermectine, and if we'll see anyone in the MSM recognize that Trump, Rogan and others were right all along.
https://archive.is/ZSuL4 (https://archive.is/ZSuL4)
Not just Ivermectin, HCQ as well. Isn't it mysterious that the latter disappeared from pharmacies in late 2019 in the UK?
The reason covid has been a total nothingburger in Africa (besides their population of over 80s being tiny) is the widespread use of HCQ to treat malaria. Same as it's done little in India due to the widespread use of Ivermectin to treat water-borne parasites.
WHAT? ISN'T THAT HORSE MEDICINE?!?!?
The real elephant in the room is the deaths in working age individuals. This group is not usually at great risk from COVID, and yet their death figures are WAY up in 2021. https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html (https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html)
The bottom line of COVID policies:Vitamin D and zinc were regularly prescribed (and, of course, available OTC) for patients with Covid along with breathing treatments (typically nebulizer-based such as DuoNeb), antibiotics (for diffuse lower-lobe pneumonia that typically leads to the worst outcomes), and anti-inflammatories (both steroidal and non-steroidal). Antiviral use was less consistent and more physician-dependent.
- The lockdowns didn't work particularly well.
- Masks appear to have worked better for lower-transmission variants, but roughly since Delta, they haven't done much of anything.
- The vaccines worked...past tense. Omicron has pretty well demolished this, with the hyper-triple jabbed Israel now hitting all time high daily deaths.
- The economic aftershocks of the lockdowns--and the frenzy of low interest leverage we got as a result--will almost certainly be far worse than the actual effects of COVID were.
- People died because alternative therapies were not pursued. HCQ and Ivermectin are the familiar names, but we now have many studies showing Vitamin D deficiency plays a key role in severe COVID, and 40% of the population of the US is severely Vitamin D deficient. All this time, and one of the key preventative treatment options is literally available at every dollar and drug store in the nation.
The real elephant in the room is the deaths in working age individuals. This group is not usually at great risk from COVID, and yet their death figures are WAY up in 2021. https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html (https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html)
This is in the process of creating a labor supply shock. You thought the low-end wage jobs suddenly going to $15/ hour was bad? Real wages are still down! Wages are about to go up in a big way. It's not hard to see how highly leveraged corporate balance sheets and the increased overhead of a labor supply shock will combine to utterly wreck most businesses.
That seems extraordinarily unlikely. The rise of deaths overall can be easily explained by the psychological and economic effects of covid-19 interventions, like lockdowns, remote learning, and masks. There's been a spectacular jump in teens and adults needing treatment for severe psychological problems.The real elephant in the room is the deaths in working age individuals. This group is not usually at great risk from COVID, and yet their death figures are WAY up in 2021. https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html (https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html)
Caused by the jabs.
Here's a direct link to the Johns Hopkins study that shows that lockdowns in the US only reduced mortality by 0.2%:
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
Note it's from the JH school of economics, not medicine.That seems extraordinarily unlikely. The rise of deaths overall can be easily explained by the psychological and economic effects of covid-19 interventions, like lockdowns, remote learning, and masks. There's been a spectacular jump in teens and adults needing treatment for severe psychological problems.The real elephant in the room is the deaths in working age individuals. This group is not usually at great risk from COVID, and yet their death figures are WAY up in 2021. https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html (https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html)
Caused by the jabs.
That seems extraordinarily unlikely. The rise of deaths overall can be easily explained by the psychological and economic effects of covid-19 interventions, like lockdowns, remote learning, and masks. There's been a spectacular jump in teens and adults needing treatment for severe psychological problems.The real elephant in the room is the deaths in working age individuals. This group is not usually at great risk from COVID, and yet their death figures are WAY up in 2021. https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html (https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html)
Caused by the jabs.
That seems extraordinarily unlikely. The rise of deaths overall can be easily explained by the psychological and economic effects of covid-19 interventions, like lockdowns, remote learning, and masks. There's been a spectacular jump in teens and adults needing treatment for severe psychological problems.
That seems extraordinarily unlikely. The rise of deaths overall can be easily explained by the psychological and economic effects of covid-19 interventions, like lockdowns, remote learning, and masks. There's been a spectacular jump in teens and adults needing treatment for severe psychological problems.
In the UK teen deaths jumped by almost 50% when their jab rollout started. Not in the year before when lockdowns were going on, with the jab rollout.
That seems extraordinarily unlikely. The rise of deaths overall can be easily explained by the psychological and economic effects of covid-19 interventions, like lockdowns, remote learning, and masks. There's been a spectacular jump in teens and adults needing treatment for severe psychological problems.The real elephant in the room is the deaths in working age individuals. This group is not usually at great risk from COVID, and yet their death figures are WAY up in 2021. https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html (https://www.thecentersquare.com/indiana/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-up-40-among-people-ages-18-64/article_71473b12-6b1e-11ec-8641-5b2c06725e2c.html)
Caused by the jabs.
If the increase were associated with either the covid vaccination or interventions like lockdown, then I would expect to see a greater increase in deaths in states with either higher vaccination rates or interventions. But Fheredin's linked article is about Indiana - which is a Republican-controlled state, and has one of the lowest rates of vaccination among the 50 states, and fewer lockdowns than many.
If the excess deaths were caused by either the vaccination or the interventions, then we'd expect to see much higher increases in states like California that had more lockdowns and higher rates of vaccination. I don't have exact figures, but that doesn't seem to be the case. California has had increases in mortality, but less so than Indiana from what I see here:
https://skylab.cdph.ca.gov/communityBurden/_w_04753eab/xMDA/2020_Excess_Mortality.html
While mortality from other causes has gone up during the pandemic, I see no sign that less vaccination or lack of lockdowns prevents this.
In the wider world, there are comparisons done of all-cause mortality in Norway and Sweden - where Sweden had no lockdowns while Norway did:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34609261/
And now all the assholes are going to start backpedalling and passing the buck.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/white-house-casts-covid-19-lockdowns-as-a-trump-era-relic
Everyone who was pro-mandate, pro-mask, pro-lockdown, 2 weeks after the start of this thing, should be skinned alive and their bones displayed as a warning to future generations.
But we know they'll all dance out of taking responsibility for their hysterical nonsense.
The past two years are a great example of why weakness is a form of evil.
Unable to actually argue on facts, the engineers of this pandemic desperately tried to censor the truth.
Now that the masses are finally waking up to the truth, the rats can't even own up to their own actions.
A swift death would be too good for them.
You're already seeing this ridiculous attempt to ass-covering in Canada, where several Premiers have announced, in the wake of the Trucker's Revolt, that they will lift the vaccine mandates, lockdowns and mask mandates, etc.
Jason Kenney, the "Conservative" premier of Alberta, made an announcement that sounded incredibly surreal. He was pretending:
a) that he was deeply opposed to the massive draconian mandates in the province of Alberta... the ones that HE and HE ALONE was responsible for instituting and enforcing, up to and including the arrest and imprisonment of pastors and grandmas who tried to object.
b) That he's lifting these regulations because that was always the plan and it has nothing to do with the truckers, but who he supports, in spite of his also trying to arrest them.
Within six months, every single conservative/republican who had gone all-in on Covid tyranny will be pretending that they had been the greatest hero of the resistance
Non-clinical trial and almost 16 and a half years old from publication.
Fuck beans, now Harvard delta-bravos are jumping on the band-wagon.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/04/harvard-medical-professor-says-its-time-to-move-on-from-pandemic-.html
And incidentally, regarding "from covid" vs. "with covid":
He pointed to an “Incidental Covid-19 Report” published this week by the Massachusetts Department of Health, which showed 49.5% of the state’s Covid-19 patients were hospitalized due to “primary” Covid infections, while 50.5% patients tested positive after being hospitalized for other reasons.
https://www.mass.gov/info-details/covid-19-response-reporting
https://www.mass.gov/doc/incidental-covid-19-report-february-4-2022/download
Read the goddamn publication date. And if it hasn't moved from test tube to human clinical trials, then it's not worth crowing about.Non-clinical trial and almost 16 and a half years old from publication.
Bless, you still believe the coronabollocks.
Fuck beans, now Harvard delta-bravos are jumping on the band-wagon.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/04/harvard-medical-professor-says-its-time-to-move-on-from-pandemic-.html
And incidentally, regarding "from covid" vs. "with covid":
He pointed to an “Incidental Covid-19 Report” published this week by the Massachusetts Department of Health, which showed 49.5% of the state’s Covid-19 patients were hospitalized due to “primary” Covid infections, while 50.5% patients tested positive after being hospitalized for other reasons.
https://www.mass.gov/info-details/covid-19-response-reporting
https://www.mass.gov/doc/incidental-covid-19-report-february-4-2022/download
Fuck beans, now Harvard delta-bravos are jumping on the band-wagon.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/04/harvard-medical-professor-says-its-time-to-move-on-from-pandemic-.html
And incidentally, regarding "from covid" vs. "with covid":
He pointed to an “Incidental Covid-19 Report” published this week by the Massachusetts Department of Health, which showed 49.5% of the state’s Covid-19 patients were hospitalized due to “primary” Covid infections, while 50.5% patients tested positive after being hospitalized for other reasons.
https://www.mass.gov/info-details/covid-19-response-reporting
https://www.mass.gov/doc/incidental-covid-19-report-february-4-2022/download
I think what should be amplified, and EVERY Canadian, agree or disagree with the Trucker thing, is the actions the Substitute Drama Teacher took. HE FLED THE FUCKING COUNTRY. I have NEVER seen a better example of a man who should not be in charge of fucking anything, maybe serving ice cream or french fries, play out right in front of everyone.
I think what should be amplified, and EVERY Canadian, agree or disagree with the Trucker thing, is the actions the Substitute Drama Teacher took. HE FLED THE FUCKING COUNTRY. I have NEVER seen a better example of a man who should not be in charge of fucking anything, maybe serving ice cream or french fries, play out right in front of everyone.
Don't you mean he fled to the country? As far as I know he hasn't left Canada. I'm not sure he even could travel abroad, since he's got Covid.
I think what should be amplified, and EVERY Canadian, agree or disagree with the Trucker thing, is the actions the Substitute Drama Teacher took. HE FLED THE FUCKING COUNTRY. I have NEVER seen a better example of a man who should not be in charge of fucking anything, maybe serving ice cream or french fries, play out right in front of everyone.
Don't you mean he fled to the country? As far as I know he hasn't left Canada. I'm not sure he even could travel abroad, since he's got Covid.
His first move was to go to his hide out country house in the USA wasnt it? I remember the autists at 4 chan pinpointed his location when he gave an address from there. Now I am sure that was not said or confirmed in the media, and IF he did not leave the country, so be it, fleeing the city is almost as bad, but at this point, I am more inclined to believe the autists at 4 chan than media reports.
I think what should be amplified, and EVERY Canadian, agree or disagree with the Trucker thing, is the actions the Substitute Drama Teacher took. HE FLED THE FUCKING COUNTRY. I have NEVER seen a better example of a man who should not be in charge of fucking anything, maybe serving ice cream or french fries, play out right in front of everyone.
Don't you mean he fled to the country? As far as I know he hasn't left Canada. I'm not sure he even could travel abroad, since he's got Covid.
His first move was to go to his hide out country house in the USA wasnt it? I remember the autists at 4 chan pinpointed his location when he gave an address from there. Now I am sure that was not said or confirmed in the media, and IF he did not leave the country, so be it, fleeing the city is almost as bad, but at this point, I am more inclined to believe the autists at 4 chan than media reports.
Huh? What hideout country house in the U.S.? Even if he had one, he shouldn't be able to enter the U.S. with an active case of Covid. You'd think.
Anyway, he is reportedly in an undisclosed location "in the National Capital Region." Almost certainly, that means he is at the PMs country retreat at Harrington Lake, which is secure, and considered part of the National Capital Region.
what I doubt is that political class people have to follow any rules at all regarding movements and Covid.
what I doubt is that political class people have to follow any rules at all regarding movements and Covid.
Maybe. They may be able to get away with things the rest of us can't. At least some of the time. cough Boris cough. I have no real insights there
what I doubt is that political class people have to follow any rules at all regarding movements and Covid.
Maybe. They may be able to get away with things the rest of us can't. At least some of the time. cough Boris cough. I have no real insights there
May? From insider trading to never wearing a mask and getting hair done during a lockdown I think they can certainly do and get away with things the rest of us can not. That is obvious to casual observers, as you point out. If they are so cavalier about things they screech about constantly, I ask myself what else to they get away with that no one can really know about (well since the institutions of the press and investigation are completely compromised in their favor)?
But whatever the calculus, he has pretty much abided by the rules Covid-wisehttps://globalnews.ca/news/6815936/coronavirus-justin-trudeau-andrew-scheer-easter-travel/
what I doubt is that political class people have to follow any rules at all regarding movements and Covid.
Maybe. They may be able to get away with things the rest of us can't. At least some of the time. cough Boris cough. I have no real insights there
May? From insider trading to never wearing a mask and getting hair done during a lockdown I think they can certainly do and get away with things the rest of us can not. That is obvious to casual observers, as you point out. If they are so cavalier about things they screech about constantly, I ask myself what else to they get away with that no one can really know about (well since the institutions of the press and investigation are completely compromised in their favor)?
Well, looking at Trudeau specifically, I'm not a huge fan. He is definitely a child of privilege who seemingly has little concept of what it means not to be a child of privilege. For which he has been called out by the press, and also, far too gently, by the Ethics Commissioner, for a number of his practices pre-Covid.
When it comes to the Covid rules though, he seems to be fairly observant. He made a point of getting real shaggy during lockdown, no lockdown-busting haircuts there. I suspect there was some calculus there:
"See, I'm abiding by the same rules you all are."
Plus,
"I'm young and pretty, I can get away with sporting flowing locks and a Count Dooku beard."
But whatever the calculus, he has pretty much abided by the rules Covid-wise
But whatever the calculus, he has pretty much abided by the rules Covid-wisehttps://globalnews.ca/news/6815936/coronavirus-justin-trudeau-andrew-scheer-easter-travel/
https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/top-officials-around-the-world-keep-getting-caught-breaking-lockdown-rules/
https://torontosun.com/news/national/lilley-trudeau-breaks-law-once-again-by-ignoring-ontarios-covid-restrictions
https://tnc.news/2020/04/13/double-standard-trudeau-violates-social-distancing-rules/
Sure he has...
But whatever the calculus, he has pretty much abided by the rules Covid-wisehttps://globalnews.ca/news/6815936/coronavirus-justin-trudeau-andrew-scheer-easter-travel/
https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/top-officials-around-the-world-keep-getting-caught-breaking-lockdown-rules/
https://torontosun.com/news/national/lilley-trudeau-breaks-law-once-again-by-ignoring-ontarios-covid-restrictions
https://tnc.news/2020/04/13/double-standard-trudeau-violates-social-distancing-rules/
Sure he has...
Read the goddamn publication date. And if it hasn't moved from test tube to human clinical trials, then it's not worth crowing about.
I'm not sure he even could travel abroad, since he's got Covid.
Are you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?Read the goddamn publication date. And if it hasn't moved from test tube to human clinical trials, then it's not worth crowing about.
I don't give a fuck about clinical trials, Pfizer don't.
Are are you in favor of vaccines for whatever reason you heard on Pzifer-sponsored media, and does that include all vaccines like the early polio vaccines?Are you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?Read the goddamn publication date. And if it hasn't moved from test tube to human clinical trials, then it's not worth crowing about.
I don't give a fuck about clinical trials, Pfizer don't.
"Scientists Find Putting Pantyhose on Your Head Makes Your Mask Safer"
https://www.vice.com/en/article/akvng5/mask-hacks-better-fit-research
Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.Are are you in favor of vaccines for whatever reason you heard on Pzifer-sponsored media, and does that include all vaccines like the early polio vaccines?Are you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?Read the goddamn publication date. And if it hasn't moved from test tube to human clinical trials, then it's not worth crowing about.
I don't give a fuck about clinical trials, Pfizer don't.
So Operation Warp Speed should not have been done and we all should still be waiting on any vaccines then?
Oh, so you believe everyone who hasn't taken one of the covid-19 vaccines is on an iron lung? Please explain more.Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.Are are you in favor of vaccines for whatever reason you heard on Pzifer-sponsored media, and does that include all vaccines like the early polio vaccines?Are you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?Read the goddamn publication date. And if it hasn't moved from test tube to human clinical trials, then it's not worth crowing about.
I don't give a fuck about clinical trials, Pfizer don't.
I was referring to the polio vaccine but I guess you can't keep your viruses straight. But please Pat, enlighten me on your views on the covid vaccines. Tell us how you really feel.Oh, so you believe everyone who hasn't taken one of the covid-19 vaccines is on an iron lung? Please explain more.Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.Are are you in favor of vaccines for whatever reason you heard on Pzifer-sponsored media, and does that include all vaccines like the early polio vaccines?Are you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?Read the goddamn publication date. And if it hasn't moved from test tube to human clinical trials, then it's not worth crowing about.
I don't give a fuck about clinical trials, Pfizer don't.
Of course people can't keep what you're talking about straight. You're keeping your claims and attributions purposely vague, so you can pretend that no that's not what you were saying when you make an outrageous claim, even when that claim is equally outlandish regardless of what it applies to.I was referring to the polio vaccine but I guess you can't keep your viruses straight. But please Pat, enlighten me on your views on the covid vaccines. Tell us how you really feel.Oh, so you believe everyone who hasn't taken one of the covid-19 vaccines is on an iron lung? Please explain more.Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.Are are you in favor of vaccines for whatever reason you heard on Pzifer-sponsored media, and does that include all vaccines like the early polio vaccines?Are you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?Read the goddamn publication date. And if it hasn't moved from test tube to human clinical trials, then it's not worth crowing about.
I don't give a fuck about clinical trials, Pfizer don't.
Please name one country where the injections stopped Covid-19.Israel!
Please name one country where the injections stopped Covid-19.Israel!
Oh.
Darn.
Please name one country where the injections stopped Covid-19.
So Operation Warp Speed should not have been done and we all should still be waiting on any vaccines then?
You don't get it man, we need to have 120% of the population with 5 jabs. Then it'll work.
Are you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?
So Operation Warp Speed should not have been done and we all should still be waiting on any vaccines then?
You don't get it man, we need to have 120% of the population with 5 jabs. Then it'll work.
6. 6 is all you’ll ever need, we DOUBLE SPAGHETTI MONSTER PINKY SWEAR with sugar on top this time.
Maybe 7.
Okay, 8, just to be safe.
I think they should just entirely quit trying to specify how many will be “good.”
My son caught it, had both shots. Wife caught it, had both shots. I didn’t, had all three. Daughter didn’t, had no shots. I give up.
I was referring to the polio vaccine but I guess you can't keep your viruses straight. But please Pat, enlighten me on your views on the covid vaccines. Tell us how you really feel.Oh, so you believe everyone who hasn't taken one of the covid-19 vaccines is on an iron lung? Please explain more.Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.Are are you in favor of vaccines for whatever reason you heard on Pzifer-sponsored media, and does that include all vaccines like the early polio vaccines?Are you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?Read the goddamn publication date. And if it hasn't moved from test tube to human clinical trials, then it's not worth crowing about.
I don't give a fuck about clinical trials, Pfizer don't.
Delta didn't give much of a shit about the jab either. Omicron isn't the first variant to bypass it.
I was talking more specifically about lessening symptoms. I did not read or hear much about the difference in symptoms with delta, but it of course ignored "immunity" or "protection", Omicron seems to have cut through the imaginary "protection" at a higher rate, and it seems your symptoms are pretty much the same intensity vaxx or no vaxx.
And incidentally, regarding "from covid" vs. "with covid":
He pointed to an “Incidental Covid-19 Report” published this week by the Massachusetts Department of Health, which showed 49.5% of the state’s Covid-19 patients were hospitalized due to “primary” Covid infections, while 50.5% patients tested positive after being hospitalized for other reasons.
The backpedalling is strong here in British Columbia as well. Just last week they revealed that 60% of "hopsitalizations with covid" were actually in hospital for something else and happened to test positive sometime during their visit.
I was talking more specifically about lessening symptoms. I did not read or hear much about the difference in symptoms with delta, but it of course ignored "immunity" or "protection", Omicron seems to have cut through the imaginary "protection" at a higher rate, and it seems your symptoms are pretty much the same intensity vaxx or no vaxx.
It did, but Omicron is even lesser than Delta was. So "protection" is irrelevant when the symptoms are basically a bad cold. Pretty difficult to lessen that any more.
I think it is important to remember the history of this vaccine propaganda. It started with a pretty iron clad level of protection as stated by Fauci that would end the spread. That was repeated ad nausem by media corporations BROUGHT TO YOU BY PFIZER. Then we had "break through" cases, and the definition of vaccine was changed. Then "break through" became, "You have a MUCH lower chance to be hospitalized" from a virus that has about a 1 percent chance of putting you in the hospital. Then we hear you need a booster, to not keep you from getting or spreading it of course, but from dying or causing gun shot victims or people in car crashes to die from tying up hospital beds. And now, with Omicron, we will need a super special vaccine for just that (even as another variant is coming, so by the time Omicron is in people, they will be getting yet a new variant that cuts right through that vaxx like Omicron did) that of course Pfizer is slapping together at record speed.
If you are the sort that has always accepted the words of your betters and do as you are told, so be it. If you think you want what is presented as "death insurance" by getting the vaxx, so be it. But the endless bullshit about stopping the spread, protecting your neighbor, blah, blah, blah at this point is clap trap. Your body, your choice.
I think it is important to remember the history of this vaccine propaganda. It started with a pretty iron clad level of protection as stated by Fauci that would end the spread. That was repeated ad nausem by media corporations BROUGHT TO YOU BY PFIZER. Then we had "break through" cases, and the definition of vaccine was changed. Then "break through" became, "You have a MUCH lower chance to be hospitalized" from a virus that has about a 1 percent chance of putting you in the hospital. Then we hear you need a booster, to not keep you from getting or spreading it of course, but from dying or causing gun shot victims or people in car crashes to die from tying up hospital beds. And now, with Omicron, we will need a super special vaccine for just that (even as another variant is coming, so by the time Omicron is in people, they will be getting yet a new variant that cuts right through that vaxx like Omicron did) that of course Pfizer is slapping together at record speed.
If you are the sort that has always accepted the words of your betters and do as you are told, so be it. If you think you want what is presented as "death insurance" by getting the vaxx, so be it. But the endless bullshit about stopping the spread, protecting your neighbor, blah, blah, blah at this point is clap trap. Your body, your choice.
Exactly. Backtracking on what the vaccine is even supposed to do for people is bogglingly blatant spin, but some people eat it up.
We've also legitimately learned more, and it's had zero effect on policy. For instance, there was good evidence in early 2020 that covid-19 was highly aerosolized, and not primarily spread through large droplets. But it was pushing against conventional wisdom, and an overly binary consensus scientific model. But the evidence became overwhelming by the end of the year. While the CDC was incredibly slow to recognize this, even they acknowledged this on their own website, in April 2021. But they didn't change their recommendations, even though the mitigation measures for droplets and tiny aerosolized particles are very different.I think it is important to remember the history of this vaccine propaganda. It started with a pretty iron clad level of protection as stated by Fauci that would end the spread. That was repeated ad nausem by media corporations BROUGHT TO YOU BY PFIZER. Then we had "break through" cases, and the definition of vaccine was changed. Then "break through" became, "You have a MUCH lower chance to be hospitalized" from a virus that has about a 1 percent chance of putting you in the hospital. Then we hear you need a booster, to not keep you from getting or spreading it of course, but from dying or causing gun shot victims or people in car crashes to die from tying up hospital beds. And now, with Omicron, we will need a super special vaccine for just that (even as another variant is coming, so by the time Omicron is in people, they will be getting yet a new variant that cuts right through that vaxx like Omicron did) that of course Pfizer is slapping together at record speed.
If you are the sort that has always accepted the words of your betters and do as you are told, so be it. If you think you want what is presented as "death insurance" by getting the vaxx, so be it. But the endless bullshit about stopping the spread, protecting your neighbor, blah, blah, blah at this point is clap trap. Your body, your choice.
Exactly. Backtracking on what the vaccine is even supposed to do for people is bogglingly blatant spin, but some people eat it up.
Yeah, at this juncture it is pretty hard to justify people who are following what looks to be religious dogma at this point. March 2020 I could understand trying to listen to the "leaders". But now...that we see alot of them knew where this came from at the beginning, knew what they know? I mean how much can I allow someone to lie to me, and then decide to start trusting them. We also know now the story didnt change because we "learned more", we know these fuckers just lied, for various reasons and agendas.
I've come to the conclusion that if you're a regulator, you should be banned for life from the industry you regulate. Same with politicians, which would have the added bonus of discouraging overly broad laws, because if you micromanage everything you'll never work again.
We've also legitimately learned more, and it's had zero effect on policy. For instance, there was good evidence in early 2020 that covid-19 was highly aerosolized, and not primarily spread through large droplets. But it was pushing against conventional wisdom, and an overly binary consensus scientific model. But the evidence became overwhelming by the end of the year. While the CDC was incredibly slow to recognize this, even they acknowledged this on their own website, in April 2021. But they didn't change their recommendations, even though the mitigation measures for droplets and tiny aerosolized particles are very different.I think it is important to remember the history of this vaccine propaganda. It started with a pretty iron clad level of protection as stated by Fauci that would end the spread. That was repeated ad nausem by media corporations BROUGHT TO YOU BY PFIZER. Then we had "break through" cases, and the definition of vaccine was changed. Then "break through" became, "You have a MUCH lower chance to be hospitalized" from a virus that has about a 1 percent chance of putting you in the hospital. Then we hear you need a booster, to not keep you from getting or spreading it of course, but from dying or causing gun shot victims or people in car crashes to die from tying up hospital beds. And now, with Omicron, we will need a super special vaccine for just that (even as another variant is coming, so by the time Omicron is in people, they will be getting yet a new variant that cuts right through that vaxx like Omicron did) that of course Pfizer is slapping together at record speed.
If you are the sort that has always accepted the words of your betters and do as you are told, so be it. If you think you want what is presented as "death insurance" by getting the vaxx, so be it. But the endless bullshit about stopping the spread, protecting your neighbor, blah, blah, blah at this point is clap trap. Your body, your choice.
Exactly. Backtracking on what the vaccine is even supposed to do for people is bogglingly blatant spin, but some people eat it up.
Yeah, at this juncture it is pretty hard to justify people who are following what looks to be religious dogma at this point. March 2020 I could understand trying to listen to the "leaders". But now...that we see alot of them knew where this came from at the beginning, knew what they know? I mean how much can I allow someone to lie to me, and then decide to start trusting them. We also know now the story didnt change because we "learned more", we know these fuckers just lied, for various reasons and agendas.
We've also legitimately learned more, and it's had zero effect on policy. For instance, there was good evidence in early 2020 that covid-19 was highly aerosolized, and not primarily spread through large droplets. But it was pushing against conventional wisdom, and an overly binary consensus scientific model. But the evidence became overwhelming by the end of the year. While the CDC was incredibly slow to recognize this, even they acknowledged this on their own website, in April 2021. But they didn't change their recommendations, even though the mitigation measures for droplets and tiny aerosolized particles are very different.I think it is important to remember the history of this vaccine propaganda. It started with a pretty iron clad level of protection as stated by Fauci that would end the spread. That was repeated ad nausem by media corporations BROUGHT TO YOU BY PFIZER. Then we had "break through" cases, and the definition of vaccine was changed. Then "break through" became, "You have a MUCH lower chance to be hospitalized" from a virus that has about a 1 percent chance of putting you in the hospital. Then we hear you need a booster, to not keep you from getting or spreading it of course, but from dying or causing gun shot victims or people in car crashes to die from tying up hospital beds. And now, with Omicron, we will need a super special vaccine for just that (even as another variant is coming, so by the time Omicron is in people, they will be getting yet a new variant that cuts right through that vaxx like Omicron did) that of course Pfizer is slapping together at record speed.
If you are the sort that has always accepted the words of your betters and do as you are told, so be it. If you think you want what is presented as "death insurance" by getting the vaxx, so be it. But the endless bullshit about stopping the spread, protecting your neighbor, blah, blah, blah at this point is clap trap. Your body, your choice.
Exactly. Backtracking on what the vaccine is even supposed to do for people is bogglingly blatant spin, but some people eat it up.
Yeah, at this juncture it is pretty hard to justify people who are following what looks to be religious dogma at this point. March 2020 I could understand trying to listen to the "leaders". But now...that we see alot of them knew where this came from at the beginning, knew what they know? I mean how much can I allow someone to lie to me, and then decide to start trusting them. We also know now the story didnt change because we "learned more", we know these fuckers just lied, for various reasons and agendas.
If anyone's interested:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm
New study that compares hospitalization rates among those who are vaccinated, who had a previous infection, or who had no protection at all. It's an early release, but by all reports seems to be a pretty solid study, controlling for all relevant factors. What's interesting is that it's by the CDC, and published by them, and ends up strongly supporting natural immunity. Here's the key graph:
(https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/figures/mm7104e1_F-large.gif?_=27717)
That big blue line that makes a big peak then a smaller one across the middle of the graph? Those are the people with no previous exposure. If you haven't been vaccinated or caught covid-19 before, there's a significant risk of hospitalization.
The most interesting part is the lines at the bottom. You see the clump of nearly straight lines just barely above the y-axis? That's everyone else. If you've had the jab or the disease, your chances of hospitalization are really low, almost flatlined. And the natural immunity line is below the vaccinated line, meaning natural immunity works better than the vax. Previous exposure plus vaccination is better, but the two lines are almost on top of each other, so the vax doesn't add much to natural immunity.
I think this the first time the CDC has admitted the efficacy of natural immunity when it comes to covid-19.
My point is the flip side of yours. You were emphasizing that they've been claiming their recommendations changed due to some "new information", when in fact there was no new information. I emphasized that even when there is legitimate new information that should upend existing policies, it often leads to no changes in their recommendations.We've also legitimately learned more, and it's had zero effect on policy. For instance, there was good evidence in early 2020 that covid-19 was highly aerosolized, and not primarily spread through large droplets. But it was pushing against conventional wisdom, and an overly binary consensus scientific model. But the evidence became overwhelming by the end of the year. While the CDC was incredibly slow to recognize this, even they acknowledged this on their own website, in April 2021. But they didn't change their recommendations, even though the mitigation measures for droplets and tiny aerosolized particles are very different.
Which is my point, lying at every turn, including lies by omission, makes any narrative of "learning more" sound like a lie. Taiwan reported it was airborne in Jan 2020, and not droplets. I guess the shit heads needed to make every dime they could from hand sanitizer first. But I also need to add...I think you are giving too much credit at this point as to what we "learned", these fucks knew exactly what they were cooking up in the lab, and what it was meant to do. That was not some discovery as to transmission by them, that was discovered by others (and inconveniently early it seems) so forgive me for not giving any sort of credence to any "new information" just because it gets released as if it is new.
Omicron is a bit worse than a bad cold, but I would not put it at Flu level. I say this after 4 of us got it. With varying results. But I also would not say in any way shape or form was it in the same zip code as a possible hospitalization.
Omicron is a bit worse than a bad cold, but I would not put it at Flu level. I say this after 4 of us got it. With varying results. But I also would not say in any way shape or form was it in the same zip code as a possible hospitalization.
It was barely a bad cold when me and mine had it. My kids were ill for a couple of days at most. Me for five.
If anyone's interested:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm
New study that compares hospitalization rates among those who are vaccinated, who had a previous infection, or who had no protection at all. It's an early release, but by all reports seems to be a pretty solid study, controlling for all relevant factors. What's interesting is that it's by the CDC, and published by them, and ends up strongly supporting natural immunity. Here's the key graph:
(https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/figures/mm7104e1_F-large.gif?_=27717)
That big blue line that makes a big peak then a smaller one across the middle of the graph? Those are the people with no previous exposure. If you haven't been vaccinated or caught covid-19 before, there's a significant risk of hospitalization.
The most interesting part is the lines at the bottom. You see the clump of nearly straight lines just barely above the y-axis? That's everyone else. If you've had the jab or the disease, your chances of hospitalization are really low, almost flatlined. And the natural immunity line is below the vaccinated line, meaning natural immunity works better than the vax. Previous exposure plus vaccination is better, but the two lines are almost on top of each other, so the vax doesn't add much to natural immunity.
I think this the first time the CDC has admitted the efficacy of natural immunity when it comes to covid-19.
I am shocked, simply shocked, at Kiero's lack of response to this.
If anyone's interested:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm
New study that compares hospitalization rates among those who are vaccinated, who had a previous infection, or who had no protection at all. It's an early release, but by all reports seems to be a pretty solid study, controlling for all relevant factors. What's interesting is that it's by the CDC, and published by them, and ends up strongly supporting natural immunity. Here's the key graph:
(https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/figures/mm7104e1_F-large.gif?_=27717)
That big blue line that makes a big peak then a smaller one across the middle of the graph? Those are the people with no previous exposure. If you haven't been vaccinated or caught covid-19 before, there's a significant risk of hospitalization.
The most interesting part is the lines at the bottom. You see the clump of nearly straight lines just barely above the y-axis? That's everyone else. If you've had the jab or the disease, your chances of hospitalization are really low, almost flatlined. And the natural immunity line is below the vaccinated line, meaning natural immunity works better than the vax. Previous exposure plus vaccination is better, but the two lines are almost on top of each other, so the vax doesn't add much to natural immunity.
I think this the first time the CDC has admitted the efficacy of natural immunity when it comes to covid-19.
I am shocked, simply shocked, at Kiero's lack of response to this.
Am I reading this right? At the height of that chart an unvaccinated person who had also not already caught COVID had a roughly 1.7% chance of being hospitalized. That's... not that bad.
Also, looking at that it seems to confirm that natural immunity was better than being vaccinated. Now, yeah, having had caught COVID and being vaccinated looks like it gave the best chance of not ending up in the hospital. The thing is that that added "protection" from being vaccinated or having had COVID to having both is such a fractional benefit that it looks nearly insignificant. It certainly doesn't seem worth all the mandates and other shit that's been pushed.
WTF is estimated hazard rate? How about just telling us how many people had covid, and how many had to go to the hospital (though that could get interesting, as many people can just take a home test, and never be entered into the data as to who had covid AND Omicron has a very small window to test positive on a PRC test). So you could get a spike in hospitalizations compared to actual cases. I think these people are just making shit up at this point.Because that's not what the study is measuring, and it would require a different set of data.
Never had a cold, even the worst one, that had me sick for 5 days, bad is 2, so I think we were on different scales. I can agree with that being where we fell though.
WTF is estimated hazard rate? How about just telling us how many people had covid, and how many had to go to the hospital (though that could get interesting, as many people can just take a home test, and never be entered into the data as to who had covid AND Omicron has a very small window to test positive on a PRC test). So you could get a spike in hospitalizations compared to actual cases. I think these people are just making shit up at this point.Because that's not what the study is measuring, and it would require a different set of data.
Here's Vinay Prasad discussing the merits of the study and its conclusions. It's the first time the CDC admits the strength of natural immunity, and the study itself does an excellent job combining the data from two states and separating out separate cohorts, like those who had natural immunity, those who had immunity from the different vaccines, those who had both, and those who had neither. Prasad is seriously overqualified to make this assessment, being a statistics geek who is also an M.D. with a Masters of Public Health, and who has published more than 300 scientific papers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CPTj1-RS5o
My take-away is that, like small pox, measles, etc., if you have had the disease you do not need to take the vaccine. But counter to that, the government has decided that everyone should get the covid vaccine. To add insult to injury, let's not forget that it has been known since late summer 2021 (before Mr. "I will never mandate taking the covid vaccine" issued his mandate dicta) that the vaccine does not stop you from transmitting the virus or catching the virus. I guess it is because SCIENCE!(tm).
That's the only reasonable take-away, even before the paper. And don't forget that the baseline risk is very low for the vast majority of the population, and the vaccines have known negative side effects and unknown long-term effects. Pushing for universal vaccination is cult-like behavior, not science.WTF is estimated hazard rate? How about just telling us how many people had covid, and how many had to go to the hospital (though that could get interesting, as many people can just take a home test, and never be entered into the data as to who had covid AND Omicron has a very small window to test positive on a PRC test). So you could get a spike in hospitalizations compared to actual cases. I think these people are just making shit up at this point.Because that's not what the study is measuring, and it would require a different set of data.
Here's Vinay Prasad discussing the merits of the study and its conclusions. It's the first time the CDC admits the strength of natural immunity, and the study itself does an excellent job combining the data from two states and separating out separate cohorts, like those who had natural immunity, those who had immunity from the different vaccines, those who had both, and those who had neither. Prasad is seriously overqualified to make this assessment, being a statistics geek who is also an M.D. with a Masters of Public Health, and who has published more than 300 scientific papers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CPTj1-RS5o
My take-away is that, like small pox, measles, etc., if you have had the disease you do not need to take the vaccine. But counter to that, the government has decided that everyone should get the covid vaccine. To add insult to injury, let's not forget that it has been known since late summer 2021 (before Mr. "I will never mandate taking the covid vaccine" issued his mandate dicta) that the vaccine does not stop you from transmitting the virus or catching the virus. I guess it is because SCIENCE!(tm).
That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.My take-away is that, like small pox, measles, etc., if you have had the disease you do not need to take the vaccine. But counter to that, the government has decided that everyone should get the covid vaccine. To add insult to injury, let's not forget that it has been known since late summer 2021 (before Mr. "I will never mandate taking the covid vaccine" issued his mandate dicta) that the vaccine does not stop you from transmitting the virus or catching the virus. I guess it is because SCIENCE!(tm).
It's simpler than that, the jabs are not vaccines.
That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.My take-away is that, like small pox, measles, etc., if you have had the disease you do not need to take the vaccine. But counter to that, the government has decided that everyone should get the covid vaccine. To add insult to injury, let's not forget that it has been known since late summer 2021 (before Mr. "I will never mandate taking the covid vaccine" issued his mandate dicta) that the vaccine does not stop you from transmitting the virus or catching the virus. I guess it is because SCIENCE!(tm).
It's simpler than that, the jabs are not vaccines.
That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.
I wasn't aware the polio vaccine needed repeated boosters and you could still catch it regardless of your vaccination status.
Sorry, Pat. You're wrong on this one.
I wasn't aware the polio vaccine needed repeated boosters and you could still catch it regardless of your vaccination status.
Sorry, Pat. You're wrong on this one.
More to the point, barring the covid and flu jabs, everything else we call a vaccine actually prevents infection. None of them are perfect (there are usually issues with individual biochemistry/immunology which means they don't "take" for specific people), but for the majority they stop you getting infected altogether.
Some of them do require boosters, but the end result is still the same: they protect you from being infected. When you are immunised against measles, it means as long as you're in the 93%, you can't be infected with measles. That is immunity.
That's not the definition of "vaccine", and never has been. A vaccine isn't defined by efficacy. It's just something that inspires an immunological response, without requiring the subject to be infected by the disease.That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.
No they are not, they fail the long-standing definition of a vaccine, which is to provide immunity to infection.
More to the point, barring the covid and flu jabs, everything else we call a vaccine actually prevents infection. None of them are perfect (there are usually issues with individual biochemistry/immunology which means they don't "take" for specific people), but for the majority they stop you getting infected altogether.That's nonsense. Neither vaccinations nor natural immunity create a magical shield that prevents (for example) a virus from getting into your body. Instead, the virus comes in, starts to replicate, and your body musters a defense, typically isolating and/or destroying the virus, and then overwhelms it.
That's not the definition of "vaccine", and never has been. A vaccine isn't defined by efficacy. It's just something that inspires an immunological response, without requiring the subject to be infected by the disease.That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.
No they are not, they fail the long-standing definition of a vaccine, which is to provide immunity to infection.
Many traditional vaccines are often very effective, because they evoke the full range of immunological responses in the body. But they also wane over time, and many require boosters (like tetanus shots). And while the body does have a general immunological response, the most effective aspects are very specific. As a result, when a disease isn't a single organism or a virus, but instead is a syndrome or collection of symptoms that can have a variety of causes, vaccination is often of little use. For instance, what we call "the flu" isn't one thing, it's many things. The seasonal flu shot protects against some of them, but it's a crapshoot whether you'll get exposed to something it protects against. Viruses that mutate rapidly can also be hard to protect against, because they change into new things over time. Some degree of cross-immunity often exists between parental strains and mutants, or within broad families of diseases, but it's less effective. Covid-19 falls into both categories, with some cross-immunity from earlier coronaviruses (like sars1), and a high degree of mutation.
I have no problems with calling the covid-19 vaccines shitty, but they're definitely vaccines.
That's a perfectly fine definition. Why aren't you using it?That's not the definition of "vaccine", and never has been. A vaccine isn't defined by efficacy. It's just something that inspires an immunological response, without requiring the subject to be infected by the disease.That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.
No they are not, they fail the long-standing definition of a vaccine, which is to provide immunity to infection.
Many traditional vaccines are often very effective, because they evoke the full range of immunological responses in the body. But they also wane over time, and many require boosters (like tetanus shots). And while the body does have a general immunological response, the most effective aspects are very specific. As a result, when a disease isn't a single organism or a virus, but instead is a syndrome or collection of symptoms that can have a variety of causes, vaccination is often of little use. For instance, what we call "the flu" isn't one thing, it's many things. The seasonal flu shot protects against some of them, but it's a crapshoot whether you'll get exposed to something it protects against. Viruses that mutate rapidly can also be hard to protect against, because they change into new things over time. Some degree of cross-immunity often exists between parental strains and mutants, or within broad families of diseases, but it's less effective. Covid-19 falls into both categories, with some cross-immunity from earlier coronaviruses (like sars1), and a high degree of mutation.
I have no problems with calling the covid-19 vaccines shitty, but they're definitely vaccines.
noun
a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
Tetanus boosters are EVERY 10 YEARS. That definition I put there, the old one, has a really, really big word in it. AND.
That's a perfectly fine definition. Why aren't you using it?That's not the definition of "vaccine", and never has been. A vaccine isn't defined by efficacy. It's just something that inspires an immunological response, without requiring the subject to be infected by the disease.That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.
No they are not, they fail the long-standing definition of a vaccine, which is to provide immunity to infection.
Many traditional vaccines are often very effective, because they evoke the full range of immunological responses in the body. But they also wane over time, and many require boosters (like tetanus shots). And while the body does have a general immunological response, the most effective aspects are very specific. As a result, when a disease isn't a single organism or a virus, but instead is a syndrome or collection of symptoms that can have a variety of causes, vaccination is often of little use. For instance, what we call "the flu" isn't one thing, it's many things. The seasonal flu shot protects against some of them, but it's a crapshoot whether you'll get exposed to something it protects against. Viruses that mutate rapidly can also be hard to protect against, because they change into new things over time. Some degree of cross-immunity often exists between parental strains and mutants, or within broad families of diseases, but it's less effective. Covid-19 falls into both categories, with some cross-immunity from earlier coronaviruses (like sars1), and a high degree of mutation.
I have no problems with calling the covid-19 vaccines shitty, but they're definitely vaccines.
noun
a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
Tetanus boosters are EVERY 10 YEARS. That definition I put there, the old one, has a really, really big word in it. AND.
Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacitySee the graph. The covid-19 vaccines do reduce the chance of hospitalization. They're not as effective as natural immunity, and they're really terrible at preventing symptomatic cases or transmission, and the risk/benefit ratio isn't very good for people outside certain categories (like those 60+). But they do have an effect.
How is that any different than a sugar pill? Other than I know the sugar pill isnt going to work. I have a theory, that A LOT of hospitalizations are largely not needed, and more the effect of people who never experience discomfort getting a little sick (this is not to discount the people with shitloads of other issues actually threatened by the virus). Visit any emergency room and you are going to see a shitload of people who really do not need to be there most days. I also suspect one of the deciding factors in these people going to the hospital is psychological to a degree. They get sick, know they are vaccinated, and might even feel pretty bad. They have been told they are MUCH less likely to need to go to the hospital...so they do not go. Conversely, someone who has not had a shot, gets sick, feels pretty bad (because it does make you feel pretty bad) and go to the hospital because they have been pummeled endlessly about how much more likely they are to need hospitalization.
So at this point I am not certain hospitalizations (past ambulance rides) mean jack shit as to vaccine vs no vaccine as a viable statistic, because there has been a whole shitload of psychological pressure on people who have been just about fear porned to death.
Immunity in this context has a specific meaning. It doesn't mean vaccines turn you into Superman and viruses just bounce off your chest. It means your body mounts an immune response. This might clarify:That's a perfectly fine definition. Why aren't you using it?That's not the definition of "vaccine", and never has been. A vaccine isn't defined by efficacy. It's just something that inspires an immunological response, without requiring the subject to be infected by the disease.That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.
No they are not, they fail the long-standing definition of a vaccine, which is to provide immunity to infection.
Many traditional vaccines are often very effective, because they evoke the full range of immunological responses in the body. But they also wane over time, and many require boosters (like tetanus shots). And while the body does have a general immunological response, the most effective aspects are very specific. As a result, when a disease isn't a single organism or a virus, but instead is a syndrome or collection of symptoms that can have a variety of causes, vaccination is often of little use. For instance, what we call "the flu" isn't one thing, it's many things. The seasonal flu shot protects against some of them, but it's a crapshoot whether you'll get exposed to something it protects against. Viruses that mutate rapidly can also be hard to protect against, because they change into new things over time. Some degree of cross-immunity often exists between parental strains and mutants, or within broad families of diseases, but it's less effective. Covid-19 falls into both categories, with some cross-immunity from earlier coronaviruses (like sars1), and a high degree of mutation.
I have no problems with calling the covid-19 vaccines shitty, but they're definitely vaccines.
noun
a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
Tetanus boosters are EVERY 10 YEARS. That definition I put there, the old one, has a really, really big word in it. AND.
I am, I just know what the meaning of the word AND means in the english language, it means to qualify it must have the thing before the and, and the thing after the and. This vaccine is not providing immunity. So....
Immunity in this context has a specific meaning. It doesn't mean vaccines turn you into Superman and viruses just bounce off your chest. It means your body mounts an immune response. This might clarify:That's a perfectly fine definition. Why aren't you using it?That's not the definition of "vaccine", and never has been. A vaccine isn't defined by efficacy. It's just something that inspires an immunological response, without requiring the subject to be infected by the disease.That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.
No they are not, they fail the long-standing definition of a vaccine, which is to provide immunity to infection.
Many traditional vaccines are often very effective, because they evoke the full range of immunological responses in the body. But they also wane over time, and many require boosters (like tetanus shots). And while the body does have a general immunological response, the most effective aspects are very specific. As a result, when a disease isn't a single organism or a virus, but instead is a syndrome or collection of symptoms that can have a variety of causes, vaccination is often of little use. For instance, what we call "the flu" isn't one thing, it's many things. The seasonal flu shot protects against some of them, but it's a crapshoot whether you'll get exposed to something it protects against. Viruses that mutate rapidly can also be hard to protect against, because they change into new things over time. Some degree of cross-immunity often exists between parental strains and mutants, or within broad families of diseases, but it's less effective. Covid-19 falls into both categories, with some cross-immunity from earlier coronaviruses (like sars1), and a high degree of mutation.
I have no problems with calling the covid-19 vaccines shitty, but they're definitely vaccines.
noun
a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
Tetanus boosters are EVERY 10 YEARS. That definition I put there, the old one, has a really, really big word in it. AND.
I am, I just know what the meaning of the word AND means in the english language, it means to qualify it must have the thing before the and, and the thing after the and. This vaccine is not providing immunity. So....
"... stimulate the production of antibodies and [therefore] provide immunity ..."
That's how the term is being used. It doesn't mean:
"... stimulate the production of antibodies and [also] provide immunity ..."
If you have a vaccine against one disease and get infected by another, it doesn't mean the vaccine isn't really a vaccine. It just means you got infected by something the vaccine doesn't protect against.
How convenient.
(http://ace.mu.nu/archives/Screenshot%20(1455).png)
Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacityThe patient gets to decide whether to go to the emergency room, but it is largely up to the provider(s) whether or not they are admitted (a "hospitalization") based on s/s, diagnosis, and prognosis. Patient preference can overrule a provider's order to admit, but preference doesn't get someone admitted without a provider's order.
How is that any different than a sugar pill? Other than I know the sugar pill isnt going to work. I have a theory, that A LOT of hospitalizations are largely not needed, and more the effect of people who never experience discomfort getting a little sick (this is not to discount the people with shitloads of other issues actually threatened by the virus). Visit any emergency room and you are going to see a shitload of people who really do not need to be there most days. I also suspect one of the deciding factors in these people going to the hospital is psychological to a degree. They get sick, know they are vaccinated, and might even feel pretty bad. They have been told they are MUCH less likely to need to go to the hospital...so they do not go. Conversely, someone who has not had a shot, gets sick, feels pretty bad (because it does make you feel pretty bad) and go to the hospital because they have been pummeled endlessly about how much more likely they are to need hospitalization.
So at this point I am not certain hospitalizations (past ambulance rides) mean jack shit as to vaccine vs no vaccine as a viable statistic, because there has been a whole shitload of psychological pressure on people who have been just about fear porned to death.
That's nonsense. Neither vaccinations nor natural immunity create a magical shield that prevents (for example) a virus from getting into your body. Instead, the virus comes in, starts to replicate, and your body musters a defense, typically isolating and/or destroying the virus, and then overwhelms it.
That's how your body's immune system works. You may display mild or no symptoms, but you were infected.
I have no problem with that, just the definition of vaccine. The government response has been fascist and anti-science, and omicron definitely seems to be supplanting all the other strains.If you have a vaccine against one disease and get infected by another, it doesn't mean the vaccine isn't really a vaccine. It just means you got infected by something the vaccine doesn't protect against.
And if it is being administered for the one that it does not work on, I think we call that getting scammed, not vaccinated. But if you are presenting the argument that they made a vaccine for a strain of covid that might not even exist any more, I agree 100 percent.
I have no problem with that, just the definition of vaccine. The government response has been fascist and anti-science, and omicron definitely seems to be supplanting all the other strains.If you have a vaccine against one disease and get infected by another, it doesn't mean the vaccine isn't really a vaccine. It just means you got infected by something the vaccine doesn't protect against.
And if it is being administered for the one that it does not work on, I think we call that getting scammed, not vaccinated. But if you are presenting the argument that they made a vaccine for a strain of covid that might not even exist any more, I agree 100 percent.
How convenient.
(http://ace.mu.nu/archives/Screenshot%20(1455).png)
My biggest regret in all this is I will never get to take a baseball to his knees and about 500 of his cronies.
You forgot the video version:I have no problem with that, just the definition of vaccine. The government response has been fascist and anti-science, and omicron definitely seems to be supplanting all the other strains.If you have a vaccine against one disease and get infected by another, it doesn't mean the vaccine isn't really a vaccine. It just means you got infected by something the vaccine doesn't protect against.
And if it is being administered for the one that it does not work on, I think we call that getting scammed, not vaccinated. But if you are presenting the argument that they made a vaccine for a strain of covid that might not even exist any more, I agree 100 percent.
Which is why we need more mandates, lockdowns, eternal boosters, etc.
(This comment brought to you by Pfizer)
I have no problem with that, just the definition of vaccine. The government response has been fascist and anti-science, and omicron definitely seems to be supplanting all the other strains.If you have a vaccine against one disease and get infected by another, it doesn't mean the vaccine isn't really a vaccine. It just means you got infected by something the vaccine doesn't protect against.
And if it is being administered for the one that it does not work on, I think we call that getting scammed, not vaccinated. But if you are presenting the argument that they made a vaccine for a strain of covid that might not even exist any more, I agree 100 percent.
Which is why we need more mandates, lockdowns, eternal boosters, etc.
(This comment brought to you by Pfizer)
How convenient.
(http://ace.mu.nu/archives/Screenshot%20(1455).png)
My biggest regret in all this is I will never get to take a baseball to his knees and about 500 of his cronies.
Bro, why you wanna hurt a dementia sufferer? I'm sure he still a complete piece of shit, but the time to destroy him was over the past several decades. He's where he is now *because* no one stopped him when he was younger. The same as every other piece of shit fossil dug in like a tick in government "service."
Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacityThe patient gets to decide whether to go to the emergency room, but it is largely up to the provider(s) whether or not they are admitted (a "hospitalization") based on s/s, diagnosis, and prognosis. Patient preference can overrule a provider's order to admit, but preference doesn't get someone admitted without a provider's order.
How is that any different than a sugar pill? Other than I know the sugar pill isnt going to work. I have a theory, that A LOT of hospitalizations are largely not needed, and more the effect of people who never experience discomfort getting a little sick (this is not to discount the people with shitloads of other issues actually threatened by the virus). Visit any emergency room and you are going to see a shitload of people who really do not need to be there most days. I also suspect one of the deciding factors in these people going to the hospital is psychological to a degree. They get sick, know they are vaccinated, and might even feel pretty bad. They have been told they are MUCH less likely to need to go to the hospital...so they do not go. Conversely, someone who has not had a shot, gets sick, feels pretty bad (because it does make you feel pretty bad) and go to the hospital because they have been pummeled endlessly about how much more likely they are to need hospitalization.
So at this point I am not certain hospitalizations (past ambulance rides) mean jack shit as to vaccine vs no vaccine as a viable statistic, because there has been a whole shitload of psychological pressure on people who have been just about fear porned to death.
You have proof, or are you just talking out of your ass again?Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacityThe patient gets to decide whether to go to the emergency room, but it is largely up to the provider(s) whether or not they are admitted (a "hospitalization") based on s/s, diagnosis, and prognosis. Patient preference can overrule a provider's order to admit, but preference doesn't get someone admitted without a provider's order.
How is that any different than a sugar pill? Other than I know the sugar pill isnt going to work. I have a theory, that A LOT of hospitalizations are largely not needed, and more the effect of people who never experience discomfort getting a little sick (this is not to discount the people with shitloads of other issues actually threatened by the virus). Visit any emergency room and you are going to see a shitload of people who really do not need to be there most days. I also suspect one of the deciding factors in these people going to the hospital is psychological to a degree. They get sick, know they are vaccinated, and might even feel pretty bad. They have been told they are MUCH less likely to need to go to the hospital...so they do not go. Conversely, someone who has not had a shot, gets sick, feels pretty bad (because it does make you feel pretty bad) and go to the hospital because they have been pummeled endlessly about how much more likely they are to need hospitalization.
So at this point I am not certain hospitalizations (past ambulance rides) mean jack shit as to vaccine vs no vaccine as a viable statistic, because there has been a whole shitload of psychological pressure on people who have been just about fear porned to death.
I $uspect that admi$$ion might be weighted on another other factor$ as well.
You have proof, or are you just talking out of your ass again?Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacityThe patient gets to decide whether to go to the emergency room, but it is largely up to the provider(s) whether or not they are admitted (a "hospitalization") based on s/s, diagnosis, and prognosis. Patient preference can overrule a provider's order to admit, but preference doesn't get someone admitted without a provider's order.
How is that any different than a sugar pill? Other than I know the sugar pill isnt going to work. I have a theory, that A LOT of hospitalizations are largely not needed, and more the effect of people who never experience discomfort getting a little sick (this is not to discount the people with shitloads of other issues actually threatened by the virus). Visit any emergency room and you are going to see a shitload of people who really do not need to be there most days. I also suspect one of the deciding factors in these people going to the hospital is psychological to a degree. They get sick, know they are vaccinated, and might even feel pretty bad. They have been told they are MUCH less likely to need to go to the hospital...so they do not go. Conversely, someone who has not had a shot, gets sick, feels pretty bad (because it does make you feel pretty bad) and go to the hospital because they have been pummeled endlessly about how much more likely they are to need hospitalization.
So at this point I am not certain hospitalizations (past ambulance rides) mean jack shit as to vaccine vs no vaccine as a viable statistic, because there has been a whole shitload of psychological pressure on people who have been just about fear porned to death.
I $uspect that admi$$ion might be weighted on another other factor$ as well.
Admission decisions are based on medical criteria, not financial criteria (including any consideration of the patient's ability to pay), and there are several conditions that automatically warrant admission that typically lose money for hospitals (e.g., involuntary psychiatric admissions for threats of harm to self or others).
I am sure the combined psychological pressure on people who get covid, combined with a financial incentive to have covid patients has never led to an influx of hospitalizations at any hospital in the country.It's interesting to see that the article you pasted says that, despite the differences in the payouts, there is no evidence of fraudulent reporting and that it's "very unlikely" data are being falsified or that money is the motivation for the classifications. You're seeing a conspiracy that the authors of your article are saying does not exist, because you just have a gut feeling that it must be so.
The article was also from april 2020, and the reason I posted it was to specifically demonstrate a financial incentive that you implied did not exist, referring to talking out of my ass. So it certainly illustrates what I $aid about other factor$.The factors you mention don't determine admissions. They determine the reimbursement from Medicare admissions. The guys doing the decisions on who's admitted are--per your own article--very unlikely to be considering the reimbursement when determining who is admitted. Your factor is thus not a factor at the point of deciding who is admitted, only how those admitted are billed to Medicare.
It's interesting to see that the article you pasted says that, despite the differences in the payouts, there is no evidence of fraudulent reporting and that it's "very unlikely" data are being falsified or that money is the motivation for the classifications. You're seeing a conspiracy that the authors of your article are saying does not exist, because you just have a gut feeling that it must be so.
The ship is being turned onto a new course.
'Doctor' Leana Wen has suddenly started touting relaxing restrictions and removing masking mandates.
They're so fucking obvious it's not even funny.
The ship is being turned onto a new course.
'Doctor' Leana Wen has suddenly started touting relaxing restrictions and removing masking mandates.
They're so fucking obvious it's not even funny.
I have been arguing since March 2020 that unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask you are just playing fuck around. And the one time that I know that St. Fauci wasn't lying was in this 60 Minutes interview where he said (effectively) the same thing (which was the scientific consensus at that time). Only someone that believes in SCIENCE!(tm) would believe that in the span of a month or two, there had been sufficient studies performed to change that consensus.
It is of some cold comfort to see these fuck-nuts have stopped spreading this particular lie.
The ship is being turned onto a new course.
'Doctor' Leana Wen has suddenly started touting relaxing restrictions and removing masking mandates.
They're so fucking obvious it's not even funny.
I have been arguing since March 2020 that unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask you are just playing fuck around. And the one time that I know that St. Fauci wasn't lying was in this 60 Minutes interview where he said (effectively) the same thing (which was the scientific consensus at that time). Only someone that believes in SCIENCE!(tm) would believe that in the span of a month or two, there had been sufficient studies performed to change that consensus.
It is of some cold comfort to see these fuck-nuts have stopped spreading this particular lie.
I disagree a bit. I am pretty sure an industrial respirator or a gas mask would also provide protection, but they are not so fun to wear, but a lot easier to breathe in than almost any other mask.
I have been arguing since March 2020 that unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask you are just playing fuck around. And the one time that I know that St. Fauci wasn't lying was in this 60 Minutes interview where he said (effectively) the same thing (which was the scientific consensus at that time). Only someone that believes in SCIENCE!(tm) would believe that in the span of a month or two, there had been sufficient studies performed to change that consensus.
It is of some cold comfort to see these fuck-nuts have stopped spreading this particular lie.
The ship is being turned onto a new course.
'Doctor' Leana Wen has suddenly started touting relaxing restrictions and removing masking mandates.
They're so fucking obvious it's not even funny.
I have been arguing since March 2020 that unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask you are just playing fuck around. And the one time that I know that St. Fauci wasn't lying was in this 60 Minutes interview where he said (effectively) the same thing (which was the scientific consensus at that time). Only someone that believes in SCIENCE!(tm) would believe that in the span of a month or two, there had been sufficient studies performed to change that consensus.
It is of some cold comfort to see these fuck-nuts have stopped spreading this particular lie.
I disagree a bit. I am pretty sure an industrial respirator or a gas mask would also provide protection, but they are not so fun to wear, but a lot easier to breathe in than almost any other mask.
I stand corrected. I should have said "unless you are at least wearing..." :)
I've mentioned it before, but I know some people who work with one of the major manufacturers of N-95 masks. Their company requires them to get fitted and tested every year, and they have nothing but horror stories about the process. None of them ever got a proper seal on the first try, they had to try again and again. Unless you're a medical professional working in a clinical environment where you routinely wear N-95 masks, the chance you're wearing it properly is essentially nil. N-95 mandates are completely irrational.I have been arguing since March 2020 that unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask you are just playing fuck around. And the one time that I know that St. Fauci wasn't lying was in this 60 Minutes interview where he said (effectively) the same thing (which was the scientific consensus at that time). Only someone that believes in SCIENCE!(tm) would believe that in the span of a month or two, there had been sufficient studies performed to change that consensus.
It is of some cold comfort to see these fuck-nuts have stopped spreading this particular lie.
You might question whether they were properly fitted/worn, but N-95 masks have been the law in Germany for well over a year. They didn't make any difference.
And the first sign you're doing it wrong: If your "N95" (more likely a KN95) has ear loops instead of dual head straps. Ear loops do not allow for a tight enough seal to make the respirator effective.I've mentioned it before, but I know some people who work with one of the major manufacturers of N-95 masks. Their company requires them to get fitted and tested every year, and they have nothing but horror stories about the process. None of them ever got a proper seal on the first try, they had to try again and again. Unless you're a medical professional working in a clinical environment where you routinely wear N-95 masks, the chance you're wearing it properly is essentially nil. N-95 mandates are completely irrational.I have been arguing since March 2020 that unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask you are just playing fuck around. And the one time that I know that St. Fauci wasn't lying was in this 60 Minutes interview where he said (effectively) the same thing (which was the scientific consensus at that time). Only someone that believes in SCIENCE!(tm) would believe that in the span of a month or two, there had been sufficient studies performed to change that consensus.
It is of some cold comfort to see these fuck-nuts have stopped spreading this particular lie.
You might question whether they were properly fitted/worn, but N-95 masks have been the law in Germany for well over a year. They didn't make any difference.
I've mentioned it before, but I know some people who work with one of the major manufacturers of N-95 masks. Their company requires them to get fitted and tested every year, and they have nothing but horror stories about the process. None of them ever got a proper seal on the first try, they had to try again and again. Unless you're a medical professional working in a clinical environment where you routinely wear N-95 masks, the chance you're wearing it properly is essentially nil. N-95 mandates are completely irrational.I have been arguing since March 2020 that unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask you are just playing fuck around. And the one time that I know that St. Fauci wasn't lying was in this 60 Minutes interview where he said (effectively) the same thing (which was the scientific consensus at that time). Only someone that believes in SCIENCE!(tm) would believe that in the span of a month or two, there had been sufficient studies performed to change that consensus.
It is of some cold comfort to see these fuck-nuts have stopped spreading this particular lie.
You might question whether they were properly fitted/worn, but N-95 masks have been the law in Germany for well over a year. They didn't make any difference.
I've had fit tests done many times, by several different systems (including the US Army), and it should not take an hour unless you are including the paperwork and setting up the materials. If everythign is set up in advance (like when a the one running it is planning on doing multiple fit tests rather than just pulling things out for one employee), the actual fitting takes no more than 10-15 minutes, and a trained fitter can work with several respirator wearers simultaneously if they have adequate equipment (some smaller operations do not).I've mentioned it before, but I know some people who work with one of the major manufacturers of N-95 masks. Their company requires them to get fitted and tested every year, and they have nothing but horror stories about the process. None of them ever got a proper seal on the first try, they had to try again and again. Unless you're a medical professional working in a clinical environment where you routinely wear N-95 masks, the chance you're wearing it properly is essentially nil. N-95 mandates are completely irrational.I have been arguing since March 2020 that unless you are wearing a properly-fitted, properly-worn N-95 mask you are just playing fuck around. And the one time that I know that St. Fauci wasn't lying was in this 60 Minutes interview where he said (effectively) the same thing (which was the scientific consensus at that time). Only someone that believes in SCIENCE!(tm) would believe that in the span of a month or two, there had been sufficient studies performed to change that consensus.
It is of some cold comfort to see these fuck-nuts have stopped spreading this particular lie.
You might question whether they were properly fitted/worn, but N-95 masks have been the law in Germany for well over a year. They didn't make any difference.
It takes an hour+ for my wife to get fitted. And the fitting is done by someone specifically trained to do N95 fittings.
What a surprise, they're quietly revising the number of deaths from flu in 2020 (which the liars said had been eradicated): https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/influenzadeathsin20182019and2020
Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
It's not just that site. It was widely reported that the flu had vanished, because it was displaced by sars2.Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
It's not just that site. It was widely reported that the flu had vanished, because it was displaced by sars2.Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/52/27142
It's not dissimilar from the way the covid-19 variants have been displacing each other. Though in a twist, there have been reports that omicron is displacing the common cold, not the flu.
Duckduckgo it. As I pointed out, it was widely reported. This isn't something obscure that was only posted on some weird little sites. You missed a major news item. Pick any newspaper you like, odds are it was covered.It's not just that site. It was widely reported that the flu had vanished, because it was displaced by sars2.Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/52/27142
It's not dissimilar from the way the covid-19 variants have been displacing each other. Though in a twist, there have been reports that omicron is displacing the common cold, not the flu.
Your link is potentially more credible than anything Kieros come up with lately. Interesting, even. But it makes no reference to Covid-19 at all (understandable given the publication date), and no reference to anything being "eradicated."
In general, does anyone have a model for what good handling of the pandemic should be? Has there been any government during the pandemic that did a good job, in your opinion?
In general, does anyone have a model for what good handling of the pandemic should be? Has there been any government during the pandemic that did a good job, in your opinion?We should have stripped ordinary citizens of their rights to protest, peacefully assemble, and even leave their own houses, while encouraging groups of armed thugs to burn down the centers of major cities. We should have demonized everyone who hesitated to inject multiple doses of experimental drugs into their system, painted them as threats, stripped them of their rights to work or enter most locations, and instituted a system where people need to show papers to move freely or access basic services. Australia, Canada, Germany, and China all did pretty well.
There's the past Trump administration, but it seems like many posters are critical of the vaccines that the Trump administration developed and promoted, and in general about that administration's messaging. Also, in the present, Trump continues to promote the vaccines including booster shots. There is Sweden, which has been positively cited for not having lockdowns, but it also has bought into vaccines, and has vaccine mandates for visitors and indoor events. So I suspect posters would be critical of that. Are there any U.S. states that posters feel have done well?
Duckduckgo it. As I pointed out, it was widely reported. This isn't something obscure that was only posted on some weird little sites. You missed a major news item. Pick any newspaper you like, odds are it was covered.It's not just that site. It was widely reported that the flu had vanished, because it was displaced by sars2.Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/52/27142
It's not dissimilar from the way the covid-19 variants have been displacing each other. Though in a twist, there have been reports that omicron is displacing the common cold, not the flu.
Your link is potentially more credible than anything Kieros come up with lately. Interesting, even. But it makes no reference to Covid-19 at all (understandable given the publication date), and no reference to anything being "eradicated."
More science:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33243355/
+1 dishonest poster pointDuckduckgo it. As I pointed out, it was widely reported. This isn't something obscure that was only posted on some weird little sites. You missed a major news item. Pick any newspaper you like, odds are it was covered.It's not just that site. It was widely reported that the flu had vanished, because it was displaced by sars2.Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/52/27142
It's not dissimilar from the way the covid-19 variants have been displacing each other. Though in a twist, there have been reports that omicron is displacing the common cold, not the flu.
Your link is potentially more credible than anything Kieros come up with lately. Interesting, even. But it makes no reference to Covid-19 at all (understandable given the publication date), and no reference to anything being "eradicated."
More science:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33243355/
The significantly lower incidence of flu in the 20-21 flu season(s) was certainly noted and covered. I'm still waiting to hear any claims that flu has been "eradicated."
In general, does anyone have a model for what good handling of the pandemic should be?
In general, does anyone have a model for what good handling of the pandemic should be?
Two weeks to flatten the curve was acceptable, IMO. We were going into a situation where we had very little data on what we were facing.
As soon as the information started coming in that it was only somewhat more deadly than the flu, we weren't looking at the next Plauge or Ebola, and that people with existing health conditions and the elderly were most suceptible, we should have lifted all restrictions and let people manage their own risks. Operation Warp Speed was acceptable as a purely voluntary measure to get a vaccine out quickly for those who wanted it, while other treatments were investigated and a long term study of the new vaccines was put into place.
End. Of. Response.
But the restrictions and lockdowns and mandates dragged on for years, and the experimental vaccine became less and less voluntary, and disinformation campaigns from mainstream media "HORSE DEWORMER!!!" tried to grab a monopoly for the vaccines.
Shit, I don't think there's any real good AND practical way to handle a pandemic when so many people have shown that they'll grab all the power and money they can out of the situation.
We just have to live with this psuedoscientifical garbage until the narrative finally collapses, and it seems like that's not far, now.
I'm not sure that would have been useful. The tests are important for contract tracing, but that's a lost cause once there is widespread community transmission (i.e. late 2019 in the US). After that, clinical diagnoses based on symptoms is all that's needed most of the time. Having more tests out there just leads to overconfidence (home tests sensitivity can be low, leading to false negatives), puts stress on healthcare and other vitals systems, and creates a lot of anxiety.In general, does anyone have a model for what good handling of the pandemic should be?
Two weeks to flatten the curve was acceptable, IMO. We were going into a situation where we had very little data on what we were facing.
As soon as the information started coming in that it was only somewhat more deadly than the flu, we weren't looking at the next Plauge or Ebola, and that people with existing health conditions and the elderly were most suceptible, we should have lifted all restrictions and let people manage their own risks. Operation Warp Speed was acceptable as a purely voluntary measure to get a vaccine out quickly for those who wanted it, while other treatments were investigated and a long term study of the new vaccines was put into place.
End. Of. Response.
But the restrictions and lockdowns and mandates dragged on for years, and the experimental vaccine became less and less voluntary, and disinformation campaigns from mainstream media "HORSE DEWORMER!!!" tried to grab a monopoly for the vaccines.
Shit, I don't think there's any real good AND practical way to handle a pandemic when so many people have shown that they'll grab all the power and money they can out of the situation.
We just have to live with this psuedoscientifical garbage until the narrative finally collapses, and it seems like that's not far, now.
We should have spent a lot more money on making tests easily available, particularly the home tests.
+1 dishonest poster pointDuckduckgo it. As I pointed out, it was widely reported. This isn't something obscure that was only posted on some weird little sites. You missed a major news item. Pick any newspaper you like, odds are it was covered.It's not just that site. It was widely reported that the flu had vanished, because it was displaced by sars2.Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/52/27142
It's not dissimilar from the way the covid-19 variants have been displacing each other. Though in a twist, there have been reports that omicron is displacing the common cold, not the flu.
Your link is potentially more credible than anything Kieros come up with lately. Interesting, even. But it makes no reference to Covid-19 at all (understandable given the publication date), and no reference to anything being "eradicated."
More science:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33243355/
The significantly lower incidence of flu in the 20-21 flu season(s) was certainly noted and covered. I'm still waiting to hear any claims that flu has been "eradicated."
I said vanished. You replied to my post, tacitly accepting that phrasing instead of Kiero's. Now you're trying to shift back.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
We should have spent a lot more money on making tests easily available, particularly the home tests.
We should have spent a lot more money on making tests easily available, particularly the home tests.
What the fuck for, when the tests are utter horseshit? The PCR test (the "gold standard" they said) can't tell the difference between covid, influenza, norovirus or a dozen other pathogens. Nor can it tell whether the virus is active or dead.
The LFT is even less accurate. It's a scam, a way of fleecing the public purse of millions for something that is useless.
+2 dishonest poster points+1 dishonest poster pointDuckduckgo it. As I pointed out, it was widely reported. This isn't something obscure that was only posted on some weird little sites. You missed a major news item. Pick any newspaper you like, odds are it was covered.It's not just that site. It was widely reported that the flu had vanished, because it was displaced by sars2.Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/52/27142
It's not dissimilar from the way the covid-19 variants have been displacing each other. Though in a twist, there have been reports that omicron is displacing the common cold, not the flu.
Your link is potentially more credible than anything Kieros come up with lately. Interesting, even. But it makes no reference to Covid-19 at all (understandable given the publication date), and no reference to anything being "eradicated."
More science:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33243355/
The significantly lower incidence of flu in the 20-21 flu season(s) was certainly noted and covered. I'm still waiting to hear any claims that flu has been "eradicated."
I said vanished. You replied to my post, tacitly accepting that phrasing instead of Kiero's. Now you're trying to shift back.
"Tacitly accepting?" What on earth are you talking about? Simply replying to your post does not constitute tacit acceptance of its content.
I'm againt the covid vaccines because they rolled them out in less than a year, bypassed the approval process with 'emergency use authorization', and then pushed them on as many people as possible while intentionally supressing any investigation into side effects as being "anti-vaxx".
Over the past two years, my trust in government, the scientific, pharmecutical, and media organizations went from "low" to "fuck no, and why aren't you in jail?"
As soon as the information started coming in that it was only somewhat more deadly than the flu, we weren't looking at the next Plauge or Ebola, and that people with existing health conditions and the elderly were most suceptible, we should have lifted all restrictions and let people manage their own risks. Operation Warp Speed was acceptable as a purely voluntary measure to get a vaccine out quickly for those who wanted it, while other treatments were investigated and a long term study of the new vaccines was put into place.
Ratman - I'm unsure of your position. Previously you said about the covid vaccines,I'm againt the covid vaccines because they rolled them out in less than a year, bypassed the approval process with 'emergency use authorization', and then pushed them on as many people as possible while intentionally supressing any investigation into side effects as being "anti-vaxx".
Over the past two years, my trust in government, the scientific, pharmecutical, and media organizations went from "low" to "fuck no, and why aren't you in jail?"
But just now, you said:As soon as the information started coming in that it was only somewhat more deadly than the flu, we weren't looking at the next Plauge or Ebola, and that people with existing health conditions and the elderly were most suceptible, we should have lifted all restrictions and let people manage their own risks. Operation Warp Speed was acceptable as a purely voluntary measure to get a vaccine out quickly for those who wanted it, while other treatments were investigated and a long term study of the new vaccines was put into place.
Have you changed your position on the rollout via Operation Warp Speed? It sounded in the prior post that you were highly critical of the emergency authorization. Do you consider the vaccines and boosters safe now?
If not, how do you feel about Trump recommending the vaccines and boosters?
I'm not sure that would have been useful. The tests are important for contract tracing, but that's a lost cause once there is widespread community transmission (i.e. late 2019 in the US). After that, clinical diagnoses based on symptoms is all that's needed most of the time. Having more tests out there just leads to overconfidence (home tests sensitivity can be low, leading to false negatives), puts stress on healthcare and other vitals systems, and creates a lot of anxiety.In general, does anyone have a model for what good handling of the pandemic should be?
Two weeks to flatten the curve was acceptable, IMO. We were going into a situation where we had very little data on what we were facing.
As soon as the information started coming in that it was only somewhat more deadly than the flu, we weren't looking at the next Plauge or Ebola, and that people with existing health conditions and the elderly were most suceptible, we should have lifted all restrictions and let people manage their own risks. Operation Warp Speed was acceptable as a purely voluntary measure to get a vaccine out quickly for those who wanted it, while other treatments were investigated and a long term study of the new vaccines was put into place.
End. Of. Response.
But the restrictions and lockdowns and mandates dragged on for years, and the experimental vaccine became less and less voluntary, and disinformation campaigns from mainstream media "HORSE DEWORMER!!!" tried to grab a monopoly for the vaccines.
Shit, I don't think there's any real good AND practical way to handle a pandemic when so many people have shown that they'll grab all the power and money they can out of the situation.
We just have to live with this psuedoscientifical garbage until the narrative finally collapses, and it seems like that's not far, now.
We should have spent a lot more money on making tests easily available, particularly the home tests.
We should have spent a lot more money on making tests easily available, particularly the home tests.
What the fuck for, when the tests are utter horseshit? The PCR test (the "gold standard" they said) can't tell the difference between covid, influenza, norovirus or a dozen other pathogens. Nor can it tell whether the virus is active or dead.
The LFT is even less accurate. It's a scam, a way of fleecing the public purse of millions for something that is useless.
Ratman - I'm unsure of your position. Previously you said about the covid vaccines,I'm againt the covid vaccines because they rolled them out in less than a year, bypassed the approval process with 'emergency use authorization', and then pushed them on as many people as possible while intentionally supressing any investigation into side effects as being "anti-vaxx".
Over the past two years, my trust in government, the scientific, pharmecutical, and media organizations went from "low" to "fuck no, and why aren't you in jail?"
But just now, you said:As soon as the information started coming in that it was only somewhat more deadly than the flu, we weren't looking at the next Plauge or Ebola, and that people with existing health conditions and the elderly were most suceptible, we should have lifted all restrictions and let people manage their own risks. Operation Warp Speed was acceptable as a purely voluntary measure to get a vaccine out quickly for those who wanted it, while other treatments were investigated and a long term study of the new vaccines was put into place.
Have you changed your position on the rollout via Operation Warp Speed? It sounded in the prior post that you were highly critical of the emergency authorization. Do you consider the vaccines and boosters safe now?
I highlighted the two contrasting points between Ratman's posts. It made sense to me, but I know you sometimes have trouble with English... (Ratman can feel free to correct me if my interpretation is wrong)
Ratman - I'm unsure of your position. Previously you said about the covid vaccines,I'm againt the covid vaccines because they rolled them out in less than a year, bypassed the approval process with 'emergency use authorization', and then pushed them on as many people as possible while intentionally supressing any investigation into side effects as being "anti-vaxx".
Over the past two years, my trust in government, the scientific, pharmecutical, and media organizations went from "low" to "fuck no, and why aren't you in jail?"
But just now, you said:As soon as the information started coming in that it was only somewhat more deadly than the flu, we weren't looking at the next Plauge or Ebola, and that people with existing health conditions and the elderly were most suceptible, we should have lifted all restrictions and let people manage their own risks. Operation Warp Speed was acceptable as a purely voluntary measure to get a vaccine out quickly for those who wanted it, while other treatments were investigated and a long term study of the new vaccines was put into place.
Have you changed your position on the rollout via Operation Warp Speed? It sounded in the prior post that you were highly critical of the emergency authorization. Do you consider the vaccines and boosters safe now?
I highlighted the two contrasting points between Ratman's posts. It made sense to me, but I know you sometimes have trouble with English... (Ratman can feel free to correct me if my interpretation is wrong)
It is clear that Ratman is opposed to vaccine mandates. However, in his initial post, he also sounded like he was opposed to the approval process that declared the vaccines safe to use. Your highlighting is in black - I added highlighting in red of this post.
However, his second post said that he was fine with the vaccine approval process as long as it was voluntary to take them.
The question is about whether the approval and rollout of the vaccines was responsible.
+2 dishonest poster points+1 dishonest poster pointDuckduckgo it. As I pointed out, it was widely reported. This isn't something obscure that was only posted on some weird little sites. You missed a major news item. Pick any newspaper you like, odds are it was covered.It's not just that site. It was widely reported that the flu had vanished, because it was displaced by sars2.Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/52/27142
It's not dissimilar from the way the covid-19 variants have been displacing each other. Though in a twist, there have been reports that omicron is displacing the common cold, not the flu.
Your link is potentially more credible than anything Kieros come up with lately. Interesting, even. But it makes no reference to Covid-19 at all (understandable given the publication date), and no reference to anything being "eradicated."
More science:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33243355/
The significantly lower incidence of flu in the 20-21 flu season(s) was certainly noted and covered. I'm still waiting to hear any claims that flu has been "eradicated."
I said vanished. You replied to my post, tacitly accepting that phrasing instead of Kiero's. Now you're trying to shift back.
"Tacitly accepting?" What on earth are you talking about? Simply replying to your post does not constitute tacit acceptance of its content.
I didn't saying anything about tacit acceptance of the content, just that you acknowledged I said what I said by replying to it. You're switching in another poster's wording and demanding I defend it. If you wanted to make a distinction between vanished and eradicated, you should have addressed that when I said it, instead of playing these shitty games.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
You want BBC or Sky News? Every fucking outlet was blurting out this shit nine months ago. Spare me the faux surprise.
In general, does anyone have a model for what good handling of the pandemic should be? Has there been any government during the pandemic that did a good job, in your opinion?
Yes, I said tacitly accepted. That's not the same as agreeing, as I just explained. You're insisting that your misinterpretation of my words is correct, even though I've specifically clarified what I meant. Why has this become such a common rhetorical technique? It's one of the worst possible combinations of internet telepathy and assuming bad faith.+2 dishonest poster points+1 dishonest poster pointDuckduckgo it. As I pointed out, it was widely reported. This isn't something obscure that was only posted on some weird little sites. You missed a major news item. Pick any newspaper you like, odds are it was covered.It's not just that site. It was widely reported that the flu had vanished, because it was displaced by sars2.Wait what? Who said the flu had been "eradicated?" I missed that one.
The narrative less than a year ago was that flu had been "eradicated" and supplanted by covid. Were you not paying attention?
For example: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/06/04/flu-j04.html
It was yet another lie, of course, which they're now quietly reversing away from and hoping no one notices.
No, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the "World Socialist Web Site." Who is? Are you? Did you even read this? Did anybody?
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/52/27142
It's not dissimilar from the way the covid-19 variants have been displacing each other. Though in a twist, there have been reports that omicron is displacing the common cold, not the flu.
Your link is potentially more credible than anything Kieros come up with lately. Interesting, even. But it makes no reference to Covid-19 at all (understandable given the publication date), and no reference to anything being "eradicated."
More science:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33243355/
The significantly lower incidence of flu in the 20-21 flu season(s) was certainly noted and covered. I'm still waiting to hear any claims that flu has been "eradicated."
I said vanished. You replied to my post, tacitly accepting that phrasing instead of Kiero's. Now you're trying to shift back.
"Tacitly accepting?" What on earth are you talking about? Simply replying to your post does not constitute tacit acceptance of its content.
I didn't saying anything about tacit acceptance of the content, just that you acknowledged I said what I said by replying to it. You're switching in another poster's wording and demanding I defend it. If you wanted to make a distinction between vanished and eradicated, you should have addressed that when I said it, instead of playing these shitty games.
You absolutely said I somehow "tacitly accepted" your phrasing simply by replying. Ridiculous, but whatever.
I'm not switching in another poster's wording, Keiro's wording is what I disputed and I did not depart from his phrasing to try to weasel in another phrasing. Look at my posts, I stuck with his wording every time. You're the one who decided to change the language. For some reason.
As for demanding you defend it, I did no such thing. I asked Kiero to to defend it, not you. I've no idea why you decided to jump in. Your contribution was clearly not germane, but I really don't care if you defend it or don't.
Sorry for the confusion. My thoughts have changed as the situation developed.
At first, I was ok with the approval process because I trusted the CDC to be at least somewhat reliable in their evaluations, if for any reason just to keep the trust of the public.
As the vaccines were rolled out, and the agencies involved got pretty cagey (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-compensation-lawsuit.html) I got concerned about their responsibility for the vaccines safety and efficacy. Still, as long as taking the vaccines was optional, I could opt out and hope more people would speak out (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QI8G8iodNms) about their concerns.
Now, that trust has been shattered (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccine-insurance-premiums/) and in hindsight, Operation Warp Speed was a mistake.
Who knows what tomorrow may bring? My suspicion, and it remains just a suspicion for now, is that adverse side effects from the vaccines are going to be more severe and widespread than the public has been told, and that this will come out slowly over the course of years, so that the agencies responsible can slowly form narratives, backtrack, and shift blame around.
WTF is wrong with the world.
I haven't listened to him for a while, but Campbell was one my major sources of daily updates during the start of the pandemic. He's an interesting mix, because he's clearly in favor of big government everything and mandates, but he's also held a couple anti-narrative positions. For instance, he was a big proponent of vitamin D from the start. And less than two weeks ago, he was "fact checked" by the BBC, who claimed he said only 17,000 people died of covid-19. Of course, that's a blatant lie. What he did do is go through a government report listing the number of people in Wales and England who died of covid-19. The report broke the deaths down by preexisting condition, like diabetes or hypertension, and then concluded with the final line, which was the number of people who died of covid-19 without any pre-existing conditions. That's where the 17,000 deaths came from.
The BBC is roughly as reliable as Snopes.
He's got his biases, but he's critical, and looks hard at data instead of trying to morph everything to fit preconceived notions.I haven't listened to him for a while, but Campbell was one my major sources of daily updates during the start of the pandemic. He's an interesting mix, because he's clearly in favor of big government everything and mandates, but he's also held a couple anti-narrative positions. For instance, he was a big proponent of vitamin D from the start. And less than two weeks ago, he was "fact checked" by the BBC, who claimed he said only 17,000 people died of covid-19. Of course, that's a blatant lie. What he did do is go through a government report listing the number of people in Wales and England who died of covid-19. The report broke the deaths down by preexisting condition, like diabetes or hypertension, and then concluded with the final line, which was the number of people who died of covid-19 without any pre-existing conditions. That's where the 17,000 deaths came from.
The BBC is roughly as reliable as Snopes.
Same. I'm glad I found him when the thing was first breaking. I don't know if Campbell is ever correct on a particular detail, but I do trust his commentary to be sincere more than the bobble heads on mainstream news.
Look dude, very few give a shit what insane belief you have on a day to day basis based on some bullshit you read on some random website which happens to match your nutcase mindset that day. Be it a conspiracy theory antisemetic site to the world socialist site, as long as it agrees with your lunatic conspiracy view that day you're all for spreading that nonsense to any who will listen. And I'll tell yah buddy, few are listening to your rantings anymore with much more than a shrug or a laugh or an eyeroll.
Anyway, getting back to your original assertion, which of those sources claimed the flu had been "eradicated?" Yes, temporarily suppressed because of Covid measures, but "eradicated?"
...... aside from the World Socialist Web Site......
I'm still not seeing it.
Help yourself to your search engine of choice and BBC or Sky News. You can stick your disingenuous and dishonest witterings up your arse for all I care.
Well, I do hope it will not turn out this vaccine, or something in it, does not cause cancer or some other horrible problem as a MYRIAD of the other FDA approved products and drugs from the companies that created this vaccine have done. All those of course had a proper period of clinical trials and went through all the time and red tape a drug normally has to go through. I am sure being free of liability and able to do it super fast would not have created something over looked, or under cared about long term in this race of immoral titans to cash in.
The drug companies, the food companies, the vaccine companies. So, they pay us hundreds of millions of dollars a year to hire and keep the reviewers to approve their products.
You’ll have to get an annual shot [COVID vaccine]. I mean, it hasn’t been formally announced yet ‘cause they don’t want to, like, rile everyone up.
They're not going to not approve [emergency use authorization for children five years old or less].”
[Annual vaccines will] be recurring fountain of revenue. It might not be that much initially, but it’ll be recurring -- if they can -- if they can get every person required at an annual vaccine, that is a recurring return of money going into their company.
I haven't listened to him for a while, but Campbell was one my major sources of daily updates during the start of the pandemic. He's an interesting mix, because he's clearly in favor of big government everything and mandates, but he's also held a couple anti-narrative positions. For instance, he was a big proponent of vitamin D from the start. And less than two weeks ago, he was "fact checked" by the BBC, who claimed he said only 17,000 people died of covid-19. Of course, that's a blatant lie. What he did do is go through a government report listing the number of people in Wales and England who died of covid-19. The report broke the deaths down by preexisting condition, like diabetes or hypertension, and then concluded with the final line, which was the number of people who died of covid-19 without any pre-existing conditions. That's where the 17,000 deaths came from.
The BBC is roughly as reliable as Snopes.
Same. I'm glad I found him when the thing was first breaking. I don't know if Campbell is ever correct on a particular detail, but I do trust his commentary to be sincere more than the bobble heads on mainstream news.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/the-mask-debacle
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/the-mask-debacle
In an alternate universe, Trump got re-elected in 2020, and Republicans and Democrats switched sides being "anti-vaxx" and "pro-mandates".
There's probably some. Politicians tend to be like that.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/the-mask-debacle
In an alternate universe, Trump got re-elected in 2020, and Republicans and Democrats switched sides being "anti-vaxx" and "pro-mandates".
Yep yep. I remember pre-2020 election all of the Ds were gainsaying the vaccine. But once Brandon got elected, the script switched.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SCbegZO13w
Anyone got a similar video of Rs doing the do-si-do?
Project Veritas has an executive officer of the FDA on video, talking about the financial incentive the pharma companies have to push the vaccines, the conflicts of interest at the FDA, a governmental culture that prevents speaking up, and of course eternal vaccine mandates.Quote from: Chris ColeThe drug companies, the food companies, the vaccine companies. So, they pay us hundreds of millions of dollars a year to hire and keep the reviewers to approve their products.Quote from: Chris ColeYou’ll have to get an annual shot [COVID vaccine]. I mean, it hasn’t been formally announced yet ‘cause they don’t want to, like, rile everyone up.Quote from: Chris ColeThey're not going to not approve [emergency use authorization for children five years old or less].”Quote from: Chris Cole[Annual vaccines will] be recurring fountain of revenue. It might not be that much initially, but it’ll be recurring -- if they can -- if they can get every person required at an annual vaccine, that is a recurring return of money going into their company.
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/fda-executive-officer-on-hidden-camera-reveals-future-covid-policy-biden/
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/fda-executive-officer-exposes-close-ties-between-agency-and-pharmaceutical/
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/the-mask-debacle
In an alternate universe, Trump got re-elected in 2020, and Republicans and Democrats switched sides being "anti-vaxx" and "pro-mandates".
Biden didn't institute vaccine mandates, until they were already widespread. The real war over mandates was fought in the states.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/the-mask-debacle
In an alternate universe, Trump got re-elected in 2020, and Republicans and Democrats switched sides being "anti-vaxx" and "pro-mandates".
Not quite. If Trump had won, he probably wouldn't have instituted mandated vaccination. So you would have had a lot of democrats refusing to be vaxxed because of TDS, but also some anti-vax conservatives who would refuse to be vaccinated. You'd also probably have left-wing media claiming that the ongoing existence of Covid was "proof" that the "Trump vaccine" was not effective.
A reflexive opposition to Trump definitely drove a lot of things, like the way the left completely ignored the pre-existing scientific consensus on masks in early 2020. But I still find it very weird how facilely the Democrats switched from being fervently opposed to Trump's vaxxes, to their current opposition to basic bodily autonomy, so I'm not clear how it would have played out if Trump had won a second term. I think the switch might have happened anyway, though it would certainly have been more conflicted. Because even if there was some degree of rapprochement at the policy level, they would have felt the need to posture and virtue signal, to make sure everyone knew they still hated Trump. It's even possible to argue that it would have given more political heft to the state and local vaccine mandates, because they could have pointed to Trump's rejection of a national vaccine mandate as a failure that needs to be corrected at the state or local level.
I still find that utterly bizarre.A reflexive opposition to Trump definitely drove a lot of things, like the way the left completely ignored the pre-existing scientific consensus on masks in early 2020. But I still find it very weird how facilely the Democrats switched from being fervently opposed to Trump's vaxxes, to their current opposition to basic bodily autonomy, so I'm not clear how it would have played out if Trump had won a second term. I think the switch might have happened anyway, though it would certainly have been more conflicted. Because even if there was some degree of rapprochement at the policy level, they would have felt the need to posture and virtue signal, to make sure everyone knew they still hated Trump. It's even possible to argue that it would have given more political heft to the state and local vaccine mandates, because they could have pointed to Trump's rejection of a national vaccine mandate as a failure that needs to be corrected at the state or local level.
It's not all that weird, because the D-team is characterized above all by oversocialization and an incredible attunement to the orthodoxy disseminated through the TV & other propaganda outlets. We saw it happen in the span of days with the mask issue when Fauci (etal.) was advising against masks, and then suddenly U-turned when the cheque cleared. All D-team members immediately updated to the new "correct" belief system, without asking any uncomfortable questions.
It's happened on basically every issue I can think of: Masks, forced medical treatment, internal passports, child sexual abuse, international wars, factory farming, GMOs, etc. As soon as the propaganda outlets began signaling that a certain thing was now part of the orthodox belief system, that's all it takes.
Looks like the US is as bad as Scotland:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/20/health/covid-cdc-data.html
We saw it happen in the span of days with the mask issue when Fauci (etal.) was advising against masks, and then suddenly U-turned when the cheque cleared. All D-team members immediately updated to the new "correct" belief system, without asking any uncomfortable questions.
It's happened on basically every issue I can think of: Masks, forced medical treatment, internal passports, child sexual abuse, international wars, factory farming, GMOs, etc. As soon as the propaganda outlets began signaling that a certain thing was now part of the orthodox belief system, that's all it takes.
Well, now it's safe to say that Omicron is both less deadly and a better vaccine than the jabs...
I'm not sure what you're referring to. I definitely believe there are statistical problems with all the studies, and I've repeated said the science is very weak. The basic problem is that, given a set of data, and given there are no clear and universal method for controlling for variables, there will always be ways of controlling for variables that show one result, or show the complete opposite. That's why it's important to decide, publicly and before your study is conducted, which variables will be controlled for, and how. It's a ward against self-selection bias. But even that doesn't erase the problem, because there is a strong bias toward publishing significant results, and not publishing negative results. And this bias occurs at multiple levels. (Did you find anything? Nah, let's try again. You didn't find anything, why would we publish this?)
New Health Affairs Paper Proves Mask Mandates Work| Or Does It? Challenges with Obs Research
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA-tljS4dh8
tl:dr
https://youtu.be/DA-tljS4dh8?t=879
This is why I, in part, respectfully disagree with Pat regarding the value of using statistical studies to determine the effectiveness of masking or lock-downs. Where I would agree is if, as Dr Prasad notes, clustered RCTs had been done. And with 100% transparency (e.g. all data, models, software, etc. are open source) and a robust, formal review process similar to that used for nuclear power plant licenses (you don't get to dismiss NRC or ACRS comments/questions on your analysis by declaring that you represent the science).
I'm not sure what you're referring to. I definitely believe there are statistical problems with all the studies, and I've repeated said the science is very weak. The basic problem is that, given a set of data, and given there are no clear and universal method for controlling for variables, there will always be ways of controlling for variables that show one result, or show the complete opposite. That's why it's important to decide, publicly and before your study is conducted, which variables will be controlled for, and how. It's a ward against self-selection bias. But even that doesn't erase the problem, because there is a strong bias toward publishing significant results, and not publishing negative results. And this bias occurs at multiple levels. (Did you find anything? Nah, let's try again. You didn't find anything, why would we publish this?)
New Health Affairs Paper Proves Mask Mandates Work| Or Does It? Challenges with Obs Research
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA-tljS4dh8
tl:dr
https://youtu.be/DA-tljS4dh8?t=879
This is why I, in part, respectfully disagree with Pat regarding the value of using statistical studies to determine the effectiveness of masking or lock-downs. Where I would agree is if, as Dr Prasad notes, clustered RCTs had been done. And with 100% transparency (e.g. all data, models, software, etc. are open source) and a robust, formal review process similar to that used for nuclear power plant licenses (you don't get to dismiss NRC or ACRS comments/questions on your analysis by declaring that you represent the science).
I remember that. I do think physical studies, like airflow studies with masks, don't extrapolate well to human behavior. They're useful for understanding underlying mechanism and possible causes, but you can't take a physical study and then just conclude that it will have a certain effect in the real world. People and their interactions are complex, messy, and it's basically impossible to isolate variables.I'm not sure what you're referring to. I definitely believe there are statistical problems with all the studies, and I've repeated said the science is very weak. The basic problem is that, given a set of data, and given there are no clear and universal method for controlling for variables, there will always be ways of controlling for variables that show one result, or show the complete opposite. That's why it's important to decide, publicly and before your study is conducted, which variables will be controlled for, and how. It's a ward against self-selection bias. But even that doesn't erase the problem, because there is a strong bias toward publishing significant results, and not publishing negative results. And this bias occurs at multiple levels. (Did you find anything? Nah, let's try again. You didn't find anything, why would we publish this?)
New Health Affairs Paper Proves Mask Mandates Work| Or Does It? Challenges with Obs Research
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA-tljS4dh8
tl:dr
https://youtu.be/DA-tljS4dh8?t=879
This is why I, in part, respectfully disagree with Pat regarding the value of using statistical studies to determine the effectiveness of masking or lock-downs. Where I would agree is if, as Dr Prasad notes, clustered RCTs had been done. And with 100% transparency (e.g. all data, models, software, etc. are open source) and a robust, formal review process similar to that used for nuclear power plant licenses (you don't get to dismiss NRC or ACRS comments/questions on your analysis by declaring that you represent the science).
Pages back (or maybe on a different thread) we had had a small difference of opinion on statistical vs. mechanistic studies. I prefer mechanistic studies to statistical studies, you had the opposite opinion. I suppose it comes down to my being mistrustful of correlation; I prefer causal relationships driven by first principles. That said, statistical studies, if done correctly, can be useful to tell you where to look for causal relationships. Also, I completely acknowledge that mechanistic studies (experimental and modeling) can be just as ho-axed as statistical studies.
IIRC, you felt that understanding the real-world effects (via properly done statistical studies) was more important than the understanding the underlying mechanistic effects (forgive me if I am putting incorrect words in your mouth).
Stepping back, I think that we are both correct. Let's say that the statistical studies showed that masking increased the rate of covid infection/hospitalization/death. I would really want to know what is mechanistically happening to produce such (an unexpected) result.
As for your above paragraph, I am in complete agreement.
And for some irony, the "mechanistic" guy wrote this while taking a break from writing up a statistical margin analysis study.
Regards.
So obvious it was all a ho-ax that even SNL is mocking it.
COVID Dinner Discussion - SNL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k6xroHtn-8
Explain to me the need to mandate vaccinating kids with an EUA vaccine? Or anyone else for that matter?
https://datavisualizations.heritage.org/public-health/covid-19-deaths-by-age/
Nothing Orwellian at all about watching a decrepit old man lurching across the White house Lawn, alone and wearing a Bane mask one day, and literally the very next day that decrepit man and many of the oldest, weakest, and fattest members of congress are all packed in a room together with no masks and fawning all over one another for a camera. I guess the science can change super duper fast on some issues.
5. Conclusions
Our study is the first in vitro study on the effect of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 on human liver cell line. We present evidence on fast entry of BNT162b2 into the cells and subsequent intracellular reverse transcription of BNT162b2 mRNA into DNA.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/03/cdc-estimates-140-million-americans-have-had-covid-about-double-case-reports/
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
952,223/140,000,000 = 0.0068016 deaths/illnesses
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html
Summing the deaths and illnesses in Figure 2 and divide, you get 0.001183 deaths/illness
Divide the two and you get 5.75. So over the entire population, covid is about 6x worse than the flu. But don't forget that the CDC-reported "covid deaths" include death from covid and death with covid. Even so, you would have to assume that only 17.3% of "covid deaths" were death from covid for it to drop to the level of flu.
What I think makes this interesting is that an overall deaths/illnesses of ~0.001 only has a recommendation to take the flu vaccine, while ~0.007 calls for shutting down the economy, mandating wearing facial decorations (cloth masks), and mandating everyone take a vaccine (that does not prevent you from catching or spreading the virus, and only lasts ~6 months) approved under an EUA. It begs the question of where between those two numbers do you transition between those two states?
Of course, unless you are a leftist talking about the gender pay gap, the overall numbers are only the start of looking at the data. It would be interesting to see how deaths/illnesses varied over age groups, races, sexes, etc. It would have been really interesting for that to have been done in near real-time so that protective measures/resources could have been allocated to those most at-risk.
Too bad the CDC is too scared of me to release all of their data.
Of course, unless you are a leftist talking about the gender pay gap, the overall numbers are only the start of looking at the data. It would be interesting to see how deaths/illnesses varied over age groups, races, sexes, etc. It would have been really interesting for that to have been done in near real-time so that protective measures/resources could have been allocated to those most at-risk.
Too bad the CDC is too scared of me to release all of their data.
Is there a way to get an accurate number of the deaths, suffering, poverty, etc. caused BY the meassures used to "Stop the Spread"?
Is there a way to get an accurate number of the deaths, suffering, poverty, etc. caused BY the meassures used to "Stop the Spread"?
Of course not, because those are victimless crimes. But it was all worth it, because otherwise we'd be building gallows.
We need more gallows.
Is there a way to get an accurate number of the deaths, suffering, poverty, etc. caused BY the meassures used to "Stop the Spread"?
Of course not, because those are victimless crimes. But it was all worth it, because otherwise we'd be building gallows.
We need more gallows.
The question presumes that we had an accurate count of deaths from or with COVID. We've never and will never have a true count of deaths or of infections.
The question presumes that we had an accurate count of deaths from or with COVID. We've never and will never have a true count of deaths or of infections.
The question presumes that we had an accurate count of deaths from or with COVID. We've never and will never have a true count of deaths or of infections.
No, but they can't fake all-cause death stats. Which barely ticked up in the UK in 2020 and weren't high for the last 20 years.
True. But the public isn't paying attention either way. The real way to do this would have required that medical practice included testing every single person presenting with cold and flu symptoms going back to the very first possible ability to test, and then tracking every single case that progressed to pneumonia and death. Except we never have. All those feebs who got pneumonia and died who tested negative for flu? Chalked up to "some kind of viral pneumonia ." Unless it was part of the AIDS! AIDS! AIDS! situation, no one ever bothered to determine if the pneumonia was caused by a rhinovirus, some other coronavirus strain, etc. We never even bothered to test for flu in many cases, so the public health bureaucracies estimated flu cases every year. If we had ever bothered to test and trace healthy people in the past, we'd see a similar number of "cases" as we did with the coof. Airborne respiratory viruses do what dey dooo...
True. But the public isn't paying attention either way. The real way to do this would have required that medical practice included testing every single person presenting with cold and flu symptoms going back to the very first possible ability to test, and then tracking every single case that progressed to pneumonia and death. Except we never have. All those feebs who got pneumonia and died who tested negative for flu? Chalked up to "some kind of viral pneumonia ." Unless it was part of the AIDS! AIDS! AIDS! situation, no one ever bothered to determine if the pneumonia was caused by a rhinovirus, some other coronavirus strain, etc. We never even bothered to test for flu in many cases, so the public health bureaucracies estimated flu cases every year. If we had ever bothered to test and trace healthy people in the past, we'd see a similar number of "cases" as we did with the coof. Airborne respiratory viruses do what dey dooo...
Your premise falls apart right there in your third sentence. There is no reliable test that can distinguish any respiratory virus from another, without sequencing the genes of every single sample taken. Not even after all the money they've spaffed away on this bollocks would they ever consider that.
In this country, they've been lumping flu and pneumonia in with "covid" since September 2020, they've deliberately made no attempt to distinguish them from each other to artificially inflate the number of covid cases and deaths.
In the U.S. the age-adjusted death rate increased by 16.8% from 715.2 deaths per 100,000 standard population in 2019 to 835.4 in 2020. Furthermore the number of deaths in 2021 was 21% higher than in 2019. This claim that we saw no appreciable increase in all causes of death is false.
We can argue about whether Covid measures caused that increase in death, but there is no question that more people died during the Covid years in the U.S..
You forgot "death from reaction to experimental vaccines" in your list...In the U.S. the age-adjusted death rate increased by 16.8% from 715.2 deaths per 100,000 standard population in 2019 to 835.4 in 2020. Furthermore the number of deaths in 2021 was 21% higher than in 2019. This claim that we saw no appreciable increase in all causes of death is false.
We can argue about whether Covid measures caused that increase in death, but there is no question that more people died during the Covid years in the U.S..
Now break that down by death from COVID, death with COVID, death to to delayed treatment for other medical issues, drug overdose, and suicide.
Overwhelmingly, death from covid is last in that count. Covid is on par with a bad flu season and the evidence that has been suppressed and is now seeing the light of day bears this out.
You forgot "death from reaction to experimental vaccines" in your list...In the U.S. the age-adjusted death rate increased by 16.8% from 715.2 deaths per 100,000 standard population in 2019 to 835.4 in 2020. Furthermore the number of deaths in 2021 was 21% higher than in 2019. This claim that we saw no appreciable increase in all causes of death is false.
We can argue about whether Covid measures caused that increase in death, but there is no question that more people died during the Covid years in the U.S..
Now break that down by death from COVID, death with COVID, death to to delayed treatment for other medical issues, drug overdose, and suicide.
Overwhelmingly, death from covid is last in that count. Covid is on par with a bad flu season and the evidence that has been suppressed and is now seeing the light of day bears this out.
In the U.S. the age-adjusted death rate increased by 16.8% from 715.2 deaths per 100,000 standard population in 2019 to 835.4 in 2020. Furthermore the number of deaths in 2021 was 21% higher than in 2019. This claim that we saw no appreciable increase in all causes of death is false.
We can argue about whether Covid measures caused that increase in death, but there is no question that more people died during the Covid years in the U.S..
Here in Florida, we often run parallel tests and have many patients positive for one or the other or both (or even RSV). It is possible to distinguish the viruses in testing, at least as done in the USA.True. But the public isn't paying attention either way. The real way to do this would have required that medical practice included testing every single person presenting with cold and flu symptoms going back to the very first possible ability to test, and then tracking every single case that progressed to pneumonia and death. Except we never have. All those feebs who got pneumonia and died who tested negative for flu? Chalked up to "some kind of viral pneumonia ." Unless it was part of the AIDS! AIDS! AIDS! situation, no one ever bothered to determine if the pneumonia was caused by a rhinovirus, some other coronavirus strain, etc. We never even bothered to test for flu in many cases, so the public health bureaucracies estimated flu cases every year. If we had ever bothered to test and trace healthy people in the past, we'd see a similar number of "cases" as we did with the coof. Airborne respiratory viruses do what dey dooo...
Your premise falls apart right there in your third sentence. There is no reliable test that can distinguish any respiratory virus from another, without sequencing the genes of every single sample taken. Not even after all the money they've spaffed away on this bollocks would they ever consider that.
In this country, they've been lumping flu and pneumonia in with "covid" since September 2020, they've deliberately made no attempt to distinguish them from each other to artificially inflate the number of covid cases and deaths.
Here in Florida, we often run parallel tests and have many patients positive for one or the other or both (or even RSV). It is possible to distinguish the viruses in testing, at least as done in the USA.
Here in Florida, we often run parallel tests and have many patients positive for one or the other or both (or even RSV). It is possible to distinguish the viruses in testing, at least as done in the USA.
With what test? Because neither PCR nor LFT test can distinguish covid from a dozen other viruses.
In the U.S. the age-adjusted death rate increased by 16.8% from 715.2 deaths per 100,000 standard population in 2019 to 835.4 in 2020. Furthermore the number of deaths in 2021 was 21% higher than in 2019. This claim that we saw no appreciable increase in all causes of death is false.
We can argue about whether Covid measures caused that increase in death, but there is no question that more people died during the Covid years in the U.S..
Now break that down by death from COVID, death with COVID, death to to delayed treatment for other medical issues, drug overdose, and suicide.
Overwhelmingly, death from covid is last in that count. Covid is on par with a bad flu season and the evidence that has been suppressed and is now seeing the light of day bears this out.
In the U.S. the age-adjusted death rate increased by 16.8% from 715.2 deaths per 100,000 standard population in 2019 to 835.4 in 2020. Furthermore the number of deaths in 2021 was 21% higher than in 2019. This claim that we saw no appreciable increase in all causes of death is false.
We can argue about whether Covid measures caused that increase in death, but there is no question that more people died during the Covid years in the U.S..
I said the UK, not the US
2019 was the end of an almost two-decades long decline in death rates. The death rate in 2008 was higher than 2020.
In the U.S. the age-adjusted death rate increased by 16.8% from 715.2 deaths per 100,000 standard population in 2019 to 835.4 in 2020. Furthermore the number of deaths in 2021 was 21% higher than in 2019. This claim that we saw no appreciable increase in all causes of death is false.
We can argue about whether Covid measures caused that increase in death, but there is no question that more people died during the Covid years in the U.S..
Now break that down by death from COVID, death with COVID, death to to delayed treatment for other medical issues, drug overdose, and suicide.
Overwhelmingly, death from covid is last in that count. Covid is on par with a bad flu season and the evidence that has been suppressed and is now seeing the light of day bears this out.
I disagree with your assessment but it doesn't matter as you ignored my point. All we know for sure is more people died during the two covid years than during the non-covid years, by meaningful numbers. We can argue about the cause (and you already are despite my saying that), but we cannot argue that more people did not die. As far as I know, only one person here is arguing that more people didn't die during those years, and you're not that guy.
And I said US, not UK. US being a much larger sample size, it's a better example. Unless you're arguing UK had better anti-covid measures maybe?
Because....reasons? Gosh what an amazing coincidence a two-decades-long trend ended when covid started. Must have nothing to do with covid, right?
Masks off on the 12th here in WA. I'm looking forward to it.
It's less hassle to wear them when asked by an establishment. But I'm one who thinks their effectiveness was questionable from the start, and quickly turned into safety theater.
Masks off on the 12th here in WA. I'm looking forward to it.
It's less hassle to wear them when asked by an establishment. But I'm one who thinks their effectiveness was questionable from the start, and quickly turned into safety theater.
The long-term risks of inhaling mask fibres worry me a lot more than the minor social strife involved in refusing to wear a mask when requested.
That would be why I've never worn one.
Masks are mandatory here in western WA if you want to go go a store or whatnot. Only in the past few days have I seen a trickle of people without mask indoors in public.
Masks are mandatory here in western WA if you want to go go a store or whatnot. Only in the past few days have I seen a trickle of people without mask indoors in public.
They were "mandatory" in the UK in shops and other indoor settings from July 2020 until last month. I went in shops every single day without one.
Masks are mandatory here in western WA if you want to go go a store or whatnot. Only in the past few days have I seen a trickle of people without mask indoors in public.
They were "mandatory" in the UK in shops and other indoor settings from July 2020 until last month. I went in shops every single day without one.
Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
Masks are mandatory here in western WA if you want to go go a store or whatnot. Only in the past few days have I seen a trickle of people without mask indoors in public.
They were "mandatory" in the UK in shops and other indoor settings from July 2020 until last month. I went in shops every single day without one.
Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
I tried that many places here. With only one exception, I was told I needed to put on a mask (or face shield) or leave. This came from normal staff, managers and security who were stationed at the front doors or chased me down very quickly after entering. One place threatened to call the police and report me for trespassing if I didn't.
Ohio's policy made the stores responsible for the policing under threat of being shut down if customers were found inside w/o masks on. None of them wanted to risk having their business closed because of a customer not following the rules.
Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
Disney was pretty hard edged. They didn't accept any excuses and were more than happy to suggest that those that wouldn't comply reschedule their visit for after the pandemic ended...and have a magical day!Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
I know a fellow who would say it was against his faith to wear the mask when asked in public places. The business always took it at face value. I have no idea if he was OK to do that or not, but it dropped the issue every time for him, and only one person ever pushed back and he shut them down pretty quick. I have also seen a clerk EXTREMELY determined to make sure everyone wore a mask and did so properly at all times, and even kicked people out of a business for improper mask wearing. So I guess it just depends on how big a deal the business wants to make it. Though it could have been interesting had the dont wear masks for religious reasons dude met the super clerk.
Disney was pretty hard edged. They didn't accept any excuses and were more than happy to suggest that those that wouldn't comply reschedule their visit for after the pandemic ended...and have a magical day!Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
I know a fellow who would say it was against his faith to wear the mask when asked in public places. The business always took it at face value. I have no idea if he was OK to do that or not, but it dropped the issue every time for him, and only one person ever pushed back and he shut them down pretty quick. I have also seen a clerk EXTREMELY determined to make sure everyone wore a mask and did so properly at all times, and even kicked people out of a business for improper mask wearing. So I guess it just depends on how big a deal the business wants to make it. Though it could have been interesting had the dont wear masks for religious reasons dude met the super clerk.
It's a major employer in central Florida. Even the most right wing folks should appreciate the jobs.Disney was pretty hard edged. They didn't accept any excuses and were more than happy to suggest that those that wouldn't comply reschedule their visit for after the pandemic ended...and have a magical day!Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
I know a fellow who would say it was against his faith to wear the mask when asked in public places. The business always took it at face value. I have no idea if he was OK to do that or not, but it dropped the issue every time for him, and only one person ever pushed back and he shut them down pretty quick. I have also seen a clerk EXTREMELY determined to make sure everyone wore a mask and did so properly at all times, and even kicked people out of a business for improper mask wearing. So I guess it just depends on how big a deal the business wants to make it. Though it could have been interesting had the dont wear masks for religious reasons dude met the super clerk.
At this point, Disney doesn't deserve my vacation dollars. Woke culture, deference to communist regimes, substandard maintenance and upkeep on the property, and overpriced admissions.
There was a time when:
1. Gay and trans employees didn't try to be in the face of the vacationing public about their personal beliefs.
2. Properties were kept up - they used to chip and paint areas of the parks that needed it *every night* and there was never trash laying on the ground.
3. An annual pass was less expensive than a 10-day Park hopper ticket. Now, it's $1,299 per annual pass for the general public ($899 for those of us with DVC memberships). The pricing reads like car-buying (0% APR, $99/month with $205 down)...
4. Disney *used* to be patriotic, but it is infested with leftist employees now (which goes hand-in-hand with #1, above) who want communism like they have in China.
Fuck Disney.
It's a major employer in central Florida. Even the most right wing folks should appreciate the jobs.Disney was pretty hard edged. They didn't accept any excuses and were more than happy to suggest that those that wouldn't comply reschedule their visit for after the pandemic ended...and have a magical day!Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
I know a fellow who would say it was against his faith to wear the mask when asked in public places. The business always took it at face value. I have no idea if he was OK to do that or not, but it dropped the issue every time for him, and only one person ever pushed back and he shut them down pretty quick. I have also seen a clerk EXTREMELY determined to make sure everyone wore a mask and did so properly at all times, and even kicked people out of a business for improper mask wearing. So I guess it just depends on how big a deal the business wants to make it. Though it could have been interesting had the dont wear masks for religious reasons dude met the super clerk.
At this point, Disney doesn't deserve my vacation dollars. Woke culture, deference to communist regimes, substandard maintenance and upkeep on the property, and overpriced admissions.
There was a time when:
1. Gay and trans employees didn't try to be in the face of the vacationing public about their personal beliefs.
2. Properties were kept up - they used to chip and paint areas of the parks that needed it *every night* and there was never trash laying on the ground.
3. An annual pass was less expensive than a 10-day Park hopper ticket. Now, it's $1,299 per annual pass for the general public ($899 for those of us with DVC memberships). The pricing reads like car-buying (0% APR, $99/month with $205 down)...
4. Disney *used* to be patriotic, but it is infested with leftist employees now (which goes hand-in-hand with #1, above) who want communism like they have in China.
Fuck Disney.
It's a major employer in central Florida. Even the most right wing folks should appreciate the jobs.Disney was pretty hard edged. They didn't accept any excuses and were more than happy to suggest that those that wouldn't comply reschedule their visit for after the pandemic ended...and have a magical day!Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
I know a fellow who would say it was against his faith to wear the mask when asked in public places. The business always took it at face value. I have no idea if he was OK to do that or not, but it dropped the issue every time for him, and only one person ever pushed back and he shut them down pretty quick. I have also seen a clerk EXTREMELY determined to make sure everyone wore a mask and did so properly at all times, and even kicked people out of a business for improper mask wearing. So I guess it just depends on how big a deal the business wants to make it. Though it could have been interesting had the dont wear masks for religious reasons dude met the super clerk.
At this point, Disney doesn't deserve my vacation dollars. Woke culture, deference to communist regimes, substandard maintenance and upkeep on the property, and overpriced admissions.
There was a time when:
1. Gay and trans employees didn't try to be in the face of the vacationing public about their personal beliefs.
2. Properties were kept up - they used to chip and paint areas of the parks that needed it *every night* and there was never trash laying on the ground.
3. An annual pass was less expensive than a 10-day Park hopper ticket. Now, it's $1,299 per annual pass for the general public ($899 for those of us with DVC memberships). The pricing reads like car-buying (0% APR, $99/month with $205 down)...
4. Disney *used* to be patriotic, but it is infested with leftist employees now (which goes hand-in-hand with #1, above) who want communism like they have in China.
Fuck Disney.
I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
There was a time when:
1. Gay and trans employees didn't try to be in the face of the vacationing public about their personal beliefs.
I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
There was a time when:
1. Gay and trans employees didn't try to be in the face of the vacationing public about their personal beliefs.I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
I'm curious. I dislike Disney in general - but I did go to Disneyland for the first time recently as a birthday present for a friend. I don't recall seeing any employees that were visibly gay or trans - but then again, I wouldn't have reacted if I did.
So what sort of expression do you have a problem with?
It's a major employer in central Florida. Even the most right wing folks should appreciate the jobs.Disney was pretty hard edged. They didn't accept any excuses and were more than happy to suggest that those that wouldn't comply reschedule their visit for after the pandemic ended...and have a magical day!Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
I know a fellow who would say it was against his faith to wear the mask when asked in public places. The business always took it at face value. I have no idea if he was OK to do that or not, but it dropped the issue every time for him, and only one person ever pushed back and he shut them down pretty quick. I have also seen a clerk EXTREMELY determined to make sure everyone wore a mask and did so properly at all times, and even kicked people out of a business for improper mask wearing. So I guess it just depends on how big a deal the business wants to make it. Though it could have been interesting had the dont wear masks for religious reasons dude met the super clerk.
At this point, Disney doesn't deserve my vacation dollars. Woke culture, deference to communist regimes, substandard maintenance and upkeep on the property, and overpriced admissions.
There was a time when:
1. Gay and trans employees didn't try to be in the face of the vacationing public about their personal beliefs.
2. Properties were kept up - they used to chip and paint areas of the parks that needed it *every night* and there was never trash laying on the ground.
3. An annual pass was less expensive than a 10-day Park hopper ticket. Now, it's $1,299 per annual pass for the general public ($899 for those of us with DVC memberships). The pricing reads like car-buying (0% APR, $99/month with $205 down)...
4. Disney *used* to be patriotic, but it is infested with leftist employees now (which goes hand-in-hand with #1, above) who want communism like they have in China.
Fuck Disney.
I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
I doubt your withheld $ even register with the House of the Mouse.
I doubt a personal investment in a timeshare matters to them any more than a fart in a hurricane. Those people are NOT high rollers. Knowing someone that takes reservations for Disney, those people are meaningless compared to resort guests.It's a major employer in central Florida. Even the most right wing folks should appreciate the jobs.Disney was pretty hard edged. They didn't accept any excuses and were more than happy to suggest that those that wouldn't comply reschedule their visit for after the pandemic ended...and have a magical day!Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
I know a fellow who would say it was against his faith to wear the mask when asked in public places. The business always took it at face value. I have no idea if he was OK to do that or not, but it dropped the issue every time for him, and only one person ever pushed back and he shut them down pretty quick. I have also seen a clerk EXTREMELY determined to make sure everyone wore a mask and did so properly at all times, and even kicked people out of a business for improper mask wearing. So I guess it just depends on how big a deal the business wants to make it. Though it could have been interesting had the dont wear masks for religious reasons dude met the super clerk.
At this point, Disney doesn't deserve my vacation dollars. Woke culture, deference to communist regimes, substandard maintenance and upkeep on the property, and overpriced admissions.
There was a time when:
1. Gay and trans employees didn't try to be in the face of the vacationing public about their personal beliefs.
2. Properties were kept up - they used to chip and paint areas of the parks that needed it *every night* and there was never trash laying on the ground.
3. An annual pass was less expensive than a 10-day Park hopper ticket. Now, it's $1,299 per annual pass for the general public ($899 for those of us with DVC memberships). The pricing reads like car-buying (0% APR, $99/month with $205 down)...
4. Disney *used* to be patriotic, but it is infested with leftist employees now (which goes hand-in-hand with #1, above) who want communism like they have in China.
Fuck Disney.
I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
I doubt your withheld $ even register with the House of the Mouse.
I remember years ago 3cat described the investment his family made in time share space and passes and purchases and you know what...they notice that level. 3cat and his family personally employed multiple full time employees for Disney with their expenditures every year. It's like Vegas losing one of their high rollers. It might not be a HUGE issue, but someone likely noticed.
By that token, pretty much nobody matters individually.I doubt a personal investment in a timeshare matters to them any more than a fart in a hurricane. Those people are NOT high rollers. Knowing someone that takes reservations for Disney, those people are meaningless compared to resort guests.It's a major employer in central Florida. Even the most right wing folks should appreciate the jobs.Disney was pretty hard edged. They didn't accept any excuses and were more than happy to suggest that those that wouldn't comply reschedule their visit for after the pandemic ended...and have a magical day!Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
I know a fellow who would say it was against his faith to wear the mask when asked in public places. The business always took it at face value. I have no idea if he was OK to do that or not, but it dropped the issue every time for him, and only one person ever pushed back and he shut them down pretty quick. I have also seen a clerk EXTREMELY determined to make sure everyone wore a mask and did so properly at all times, and even kicked people out of a business for improper mask wearing. So I guess it just depends on how big a deal the business wants to make it. Though it could have been interesting had the dont wear masks for religious reasons dude met the super clerk.
At this point, Disney doesn't deserve my vacation dollars. Woke culture, deference to communist regimes, substandard maintenance and upkeep on the property, and overpriced admissions.
There was a time when:
1. Gay and trans employees didn't try to be in the face of the vacationing public about their personal beliefs.
2. Properties were kept up - they used to chip and paint areas of the parks that needed it *every night* and there was never trash laying on the ground.
3. An annual pass was less expensive than a 10-day Park hopper ticket. Now, it's $1,299 per annual pass for the general public ($899 for those of us with DVC memberships). The pricing reads like car-buying (0% APR, $99/month with $205 down)...
4. Disney *used* to be patriotic, but it is infested with leftist employees now (which goes hand-in-hand with #1, above) who want communism like they have in China.
Fuck Disney.
I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
I doubt your withheld $ even register with the House of the Mouse.
I remember years ago 3cat described the investment his family made in time share space and passes and purchases and you know what...they notice that level. 3cat and his family personally employed multiple full time employees for Disney with their expenditures every year. It's like Vegas losing one of their high rollers. It might not be a HUGE issue, but someone likely noticed.
By that token, pretty much nobody matters individually.I doubt a personal investment in a timeshare matters to them any more than a fart in a hurricane. Those people are NOT high rollers. Knowing someone that takes reservations for Disney, those people are meaningless compared to resort guests.It's a major employer in central Florida. Even the most right wing folks should appreciate the jobs.Disney was pretty hard edged. They didn't accept any excuses and were more than happy to suggest that those that wouldn't comply reschedule their visit for after the pandemic ended...and have a magical day!Don't quite know what to make of that. Is there some weird UK thing where you can ignore policies if you feel like it?
It was a law left with an exemption loophole: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/791/regulation/4/made
One which required nothing more than self-declaration of an exemption.
Designed to ensure that in the event of a legal challenge, the entire Regulation wouldn't be thrown out by the courts.
Ah. I don't know how such a loophole would be affected by "We reserve the right to refuse service." Not sure if that's strictly an American thing.
I know a fellow who would say it was against his faith to wear the mask when asked in public places. The business always took it at face value. I have no idea if he was OK to do that or not, but it dropped the issue every time for him, and only one person ever pushed back and he shut them down pretty quick. I have also seen a clerk EXTREMELY determined to make sure everyone wore a mask and did so properly at all times, and even kicked people out of a business for improper mask wearing. So I guess it just depends on how big a deal the business wants to make it. Though it could have been interesting had the dont wear masks for religious reasons dude met the super clerk.
At this point, Disney doesn't deserve my vacation dollars. Woke culture, deference to communist regimes, substandard maintenance and upkeep on the property, and overpriced admissions.
There was a time when:
1. Gay and trans employees didn't try to be in the face of the vacationing public about their personal beliefs.
2. Properties were kept up - they used to chip and paint areas of the parks that needed it *every night* and there was never trash laying on the ground.
3. An annual pass was less expensive than a 10-day Park hopper ticket. Now, it's $1,299 per annual pass for the general public ($899 for those of us with DVC memberships). The pricing reads like car-buying (0% APR, $99/month with $205 down)...
4. Disney *used* to be patriotic, but it is infested with leftist employees now (which goes hand-in-hand with #1, above) who want communism like they have in China.
Fuck Disney.
I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
I doubt your withheld $ even register with the House of the Mouse.
I remember years ago 3cat described the investment his family made in time share space and passes and purchases and you know what...they notice that level. 3cat and his family personally employed multiple full time employees for Disney with their expenditures every year. It's like Vegas losing one of their high rollers. It might not be a HUGE issue, but someone likely noticed.
I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
I doubt your withheld $ even register with the House of the Mouse.
I doubt that is real, though I know 4 of their employees did get pinched in a pedo sting this week.
I doubt that is real, though I know 4 of their employees did get pinched in a pedo sting this week.
This seems to be a failure regular occurrence... Not necessarily Disney's fault so much as it is that they are a form of employment that attracts pedos for the same reason schools, scouts, etc. do - easy access to children.
That having been said, there *is* an intersection between the trans agenda, the propensity for leftists to want to teach primary school kids graphic sexual topics without parental knowledge/consent, and the attempt to normalize pedo behavior. As I said, there are *gay* couples who have kids who don't want this stuff being taught in school either. It's only because of covid remote zoom meeting school attendance that parents were finally able to see what teachers are indoctrinating their kids in.
How it started:I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
I doubt your withheld $ even register with the House of the Mouse.
How its going:
BREAKING: CEO of Disney arrested for human trafficking
https://twitter.com/Michael_PSenger/status/1504382937722068996 (https://twitter.com/Michael_PSenger/status/1504382937722068996)
Oh look, Shasarak falling for more fake news. What a shock. I am completely stunned at this totally unexpected turn of events.
Seriously dude, do you ever critically think about stuff you read on the internet from randos?
I doubt that is real, though I know 4 of their employees did get pinched in a pedo sting this week.
This seems to be a failure regular occurrence... Not necessarily Disney's fault so much as it is that they are a form of employment that attracts pedos for the same reason schools, scouts, etc. do - easy access to children.
That having been said, there *is* an intersection between the trans agenda, the propensity for leftists to want to teach primary school kids graphic sexual topics without parental knowledge/consent, and the attempt to normalize pedo behavior. As I said, there are *gay* couples who have kids who don't want this stuff being taught in school either. It's only because of covid remote zoom meeting school attendance that parents were finally able to see what teachers are indoctrinating their kids in.
Groomers want to groom. Next step for "progress" will be some form of pedo acceptance. Boys scouts is pretty fucked up now. It certainly had its issues before, with pedo cases (not sure if 7k cases out of 110 million scouts is way out of proportion if compared to Catholic priests or youth pastors or teachers) but 2013 on has been a disaster. I rolled with all the changes and clinched my teeth...as the allowing of girls was supposed to operate with girls separate from boys, but in practice, that is not the case IME. I guess we will be camping, shooting, tying knots and learning about being a good citizen without their purview from here on out.
I doubt that is real, though I know 4 of their employees did get pinched in a pedo sting this week.
This seems to be a failure regular occurrence... Not necessarily Disney's fault so much as it is that they are a form of employment that attracts pedos for the same reason schools, scouts, etc. do - easy access to children.
That having been said, there *is* an intersection between the trans agenda, the propensity for leftists to want to teach primary school kids graphic sexual topics without parental knowledge/consent, and the attempt to normalize pedo behavior. As I said, there are *gay* couples who have kids who don't want this stuff being taught in school either. It's only because of covid remote zoom meeting school attendance that parents were finally able to see what teachers are indoctrinating their kids in.
Groomers want to groom. Next step for "progress" will be some form of pedo acceptance. Boys scouts is pretty fucked up now. It certainly had its issues before, with pedo cases (not sure if 7k cases out of 110 million scouts is way out of proportion if compared to Catholic priests or youth pastors or teachers) but 2013 on has been a disaster. I rolled with all the changes and clinched my teeth...as the allowing of girls was supposed to operate with girls separate from boys, but in practice, that is not the case IME. I guess we will be camping, shooting, tying knots and learning about being a good citizen without their purview from here on out.
The Boy Scouts did an absolutely horrific job of even the most basic screening efforts to keep pedos out of the scouts, going all the way back to their founder.
I have enjoyed the fact that bad polls, a little real science, and war make masks and vax mandates go "poof". Lets see...Pestilence, then war, I guess Famine is next up to bat in a few months?
I have enjoyed the fact that bad polls, a little real science, and war make masks and vax mandates go "poof". Lets see...Pestilence, then war, I guess Famine is next up to bat in a few months?
With the deliberate spiking of input costs to fit the "green" agenda, we'll have food shortages soon enough, don't worry.
I have enjoyed the fact that bad polls, a little real science, and war make masks and vax mandates go "poof". Lets see...Pestilence, then war, I guess Famine is next up to bat in a few months?If you've been following the news it absolutely is. They're already taking about impending food shortages.
Oh look, Shasarak falling for more fake news. What a shock. I am completely stunned at this totally unexpected turn of events.
Seriously dude, do you ever critically think about stuff you read on the internet from randos?
Says the guy in a contest with Tubesock Amy for Forum Troll of the Year.....
It's not trolling to just say what I believe even if it's not popular, and even if there isn't a pack behind me cheering me on. Which is what you do. Don't get it twisted here Jeff. It's your views which are more commonly orthodoxy around here, not mine. There is nothing brave about you just repeating the same stuff almost everyone else around here already agrees with.
Oh look, Shasarak falling for more fake news. What a shock. I am completely stunned at this totally unexpected turn of events.
Seriously dude, do you ever critically think about stuff you read on the internet from randos?
Says the guy in a contest with Tubesock Amy for Forum Troll of the Year.....
It's not trolling to just say what I believe even if it's not popular, and even if there isn't a pack behind me cheering me on. Which is what you do. Don't get it twisted here Jeff. It's your views which are more commonly orthodoxy around here, not mine. There is nothing brave about you just repeating the same stuff almost everyone else around here already agrees with.
It's not trolling to just say what I believe even if it's not popular, and even if there isn't a pack behind me cheering me on. Which is what you do. Don't get it twisted here Jeff. It's your views which are more commonly orthodoxy around here, not mine. There is nothing brave about you just repeating the same stuff almost everyone else around here already agrees with.
You parrot the narrative being pushed by the MSM, that's the very opposite of saying what's unpopular.
Oh look, Shasarak falling for more fake news. What a shock. I am completely stunned at this totally unexpected turn of events.
Seriously dude, do you ever critically think about stuff you read on the internet from randos?
Says the guy in a contest with Tubesock Amy for Forum Troll of the Year.....
It's not trolling to just say what I believe even if it's not popular, and even if there isn't a pack behind me cheering me on. Which is what you do. Don't get it twisted here Jeff. It's your views which are more commonly orthodoxy around here, not mine. There is nothing brave about you just repeating the same stuff almost everyone else around here already agrees with.
See? You are trolling me right now.....
Oh look, Shasarak falling for more fake news. What a shock. I am completely stunned at this totally unexpected turn of events.
Seriously dude, do you ever critically think about stuff you read on the internet from randos?
Says the guy in a contest with Tubesock Amy for Forum Troll of the Year.....
It's not trolling to just say what I believe even if it's not popular, and even if there isn't a pack behind me cheering me on. Which is what you do. Don't get it twisted here Jeff. It's your views which are more commonly orthodoxy around here, not mine. There is nothing brave about you just repeating the same stuff almost everyone else around here already agrees with.
See? You are trolling me right now.....
You seem to not understand what that word means. Disagreeing with you isn't trolling my friend.
"I had followed very closely the literature on community masking prior to the pandemic in March, and when Fauci went on 60 Minutes the first time and said we don't know for sure you should wear a mask...I think that reflected what the consensus was in early March, which was the entire preexisting body of evidence was equivocal or negative about community masking, and that's why the WHO and CDC didn't recommend it initially.
How Politics Corrupted Science: Dr. Vinay Prasad on COVID
https://youtu.be/Xm55BnJi3zQ?t=547
"I had followed very closely the literature on community masking prior to the pandemic in March, and when Fauci went on 60 Minutes the first time and said we don't know for sure you should wear a mask...I think that reflected what the consensus was in early March, which was the entire preexisting body of evidence was equivocal or negative about community masking, and that's why the WHO and CDC didn't recommend it initially.
How Politics Corrupted Science: Dr. Vinay Prasad on COVID
https://youtu.be/Xm55BnJi3zQ?t=547
There have been RCT studies in the past that clearly showed that, except for in a clinical environment when work by people trained in their use as PPE, masks were statistically insignificant in preventing spread of contagions.
The Chinese Communist Party is now telling couples living in Shanghai to not sleep in the same bed, eat together, or hug each other. And they're also sending around drones warning people that opening the window and singing can spread covid. Oh, and South Korean clothes. Those cause covid, too.They can try. There's an awful lot of shotguns, and drones make big targets.
This is what happens when an authoritarian regime's policies fail but they can't admit they're wrong.
Wonder how long it will take before it happens in Canada or the US.
The Chinese Communist Party is now telling couples living in Shanghai to not sleep in the same bed, eat together, or hug each other. And they're also sending around drones warning people that opening the window and singing can spread covid. Oh, and South Korean clothes. Those cause covid, too.
This is what happens when an authoritarian regime's policies fail but they can't admit they're wrong.
Wonder how long it will take before it happens in Canada or the US.
Babies are being taken from their parents and put behind bars in Shanghai.
I mean that literally. As part of the Chinese Communist Party's insane zero covid policy, they're separating covid-positive children from their parents, even if when the parents are covid-positive as well, putting multiple babies and toddlers in cribs with giant iron bars, and there are viral videos of the kids screaming their heads off.
Goo goo gah gah gulag!
I expect Justin Trudeau is taking notes.
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/shanghai-separates-covid-positive-children-parents-virus-fight-2022-04-02/Babies are being taken from their parents and put behind bars in Shanghai.
I mean that literally. As part of the Chinese Communist Party's insane zero covid policy, they're separating covid-positive children from their parents, even if when the parents are covid-positive as well, putting multiple babies and toddlers in cribs with giant iron bars, and there are viral videos of the kids screaming their heads off.
Goo goo gah gah gulag!
I expect Justin Trudeau is taking notes.
Link for that? Not doubting you for a moment on this one. I am asking because I have a friend who has been preaching Covid Zero for two years now, I've always disagreed with her, and would appreciate sending her a link to that.
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/shanghai-separates-covid-positive-children-parents-virus-fight-2022-04-02/Babies are being taken from their parents and put behind bars in Shanghai.
I mean that literally. As part of the Chinese Communist Party's insane zero covid policy, they're separating covid-positive children from their parents, even if when the parents are covid-positive as well, putting multiple babies and toddlers in cribs with giant iron bars, and there are viral videos of the kids screaming their heads off.
Goo goo gah gah gulag!
I expect Justin Trudeau is taking notes.
Link for that? Not doubting you for a moment on this one. I am asking because I have a friend who has been preaching Covid Zero for two years now, I've always disagreed with her, and would appreciate sending her a link to that.
https://www.insider.com/video-shows-infants-left-unattended-shanghai-amid-covid-lockdown-2022-4
They were widely reported by sites like the Times and the NYT (you could search for their articles, but they don't add a lot new), but the videos have become harder to find. The Insider article includes one.
Thanks.
Terrifying.
Thanks.
Terrifying.
Coming soon to a town near you - you do realise the Chinese playbook is the one the elites in most of the developed world are incrementally applying, right?
You do realize you have mental health issues which you should be seeking treatment for, and your life would in fact be better if you at least were brave enough to take a harder look at your issues and acknowledge you might have some and could use some help?
I gotta say, some of the freakouts over the airline mask mandate being struck down are amusing.
The impression I'm getting is that they know they can wear a mask anyways. Heck, wear two.
They're just upset they can't force other people to mask up.
You do realize you have mental health issues which you should be seeking treatment for, and your life would in fact be better if you at least were brave enough to take a harder look at your issues and acknowledge you might have some and could use some help?
Aw, poor Misty has no response to what's clearly going on around him, so has to fall back on the pathetic "you're crazy" line. I'm sure you'll be happy when you own nothing, because that's what you've been told.
I gotta say, some of the freakouts over the airline mask mandate being struck down are amusing.
The impression I'm getting is that they know they can wear a mask anyways. Heck, wear two.
They're just upset they can't force other people to mask up.
Which has been the issue all along. Little fascists who get off on that feeling of entitlement that they can tell other people what to do.
I gotta say, some of the freakouts over the airline mask mandate being struck down are amusing.
The impression I'm getting is that they know they can wear a mask anyways. Heck, wear two.
They're just upset they can't force other people to mask up.
Which has been the issue all along. Little fascists who get off on that feeling of entitlement that they can tell other people what to do.
Pretty sure the airline mask rule was driven by airline employees who didn't want to die from doing their job. Maybe they were mistaken in that belief but that doesn't make them fascists for thinking that.
See, that's a good example of how you attribute to conspiracy theories what can be explained by ordinary people doing ordinary things. To you, the rule had to be about a group wanting to control other people. Reality was people just being afraid for their health.
"I was just a guard at Auschwitz."I gotta say, some of the freakouts over the airline mask mandate being struck down are amusing.
The impression I'm getting is that they know they can wear a mask anyways. Heck, wear two.
They're just upset they can't force other people to mask up.
Which has been the issue all along. Little fascists who get off on that feeling of entitlement that they can tell other people what to do.
Pretty sure the airline mask rule was driven by airline employees who didn't want to die from doing their job. Maybe they were mistaken in that belief but that doesn't make them fascists for thinking that.
See, that's a good example of how you attribute to conspiracy theories what can be explained by ordinary people doing ordinary things. To you, the rule had to be about a group wanting to control other people. Reality was people just being afraid for their health.
I don't think there's any real world evidence that N95 respirators work either. I mean, if they failed among all of the RCTs in hospitals, I don't have any confidence they'd work anywhere else either.
I don't think there's any real world evidence that N95 respirators work either. I mean, if they failed among all of the RCTs in hospitals, I don't have any confidence they'd work anywhere else either.
People tend to be afraid when "experts" who know better tell them lies, things like how useful wearing masks is. The experts should have led with the reality that anything but a respirator is theatre, and the people who had honest concerns could have worn respirators. Instead I saw all sorts of people who should know better shouting people down about "not caring for others" by not wearing cloth on their faces. That quickly turned into advocation for mass vaccination, for your personal protection. Resist that? well then you must be a murderous bigot who is scared of needles.
The rhetoric around all this was driven by fear, and no one makes a good decision while in fear mode. I said from the start, if you are worried about your health, get a respirator. No need to try to worry with getting properly fitted with an N-95, you can just buy one at a hardware store like painters buy to do the job, and no special fit required (not comfortable, but hey...this is your life you are saving). If you are truly concerned, gas masks were easy to buy online...again, not the most comfortable thing to wear, but if you really felt it was life or death, you should get one.
I did not see anyone with respirators or gas masks, I DID see people LOSING THEIR SHIT (a few in person) over other people not wearing a mask... seemed strange for such educated, medically up to date people (who of course asked the offender if he/she was a doctor anytime there was push back on the efficacy of a bit of cloth over their faces), and so empathetic and caring for their fellow humans they had the need to lecture. Looked a whole lot to me like people who were just PISSED that some were not conforming as demanded.
Different mortality rates, I could understand. Hell I wore a respirator out the first few weeks to the stores if I had to go out. It quickly showed even through data people were trying to make look worse, that this was not Captain Tripps. That as well as knowing probably a score of people who had no issues after getting covid, as well as having it, and I still get told how "lucky" I was or those other people are. If you do not die from an infection that has well under a 1 percent mortality rate (and those who do die have LOTS of comorbidities, extreme outliers not withstanding) it is not in any way the definition of lucky.
I don't think there's any real world evidence that N95 respirators work either. I mean, if they failed among all of the RCTs in hospitals, I don't have any confidence they'd work anywhere else either.Is that with or without eye protection?
"I was just a guard at Auschwitz."I gotta say, some of the freakouts over the airline mask mandate being struck down are amusing.
The impression I'm getting is that they know they can wear a mask anyways. Heck, wear two.
They're just upset they can't force other people to mask up.
Which has been the issue all along. Little fascists who get off on that feeling of entitlement that they can tell other people what to do.
Pretty sure the airline mask rule was driven by airline employees who didn't want to die from doing their job. Maybe they were mistaken in that belief but that doesn't make them fascists for thinking that.
See, that's a good example of how you attribute to conspiracy theories what can be explained by ordinary people doing ordinary things. To you, the rule had to be about a group wanting to control other people. Reality was people just being afraid for their health.
Ordinary people are the people who do all the horrible things.
I had everything to do with your post, but to you everything is about virtue signals."I was just a guard at Auschwitz."I gotta say, some of the freakouts over the airline mask mandate being struck down are amusing.
The impression I'm getting is that they know they can wear a mask anyways. Heck, wear two.
They're just upset they can't force other people to mask up.
Which has been the issue all along. Little fascists who get off on that feeling of entitlement that they can tell other people what to do.
Pretty sure the airline mask rule was driven by airline employees who didn't want to die from doing their job. Maybe they were mistaken in that belief but that doesn't make them fascists for thinking that.
See, that's a good example of how you attribute to conspiracy theories what can be explained by ordinary people doing ordinary things. To you, the rule had to be about a group wanting to control other people. Reality was people just being afraid for their health.
Ordinary people are the people who do all the horrible things.
And yet his point was that it was a fascist conspiracy when it wasn't. Which you conveniently sidestepped to virtue signal your stupid rhetoric which had nothing to do with the point being argued or responded to.
Don't feed Kiero's delusions that everything is some secret conspiracy. It's not helping you or him. We can disagree without it being about secret cabals trying to control the world at every step.
Nope! Because Mistwell is on the Right Side Of History, so he is ALWAYS right and good. Therefore, you are guilty of wrongthink.I had everything to do with your post, but to you everything is about virtue signals."I was just a guard at Auschwitz."I gotta say, some of the freakouts over the airline mask mandate being struck down are amusing.
The impression I'm getting is that they know they can wear a mask anyways. Heck, wear two.
They're just upset they can't force other people to mask up.
Which has been the issue all along. Little fascists who get off on that feeling of entitlement that they can tell other people what to do.
Pretty sure the airline mask rule was driven by airline employees who didn't want to die from doing their job. Maybe they were mistaken in that belief but that doesn't make them fascists for thinking that.
See, that's a good example of how you attribute to conspiracy theories what can be explained by ordinary people doing ordinary things. To you, the rule had to be about a group wanting to control other people. Reality was people just being afraid for their health.
Ordinary people are the people who do all the horrible things.
And yet his point was that it was a fascist conspiracy when it wasn't. Which you conveniently sidestepped to virtue signal your stupid rhetoric which had nothing to do with the point being argued or responded to.
Don't feed Kiero's delusions that everything is some secret conspiracy. It's not helping you or him. We can disagree without it being about secret cabals trying to control the world at every step.
I disagree with Kiero on many things, and I disagree with you on other things. But his post doesn't involve a conspiracy theory, and you're diagnosing someone with an extreme mental condition over the internet. So you're the one in the wrong, here.
Nope! Because Mistwell is on the Right Side Of History, so he is ALWAYS right and good. Therefore, you are guilty of wrongthink.I had everything to do with your post, but to you everything is about virtue signals."I was just a guard at Auschwitz."I gotta say, some of the freakouts over the airline mask mandate being struck down are amusing.
The impression I'm getting is that they know they can wear a mask anyways. Heck, wear two.
They're just upset they can't force other people to mask up.
Which has been the issue all along. Little fascists who get off on that feeling of entitlement that they can tell other people what to do.
Pretty sure the airline mask rule was driven by airline employees who didn't want to die from doing their job. Maybe they were mistaken in that belief but that doesn't make them fascists for thinking that.
See, that's a good example of how you attribute to conspiracy theories what can be explained by ordinary people doing ordinary things. To you, the rule had to be about a group wanting to control other people. Reality was people just being afraid for their health.
Ordinary people are the people who do all the horrible things.
And yet his point was that it was a fascist conspiracy when it wasn't. Which you conveniently sidestepped to virtue signal your stupid rhetoric which had nothing to do with the point being argued or responded to.
Don't feed Kiero's delusions that everything is some secret conspiracy. It's not helping you or him. We can disagree without it being about secret cabals trying to control the world at every step.
I disagree with Kiero on many things, and I disagree with you on other things. But his post doesn't involve a conspiracy theory, and you're diagnosing someone with an extreme mental condition over the internet. So you're the one in the wrong, here.
Welcome to the deplorables, Pat. Here's your complimentary red cap :)
Dude, there is nobody here, not one single other person here, who I ever say has mental issues. You're it. You do have mental health issues. You are in fact seeing conspiracies in everything. It is a real problem. You would be happier if you sought help. It's good that people tell you.
And yet his point was that it was a fascist conspiracy when it wasn't. Which you conveniently sidestepped to virtue signal your stupid rhetoric which had nothing to do with the point being argued or responded to.
Don't feed Kiero's delusions that everything is some secret conspiracy. It's not helping you or him. We can disagree without it being about secret cabals trying to control the world at every step.
Dude, there is nobody here, not one single other person here, who I ever say has mental issues. You're it. You do have mental health issues. You are in fact seeing conspiracies in everything. It is a real problem. You would be happier if you sought help. It's good that people tell you.
My mental health is as robust as my physical health, thanks for asking. The person living in a delusional world is you, you can't even see what's going on around you or the direction of travel. You think the sudden spike in fuel costs is a mistake? We're headed for the WEF's endgame, whether you can see it or not, because most of the world's governments are on board with the agenda.
It's no "conspiracy" when everything is out on the open for anyone to see. They're so arrogant they don't care that it's public.And yet his point was that it was a fascist conspiracy when it wasn't. Which you conveniently sidestepped to virtue signal your stupid rhetoric which had nothing to do with the point being argued or responded to.
Don't feed Kiero's delusions that everything is some secret conspiracy. It's not helping you or him. We can disagree without it being about secret cabals trying to control the world at every step.
No, my point was every jumped-up Karen and Trevor harbours fascist fantasies where they get to be in charge of other people. It has nothing whatsoever to do with "conspiracies".
You quoted his post, and claimed he said something about a fascist conspiracy. Which he didn't. Ignoring that and making similar accusations about other unspecified posts doesn't lend those claims much credibility.And yet his point was that it was a fascist conspiracy when it wasn't. Which you conveniently sidestepped to virtue signal your stupid rhetoric which had nothing to do with the point being argued or responded to.
Don't feed Kiero's delusions that everything is some secret conspiracy. It's not helping you or him. We can disagree without it being about secret cabals trying to control the world at every step.
No, my point was every jumped-up Karen and Trevor harbours fascist fantasies where they get to be in charge of other people. It has nothing whatsoever to do with "conspiracies".
You just claimed a massive worldwide conspiracy at the top of your post concerning oil prices (a hilarious one where you claimed most of the worlds governments agreed on a topic - which in itself is an obvious nutcase position because most of the worlds governments cannot agree on even the simplest of things much less that type of topic), only to deny you're posting about conspiracies at the bottom.
You've claimed Covid was a massive worldwide conspiracy as well.
Greetings!
You know what? All the weak, Liberal pussies that cry and shriek about "CONSPIRACY THEORIES!!!" can get fucked.
There is a fucking DEEP STATE.
There are secretive families and gigantic corporations working behind the scenes to gain ever more wealth, power, and control.
I've known all of this for some time--and the fucking Liberals condescendingly smirk for years about "Conspiracy Theories" and those crazy right wingers! Fuck them.
In college, at my university, I had several courses in the Political Science department, as Political Science was one of my specialties. I had one particular university professor that headed the class on "Politics of the Future"--and we studied dozens of different books and sources, all authored by doctors, scholars, various experts, journalists, investigators, and so on. The topic and evidence for "The Illuminati", the Bildebergers, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Affairs, various international families, all being hooked into a globalist-minded association was demonstrated conclusively.
Imagine that? Certainly, about 20 years late to the party, so to speak, but late is better than not arriving at all. Conspiracy Theories my ass. Many of them are fucking true, just give it some time to ripen and be brought forth. Many of them have, especially in more recent years. So yeah, fuck the Liberal pussies. There is a fucking Globalist Deep State, and they are working on subjugating the world and corrupting it and everyone in it.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Greetings!Oh look, another convert of the Pillow Prophet. Fucking idiot.
You know what? All the weak, Liberal pussies that cry and shriek about "CONSPIRACY THEORIES!!!" can get fucked.
There is a fucking DEEP STATE.
There are secretive families and gigantic corporations working behind the scenes to gain ever more wealth, power, and control.
I've known all of this for some time--and the fucking Liberals condescendingly smirk for years about "Conspiracy Theories" and those crazy right wingers! Fuck them.
In college, at my university, I had several courses in the Political Science department, as Political Science was one of my specialties. I had one particular university professor that headed the class on "Politics of the Future"--and we studied dozens of different books and sources, all authored by doctors, scholars, various experts, journalists, investigators, and so on. The topic and evidence for "The Illuminati", the Bildebergers, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Affairs, various international families, all being hooked into a globalist-minded association was demonstrated conclusively.
Imagine that? Certainly, about 20 years late to the party, so to speak, but late is better than not arriving at all. Conspiracy Theories my ass. Many of them are fucking true, just give it some time to ripen and be brought forth. Many of them have, especially in more recent years. So yeah, fuck the Liberal pussies. There is a fucking Globalist Deep State, and they are working on subjugating the world and corrupting it and everyone in it.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
You just claimed a massive worldwide conspiracy at the top of your post concerning oil prices (a hilarious one where you claimed most of the worlds governments agreed on a topic - which in itself is an obvious nutcase position because most of the worlds governments cannot agree on even the simplest of things much less that type of topic), only to deny you're posting about conspiracies at the bottom.
You've claimed Covid was a massive worldwide conspiracy as well.
Investigation into a twitter "doctor".And you wonder... was this something 'Doctor' Hoshino came up with, or did someone suggest it to her?
https://sarahburwick.substack.com/p/who-is-risa-hoshino?s=r
Investigation into a twitter "doctor".
https://sarahburwick.substack.com/p/who-is-risa-hoshino?s=r
You just claimed a massive worldwide conspiracy at the top of your post concerning oil prices (a hilarious one where you claimed most of the worlds governments agreed on a topic - which in itself is an obvious nutcase position because most of the worlds governments cannot agree on even the simplest of things much less that type of topic), only to deny you're posting about conspiracies at the bottom.
You've claimed Covid was a massive worldwide conspiracy as well.
For a supposed lawyer, you really don't appear to understand the definition of common words. If it's done openly, it's not a "conspiracy".
The response to covid, a relatively minor seasonal infection, was most definitely orchestrated to increase government power. If you still truly believe there was a global pandemic, a health emergency that necessitated any of this, then you're even more stupid than you appear.
I'd love to know how you explain the World Health Organisation's push for an international treaty that would give it the power to override the elected governments of every signatory nation in the event of a "pandemic", and secondly what the fuck that has to do with the World Economic Forum, who are very publicly partnering the WHO on the matter?
You just claimed a massive worldwide conspiracy at the top of your post concerning oil prices (a hilarious one where you claimed most of the worlds governments agreed on a topic - which in itself is an obvious nutcase position because most of the worlds governments cannot agree on even the simplest of things much less that type of topic), only to deny you're posting about conspiracies at the bottom.
You've claimed Covid was a massive worldwide conspiracy as well.
For a supposed lawyer, you really don't appear to understand the definition of common words. If it's done openly, it's not a "conspiracy".
The response to covid, a relatively minor seasonal infection, was most definitely orchestrated to increase government power. If you still truly believe there was a global pandemic, a health emergency that necessitated any of this, then you're even more stupid than you appear.
I'd love to know how you explain the World Health Organisation's push for an international treaty that would give it the power to override the elected governments of every signatory nation in the event of a "pandemic", and secondly what the fuck that has to do with the World Economic Forum, who are very publicly partnering the WHO on the matter?
Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
So you are irredeemably stupid and ignorant of everything that's happened in the last two years. Thanks for the confirmation.
Or, we don't trust you to accurately report, interpret, and/or evaluate your personal experiences with respect to the actualities of Covid. I'm not going to ask a prison guard about his opinion on the basic morality of the entire population of the US, either.Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
So you are irredeemably stupid and ignorant of everything that's happened in the last two years. Thanks for the confirmation.
You distrust those best able to accurately report, interpret and/or evaluate because you don't like what they are saying. That doesn't matter though, when I'm speaking the truth. I have qualified my statements with locations and dates rather than speaking generally, and I am still doubted. So, do you believe anyone? Why?Or, we don't trust you to accurately report, interpret, and/or evaluate your personal experiences with respect to the actualities of Covid. I'm not going to ask a prison guard about his opinion on the basic morality of the entire population of the US, either.Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
So you are irredeemably stupid and ignorant of everything that's happened in the last two years. Thanks for the confirmation.
You just claimed a massive worldwide conspiracy at the top of your post concerning oil prices (a hilarious one where you claimed most of the worlds governments agreed on a topic - which in itself is an obvious nutcase position because most of the worlds governments cannot agree on even the simplest of things much less that type of topic), only to deny you're posting about conspiracies at the bottom.
You've claimed Covid was a massive worldwide conspiracy as well.
For a supposed lawyer, you really don't appear to understand the definition of common words. If it's done openly, it's not a "conspiracy".
The response to covid, a relatively minor seasonal infection, was most definitely orchestrated to increase government power. If you still truly believe there was a global pandemic, a health emergency that necessitated any of this, then you're even more stupid than you appear.
I'd love to know how you explain the World Health Organisation's push for an international treaty that would give it the power to override the elected governments of every signatory nation in the event of a "pandemic", and secondly what the fuck that has to do with the World Economic Forum, who are very publicly partnering the WHO on the matter?
Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
I think the danger and risks of Covid were severely exaggerated in order to create a situation where governments were granted more power.
https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/354938/adults-estimates-covid-hospitalization-risk.aspx
We knew well enough by mid-2020 that this wasn't an exceptionally dangerous virus for the majority of adults. There was no reason for panic, and the response in America & Europe was a tremendous failure that harmed more people (and its effects are continually building) for no meaningful reduction in the harm of a virus that we had no hope of realistically stopping.
I agree with Kiero, Ratman_tf and Zelen.
Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
So you are irredeemably stupid and ignorant of everything that's happened in the last two years. Thanks for the confirmation.
First, I've seen no indication that you are the best able to do any of the above. And, far from qualifying, you have generalized your experiences many times, not the least of which is asserting that your experiences are meaningful in discussing the overall pandemic. I wouldn't trust a judge or cop to have a good idea of the average person's trustworthiness, either. You're just not self-aware enough to recognize it.You distrust those best able to accurately report, interpret and/or evaluate because you don't like what they are saying. That doesn't matter though, when I'm speaking the truth. I have qualified my statements with locations and dates rather than speaking generally, and I am still doubted. So, do you believe anyone? Why?Or, we don't trust you to accurately report, interpret, and/or evaluate your personal experiences with respect to the actualities of Covid. I'm not going to ask a prison guard about his opinion on the basic morality of the entire population of the US, either.Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
So you are irredeemably stupid and ignorant of everything that's happened in the last two years. Thanks for the confirmation.
Was there a global pandemic, or wasn't there? It's a yes or no answer. No need to write a paragraph about whether it was exaggerated by Governments, or power, or any of that shit to answer that question.Have you stopped beating your wife?
Or, we don't trust you to accurately report, interpret, and/or evaluate your personal experiences with respect to the actualities of Covid. I'm not going to ask a prison guard about his opinion on the basic morality of the entire population of the US, either.Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
So you are irredeemably stupid and ignorant of everything that's happened in the last two years. Thanks for the confirmation.
You just claimed a massive worldwide conspiracy at the top of your post concerning oil prices (a hilarious one where you claimed most of the worlds governments agreed on a topic - which in itself is an obvious nutcase position because most of the worlds governments cannot agree on even the simplest of things much less that type of topic), only to deny you're posting about conspiracies at the bottom.
You've claimed Covid was a massive worldwide conspiracy as well.
For a supposed lawyer, you really don't appear to understand the definition of common words. If it's done openly, it's not a "conspiracy".
The response to covid, a relatively minor seasonal infection, was most definitely orchestrated to increase government power. If you still truly believe there was a global pandemic, a health emergency that necessitated any of this, then you're even more stupid than you appear.
I'd love to know how you explain the World Health Organisation's push for an international treaty that would give it the power to override the elected governments of every signatory nation in the event of a "pandemic", and secondly what the fuck that has to do with the World Economic Forum, who are very publicly partnering the WHO on the matter?
Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
I think the danger and risks of Covid were severely exaggerated in order to create a situation where governments were granted more power.
https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/354938/adults-estimates-covid-hospitalization-risk.aspx
And I think that was a very "It depends on what the definition of "is" is" lawyerly type respose.
When I ask you if something is blue or not, do you respond yes or no, or do you get into the technicalities of shades of blue?
I fucking asked if you thought there was a global pandemic or not. That's it. Nothing about the dangers, nothing about whether it was exaggerated, nothing about Government power. So answer the damn question that was asked, Mr Clinton. Was there or was there not a global pandemic? Because Kiero flat out thinks there was not - no additional conversation needed by him for him to state outright there was not a global pandemic.
Was there a global pandemic, or wasn't there? It's a yes or no answer. No need to write a paragraph about whether it was exaggerated by Governments, or power, or any of that shit to answer that question.Have you stopped beating your wife?
When you ask a loaded question, you don't get to demand a yes/no answer. The nuance matters.
An anecdote is "I know X people who had covid". It's meaningless. HappyDaze works in a hospital serving a specific area. It's not broad nation-wide data, and you're correct the data is biased, but it is data.Or, we don't trust you to accurately report, interpret, and/or evaluate your personal experiences with respect to the actualities of Covid. I'm not going to ask a prison guard about his opinion on the basic morality of the entire population of the US, either.Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
So you are irredeemably stupid and ignorant of everything that's happened in the last two years. Thanks for the confirmation.
Exactly. Hospitals are a bad way to gauge the severity of the virus, because people with severe reactions are the ones who went to hospitals. How many caught the virus and didn't know? How many had mild symptoms and never went to a hospital?
It's the epitome of anecdote.
So when I described the average day census and the increasing wait times in central Florida EDs during Covid spikes, you think that's not relevant? When i discussed severity of symptoms seen amd changes to admission rates, thats not relevant either? Who would you accept that information from?First, I've seen no indication that you are the best able to do any of the above. And, far from qualifying, you have generalized your experiences many times, not the least of which is asserting that your experiences are meaningful in discussing the overall pandemic. I wouldn't trust a judge or cop to have a good idea of the average person's trustworthiness, either. You're just not self-aware enough to recognize it.You distrust those best able to accurately report, interpret and/or evaluate because you don't like what they are saying. That doesn't matter though, when I'm speaking the truth. I have qualified my statements with locations and dates rather than speaking generally, and I am still doubted. So, do you believe anyone? Why?Or, we don't trust you to accurately report, interpret, and/or evaluate your personal experiences with respect to the actualities of Covid. I'm not going to ask a prison guard about his opinion on the basic morality of the entire population of the US, either.Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
So you are irredeemably stupid and ignorant of everything that's happened in the last two years. Thanks for the confirmation.
You think that the considerably higher occurrence of viral respiratory illness in 2020-2021 and the increased hospitalizations are just coincidence? Did all of these sick people happen in previous years and just stay home?Or, we don't trust you to accurately report, interpret, and/or evaluate your personal experiences with respect to the actualities of Covid. I'm not going to ask a prison guard about his opinion on the basic morality of the entire population of the US, either.Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.Yes, I truly believe there was a global pandemic. Let's start right there. Yes there was a global pandemic.
Who here do you think agrees with you on claiming there was no global pandemic? Point them out, or they can sound off on their own.
So you are irredeemably stupid and ignorant of everything that's happened in the last two years. Thanks for the confirmation.
Exactly. Hospitals are a bad way to gauge the severity of the virus, because people with severe reactions are the ones who went to hospitals. How many caught the virus and didn't know? How many had mild symptoms and never went to a hospital?
It's the epitome of anecdote.
Was there a global pandemic, or wasn't there? It's a yes or no answer. No need to write a paragraph about whether it was exaggerated by Governments, or power, or any of that shit to answer that question.Have you stopped beating your wife?
When you ask a loaded question, you don't get to demand a yes/no answer. The nuance matters.
So yes, there was a pandemic.
Was there a global pandemic or not? Not how dangerous, just was there a global pandemic or not?Yes! It was the very definition of pandemic.
So yes, there was a pandemic.
Thank you. Glad someone has the balls to answer the question.
It's a leading question, because a lot of people have a very mistaken impression of what a global pandemic really is, and the assumptions and conclusions are highly politicized. There was a parrot fever pandemic in 1929 and 1930, that killed maybe 100 people in total, but it's commonly called a pandemic and meets most criteria, including the post 2009 definition used by the WHO. The annual flu also meets that definition. There are also a massive amounts of fear related to covid-19, driven by false information about its lethality. Clarifying your stance on those related issues is a very appropriate response, regardless of how you want to limit the conversation.Was there a global pandemic, or wasn't there? It's a yes or no answer. No need to write a paragraph about whether it was exaggerated by Governments, or power, or any of that shit to answer that question.Have you stopped beating your wife?
When you ask a loaded question, you don't get to demand a yes/no answer. The nuance matters.
It's not a question anything like leading, which is the wife beating question. There is nothing hidden in the question. No implication in the question itself. It's not loaded.
Either it was a global pandemic or it was not. Either "global pandemic" is a phrase with a meaning or it isn't. Does it or doesn't it meet the meaning of that phrase?
Yep.
So yes, there was a pandemic.
Thank you. Glad someone has the balls to answer the question.
You're welcome. I don't agree with people who think the virus never existed. But it's hard to determine if they mean the virus never existed, or that the response was disproportional to the danger. (The virus is real, but the pandemic was blown out of proportion)
So yes, there was a pandemic.
Thank you. Glad someone has the balls to answer the question.
You're welcome. I don't agree with people who think the virus never existed. But it's hard to determine if they mean the virus never existed, or that the response was disproportional to the danger. (The virus is real, but the pandemic was blown out of proportion)
Greetings!
I imagine more Covid variants will conveniently be discovered by the government, which will of course endanger more unhealthy, fat Americans.
It's pretty pathetic to review so many fat, unhealthy Americans flopping out and dying, whether from Covid or not, and then see that so many of these people have a fucking *list* of health problems as long as your leg.
So many Americans need to stay away from the goddamned cheeseburgers and chicken strips, and stop eating monstrous portions of food like fucking pigs.
That right there would make people in America much healthier and more resilient to diseases.
But our stupid fucking country has hordes of fat, obese women running around as of recently, pushing a new stupid ideology that "Healthy at any size" and everyone should love being a fat fucking pig. And if you are a man, and don't like fat women, well, you are a misogynist bigot, and full of hate! There's even a movement now to blast doctors that describe you as being fat. Fitness trainers that don't affirm and approve of you being a fucking hog beast are now also to be considered bigots and full of hate. Our country is becoming literally more insane, hedonistic, and juvenile by the fucking month.
Welcome to the Decline.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
It's a leading question, because a lot of people have a very mistaken impression of what a global pandemic really is, and the assumptions and conclusions are highly politicized. There was a parrot fever pandemic in 1929 and 1930, that killed maybe 100 people in total, but it's commonly called a pandemic and meets most criteria, including the post 2009 definition used by the WHO. The annual flu also meets that definition. There are also a massive amounts of fear related to covid-19, driven by false information about its lethality. Clarifying your stance on those related issues is a very appropriate response, regardless of how you want to limit the conversation.Was there a global pandemic, or wasn't there? It's a yes or no answer. No need to write a paragraph about whether it was exaggerated by Governments, or power, or any of that shit to answer that question.Have you stopped beating your wife?
When you ask a loaded question, you don't get to demand a yes/no answer. The nuance matters.
It's not a question anything like leading, which is the wife beating question. There is nothing hidden in the question. No implication in the question itself. It's not loaded.
Either it was a global pandemic or it was not. Either "global pandemic" is a phrase with a meaning or it isn't. Does it or doesn't it meet the meaning of that phrase?
Plus, browbeating people isn't a very good way to get people you don't have any control over to follow your rules.
Greetings!
I imagine more Covid variants will conveniently be discovered by the government, which will of course endanger more unhealthy, fat Americans.
It's pretty pathetic to review so many fat, unhealthy Americans flopping out and dying, whether from Covid or not, and then see that so many of these people have a fucking *list* of health problems as long as your leg.
So many Americans need to stay away from the goddamned cheeseburgers and chicken strips, and stop eating monstrous portions of food like fucking pigs.
That right there would make people in America much healthier and more resilient to diseases.
But our stupid fucking country has hordes of fat, obese women running around as of recently, pushing a new stupid ideology that "Healthy at any size" and everyone should love being a fat fucking pig. And if you are a man, and don't like fat women, well, you are a misogynist bigot, and full of hate! There's even a movement now to blast doctors that describe you as being fat. Fitness trainers that don't affirm and approve of you being a fucking hog beast are now also to be considered bigots and full of hate. Our country is becoming literally more insane, hedonistic, and juvenile by the fucking month.
Welcome to the Decline.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
My uncle died because of Covid. He did have health issues (though he was not overweight) but those health issues were well under control and he had years left of his life, and had lived fine with those health issues for quite a while. Covid fucked his shit up, his system went into a spiral downward, and he was never able to pull out of it. Which sucks. He was a great man, and he did nothing wrong to have died like that.
Greetings!
I imagine more Covid variants will conveniently be discovered by the government, which will of course endanger more unhealthy, fat Americans.
It's pretty pathetic to review so many fat, unhealthy Americans flopping out and dying, whether from Covid or not, and then see that so many of these people have a fucking *list* of health problems as long as your leg.
So many Americans need to stay away from the goddamned cheeseburgers and chicken strips, and stop eating monstrous portions of food like fucking pigs.
That right there would make people in America much healthier and more resilient to diseases.
But our stupid fucking country has hordes of fat, obese women running around as of recently, pushing a new stupid ideology that "Healthy at any size" and everyone should love being a fat fucking pig. And if you are a man, and don't like fat women, well, you are a misogynist bigot, and full of hate! There's even a movement now to blast doctors that describe you as being fat. Fitness trainers that don't affirm and approve of you being a fucking hog beast are now also to be considered bigots and full of hate. Our country is becoming literally more insane, hedonistic, and juvenile by the fucking month.
Welcome to the Decline.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
My uncle died because of Covid. He did have health issues (though he was not overweight) but those health issues were well under control and he had years left of his life, and had lived fine with those health issues for quite a while. Covid fucked his shit up, his system went into a spiral downward, and he was never able to pull out of it. Which sucks. He was a great man, and he did nothing wrong to have died like that.
I'm sorry for your loss.
But that doesn't prove SHARK wrong, quite the opposite.
Not answering a rhetorical question is cowardice?It's a leading question, because a lot of people have a very mistaken impression of what a global pandemic really is, and the assumptions and conclusions are highly politicized. There was a parrot fever pandemic in 1929 and 1930, that killed maybe 100 people in total, but it's commonly called a pandemic and meets most criteria, including the post 2009 definition used by the WHO. The annual flu also meets that definition. There are also a massive amounts of fear related to covid-19, driven by false information about its lethality. Clarifying your stance on those related issues is a very appropriate response, regardless of how you want to limit the conversation.Was there a global pandemic, or wasn't there? It's a yes or no answer. No need to write a paragraph about whether it was exaggerated by Governments, or power, or any of that shit to answer that question.Have you stopped beating your wife?
When you ask a loaded question, you don't get to demand a yes/no answer. The nuance matters.
It's not a question anything like leading, which is the wife beating question. There is nothing hidden in the question. No implication in the question itself. It's not loaded.
Either it was a global pandemic or it was not. Either "global pandemic" is a phrase with a meaning or it isn't. Does it or doesn't it meet the meaning of that phrase?
Plus, browbeating people isn't a very good way to get people you don't have any control over to follow your rules.
There isn't a definition of pandemic which wouldn't include this virus, if you believe the virus is real and as widespread as it was. The definition of pandemic isn't "my stance". It has an objective definition which I don't make up for you to answer a question. Use whatever definition from whatever dictionary you prefer - it meets that criteria. So you tell me what definition you prefer and then answer the question please. Stop being such a fucking coward. We all know you believe it was a pandemic so why are you so afraid of admitting that?
There's been way too much attention focused on obesity and other co-morbidities. Covid-19 is extraordinarily age-stratified. The top 5 risk factors are age, age, age, age, age, and an extra age just in case. No other factor even comes close.Greetings!
I imagine more Covid variants will conveniently be discovered by the government, which will of course endanger more unhealthy, fat Americans.
It's pretty pathetic to review so many fat, unhealthy Americans flopping out and dying, whether from Covid or not, and then see that so many of these people have a fucking *list* of health problems as long as your leg.
So many Americans need to stay away from the goddamned cheeseburgers and chicken strips, and stop eating monstrous portions of food like fucking pigs.
That right there would make people in America much healthier and more resilient to diseases.
But our stupid fucking country has hordes of fat, obese women running around as of recently, pushing a new stupid ideology that "Healthy at any size" and everyone should love being a fat fucking pig. And if you are a man, and don't like fat women, well, you are a misogynist bigot, and full of hate! There's even a movement now to blast doctors that describe you as being fat. Fitness trainers that don't affirm and approve of you being a fucking hog beast are now also to be considered bigots and full of hate. Our country is becoming literally more insane, hedonistic, and juvenile by the fucking month.
Welcome to the Decline.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
My uncle died because of Covid. He did have health issues (though he was not overweight) but those health issues were well under control and he had years left of his life, and had lived fine with those health issues for quite a while. Covid fucked his shit up, his system went into a spiral downward, and he was never able to pull out of it. Which sucks. He was a great man, and he did nothing wrong to have died like that.
I'm sorry for your loss.
But that doesn't prove SHARK wrong, quite the opposite.
SHARK was pretty heavily focused on "obese is the cause of Covid deaths". Which I also think is his way of saying "If you die from Covid it's your own damn fault for eating too many burgers and fries and not keeping your weight under control."
My uncle had no weight issues and ate a good diet. His health issues had nothing to do with gluttony or any other sin.
Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
Did looking for thr virus also cause a surge in hospitalizations from respiratory viral infections? Did these same people in previous years just not seek treatments and so remain invisible? I'm not mentioning the surges of asymptomatic idiots that clogged up resources, I'm talking about the sick that needed medical resources to survive and/or recover (or do you deny they exist too?).What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What part of it don't you understand? The *only* reason that so many cases of the coof were found *is* because people specifically looked high and low for them. If the world had been testing every person in 2018, 2019, etc. for rhinovirus, other corona strains, adenovirus, etc., they'd have found a similar number of people infected by those viruses. Likewise for flu which we don't routinely test for unless it is as a result of a sick visit.
Any wonder why there is a big news story about kids with adenovirus 41-linked hepatitis right now? Because they were specifically testing these kids, primarily to disprove that it was coronavirus or the jab causing them. They *specifically* looked for these viruses. Ad 41 causes the hershey squirts and has killed tons of kids in Africa because of it. No one gave a shit (pun intended) because it didn't fit their agenda. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Ad 41 is the definitive cause of these hep cases. There *is* proof that weakened immune systems due to 2 years of lockdowns and distancing after going to cause people to get really sick because of things that would've otherwise mildly sickened them... We could see it coming last year when all those toddlers got out of season RSV and were seriously I'll.
Did looking for thr virus also cause a surge in hospitalizations from respiratory viral infections? Did these same people in previous years just not seek treatments and so remain invisible? I'm not mentioning the surges of asymptomatic idiots that clogged up resources, I'm talking about the sick that needed medical resources to survive and/or recover (or do you deny they exist too?).What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What part of it don't you understand? The *only* reason that so many cases of the coof were found *is* because people specifically looked high and low for them. If the world had been testing every person in 2018, 2019, etc. for rhinovirus, other corona strains, adenovirus, etc., they'd have found a similar number of people infected by those viruses. Likewise for flu which we don't routinely test for unless it is as a result of a sick visit.
Any wonder why there is a big news story about kids with adenovirus 41-linked hepatitis right now? Because they were specifically testing these kids, primarily to disprove that it was coronavirus or the jab causing them. They *specifically* looked for these viruses. Ad 41 causes the hershey squirts and has killed tons of kids in Africa because of it. No one gave a shit (pun intended) because it didn't fit their agenda. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Ad 41 is the definitive cause of these hep cases. There *is* proof that weakened immune systems due to 2 years of lockdowns and distancing after going to cause people to get really sick because of things that would've otherwise mildly sickened them... We could see it coming last year when all those toddlers got out of season RSV and were seriously I'll.
I can tell you from the front lines of this, you are wrong. How much time did you spend at hospitals over the past decade? In central Florida, 2020 & 2021 showed a far higher incidence of severe viral respiratory illness and admissions for the same than in the past decade. I saw it firsthand and, I saw the data afterward. Your denials of it make you look like a fool.Did looking for thr virus also cause a surge in hospitalizations from respiratory viral infections? Did these same people in previous years just not seek treatments and so remain invisible? I'm not mentioning the surges of asymptomatic idiots that clogged up resources, I'm talking about the sick that needed medical resources to survive and/or recover (or do you deny they exist too?).What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What part of it don't you understand? The *only* reason that so many cases of the coof were found *is* because people specifically looked high and low for them. If the world had been testing every person in 2018, 2019, etc. for rhinovirus, other corona strains, adenovirus, etc., they'd have found a similar number of people infected by those viruses. Likewise for flu which we don't routinely test for unless it is as a result of a sick visit.
Any wonder why there is a big news story about kids with adenovirus 41-linked hepatitis right now? Because they were specifically testing these kids, primarily to disprove that it was coronavirus or the jab causing them. They *specifically* looked for these viruses. Ad 41 causes the hershey squirts and has killed tons of kids in Africa because of it. No one gave a shit (pun intended) because it didn't fit their agenda. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Ad 41 is the definitive cause of these hep cases. There *is* proof that weakened immune systems due to 2 years of lockdowns and distancing after going to cause people to get really sick because of things that would've otherwise mildly sickened them... We could see it coming last year when all those toddlers got out of season RSV and were seriously I'll.
They were always there - and at about the same rate as in prior years - airborne viral infections are not ever going to be stopped...
I can tell you from the front lines of this, you are wrong. How much time did you spend at hospitals over the past decade? In central Florida, 2020 & 2021 showed a far higher incidence of severe viral respiratory illness and admissions for the same than in the past decade. I saw it firsthand and, I saw the data afterward. Your denials of it make you look like a fool.Did looking for thr virus also cause a surge in hospitalizations from respiratory viral infections? Did these same people in previous years just not seek treatments and so remain invisible? I'm not mentioning the surges of asymptomatic idiots that clogged up resources, I'm talking about the sick that needed medical resources to survive and/or recover (or do you deny they exist too?).What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What part of it don't you understand? The *only* reason that so many cases of the coof were found *is* because people specifically looked high and low for them. If the world had been testing every person in 2018, 2019, etc. for rhinovirus, other corona strains, adenovirus, etc., they'd have found a similar number of people infected by those viruses. Likewise for flu which we don't routinely test for unless it is as a result of a sick visit.
Any wonder why there is a big news story about kids with adenovirus 41-linked hepatitis right now? Because they were specifically testing these kids, primarily to disprove that it was coronavirus or the jab causing them. They *specifically* looked for these viruses. Ad 41 causes the hershey squirts and has killed tons of kids in Africa because of it. No one gave a shit (pun intended) because it didn't fit their agenda. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Ad 41 is the definitive cause of these hep cases. There *is* proof that weakened immune systems due to 2 years of lockdowns and distancing after going to cause people to get really sick because of things that would've otherwise mildly sickened them... We could see it coming last year when all those toddlers got out of season RSV and were seriously I'll.
They were always there - and at about the same rate as in prior years - airborne viral infections are not ever going to be stopped...
Dumbass, I'm not talking about the ones that show up at the ED and get sent home because they weren't significantly sick. I specified those that were hospitalized for severe viral respiratory illness. This means people that went to the ED and were admitted because physicians determined that they were in respiratory distress (or failure) or were sufficiently at risk of developing it. This is done by assessing signs and symptoms, not merely because a patient is afraid of Covid.I can tell you from the front lines of this, you are wrong. How much time did you spend at hospitals over the past decade? In central Florida, 2020 & 2021 showed a far higher incidence of severe viral respiratory illness and admissions for the same than in the past decade. I saw it firsthand and, I saw the data afterward. Your denials of it make you look like a fool.Did looking for thr virus also cause a surge in hospitalizations from respiratory viral infections? Did these same people in previous years just not seek treatments and so remain invisible? I'm not mentioning the surges of asymptomatic idiots that clogged up resources, I'm talking about the sick that needed medical resources to survive and/or recover (or do you deny they exist too?).What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What part of it don't you understand? The *only* reason that so many cases of the coof were found *is* because people specifically looked high and low for them. If the world had been testing every person in 2018, 2019, etc. for rhinovirus, other corona strains, adenovirus, etc., they'd have found a similar number of people infected by those viruses. Likewise for flu which we don't routinely test for unless it is as a result of a sick visit.
Any wonder why there is a big news story about kids with adenovirus 41-linked hepatitis right now? Because they were specifically testing these kids, primarily to disprove that it was coronavirus or the jab causing them. They *specifically* looked for these viruses. Ad 41 causes the hershey squirts and has killed tons of kids in Africa because of it. No one gave a shit (pun intended) because it didn't fit their agenda. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Ad 41 is the definitive cause of these hep cases. There *is* proof that weakened immune systems due to 2 years of lockdowns and distancing after going to cause people to get really sick because of things that would've otherwise mildly sickened them... We could see it coming last year when all those toddlers got out of season RSV and were seriously I'll.
They were always there - and at about the same rate as in prior years - airborne viral infections are not ever going to be stopped...
You completely misunderstand the reason for this. It's not because there were more people who were sicker. It's because of human nature. People who previously would suck it up and ride out illness (severe or not) at home were incentivized to go to the ER because of the unknown. "What if it's covid?" "They are saying that COVID is killing people. I saw that Chinese guy keel over in the street on TikTok." "I should go to the hospital, just to be sure." There were a lot more people going and seeking medical aid out of (irrational) fear. In the past those people (many of whom were already on death's door anyway) would have died elsewhere with no details on their cause of death.
Oh great, another person with the Kiero disease.What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What part of it don't you understand? The *only* reason that so many cases of the coof were found *is* because people specifically looked high and low for them. If the world had been testing every person in 2018, 2019, etc. for rhinovirus, other corona strains, adenovirus, etc., they'd have found a similar number of people infected by those viruses. Likewise for flu which we don't routinely test for unless it is as a result of a sick visit.
Any wonder why there is a big news story about kids with adenovirus 41-linked hepatitis right now? Because they were specifically testing these kids, primarily to disprove that it was coronavirus or the jab causing them. They *specifically* looked for these viruses. Ad 41 causes the hershey squirts and has killed tons of kids in Africa because of it. No one gave a shit (pun intended) because it didn't fit their agenda. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Ad 41 is the definitive cause of these hep cases. There *is* proof that weakened immune systems due to 2 years of lockdowns and distancing after going to cause people to get really sick because of things that would've otherwise mildly sickened them... We could see it coming last year when all those toddlers got out of season RSV and were seriously I'll.
Oh great, another person with the Kiero disease.What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What part of it don't you understand? The *only* reason that so many cases of the coof were found *is* because people specifically looked high and low for them. If the world had been testing every person in 2018, 2019, etc. for rhinovirus, other corona strains, adenovirus, etc., they'd have found a similar number of people infected by those viruses. Likewise for flu which we don't routinely test for unless it is as a result of a sick visit.
Any wonder why there is a big news story about kids with adenovirus 41-linked hepatitis right now? Because they were specifically testing these kids, primarily to disprove that it was coronavirus or the jab causing them. They *specifically* looked for these viruses. Ad 41 causes the hershey squirts and has killed tons of kids in Africa because of it. No one gave a shit (pun intended) because it didn't fit their agenda. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Ad 41 is the definitive cause of these hep cases. There *is* proof that weakened immune systems due to 2 years of lockdowns and distancing after going to cause people to get really sick because of things that would've otherwise mildly sickened them... We could see it coming last year when all those toddlers got out of season RSV and were seriously I'll.
Look, most covid-19 infections, as well as the other ones diseases mentioned, aren't reported, and among those that are, most are diagnosed based on clinical symptoms rather than tests. We know novel coronavirus displaced the flu, and later the cold. So infections may be comparable. There's also a serious rebound effect from the (6?)14 days to stop the spread, because social isolation has helped population-wide immunity in a number of common endemic diseases to drop enough to cause outbreaks or even epidemics. Those things are true.
But this was a pandemic. That doesn't mean you have to agree with the insane narrative that's been pushed. But it's still a pandemic.
But this was a pandemic. That doesn't mean you have to agree with the insane narrative that's been pushed. But it's still a pandemic.
Fuck off.But this was a pandemic. That doesn't mean you have to agree with the insane narrative that's been pushed. But it's still a pandemic.
Thank you.
No, that's the difference between a pandemic and endemic diseases. Those diseases are endemic. Covid-19 was a pandemic, which has now become endemic.Oh great, another person with the Kiero disease.What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What part of it don't you understand? The *only* reason that so many cases of the coof were found *is* because people specifically looked high and low for them. If the world had been testing every person in 2018, 2019, etc. for rhinovirus, other corona strains, adenovirus, etc., they'd have found a similar number of people infected by those viruses. Likewise for flu which we don't routinely test for unless it is as a result of a sick visit.
Any wonder why there is a big news story about kids with adenovirus 41-linked hepatitis right now? Because they were specifically testing these kids, primarily to disprove that it was coronavirus or the jab causing them. They *specifically* looked for these viruses. Ad 41 causes the hershey squirts and has killed tons of kids in Africa because of it. No one gave a shit (pun intended) because it didn't fit their agenda. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Ad 41 is the definitive cause of these hep cases. There *is* proof that weakened immune systems due to 2 years of lockdowns and distancing after going to cause people to get really sick because of things that would've otherwise mildly sickened them... We could see it coming last year when all those toddlers got out of season RSV and were seriously I'll.
Look, most covid-19 infections, as well as the other ones diseases mentioned, aren't reported, and among those that are, most are diagnosed based on clinical symptoms rather than tests. We know novel coronavirus displaced the flu, and later the cold. So infections may be comparable. There's also a serious rebound effect from the (6?)14 days to stop the spread, because social isolation has helped population-wide immunity in a number of common endemic diseases to drop enough to cause outbreaks or even epidemics. Those things are true.
But this was a pandemic. That doesn't mean you have to agree with the insane narrative that's been pushed. But it's still a pandemic.
By the definition of pandemic, we've been in pandemics of other diseases for millenia. *Because* most infections are never reported, we can surmise that in any given year, untold numbers of people are infected with viral respiratory infections. COVID 19 is no different in that respect. It just so happens to have been a strain that was more virulent than usual. What *would* have happened if governments had not have overreacted would have been that humans would still circulate viruses, resulting in COVID being out-competed - most likely by rhinovirus but perhaps adenovirus. Instead, lockdowns and social distancing in the face of an airborne respiratory virus pretty well guaranteed that it would continue to be predominant.
A few years ago we were in a swine flu pandemic that was stopped cold because we didn't panic and lockdown. A top end estimate of over 1 billion infected in the 18 months it lasted with no official county of the number dead.
One has to ask what would have happened if we did nothing the past two years if no governments has overreacted. Which asks the question - why did they overreact in such a concerted fashion unless certain individuals knew how the virus got into the wild. We've got the smoking gun of info that Ecohealth Alliance engaged in GoF research at Wuhan under a NIAID contract , in direct violation of US law. Fauci, Daszak, and their comrades all need to have a fair trial followed by a fair public execution.
OK. I take it back that literally nobody here agrees with Kiero. 3cat, who never used to be this crazy, also agrees with him.
OK. I take it back that literally nobody here agrees with Kiero. 3cat, who never used to be this crazy, also agrees with him.
WUT? From my reading he agrees it was a pandemic. But then again you're not known for honest interpretations of others...
No, that's the difference between a pandemic and endemic diseases. Those diseases are endemic. Covid-19 was a pandemic, which has now become endemic.Oh great, another person with the Kiero disease.What Kiero-world definition of pandemic are you using in your atrempt to deny reality? Serious question.Make it clear to everyone where you stand: You think there was not a global pandemic, right? I mean regardless of Government motives and exaggerations and danger levels and power grabs and stuff (all which you also think happened) you think there was no global pandemic, right?
I've made it very clear all the way along this discussion: no there was no pandemic.
Coronaviruses are real, there are several thousand strains of them we're aware of. Mostly, they're trivial. There was a nasty strain around in spring 2020. It didn't merit any of the measures innovated in the last 2 years. That non-existent emergency was cynically used as a means to expand government power by some very unscrupulous people. Dumbasses like you have gone along with it because you believed the ever-shifting tissue of lies they told to justify it.
What part of it don't you understand? The *only* reason that so many cases of the coof were found *is* because people specifically looked high and low for them. If the world had been testing every person in 2018, 2019, etc. for rhinovirus, other corona strains, adenovirus, etc., they'd have found a similar number of people infected by those viruses. Likewise for flu which we don't routinely test for unless it is as a result of a sick visit.
Any wonder why there is a big news story about kids with adenovirus 41-linked hepatitis right now? Because they were specifically testing these kids, primarily to disprove that it was coronavirus or the jab causing them. They *specifically* looked for these viruses. Ad 41 causes the hershey squirts and has killed tons of kids in Africa because of it. No one gave a shit (pun intended) because it didn't fit their agenda. There isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Ad 41 is the definitive cause of these hep cases. There *is* proof that weakened immune systems due to 2 years of lockdowns and distancing after going to cause people to get really sick because of things that would've otherwise mildly sickened them... We could see it coming last year when all those toddlers got out of season RSV and were seriously I'll.
Look, most covid-19 infections, as well as the other ones diseases mentioned, aren't reported, and among those that are, most are diagnosed based on clinical symptoms rather than tests. We know novel coronavirus displaced the flu, and later the cold. So infections may be comparable. There's also a serious rebound effect from the (6?)14 days to stop the spread, because social isolation has helped population-wide immunity in a number of common endemic diseases to drop enough to cause outbreaks or even epidemics. Those things are true.
But this was a pandemic. That doesn't mean you have to agree with the insane narrative that's been pushed. But it's still a pandemic.
By the definition of pandemic, we've been in pandemics of other diseases for millenia. *Because* most infections are never reported, we can surmise that in any given year, untold numbers of people are infected with viral respiratory infections. COVID 19 is no different in that respect. It just so happens to have been a strain that was more virulent than usual. What *would* have happened if governments had not have overreacted would have been that humans would still circulate viruses, resulting in COVID being out-competed - most likely by rhinovirus but perhaps adenovirus. Instead, lockdowns and social distancing in the face of an airborne respiratory virus pretty well guaranteed that it would continue to be predominant.
A few years ago we were in a swine flu pandemic that was stopped cold because we didn't panic and lockdown. A top end estimate of over 1 billion infected in the 18 months it lasted with no official county of the number dead.
One has to ask what would have happened if we did nothing the past two years if no governments has overreacted. Which asks the question - why did they overreact in such a concerted fashion unless certain individuals knew how the virus got into the wild. We've got the smoking gun of info that Ecohealth Alliance engaged in GoF research at Wuhan under a NIAID contract , in direct violation of US law. Fauci, Daszak, and their comrades all need to have a fair trial followed by a fair public execution.
An pandemic is something new, and the novelty means there's no or very limited natural immunity. As a result, it spreads across a population quickly, until herd immunity is achieved. At which point, it becomes endemic.
Endemic diseases never really go away. They're continually with us. But because most people have immunity to some degree, the diseases have limited effect. Generally, we'll see endemic diseases flare into outbreaks or even epidemics when immunity drops, typically due to population turnover (a new generation), at least until they've infected most of the unimmune, and then lapse back into quiescence.
The other cause of these outbreaks in endemic diseases is minor variations that bypass immunity to some degree, allowing the disease to spread again. But this rarely flares back up into a full pandemic. There's a reason most of the worse diseases in history are zoonotic; there is generally no background immunity against a disease that jumped from another species, in contrast to the background immunity that's always present for minor variations of existing human diseases, like the flu. That's why zoonotic pandemics burn through the human population like wildfire, because there's no degree of natural cross-immunity stopping them.
No, stupid. Every year we have both endemic viruses and new pandemics of other viruses. Most of them are silent because they are asymptomatic. Occasionally they are symptomatic, and sometimes they are very virulent. I guarantee that if you were to look at any given person, you'd find about a half dozen viruses infecting them. That's just the way viruses do what they do.No, you drooling moron with barely enough brainpower to sustain your autonomic functions, we do not have yearly pandemics. As I described, we have endemic diseases that occasionally flare up, when they're exposed to a population with a lower level of immunity (like the next generation), or when they morph into a new variant that only provides partial cross-immunity (like the flu). That's what "endemic" means. They constantly exist within the population, but they have little or no effect most of the time because people have a high degree of immunity, and only flare up when they find a pocket of people with lower immunity. Pandemics only occur when a new disease arrives that almost entirely bypasses any natural cross-immunity, which generally means they've jumped from a different species. Which is rare.
The question remains: is any given pandemic of airborne respiratory viruses of such consequence that it requires lockdowns and masks? The answer is decidedly no. It didn't stop the 1918 flu, it didn't stop Hong Kong Flu, it didn't stop MERS or SARS1, and it didn't stop this.
Ebola? Yeah, given it kills at least 50% of those infected. COVID with its < 1% not so much.
Again - the only reason COVID was noticed as killing people was because people were specifically looking for it - no one has ever bothered paying attention in the past when the dying were in nursing homes or hospices, or died at home - or died of a "some viral" pneumonia at age 80 in hospital.
No, stupid. Every year we have both endemic viruses and new pandemics of other viruses. Most of them are silent because they are asymptomatic. Occasionally they are symptomatic, and sometimes they are very virulent. I guarantee that if you were to look at any given person, you'd find about a half dozen viruses infecting them. That's just the way viruses do what they do.No, you drooling moron with barely enough brainpower to sustain your autonomic functions, we do not have yearly pandemics. As I described, we have endemic diseases that occasionally flare up, when they're exposed to a population with a lower level of immunity (like the next generation), or when they morph into a new variant that only provides partial cross-immunity (like the flu). That's what "endemic" means. They constantly exist within the population, but they have little or no effect most of the time because people have a high degree of immunity, and only flare up when they find a pocket of people with lower immunity. Pandemics only occur when a new disease arrives that almost entirely bypasses any natural cross-immunity, which generally means they've jumped from a different species. Which is rare.
The question remains: is any given pandemic of airborne respiratory viruses of such consequence that it requires lockdowns and masks? The answer is decidedly no. It didn't stop the 1918 flu, it didn't stop Hong Kong Flu, it didn't stop MERS or SARS1, and it didn't stop this.
Ebola? Yeah, given it kills at least 50% of those infected. COVID with its < 1% not so much.
Again - the only reason COVID was noticed as killing people was because people were specifically looking for it - no one has ever bothered paying attention in the past when the dying were in nursing homes or hospices, or died at home - or died of a "some viral" pneumonia at age 80 in hospital.
If you think the average person is infected with a half a dozen viruses, you've underestimated the real number by a many orders of magnitude. We are host to gut flora, skin flora, and an absurd number of other flora, including viruses. Viruses are even in our DNA. But if they're asymptomatic, it's not a pandemic. That's not the case with covid-19, which did cause a spike of deaths among the elderly. Also, we saw classic signs of viral displacement. It replaced the flu, and later the cold.
Yes, there could conceivably be an infectious respiratory disease that's severe enough to require extreme measures. But covid-19 wasn't it, highly infectious respiratory diseases are almost impossible to stop, and the government has demonstrated they're completely incompetent when it comes to responding to pandemics, anyway.
Ebola isn't a significant threat because it's too deadly. It kills people before they can infect others, and the short incubation and gory results means people take severe actions to isolate the infected.
The *only* way you do not say or do anything and then suddenly, in concert with other nations, act as if it's like Ebola is if you have a vested interest in hiding the origin and/or formulating a cover story...You say that is the "*only way*" but there have many explanations given for the responses taken, But, by all means, keep your tinfoil hat in place--go ahead and use some long carpentry staples to make sure it really stays put--you won't damage anything that's serving any purpose.
For such an educated person, you're extremely lacking in the critical thinking skills department.For such a critical thinker, you're extremely lacking in the basic knowledge department.
There are untold numbers of pandemics - they don't need to be symptomatic to be pandemics. Every year, viruses and bacteria mutate, causing widespread infections of people all across the planet. Most of them are don't cares because they cause no symptoms - which is why no one actively tracks them. In some cases, people start paying attention but don't equate localized symptomatic infections to actually being widespread. In rarer instances, people get sick enough to seek out medical care in sufficient numbers that people pay cost attention.
In the case of COVID it was infecting people in large numbers in China as far back as August or September of 2019. Ecohealth Alliance (and hence NIAID) knew about it and did nothing until early 2020. Then they overreacted. The *only* way you do not say or do anything and then suddenly, in concert with other nations, act as if it's like Ebola is if you have a vested interest in hiding the origin and/or formulating a cover story...
For such an educated person, you're extremely lacking in the critical thinking skills department.For such a critical thinker, you're extremely lacking in the basic knowledge department.
There are untold numbers of pandemics - they don't need to be symptomatic to be pandemics. Every year, viruses and bacteria mutate, causing widespread infections of people all across the planet. Most of them are don't cares because they cause no symptoms - which is why no one actively tracks them. In some cases, people start paying attention but don't equate localized symptomatic infections to actually being widespread. In rarer instances, people get sick enough to seek out medical care in sufficient numbers that people pay cost attention.
In the case of COVID it was infecting people in large numbers in China as far back as August or September of 2019. Ecohealth Alliance (and hence NIAID) knew about it and did nothing until early 2020. Then they overreacted. The *only* way you do not say or do anything and then suddenly, in concert with other nations, act as if it's like Ebola is if you have a vested interest in hiding the origin and/or formulating a cover story...
The normal background noise of viruses and bacteria mutating does not cause pandemics. It causes minor outbreaks, and perhaps some very minor localized epidemics, but mostly what it does is covered by the word "endemic". Continual waves of infection and reinfection, as immunity wanes over time, in localized areas, or as new generations grow up, or as minor variations bypass a small bit of the natural immunity against the original strain, is the nature of endemicity. A pandemic can only really occur from a novel disease, to which humanity has no or nearly no immunity. Otherwise, it won't spread across the entire world in a very rapid time frame. That's why sars2 spread so quickly, because while there was some cross-immunity from sars1, it wasn't enough. The diseases that cause pandemics are almost all zoonotic, and zoonotic diseases are rare.
You could make an argument that there are invisible pandemics, which are asymptomatic or have symptoms that aren't readily distinguishable from seasonal diseases, and which don't cause any other side effects like a jump in all-cause mortality. But they'd still be pretty rare, because the basic requirement of a pandemic is that there is no real natural immunity, and that requires something extraordinary like a species jump. And it's not the strongest argument even with that limitation, because pandemic was coined to refer to diseases that were noticed based on clinical symptoms, not gene sequencing. A disease or syndrome is distinct from the bacteria, virus, fungus, genetic defect, or whatever causes it, and they don't map 1:1. The common cold is the classic example, a set of widely recognized symptoms that can be caused by a bewildering variety of microbes. Expanding the term might make sense, might not. But it's not what people typically mean when they use the word.
And no, there are other explanations for not doing anything and then overreacting. One is simply reacting to publicity. If nobody's heard of something, the easiest thing to do is ignore it. But if it's starting to make the press, then it behooves bureaucrats to overreact, because we never punish bureaucrats or politicians for excess. Cf. Andrew "I killed all your grannies but all anybody cares about is I'm a little handsy" Cuomo.
You do not need to be symptomatic to have no immunity to something.What does this have to do with anything? Are you under the impression I said the opposite? Because I didn't.
As to the notion of publicity - sure, after a certain point that's probably true, but we have incontrovertible proof that there was widespread infection in Wuhan in the fall of 2019, but that knowledge was surpressed by Chinese authorities even as they closed down flights inside the country. Western researchers in Wuhan did *nothing* beyond alerting their superiors - who did nothing until they *had* to suffer all the Chinese slave labor flew back to Italy to work in the fashion sweatshops, bringing infection with them.Yes, China suppressed all information on a potential pandemic. Yes, NIAID clearly wanted to distract attention away from their involvement. Yes, that includes Fauci. Yes, it's clear some of the researchers lied through their teeth to protect themselves, and that influenced public policy because of, among other things, the article in the Lancet written by Daszak and others was very influential. There's also an email trail of them actively trying to discredit and deflect. Never said anything about that.
It doesn't have to be a conspiracy by malice to be a conspiracy, given the Asian mindset for not wanting to be the one upsetting the group harmony by calling attention to piss poor lab safety causing a lab escape of a naturally occurring pathogen. *That* is the most likely scenario, followed closely by a lab escape of a pathogen that underwent GoF testing by Ecohealth paid by the NIH in contravention of US law, resulting in Fauci, Dasczak, and others having a vested interest in drawing attention away from their complicity. Third most likely is a lab escape of a GoF tested virus coopted by PLA scientists for biowarfare research.
Bayesian analysis of Bangladesh study concludes masks have no effect: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360320982_The_Bangladesh_Mask_study_a_Bayesian_perspective
Negative correlation between mask usage and Covid-19 outcomes: https://www.cureus.com/articles/93826-correlation-between-mask-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe
Bayesian analysis of Bangladesh study concludes masks have no effect: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360320982_The_Bangladesh_Mask_study_a_Bayesian_perspective
Negative correlation between mask usage and Covid-19 outcomes: https://www.cureus.com/articles/93826-correlation-between-mask-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe
Not surprised. There was never strong evidence that the public wearing masks would be effective. In fact, that was the conclusion of all previous studies pre-covid. But the then St. Fauci had a divine revelation (a road to Wuhan experience, one might say) that the general public wearing cloth or surgical masks would be effective.
To put it bluntly, masking mandates were a ho-ax. But the silver lining is that the masqubators still wearing them (especially outside, alone in their car, or for the walk form the restaurant door to their table [sitting a table puts you below the covid layer]) let me know who the dumb-asses/midwits are.
Bayesian analysis of Bangladesh study concludes masks have no effect: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360320982_The_Bangladesh_Mask_study_a_Bayesian_perspective
Negative correlation between mask usage and Covid-19 outcomes: https://www.cureus.com/articles/93826-correlation-between-mask-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe
Not surprised. There was never strong evidence that the public wearing masks would be effective. In fact, that was the conclusion of all previous studies pre-covid. But the then St. Fauci had a divine revelation (a road to Wuhan experience, one might say) that the general public wearing cloth or surgical masks would be effective.
To put it bluntly, masking mandates were a ho-ax. But the silver lining is that the masqubators still wearing them (especially outside, alone in their car, or for the walk form the restaurant door to their table [sitting a table puts you below the covid layer]) let me know who the dumb-asses/midwits are.
Don't attribute to stupid that which can be attributed to lazy. Sometimes, it's just easier to leave the damn thing off than take it off (which requires care to not touch the outside) and then put it back on again 5 mins later for something (which requires care to not touch the outside).
Bayesian analysis of Bangladesh study concludes masks have no effect: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360320982_The_Bangladesh_Mask_study_a_Bayesian_perspective
Negative correlation between mask usage and Covid-19 outcomes: https://www.cureus.com/articles/93826-correlation-between-mask-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe
Not surprised. There was never strong evidence that the public wearing masks would be effective. In fact, that was the conclusion of all previous studies pre-covid. But the then St. Fauci had a divine revelation (a road to Wuhan experience, one might say) that the general public wearing cloth or surgical masks would be effective.
To put it bluntly, masking mandates were a ho-ax. But the silver lining is that the masqubators still wearing them (especially outside, alone in their car, or for the walk form the restaurant door to their table [sitting a table puts you below the covid layer]) let me know who the dumb-asses/midwits are.
Don't attribute to stupid that which can be attributed to lazy. Sometimes, it's just easier to leave the damn thing off than take it off (which requires care to not touch the outside) and then put it back on again 5 mins later for something (which requires care to not touch the outside).
Wearing a mask (other than an N95 or other respirator) in the first place puts them in the dumb-ass/midwit category. Even the Communist News Network's chief medical propagandist has declared that, "Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations".
https://reason.com/2021/12/21/leana-wen-cloth-mask-facial-decorations-covid-cdc-guidance/
I was out at lunch and a family of four came in. The only one wearing a (cloth) mask was the 6 year-old (i.e., the one with the lowest risk of dying from covid). The real irony here is that the child is at materially more risk from dying in an auto accident that from covid.
Bayesian analysis of Bangladesh study concludes masks have no effect: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360320982_The_Bangladesh_Mask_study_a_Bayesian_perspective
Negative correlation between mask usage and Covid-19 outcomes: https://www.cureus.com/articles/93826-correlation-between-mask-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe
Not surprised. There was never strong evidence that the public wearing masks would be effective. In fact, that was the conclusion of all previous studies pre-covid. But the then St. Fauci had a divine revelation (a road to Wuhan experience, one might say) that the general public wearing cloth or surgical masks would be effective.
To put it bluntly, masking mandates were a ho-ax. But the silver lining is that the masqubators still wearing them (especially outside, alone in their car, or for the walk form the restaurant door to their table [sitting a table puts you below the covid layer]) let me know who the dumb-asses/midwits are.
Don't attribute to stupid that which can be attributed to lazy. Sometimes, it's just easier to leave the damn thing off than take it off (which requires care to not touch the outside) and then put it back on again 5 mins later for something (which requires care to not touch the outside).
Wearing a mask (other than an N95 or other respirator) in the first place puts them in the dumb-ass/midwit category. Even the Communist News Network's chief medical propagandist has declared that, "Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations".
https://reason.com/2021/12/21/leana-wen-cloth-mask-facial-decorations-covid-cdc-guidance/
I was out at lunch and a family of four came in. The only one wearing a (cloth) mask was the 6 year-old (i.e., the one with the lowest risk of dying from covid). The real irony here is that the child is at materially more risk from dying in an auto accident that from covid.
Well for me, it's been N95 for a long time. Sometimes KN95, but usually full N95. And I fit them properly. And I don't touch the outside. And I replace them often. Which doesn't make me invulnerable, but I do think they help.
Are you adding eye protection?Bayesian analysis of Bangladesh study concludes masks have no effect: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360320982_The_Bangladesh_Mask_study_a_Bayesian_perspective
Negative correlation between mask usage and Covid-19 outcomes: https://www.cureus.com/articles/93826-correlation-between-mask-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe
Not surprised. There was never strong evidence that the public wearing masks would be effective. In fact, that was the conclusion of all previous studies pre-covid. But the then St. Fauci had a divine revelation (a road to Wuhan experience, one might say) that the general public wearing cloth or surgical masks would be effective.
To put it bluntly, masking mandates were a ho-ax. But the silver lining is that the masqubators still wearing them (especially outside, alone in their car, or for the walk form the restaurant door to their table [sitting a table puts you below the covid layer]) let me know who the dumb-asses/midwits are.
Don't attribute to stupid that which can be attributed to lazy. Sometimes, it's just easier to leave the damn thing off than take it off (which requires care to not touch the outside) and then put it back on again 5 mins later for something (which requires care to not touch the outside).
Wearing a mask (other than an N95 or other respirator) in the first place puts them in the dumb-ass/midwit category. Even the Communist News Network's chief medical propagandist has declared that, "Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations".
https://reason.com/2021/12/21/leana-wen-cloth-mask-facial-decorations-covid-cdc-guidance/
I was out at lunch and a family of four came in. The only one wearing a (cloth) mask was the 6 year-old (i.e., the one with the lowest risk of dying from covid). The real irony here is that the child is at materially more risk from dying in an auto accident that from covid.
Well for me, it's been N95 for a long time. Sometimes KN95, but usually full N95. And I fit them properly. And I don't touch the outside. And I replace them often. Which doesn't make me invulnerable, but I do think they help.
Covid can crawl up your butt if you use a public toilet.Well for me, it's been N95 for a long time. Sometimes KN95, but usually full N95. And I fit them properly. And I don't touch the outside. And I replace them often. Which doesn't make me invulnerable, but I do think they help.Are you adding eye protection?
You don't wear ass protection?Covid can crawl up your butt if you use a public toilet.Well for me, it's been N95 for a long time. Sometimes KN95, but usually full N95. And I fit them properly. And I don't touch the outside. And I replace them often. Which doesn't make me invulnerable, but I do think they help.Are you adding eye protection?
Bayesian analysis of Bangladesh study concludes masks have no effect: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360320982_The_Bangladesh_Mask_study_a_Bayesian_perspective
Negative correlation between mask usage and Covid-19 outcomes: https://www.cureus.com/articles/93826-correlation-between-mask-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe
Not surprised. There was never strong evidence that the public wearing masks would be effective. In fact, that was the conclusion of all previous studies pre-covid. But the then St. Fauci had a divine revelation (a road to Wuhan experience, one might say) that the general public wearing cloth or surgical masks would be effective.
To put it bluntly, masking mandates were a ho-ax. But the silver lining is that the masqubators still wearing them (especially outside, alone in their car, or for the walk form the restaurant door to their table [sitting a table puts you below the covid layer]) let me know who the dumb-asses/midwits are.
Don't attribute to stupid that which can be attributed to lazy. Sometimes, it's just easier to leave the damn thing off than take it off (which requires care to not touch the outside) and then put it back on again 5 mins later for something (which requires care to not touch the outside).
Wearing a mask (other than an N95 or other respirator) in the first place puts them in the dumb-ass/midwit category. Even the Communist News Network's chief medical propagandist has declared that, "Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations".
https://reason.com/2021/12/21/leana-wen-cloth-mask-facial-decorations-covid-cdc-guidance/
I was out at lunch and a family of four came in. The only one wearing a (cloth) mask was the 6 year-old (i.e., the one with the lowest risk of dying from covid). The real irony here is that the child is at materially more risk from dying in an auto accident that from covid.
Well for me, it's been N95 for a long time. Sometimes KN95, but usually full N95. And I fit them properly. And I don't touch the outside. And I replace them often. Which doesn't make me invulnerable, but I do think they help.
For Mistwell, it would have to be full body...You don't wear ass protection?Covid can crawl up your butt if you use a public toilet.Well for me, it's been N95 for a long time. Sometimes KN95, but usually full N95. And I fit them properly. And I don't touch the outside. And I replace them often. Which doesn't make me invulnerable, but I do think they help.Are you adding eye protection?
Are you adding eye protection?Bayesian analysis of Bangladesh study concludes masks have no effect: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360320982_The_Bangladesh_Mask_study_a_Bayesian_perspective
Negative correlation between mask usage and Covid-19 outcomes: https://www.cureus.com/articles/93826-correlation-between-mask-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe
Not surprised. There was never strong evidence that the public wearing masks would be effective. In fact, that was the conclusion of all previous studies pre-covid. But the then St. Fauci had a divine revelation (a road to Wuhan experience, one might say) that the general public wearing cloth or surgical masks would be effective.
To put it bluntly, masking mandates were a ho-ax. But the silver lining is that the masqubators still wearing them (especially outside, alone in their car, or for the walk form the restaurant door to their table [sitting a table puts you below the covid layer]) let me know who the dumb-asses/midwits are.
Don't attribute to stupid that which can be attributed to lazy. Sometimes, it's just easier to leave the damn thing off than take it off (which requires care to not touch the outside) and then put it back on again 5 mins later for something (which requires care to not touch the outside).
Wearing a mask (other than an N95 or other respirator) in the first place puts them in the dumb-ass/midwit category. Even the Communist News Network's chief medical propagandist has declared that, "Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations".
https://reason.com/2021/12/21/leana-wen-cloth-mask-facial-decorations-covid-cdc-guidance/
I was out at lunch and a family of four came in. The only one wearing a (cloth) mask was the 6 year-old (i.e., the one with the lowest risk of dying from covid). The real irony here is that the child is at materially more risk from dying in an auto accident that from covid.
Well for me, it's been N95 for a long time. Sometimes KN95, but usually full N95. And I fit them properly. And I don't touch the outside. And I replace them often. Which doesn't make me invulnerable, but I do think they help.
Bayesian analysis of Bangladesh study concludes masks have no effect: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360320982_The_Bangladesh_Mask_study_a_Bayesian_perspective
Negative correlation between mask usage and Covid-19 outcomes: https://www.cureus.com/articles/93826-correlation-between-mask-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe
Not surprised. There was never strong evidence that the public wearing masks would be effective. In fact, that was the conclusion of all previous studies pre-covid. But the then St. Fauci had a divine revelation (a road to Wuhan experience, one might say) that the general public wearing cloth or surgical masks would be effective.
To put it bluntly, masking mandates were a ho-ax. But the silver lining is that the masqubators still wearing them (especially outside, alone in their car, or for the walk form the restaurant door to their table [sitting a table puts you below the covid layer]) let me know who the dumb-asses/midwits are.
Don't attribute to stupid that which can be attributed to lazy. Sometimes, it's just easier to leave the damn thing off than take it off (which requires care to not touch the outside) and then put it back on again 5 mins later for something (which requires care to not touch the outside).
Wearing a mask (other than an N95 or other respirator) in the first place puts them in the dumb-ass/midwit category. Even the Communist News Network's chief medical propagandist has declared that, "Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations".
https://reason.com/2021/12/21/leana-wen-cloth-mask-facial-decorations-covid-cdc-guidance/
I was out at lunch and a family of four came in. The only one wearing a (cloth) mask was the 6 year-old (i.e., the one with the lowest risk of dying from covid). The real irony here is that the child is at materially more risk from dying in an auto accident that from covid.
Well for me, it's been N95 for a long time. Sometimes KN95, but usually full N95. And I fit them properly. And I don't touch the outside. And I replace them often. Which doesn't make me invulnerable, but I do think they help.
This is where I am curious as to why you're still masking. I believe you indicated you received the jab, correct? Is there an underlying medical condition (no details needed, nor would I ask for details)?
It almost seems as if wearing the mask is borderline social conditioning, and a person's desire to wear one is guided by the group around them.
It almost seems as if wearing the mask is borderline social conditioning, and a person's desire to wear one is guided by the group around them.
Like clothing.
It almost seems as if wearing the mask is borderline social conditioning, and a person's desire to wear one is guided by the group around them.
Like clothing.
It almost seems as if wearing the mask is borderline social conditioning, and a person's desire to wear one is guided by the group around them.
Like clothing.
True.
(https://i.dawn.com/primary/2014/04/5358f5a683693.jpg)
It almost seems as if wearing the mask is borderline social conditioning, and a person's desire to wear one is guided by the group around them.
Like clothing.
Sure. Though I can make a shitload of practical arguments for clothing and you can make almost zero for a cloth mask other than conforming.
Greetings!
Well, all the mask-wearing folks out there and about you, just shows you how many of our citizens are fucking sheep
It almost seems as if wearing the mask is borderline social conditioning, and a person's desire to wear one is guided by the group around them.
Like clothing.
True.
(https://i.dawn.com/primary/2014/04/5358f5a683693.jpg)
No, smartass. Not like a specific clothing. I mean like ANY clothing. There are many times (like a warm clear day at the beach) where clothing is purely because it's expected by those around us. Not because it's actually utilitarian.
This is a concept you're plenty familiar with even if you want to spin it as something nefarious. We all do all sorts of things in life because of social conditioning, and a person's desire to behave that way is guided by the group around them.
It almost seems as if wearing the mask is borderline social conditioning, and a person's desire to wear one is guided by the group around them.
Like clothing.
True.
(https://i.dawn.com/primary/2014/04/5358f5a683693.jpg)
No, smartass. Not like a specific clothing. I mean like ANY clothing. There are many times (like a warm clear day at the beach) where clothing is purely because it's expected by those around us. Not because it's actually utilitarian.
This is a concept you're plenty familiar with even if you want to spin it as something nefarious. We all do all sorts of things in life because of social conditioning, and a person's desire to behave that way is guided by the group around them.
It isn't hard to spin it into something nefarious because it is Masks became a symbol of fear and submission to the state and to superstitious groupthink.
Greetings!
Well, all the mask-wearing folks out there and about you, just shows you how many of our citizens are fucking sheep
Did you wear clothing last time you went out, even if the weather was such you didn't need to?
Did you pee in the toilet rather than the sink at the last public restroom you went to, even though the sink would serve the same drainage purpose as the toilet?
Fucking sheep is what you are. Bleet for us, Shark! Bleet!
Greetings!
Well, all the mask-wearing folks out there and about you, just shows you how many of our citizens are fucking sheep
Did you wear clothing last time you went out, even if the weather was such you didn't need to?
Did you pee in the toilet rather than the sink at the last public restroom you went to, even though the sink would serve the same drainage purpose as the toilet?
Fucking sheep is what you are. Bleet for us, Shark! Bleet!
Greetings!
*Laughing* Bahah! Bahah! Bahah! ;D
Being sanitary, proper and dignified though is different from submitting to power-hungry Nanny-State tyrants, Mistwell.
far more to do with psychological and social conditioning.
Greetings!
Well, all the mask-wearing folks out there and about you, just shows you how many of our citizens are fucking sheep
Did you wear clothing last time you went out, even if the weather was such you didn't need to?
Did you pee in the toilet rather than the sink at the last public restroom you went to, even though the sink would serve the same drainage purpose as the toilet?
Fucking sheep is what you are. Bleet for us, Shark! Bleet!
Greetings!
*Laughing* Bahah! Bahah! Bahah! ;D
Being sanitary, proper and dignified though is different from submitting to power-hungry Nanny-State tyrants, Mistwell.
It's sanitary, proper and dignified to wear a mask around others who are more comfortable if you wear a mask.Quotefar more to do with psychological and social conditioning.
Like clothing. And where we go to the bathroom. And tons of other stuff. Those things are often purely about social conditioning and psychology. People don't want to see your junk, so we make rules so that they don't see your junk. Usually, it has nothing to do with sanitation. There are other cultures which function just fine without clothing all the time in public, and without designated stalls for urination and such. You're fine however with the psychology and social conditioning of our society for those topics, but not the new topic of masks.
Greetings!
Well, all the mask-wearing folks out there and about you, just shows you how many of our citizens are fucking sheep
Did you wear clothing last time you went out, even if the weather was such you didn't need to?
Did you pee in the toilet rather than the sink at the last public restroom you went to, even though the sink would serve the same drainage purpose as the toilet?
Fucking sheep is what you are. Bleet for us, Shark! Bleet!
Greetings!
*Laughing* Bahah! Bahah! Bahah! ;D
Being sanitary, proper and dignified though is different from submitting to power-hungry Nanny-State tyrants, Mistwell.
It's sanitary, proper and dignified to wear a mask around others who are more comfortable if you wear a mask.Quotefar more to do with psychological and social conditioning.
Like clothing. And where we go to the bathroom. And tons of other stuff. Those things are often purely about social conditioning and psychology. People don't want to see your junk, so we make rules so that they don't see your junk. Usually, it has nothing to do with sanitation. There are other cultures which function just fine without clothing all the time in public, and without designated stalls for urination and such. You're fine however with the psychology and social conditioning of our society for those topics, but not the new topic of masks.
Greetings!
*Laughing* However, Mistwell, I'm a right-wing Neanderthal that doesn't give a fuck about others being "comfortable", in particular when it comes to wearing the fucking masks.
It's all really not terribly relevant to me though. Where I live, here in Idaho, most people are strongly against the fucking mask mandates, and mask mandates were never a thing here. Currently, going about town, to restaurants, the gas-station, the Tractor Supply Company, and more, no one wears masks. The only people I have seen consistently wear masks around here are the girls that work in the hospitals or local medical clinics.
I'm glad that I don't live in a fucking Liberal Democrat shithole that loves tyranny.
It may be polite, in certain social circumstances. Just as it was polite for certain people to sit at the back of the bus, or for certain other people to have their feet so tightly bound they became deformed. Or to use a more modern example, not to complain when a stranger feels you up at the airport. Like the TSA, masks provide no real benefit, and have real negative consequences. They have negative effects on human socialization, in the development of social skills among children, and they also harm sanitation a bit because outside a clinical environment the number of people who wear or dispose of them correctly is essentially nil. The best time to stop newly developed social conventions that are harmful is when they're first put in place.Greetings!
Well, all the mask-wearing folks out there and about you, just shows you how many of our citizens are fucking sheep
Did you wear clothing last time you went out, even if the weather was such you didn't need to?
Did you pee in the toilet rather than the sink at the last public restroom you went to, even though the sink would serve the same drainage purpose as the toilet?
Fucking sheep is what you are. Bleet for us, Shark! Bleet!
Greetings!
*Laughing* Bahah! Bahah! Bahah! ;D
Being sanitary, proper and dignified though is different from submitting to power-hungry Nanny-State tyrants, Mistwell.
It's sanitary, proper and dignified to wear a mask around others who are more comfortable if you wear a mask.Quotefar more to do with psychological and social conditioning.
Like clothing. And where we go to the bathroom. And tons of other stuff. Those things are often purely about social conditioning and psychology. People don't want to see your junk, so we make rules so that they don't see your junk. Usually, it has nothing to do with sanitation. There are other cultures which function just fine without clothing all the time in public, and without designated stalls for urination and such. You're fine however with the psychology and social conditioning of our society for those topics, but not the new topic of masks.
Did you wear clothing last time you went out, even if the weather was such you didn't need to?
It almost seems as if wearing the mask is borderline social conditioning, and a person's desire to wear one is guided by the group around them.
Like clothing.
True.
(https://i.dawn.com/primary/2014/04/5358f5a683693.jpg)
No, smartass. Not like a specific clothing. I mean like ANY clothing. There are many times (like a warm clear day at the beach) where clothing is purely because it's expected by those around us. Not because it's actually utilitarian.
This is a concept you're plenty familiar with even if you want to spin it as something nefarious. We all do all sorts of things in life because of social conditioning, and a person's desire to behave that way is guided by the group around them.
It isn't hard to spin it into something nefarious because it is Masks became a symbol of fear and submission to the state and to superstitious groupthink.
Only to a subset of people in society who decided to declare going without a mask was a symbol of freedom like an American flag. The decision to call masks "a symbol of fear and submission to the state and to superstitious groupthink" was as arbitrary as the decision to declare them standard for situations where they were not helpful, like outside. It was lazy, and overly broad, and exaggerated.
You routinely every day engage in acts of submission to State law based on tenuous standards purely because it's the law and expected of you. You just don't think about it that way anymore while doing it.
You drive speed limits (or closer to them) which are sometimes arbitrary. You stop at stop lights and stop signs even when nobody else is there. You drive in the lane of the road rather than down the middle of the road even when there are no other cars.
You wear clothing outside your house even when the weather is such you wouldn't need to.
You go to the bathroom in designated places in the proscribed manner even if it would be perfectly sanitary to do it in public somewhere else or in a different way link in a sink or other drain.
You don't eat dog meat and cat meat and human meat even though your body could digest it just fine.
We ALL DO THESE THINGS because that's how societies function. But somehow a stupid inconsequential mask became the symbol of submission to groupthink? Nonsense. You drew an arbitrary line in the sand which you won't draw for dozens of other things in your life which are just as submissive to the rules of society, because it was a target of convenience and a tool you could use to insult the libtards. Not because it actually has the deep ethical meaning behind it that you claim it does.
Greetings!
Well, all the mask-wearing folks out there and about you, just shows you how many of our citizens are fucking sheep
Did you wear clothing last time you went out, even if the weather was such you didn't need to?
Did you pee in the toilet rather than the sink at the last public restroom you went to, even though the sink would serve the same drainage purpose as the toilet?
Fucking sheep is what you are. Bleet for us, Shark! Bleet!
Greetings!
Well, all the mask-wearing folks out there and about you, just shows you how many of our citizens are fucking sheep
Did you wear clothing last time you went out, even if the weather was such you didn't need to?
Did you pee in the toilet rather than the sink at the last public restroom you went to, even though the sink would serve the same drainage purpose as the toilet?
Fucking sheep is what you are. Bleet for us, Shark! Bleet!
One of the dive bars I frequented in collage had a single men's room with a shitter, a urinal, and a sink. And I cannot count how many times I either pissed in that sink or saw someone piss in it.
If you have never pissed in a sink you're:
A) Lying
B) Not a man
C) All of the above because I know for a fact even women have done it.
If you have never pissed in a sink you're:
A) Lying
B) Not a man
C) All of the above because I know for a fact even women have done it.
D) Midget?
Did you wear clothing last time you went out, even if the weather was such you didn't need to?
Yes, but only because I do not want any innocent bystanders to make Sanity checks when they see my naked flesh.
During the cloth mask phase of the pandemic, when N95s just couldn't be easily had and yet it was the social norm to wear one, I at least made an aesthetic choice with my masks. I wore GI Joe themed ones, and superhero ones, and St. Patrick's Day themed ones for that holiday, etc..
Since boosters are the expected social conditioning, I guess it is boosters in perpetuity from here on out. Society is fun. I remember when people wore masks to save lives. Now it is because it is expected of them by people around them. Maybe we can go ahead and make that the official reason to get that shot and boosters.
During the cloth mask phase of the pandemic, when N95s just couldn't be easily had and yet it was the social norm to wear one, I at least made an aesthetic choice with my masks. I wore GI Joe themed ones, and superhero ones, and St. Patrick's Day themed ones for that holiday, etc..
Oh bless, you accessorised the symbol of your oppression. What a good slave you are.
Interesting article from 538 on vaccine efficacy (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-even-a-less-effective-covid-19-vaccine-is-worth-getting/?ex_cid=538twitter). The article is specific to kids, but has a good review of how vaccines work, why they work better with some viruses and worse with others. I thought this part was helpful:
First, mutation rate. Viruses like measles barely change at all over time. One formulation of a vaccine can work — and an individual’s immune response to it can remain effective — for many, many years. Scientists knew coronaviruses could mutate faster and more successfully than measles, but no one was really prepared for how much and how quickly SARS-CoV-2 would end up mutating, Offit said. The faster the rate of mutation and the bigger the changes, the less efficacy you can expect from a vaccine.
The second way that virus biology affects vaccine efficacy centers around how long a virus incubates in its host before it starts to cause illness. It’s no coincidence that viruses with incubation periods measured in weeks, like measles, smallpox or rubella, have highly effective vaccines, Moss and Offit said. That’s because two types of immune responses are triggered by a vaccine. In the short term, the vaccine stimulates your body to produce virus-fighting antibodies, but those fade within three to six months. The real, long-term protection comes from memory cells, which hang out quietly until the next time you’re exposed to the virus — then they start cranking out fresh antibodies. It’s like getting a new star pitcher who’s going to burn out fairly quickly — but also getting the technology to grow clone replacements of that pitcher.
The problem, Moss and Offit said, is that the process of creating fresh antibodies takes time. If a virus incubates for a while before causing illness, then memory cells can whip up some antibodies and prevent infection. But if the incubation period is short — as it is for COVID-19 — there’s not enough time before infection sets in. The antibodies your memory cells make are still helpful in reducing the severity of the illness, though. You’d rather your clone pitcher show up late and strike out a few batters than not have a pitcher at all.
Vaccine efficacy, then, becomes a spectrum. At one end, you’ve got rotavirus, a virus with a short incubation period — about two days — whose vaccine can’t prevent infection or spread, but it can keep babies out of hospitals, preventing serious illness at a greater than 90 percent efficacy. At the other end of the spectrum is rabies, a virus with an incubation period so long — typically two to three months — you can literally give people the vaccine after they’ve been exposed and have it prevent illness essentially 100 percent of the time. You’re just not going to get rabies-style vaccine efficacy with SARS-CoV-2, a virus with an incubation period that’s typically not much longer than that of rotavirus.
You don't know what real oppression looks like, you privileged little snotty rich kid.
Interesting article from 538 on vaccine efficacy (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-even-a-less-effective-covid-19-vaccine-is-worth-getting/?ex_cid=538twitter). The article is specific to kids, but has a good review of how vaccines work, why they work better with some viruses and worse with others. I thought this part was helpful:
First, mutation rate. Viruses like measles barely change at all over time. One formulation of a vaccine can work — and an individual’s immune response to it can remain effective — for many, many years. Scientists knew coronaviruses could mutate faster and more successfully than measles, but no one was really prepared for how much and how quickly SARS-CoV-2 would end up mutating, Offit said. The faster the rate of mutation and the bigger the changes, the less efficacy you can expect from a vaccine.
The second way that virus biology affects vaccine efficacy centers around how long a virus incubates in its host before it starts to cause illness. It’s no coincidence that viruses with incubation periods measured in weeks, like measles, smallpox or rubella, have highly effective vaccines, Moss and Offit said. That’s because two types of immune responses are triggered by a vaccine. In the short term, the vaccine stimulates your body to produce virus-fighting antibodies, but those fade within three to six months. The real, long-term protection comes from memory cells, which hang out quietly until the next time you’re exposed to the virus — then they start cranking out fresh antibodies. It’s like getting a new star pitcher who’s going to burn out fairly quickly — but also getting the technology to grow clone replacements of that pitcher.
The problem, Moss and Offit said, is that the process of creating fresh antibodies takes time. If a virus incubates for a while before causing illness, then memory cells can whip up some antibodies and prevent infection. But if the incubation period is short — as it is for COVID-19 — there’s not enough time before infection sets in. The antibodies your memory cells make are still helpful in reducing the severity of the illness, though. You’d rather your clone pitcher show up late and strike out a few batters than not have a pitcher at all.
Vaccine efficacy, then, becomes a spectrum. At one end, you’ve got rotavirus, a virus with a short incubation period — about two days — whose vaccine can’t prevent infection or spread, but it can keep babies out of hospitals, preventing serious illness at a greater than 90 percent efficacy. At the other end of the spectrum is rabies, a virus with an incubation period so long — typically two to three months — you can literally give people the vaccine after they’ve been exposed and have it prevent illness essentially 100 percent of the time. You’re just not going to get rabies-style vaccine efficacy with SARS-CoV-2, a virus with an incubation period that’s typically not much longer than that of rotavirus.
You don't know what real oppression looks like, you privileged little snotty rich kid.
The projection is off the chart, the lawyer calling other people "rich kid" is rather rich.
My ancestors, who were slaves, were muzzled as punishment. Dumbasses like you do it voluntarily because you think compliance makes you virtuous.
Do not worry, the W.H.O. is on the case!(https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/2/pete-townshend-of-the-who-george-rose.jpg)
Do not worry, the W.H.O. is on the case!(https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/2/pete-townshend-of-the-who-george-rose.jpg)
WE WON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN???
Naw MonkeyPox doesn't kill people. I mean, as a relative of small pox there is always the worry it could mutate into something deadly, but we have a vaccine which typically works on it (the small pox vaccine). Which is a vaccine I've had, but it has almost certainly worn off as it apparently wares off after 50 years and it's been 50 years. Nevertheless, it's just not as big a deal as Covid at all, despite some people here pretending Covid doesn't kill people it's all some big conspiracy focused on US politics worldwide.
Naw MonkeyPox doesn't kill people. I mean, as a relative of small pox there is always the worry it could mutate into something deadly, but we have a vaccine which typically works on it (the small pox vaccine). Which is a vaccine I've had, but it has almost certainly worn off as it apparently wares off after 50 years and it's been 50 years. Nevertheless, it's just not as big a deal as Covid at all, despite some people here pretending Covid doesn't kill people it's all some big conspiracy focused on US politics worldwide.
It's not as big a deal because the current spread is by European buggery.
Naw MonkeyPox doesn't kill people.
Naw MonkeyPox doesn't kill people. I mean, as a relative of small pox there is always the worry it could mutate into something deadly, but we have a vaccine which typically works on it (the small pox vaccine). Which is a vaccine I've had, but it has almost certainly worn off as it apparently wares off after 50 years and it's been 50 years. Nevertheless, it's just not as big a deal as Covid at all, despite some people here pretending Covid doesn't kill people it's all some big conspiracy focused on US politics worldwide.
It's not as big a deal because the current spread is by European buggery.
Not African, Asian, or American Buggery? Aussie buggery doesn't spread it?
I'm now wondering if there is something special about European buggery.
Oy what's with the blind links people?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XMqRHihUbc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XMqRHihUbc)Dude, Pundit does not allow blind links. And most of us won't click on one, anyway...
It's Youtube, the link itself is harmless. But yes, a description would be nice, and is required on this site. Even looking at the first couple minutes, I'm missing context. It's some guy reacting to Jimmy Dore reacting to Bill Gates. Gates is saying they didn't know the death rates of covid-19 were low and concentrated among the elderly at the time, Dore is saying he knew why didn't Gates, and the guy who's nesting the two videos is agreeing. I'm not sure why he's watching a video of someone watching a video of Gates, instead of just watching the Gates video himself. Maybe he's surprised that Dore is pointing it out? But Dore generally is a contrarian leftist, so this doesn't seem unusual for him. Is there some history I'm missing?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XMqRHihUbc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XMqRHihUbc)Dude, Pundit does not allow blind links. And most of us won't click on one, anyway...
I agree it's time to end all lockdowns and mask mandates. Those who will be vaxxed and boosted have been, those who haven't won't.Where are you getting your breakdown of the the political affiliations of the dead?
Covid, in America, is killing far more Republican voters than democrats. In some areas the ratio is 8-1. While I feel sad for the Democrat i'm very happy to see 8 morons removed from the Gene and voter pools. I'm just hoping covid keeps on shifting the ratios of live voters enough to prevent a disaster in November.
I agree it's time to end all lockdowns and mask mandates. Those who will be vaxxed and boosted have been, those who haven't won't.
Covid, in America, is killing far more Republican voters than democrats. In some areas the ratio is 8-1. While I feel sad for the Democrat i'm very happy to see 8 morons removed from the Gene and voter pools. I'm just hoping covid keeps on shifting the ratios of live voters enough to prevent a disaster in November.
Here is one of the several data sources about the political disparity in covid deaths.
https://rollcall.com/2022/03/30/republicans-pandemic-deaths-pollsters/
More.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IGyG0A5m1mo
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/red-covid-coronavirus-deaths-are-highest-in-counties-with-the-largest-share-of-trump-voters-report-11632764116
I agree it's time to end all lockdowns and mask mandates. Those who will be vaxxed and boosted have been, those who haven't won't.
Covid, in America, is killing far more Republican voters than democrats. In some areas the ratio is 8-1. While I feel sad for the Democrat i'm very happy to see 8 morons removed from the Gene and voter pools. I'm just hoping covid keeps on shifting the ratios of live voters enough to prevent a disaster in November.
Fap fap fap.... to dead Republicans.
I agree it's time to end all lockdowns and mask mandates. Those who will be vaxxed and boosted have been, those who haven't won't.
Covid, in America, is killing far more Republican voters than democrats. In some areas the ratio is 8-1. While I feel sad for the Democrat i'm very happy to see 8 morons removed from the Gene and voter pools. I'm just hoping covid keeps on shifting the ratios of live voters enough to prevent a disaster in November.
Fap fap fap.... to dead Republicans.
Well, after hearing then talk about killing all the ''dems, libtards, femnazis, homos, BLM terrorists'' etc for decades I decided if one side has to wipe out the other in America I'd rather bulldoze the right into mass graves than be bulldozed into mas graves along with everyone i care about by them. Go figure...
I agree it's time to end all lockdowns and mask mandates. Those who will be vaxxed and boosted have been, those who haven't won't.Where are you getting your breakdown of the the political affiliations of the dead?
Covid, in America, is killing far more Republican voters than democrats. In some areas the ratio is 8-1. While I feel sad for the Democrat i'm very happy to see 8 morons removed from the Gene and voter pools. I'm just hoping covid keeps on shifting the ratios of live voters enough to prevent a disaster in November.
I agree it's time to end all lockdowns and mask mandates. Those who will be vaxxed and boosted have been, those who haven't won't.
Covid, in America, is killing far more Republican voters than democrats. In some areas the ratio is 8-1. While I feel sad for the Democrat i'm very happy to see 8 morons removed from the Gene and voter pools. I'm just hoping covid keeps on shifting the ratios of live voters enough to prevent a disaster in November.
Here is one of the several data sources about the political disparity in covid deaths.
https://rollcall.com/2022/03/30/republicans-pandemic-deaths-pollsters/
Here is one of the several data sources about the political disparity in covid deaths.
https://rollcall.com/2022/03/30/republicans-pandemic-deaths-pollsters/
Correlation does not imply causation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
https://towardsdatascience.com/4-reasons-why-correlation-does-not-imply-causation-f202f69fe979